Talk:Rolls-Royce Pennine

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.

Displacement

Bore and stroke given yield 2748cuin/45.04L, not the 2791/45.73 given. AMCKen (talk) 01:48, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added your numbers; let's see how long they last! 86.3.108.31 (talk) 17:26, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About 10 months. Displacement is the TOTAL capacity which id Swept volume + un-swept volume . Using bore and stroke will only give you SWEPT VOLUME.--Petebutt (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is any engine's displacement designated by anything OTHER than swept volume? Unswept volume (the combustion chamber?) varies in many engines yet they are still called the same displacement. A 9:1 327 and 12:1 327 have the same displacement even though the combustion chamber is not the same. AMCKen (talk) 03:24, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted to 2748 after discussion 31.52.97.94 (talk) 13:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a sleeve valve engine, capacity calculations based on the bore and stroke don't work. I added the specs figures but sadly failed to add the source, I must have it somewhere and will add it. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly from the bizarre table at the back of Gunston 'Rolls-Royce Aero Engines', which is flatly contradicted by his text earlier in the book! 31.52.97.94 (talk) 03:02, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't have that book. The stroke is given as 5.08 inches in other sources that I have seen (Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust response on a forum which can't be used as a source), this might explain the discrepancy when using a calculator. Another factor with this engine is the apparent use of articulated connecting rods, the stroke of the master rod and the three articulated rods for each cylinder row would be slightly different. We don't know which stroke figure is being given. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 13:22, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is the stoke on the articulated cylinders? I have seen 2 different strokes listed for some engines with this setup. Also, how would sleeve valves alter the displacement? thanks AMCKen (talk) 23:46, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]