Sleeve valve engine Cylinder head removed 2of3

[Tunerboii2045]

so its almost kinda like a 2 stroke with the ports in the sleeve but the sleeve roates and moves also how does the sleeve get oil between the clyinder and the outside of the sleeve becuase it would have to be a tight fit for no play but needs oil so it dosent sieze amazing design tho :) 5*

[ChargerMiles007]

@Tunerboii2045

The clearance is about .002", but oil finds its way into there, no problem, all sleeve valves are just splash oiled from the mist in the crankcase.

[SuperKONR]

Cool! So it doesnt need any extra top end lube?

[ChargerMiles007]

Nope, no extra lube, it gets lots up the side of the sleeve, so much that it burns it and has smokey exhaust. The engine should have a wiper ring for the bottom of the sleeve, but the block is too thin to fit one in. Supercharging would cure that, as it would blow air into the crankcase, instead of sucking oil out of it.

[ChargerMiles007]

Continuing:

If you use all mixed or "compound" ports (1 port in the sleeve, acting as inlet and exhaust) The inlet and exhaust ports would alternate around the cylinder, making manifolding difficult! The 3 inlet, 2 exhaust design was commonly used, having 2 inlet ports and 1 exhaust port, as well as 1 compound port in the sleeve. So 4 sleeve ports connecting to 5 ports in the "head". The sleeve stroke needed to service various port designs also comes into play. The 5 port seems the best.

[BlakeMason2]

How do the upper rings on the head "piston" get lubed? Also, is there an advantage to one compound port and having the other ports regular? It's a mixed port design. Can't figure out why.

[ChargerMiles007]

The "junk head rings" as they were called, seem to get enough oil from the outside of the sleeve, and the inside of the sleeve, the small amount sneaking by the piston rings. The small amount required seems to find its way there to do the job, as I am not aware of any of the engines having any oil supply to that area, and I know this one doesn't. The mixed port design lets you save on some sleeve distance so that the ports can be larger. The 5 port design was the most common.

(see more:)

[aheartattack1]

Its a really innovative and advanced design for the era it came out, props to the engineers whom designed this. How ever i see a few weekpoints in the design which could explain its extinction and wonder if youd agree or disagree.

1) it seems that there would be a high amount of wear on the piston rings.

2) the pivot point where the sleeve pin meets the bearing in the sleeve crank looks like it would wear quickly.

3) the amount of wear on the crancase walls from the sleeves.

[ChargerMiles007]

3 Good points there.

The piston rings don't seem to wear any faster, for 1 thing, the piston & sleeve move down together during power stroke, helping reduce wear.

The sleeve drive pin experiences very little wear, there is surprisingly small forces on it.

There is in fact very little wear in the block due to the sleeve moving, as there is lots of oil, and the sleeve spreads the oil out well.

These engines were actually noted for their long life, up to 2000 hours between overhauls I think :)

[30GB]

very wired never seen this type of engine before is it you own design?

[ChargerMiles007]

The single sleeve valve design was patented around 1918, by 2 different people at the same time! Burt & McCollum, so that is what this type is called, or just a single sleeve valve engine. There was actually a double sleeve valve engine first, an example would be the Willys Knight design.

This type of engine saw a lot of use in WW2 in British engines, such as the Bristol Hercules 14 cyl. radial, and the Napier Sabre flat H 24 cylinder.

A group of 6 designers built this as a univ. senior proj