Talk:Otto cycle

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Engineering High‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy High‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Compression after ignition?[edit]

< The compression stroke is intended to compress the products after the flame ignites the mixture. >

I don't understand this; it makes no sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.248.160.84 (talk) 09:54, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

learn latex properly![edit]

Whoever wrote this should learn latex first! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.152.203 (talk) 07:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

corrections to come[edit]

I made a mistake when editing this article in that the usual sign convention found in references was turned about. Energy into the system should be given a positive sign and energy out of the system should be given a negative sign. I will correct when I find the energy and also clean up the Latex script that I made a mess of as I am an amateur at that.

Introductory paragraphs somewhat disordered[edit]

The introduction describes an Otto cycle as consisting of four processes. It then lists six processes. It then returns to four processes, but introduces a new term, the four-stroke Otto cycle, which really has six processes, using the following words:

The Otto cycle consists of isentropic compression, heat addition at constant volume, isentropic expansion, 
and rejection of heat at constant volume. In the case of a four-stroke Otto cycle, technically there 
are two additional processes....

I understand the general idea: the two extra processes (labelled 0-1 and 4-0) are usually ignored in theoretical treatments, even though their details are important in practice. I also assume that the Otto cycle is synonymous with the four-stroke Otto cycle, even though they are presented as contrasting, with the four-stroke one having six processes. But the switching back and forth between these perspectives is confusing. All it needs is a quick tune-up from an expert.

Incidentally the "0" is missing in the diagram. 84.227.234.163 (talk) 11:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Otto cycle[edit]

Derive its efficiency Anurag Singh bhu (talk) 03:59, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Usable picture: real-engine deviations to the Otto cycle[edit]

I just uploaded this on Commons. If someone wants to make a paragraph of accompanying text, be my guest (I do not have the time to do so right now). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:50, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signature of an unknown author in an image?[edit]

Since November 2015 there is an image in the middle of the page, that describes the process of the Otto cycle. Besides the fact that it doens't have neither a frame nor a caption, it's the first image I see in Wikipedia with the name of the (unknown) author, @Aiman Alqwshab:, in the image itself. The name is central, in bold, more evident than some other text present in the image. This is more than a way of (self-)crediting the author – for this the information page of the image is enough, like for all the other authors. We don't sign a paragraph on Wikipedia, so why sould an image be signed? Here it is written that "the image should be primarily serving an educational purpose, and not as a means of self-promotion of the user's artistic skills". And it seems to me that this is exactly a means of self-promotion. I think we have two options to solve this:

we ask the author to remove his name from the image, or we do it ourselves if we are allowed to;
we create a new image; this one is not so complex after all, and an even better one can be easily generated.

--Almicione (talk) 17:13, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]