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
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
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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Compression after ignition?

< 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!

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

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

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

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

Usable picture: real-engine deviations to the Otto cycle

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?

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]