Radial Engine Cutaway

Tarheelpilot said:
You tell me. I already know, your opinion of me is none of my business and I’m not answering your pedantic and leading questions.
Click to expand...
simple answer, it must be 1,3,2
The question is WHY?
When you understand the answer to my other question you'll understand why it must be that way.
 
Those of you that continue to bring up even number of cylinder Radial engines, the only way a radial can be an even number of cylinders is that the engine operates on the 2 stroke theory, not the 4 stroke. the 2 stroke engines fire all cylinder in one revolution.

Every 4 stroke engine must make 2 revolutions to fire all cylinders. (720 degrees of rotation) 180 degrees for intake, 180 degrees for compression, 180 degrees for power, 180 degrees for exhaust.
Knowing it will require 2 revolutions to fire them all, you start with 1-3-5-7-9, skipping every other one, as the rotation continues skip the next cylinder (1), and continue with 2-4-6-8. firing them all in two rotations.
If you can't skip that one cylinder you'd continue to fire 1,3,5,7,9 and never fire 2-4-6-8.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
simple answer, it must be 1,3,2
The question is WHY?
When you understand the answer to my other question you'll understand why it must be that way.
Click to expand...
Tom- you got it wrong-

Here's the portion of the thread in question:
Tarheelpilot said:
The only even number single row I’ve ever seen was an ingersol rand radial air compressor. 3 cylinders were combustion cylinders and the other three were air compressor cylinders. I have only seen one in person.

Click to expand...

Tom-D said:
Then it was a 3 cylinder engine, and a 3 cylinder compressor
Click to expand...
Her's the correct answer unless the cylinders are laid out differently than assumed:
Assuming the compressor and driving cylinders alternate each other, and the usual numbering clockwise, and the first cylinder being a driver:
1, 3, 5
 
Tom-D said:
Those of you that continue to bring up even number of cylinder Radial engines, the only way a radial can be an even number of cylinders is that the engine operates on the 2 stroke theory, not the 4 stroke. the 2 stroke engines fire all cylinder in one revolution.
Click to expand...
As they say, No chit, Sherlock :)
It was discussed earlier. As you sometimes say, try to keep up :)
But we did prove that some radials can have an even number of cylinders in a single back of cylinders.

Another way to have an even number of cylinders ( in the post quoted above) is an even number of cylinder banks (2,4, etc) but you were assuming one single row, or bank, earlier.

Multiple banks in a 2 cycle radial would also be an even number, with even or odd numbers of banks.

Tom-D said:
Every 4 stroke engine must make 2 revolutions to fire all cylinders. (720 degrees of rotation) 180 degrees for intake, 180 degrees for compression, 180 degrees for power, 180 degrees for exhaust.
Knowing it will require 2 revolutions to fire them all, you start with 1-3-5-7-9, skipping every other one, as the rotation continues skip the next cylinder (1), and continue with 2-4-6-8. firing them all in two rotations.
If you can't skip that one cylinder you'd continue to fire 1,3,5,7,9 and never fire 2-4-6-8.
Click to expand...
We know this too.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
simple answer, it must be 1,3,2
The question is WHY?
When you understand the answer to my other question you'll understand why it must be that way.
Click to expand...
I already understand how and why. I’m just not going to explain it to you. Unless you don’t understand. Then I will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top