Author Topic: Norton F1 - more power please  (Read 5675 times)

Offline Norton

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.ntlworld.com/derek.nicol/
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2006, 12:40:58 AM »
some diagrams...

Offline Norton

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.ntlworld.com/derek.nicol/
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2006, 11:55:25 PM »
Quote from: rotaryart.uk.com
Nos will cost from £200 to £400 approx.

Snigger, it would be sooo cool to have NOS but my credit card really cant afford it. Ive had a look on a website called \'Wizards of NOS\' and their bike kits are around £500.
Its tempting to buy an empty NOS bottle and mount it on the bike... it would be worth it just to see the look on my drag strip rivals face (Geoff) when i roll into Rotorstock   :evillaugh

Offline MikeLMR

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,845
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #17 on: January 18, 2006, 12:55:55 PM »
how do the uav engine people cool the rotors nowadays ? they still air cool them (got to have a look at a rotor) I suspect they use the ejector exhaust too

Offline MikeLMR

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,845
  • Karma: +15/-0
    • View Profile
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2006, 01:01:34 PM »
OR ... how about fitting a turbocharger to soley blow air through the rotors ? would be nice and quiet and similiar to the ejector exhaust sytem setup ?

Offline Norton

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.ntlworld.com/derek.nicol/
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #19 on: January 18, 2006, 05:22:12 PM »
Quote from: MikeLMR
how do the uav engine people cool the rotors nowadays ? they still air cool them (got to have a look at a rotor) I suspect they use the ejector exhaust too... OR ... how about fitting a turbocharger to soley blow air through the rotors ? would be nice and quiet and similiar to the ejector exhaust sytem setup ?

Yes, UAV use the ejector exhaust system.
I think ive finally figured out how to use the ejector exhaust without taking the engine apart. Its so simple and obvious that i dont know why i didnt think of it before, ive tended to just take everyones word for it that you have to do it the same way as they did the works racers. I think we, in the \'Norton rotary community\' have become blinkered and unable to think beyond the established way of doing it.
Im already halfway there having had the replica race exhaust put on a few years ago, i just need to get a few bits ive drawn made up and hopefully i will have it done before RSIII.

Offline Norton

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.ntlworld.com/derek.nicol/
Heres my \'Masterplan\'...
« Reply #20 on: February 18, 2006, 12:18:12 AM »
All Norton Rotary engines (both the air cooled and the water cooled engines) use air-cooling to cool the centre of the rotors, the eccentric shaft and the main bearings. The centres of the rotors have air-cooling fins incorporated into the castings. Oil is ‘injected’ into the airflow by a metering pump that varies the flow according to engine revs (effectively a ‘dry sump’ system). On the air cooled engine, air is pulled in through a channel in the centre plate, oil mist is then injected at the centre plate and is drawn outwards to the left and right sides towards the end plates where it is then ‘sucked’ back out from the engine through two ports. For the race bikes the direction of the air flow was reversed with the oil being injected at the main bearings near both the end plates and being drawn in towards the centre plate and then extracted from the engine at one central point (by the ‘extractor’ or ‘ejector’ exhaust) where the air would normally enter the engine. This ‘reverse’ direction of flow was later used as standard for the water-cooled engines. For road use, both the air and the water-cooled engines use the suction of the combustion process, or the suction of the carbs if you prefer, to draw the cooling air through the centre of the engine.
All the (three) owners of air-cooled road bikes that now use an extractor/ejector exhaust have closely followed the example of the factory race team. The thing that has put me off connecting the ejector previously is the cost involved having the engine stripped, the route of the oil pipes modified (which involves drilling through castings etc), the cost of an expensive pair of amal carbs or similar and the relocation of the carbs. I was thinking about it and started to question why it has to be done the same way as the race team did it. Why must the ejector pull the air out from the centre plate? (it works well enough with the combustion process sucking the air out from the two \'ports\' at the sides)... and what’s wrong with keeping the SU carbs situated right where they are?
On the standard air cooled bike, the shiny alloy air transfer ports on top of both sides of the engine take the hot air out of the engine and feed it into the plenum chamber in the frame. This seems to me to be the ideal point at which to split the processes of the internal engine cooling and the carb intake. One small complication is that the air transfer ports also double as engine mountings, attaching the engine to the frame.
My idea is to replace the air transfer ports with basic stainless steel engine mountings complete with openings through to the engine and the plenum chamber. The openings from the engine will have twin flexible pipes connected going to the ejector exhaust venturi vacuum pipe to draw the hot air out from the centre of the engine. This cooling air will still enter the engine through the standard air filter and the oil-metering pump will still inject oil mist into it at the centre plate.
The openings into the plenum chamber in the frame will have air filters fitted (the K&Ns in the diagram) to filter the incoming air for the carbs and subsequently the combustion chambers. The plenum chamber will now act as an air box. 50:1 ‘Pre-mix’ lubrication for the rotor tips will now have to be added manually to the petrol tank (groan).
The carbs will have to be adjusted to flow more fuel (to cope with the denser cold air). I’m hoping this will be sufficient on its own without having to change to differently profiled needles.
So, there you have it! All I need to do is have the required bits made (I have no welding skills) in time for Rotorstock 3. With luck I will be able to chase my track rival down into the eleven-second bracket, hopefully without wrecking the rotor motor in the process.

Offline Norton

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.ntlworld.com/derek.nicol/
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2006, 11:15:00 AM »
Quote from: Norton
All I need to do is have the required bits made in time for Rotorstock 3. With luck I will be able to chase my track rival down into the eleven-second bracket

Unfortunately Geoff has been too snowed under with work to make the bits for me yet, looks like my bike will still be standard for RSIII.

DHeart197

  • Guest
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #22 on: January 07, 2007, 12:31:27 AM »
Hey Norton, what kind of trans would you use with a UAV engine for a bike.

Offline Norton

  • Major Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 824
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://homepage.ntlworld.com/derek.nicol/
Norton F1 - more power please
« Reply #23 on: January 07, 2007, 02:18:16 AM »
If you could afford a UAV engine then you could probably afford something like a Quaife gearbox as well.
A cheaper option might be to find a modernish production bike that uses a seperate gearbox...erm...dunno, is the...no...or...erm... cant think of one right now!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

P.S. Re: My \'Masterplan\' (a couple of posts previous), ive been advised by three of the top Norton Rotary experts that it would be very \'risky\'. It seems the oil supply to the mains bearings on the air cooled bikes is only just adequate and an increase in power output could show up its weaknesses. They all advise that it is strongly recommended that the oil feed is \'reversed\'... Oh Well, back to the drawing board :Hammer
« Last Edit: January 07, 2007, 02:31:34 AM by Norton »