2
$\begingroup$

I recently rediscovered the cyclorotor concept. There is a good example on youtube here. Ignoring the mechanical complexity to an extent how does the 'efficiency' compare to conventional designs?

When I say efficiency I'm not sure what the best measure is. Possibly lift to drag ratio? I'm interested in:

  • lifting capacity: how much weight could a cyclorotor lift vs a helicopter or fixed wing design

  • energy efficiency

Obviously these things depend on factors like size of the airfoil & airspeed so a rough guide would be suffcient.

I also have the same question about aircraft based on the magnus effect which I have posted separately.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ One thing is for sure: after more than a century of fligh all together, and the magnus effect, cycloidial rotors and whatnot being of a ripe age also, they are not very efficient when considering practical use. Otherwise they would be used extensively. $\endgroup$
    – Jpe61
    Oct 20 '21 at 14:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ask yourself what percentage of the cycle is each wing performing optimally. $\endgroup$
    – Jim
    Oct 20 '21 at 18:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think part of the challenge for the cyclorotor was partly materials and partly engineering. It clearly works but has not had the same amount of effort put into it. $\endgroup$ Oct 20 '21 at 18:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ "Ask yourself what percentage of the cycle is each wing performing optimally". That is a very good point but presumably it only applies for vertical take ouff, when a blade is not providing lift it can instead contribute thrust in the direction of flight can't it? $\endgroup$ Oct 20 '21 at 18:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.