Wankel Engine
I’ve recently found out about a Wankel Engine, much more sensible engine design then the usual engines we are used to. This is something most people are unaware of.
Most of us are used to common 4-stroke cylinder engines found in most today’s cars. One such engine consists of a cylinder body, piston that moves up and down, and a connecting rod that connects the piston with the crankshaft, turning linear movement into a rotational. Of course there are much more elements to it then these but these are basics. In four strokes of the engine air and fuel are inducted, compressed, ignited and exhausted out. Here is the schematic view.

Four stroke engine work diagram
These are the most widely spread engines today although they have many disadvantages. A lot of moving parts which makes them complicated to build and maintain. It also adds to the weight of the engine. Due to transformation of linear to rotational movement noticeable vibrations occur and the limit is imposed on maximum RPM (so called redline). Efficiency of such engines is normally only around 30%, which means that 70% of power is lost during one combustion cycle to other sources like heat. That means that your 100hp car in reality has a 300hp capable engine. Add transmission and drive train losses which are usually about 20% and you see how much power (and fuel) is wasted.
Naturally if someone could solve this efficiency problem connected with engine design they would become the richest man in the world.
The Wankel Engine
A German inventor called Felix Wankel first proposed a design of an ultra simple and efficient engine which was called after him the Wankel Engine. Wankel engine uses rotor instead of a pistons which allow it to deliver power without vibration in much higher RPMs. The design is so simple and brilliant. Here is how it works.

Wankel engine work cycle
In the basic single-rotor Wankel engine, the oval-like housing surrounds a three-sided rotor. The central drive shaft, also called an eccentric shaft or E-shaft, passes through the center of the rotor and is supported by bearings. The rotor both rotates around an offset lobe (crank) on the E-shaft and makes orbital revolutions around the central shaft. Seals at the corners of the rotor seal against the periphery of the housing, dividing it into three moving combustion chambers. Fixed gears mounted on each side of the housing engage with ring gears attached to the rotor to ensure the proper orientation as the rotor moves.
Wankel engines deliver much more power output then a cylinder engine of same displacement. They are also much lighter and since they consist of only three or four moving parts they are much easier to build and maintain. In case of engine problems in combustion, the Wankel Engine would only slowly seize to work while in a piston based design engine a possible destruction of inner parts of the engine is likely.
Wankel engines just start to have a wide recognition with car manufacturers. Only Mazda actively uses Wankel engines and their model RX-8 is best known for it. From a 1.3 liter engine a power output of 238HP is achieved without use of turbo or compressor. That is 183hp per liter which is impressive. Best atmospheric cylinder engines in the world like those in BMW and Honda achieve only around 100Hp/liter of displacement.
So the advantages are obvious, what about disadvantages? Well Wankel engine uses more fuel per displacement (although it produces more power) . Also design of seals is complicated and still much can be done in that perspective. There are several other problems but they are mostly connected with relatively low amount of research money spent on these engines today. There is also a lack of awareness of the existence of such an engine design.
Engine design has so much room for new inventions that this is a brilliant opportunity for those of you with innovative ideas to contribute. More efficient engines designs would help radically bringing down the cost of transportation, ultimately saving our planet in the process.
When I hear stuff like this how things can be so much more efficient and cost effective for everyone but no one is doing enough about it, it pisses me off!
Now all I want is that bloody Mazda cause they’re bold enough to lead. Damn it, when will the Japanese auto makers all get in on this and blow the American standard into hiding. Hehe. My two cents.
Great post!!!!!! Brilliantly enlightening.
Hehe cheers to that :)
Wankel engines have big advantages but so much money has been already spent in building cylinder engines that it is still not economically justifiable for big corporations to turn to them.
That’s the whole problem, is existing infrastructure does not allow for the massive retooling that would need to take place, companies would have to spend millions to invest in this new technology.
Aside from that, the only real benefit of this engine is performance, and less maintenance. Automakers would rather not lose valuable profits on maintenance and repair, and not everyone wants to sacrifice performance for fuel economy.
It’s a shame we start out with the wankel, it’s a genius design and if as much innovation was put into this motor as we have in the otto style, we would be much more progressed. The seals and oil leaking issues could be solved with enough research.
Good article though, I really enjoyed it!
It is a genius design in a sense that the only other design is a very bad one.
But I am sure much more clever design than Wankel engine still can be made. I am somehow still not bought on the idea of triangular body rotation as a best possible solution. I do not know why, maybe I am not a triangles guy.
Anyways, investing in Wankel design is surely a step forward for humanity, but corporations are the ones that will decide.
Reminds me of the mid 70’s when me and my mate use to cruise around in his father’s RX-7 (In New Zealand). Trouble was, the “sewing machine” noise it generated. Maybe in time the wankel (or rotary) will resurface in another application, it deserves to…
what i dont like is i have a 1990 ford festiva and its pushing 40 to 50 miles to a gallon in 1990 and we have cars that have fuel cells that get that good. so i ask if they did it then, then whats the problem now. and may i add that it is a 1.3 liter 4 cylinder with a 4 speed manual thanks