It's hard to back up engine efficiency. This is still a reciprocating piston engine, and inherently loses more efficiency to friction than other Otto-cycle engines, such as the Wankel Rotary. The Scotch Yoke used to translate oscillation to rotation creates more friction and is a less reliable part than a conventional crankshaft. The problem inherent in all 2-stroke engines is their emission of unburnt fuel, reducing efficiency and increasing carbon and noise pollution levels.
Usually you have pistons going out at the same time for balance, but in 2 cycle your power strokes are staggered. Maytag model 72 had a 2 cycle engine where pistons fired same time ,but they were striving for vibration free operation more than staggered power strokes. I`v seen your setup in older refrigerator compressors
the most efficient engine ever built is the IRIS engine concept and is going through testing currently in order to pass safty regulations but should be commercialized within a decade or so.
The difference is that the connecting rods do not oscillate and are not directly connected to the crankshaft like in a boxer or other common engines (ie inline and V)
It is a scotch yoke crank for a modern engine. The design is as old as the steam engine. Originally these engines were produced for pumping water out of quarries.
The note says "ever built" the picture isnt of one built, its a computer simulation.
@gomunkul This is the exact opposite. In a boxer, the pistons directly across from each other move in and out at the same time. A 180 degree crank with opposed cylinders (like Subaru).
all wrong = the vibration would tear the engine apart even with the heavy counterweight making the engine have to work harder and balance & stress on the crank causing catostrofic failure , the crank should look more like a bike crank and the pistons should go out at the same time , but then it would be a boxer engine and has allready been done so back to the drawing board , nice try though
@lolzordje123 The movement of pistons in a boxxer engine oppose eachother (Like boxxers touching their mitts to eachother before a fight) whereas in this one both pistons move in the same direction. Boxxers typically negate their vibrations, this engine would amplify it two-fold.
Good point, the reason I think is because there would be less people buying there vehicles due to them using only half the amount of oil that they now do. It would hurt the oil companies too much. Even the ones producing and operating inside America. So basically it would be like saying that all they basically care about is that the more people who buy and pay for gas, then the more money they get to have.
@coby4861 the vibration would be partially negated by the counterweights on the crank, and i'm sure if you made a 4, 6, or 8 cylinder version of this, there would be absolutly no problem.
@coby4861 there is a weight on the crank that look like its designed to counterbalance the pistons. though i wonder whther this is actually that effective in lowering vibrations.
Russel Bourke built many versions of this engine in the 50's and 60's. One mounted on an outboard engine lower assembly that powered a boat exceptionally well, in fact the engine actually sheared the prop pin.
He built a much larger 4 cylinder version for trucks.
Of course they were all 2 stroke cycle engines, the object of using the Scotch yoke, was to draw the fresh charge into a small chamber, isolated from the crankcase.
It is NOT a boxer engine, the pistons work together and don't "box".
nope, if you notice each piston shares one long connecting rod that passes through the crank. It does share a block layout that is similar to a boxer, however this motor is 2 stroke and most boxer's i have seen are 4.
Couse this is like a two stroke engine, when the piston moves up it creates a small vacuum under it that sucks fuel in and then compresses it and it goes into the cylinder
No side loading of the piston walls. 20% of the total friction in an engine is from the piston rings on the bore walls. Zero side loading means you can use much thinner rings under much less compressive load = less friction. This type of crank is called a 'Scotch Yoke' and is as old as the hills.
The oil companies dont care about efficiency of the engines used. In fact there were cars that had efficient engines like the audi A2 and the VW Lupo. Their production was stopped because there were not enough clients. The efficent engines exist, but noone buys them. Oil industry is not the enemy of efficient engines! It is THE CLIENT!
@io9487 i guess you missed the fact that we, the client, get trashy looking cars .. are we 2nd class clients??? Tesla Motors FTW! It is proven fact that there is a lobby behind the scenes which influences improvements so go back to sleep instead of misleading the people away from reality.
@io9487 Says you, you are not the Oil company or the general public. Efficiency in gas powered engines shouldn't even matter, We should be moving to Electric of hydro engines, but the oil companies buy out any working patent and bury them so they cannot be made. They want you to keep buy their gas.
@GilHeron I totally agree with you bro, and with lithium batteries getting better so quickly its only a matter of time before someone will make electric cars a reality to the public
noone wants a gutless wonder. there are many factors to consider in an engine for a car... power to weight ratio, power to size ratio, power to fuel consumption (efficiency), production costs, reliability and repair costs.
yes it is a 2-stroke.. its the scotch yoke which makes it so efficient, it owuld work but then the oil companies wouldn;t make so much money so thats why we are not driving more efficient vehicles. we have to technology to run off of basically nothing but its all about a corrupt government and oil profits these days
Most technologies that where abandoned were in fact disadvantageaus compared to an OHV fourstroke or had high developement risks ,which is in fact sad for these technologies. This is business, but for example Wankel found his investors.
This engine has a better fulcrum to push on at TDC. Conventional engines are the exact opposite. This means a difference in power that makes it to the output. Vibration, too.
the navy use something like it in their aircraft carriers. it's powerfull but got no fuel efficiency and get over heated easy. we pay that gas bill, so they won't care! ja ja ja
i think this engine would cause too much vibration from the 2 pistons moving in the same direction. the boxster has kind of the same layout, but with a crank shaft allowing the pistons to move in opposite directions, balancing out the side to side vibration
The crank type is known as a Scotch Crank. Been used on marine engines, usually pumps, for a long time as it originated in the Steam days.
I have designed a feed pump (for a steam plant) using the same technique.
Deffinetly less moving parts, but it is far from balanced. You have a huge mass of 2 pistons moving in the same direction.
Also the acceleration of the piston is larger than with a con rod because the con rod is always straight and not angled. Less moving parts is better though.
Old technology is been on aviation a long time in 4, 6, 8 and more cilinders running on magnetos and yesiamanalien is right this is been on volkswagen beatle (out of the market in 2004) since day one and yes the crank is balanced.... on airplanes is (lycoming)2500rpm and (continental some of them) 2700 rpm`s for five minutes
the VW beetle was a traditional 4 stroke horizontally opposed engine. The two opposing pistones moved in together and out together, not left right like this engine.
This is NOT how a Bug engine works: They are standard reciprocating engines. There has NEVER been a Bourke cycle engine in a aproduction car. My Dad improved upon the Bourke's basic flaw (ever-changing cylinder volume) by a modification to the crank yoke, which allowed a static combustion volume. Tried to get it funded by Carter's O.E.R.I, in the early 80s but never got far..;:(
Aviation flats and VW/porche engine have pistons in the same position going towards and away from the crank at the same time... two dif crank pins at the same longitudinal position
This engine reminds me of the Volkswagen Beetle engine. If you may it a 4 cylinder engine instead of two and did it right, there would be very little vibration. Make it air cooled and you have the next generation of beetle engine :P
Not practical, too much vibration. How about instead of both traveling the same way, both travel the oppisite way. That would be a smoother running engine and unless this is a two stroke it would even out the power
OriginalUsernameHere: No, this engine has 2 piston. 2 stroke and 4 stroke refer to the stages in each combustion chamber, not the number of power cycle by revolution, else a v8 would be a 1 stroke having 8powercycle/2revolution.
Actualy there wouldn't be too much vibration, because the Comprestion of gases in one cylinder would act as a shock absorber. I wouldn't be less vibrant than any of the straigt, or V configurations.
Since both pistons are moving in the same direction this engine would tear itself apart at high speed. BMW (motorcycle division) has been using this configuration for years - both out both in.
Well yes it would tear itself apart at high speeds, all engines will, I think though it would be more workable than most engines on the market. Since the coprestion of gases in one cylinder acts as a shock absorber.
No not really, boxxer engines dont run flat cranks i.e the opposing cylinders are not 180 degrees out of phase with each other. A boxxer four fires all four cylinders sequentially not two at a time.
what do you mean there is no vibration? Do you not see the reciprocating mass that is the crank follower ring, conrods and pistons. Its being thrown side to side with the force of combustion explosions of course there will be an equal and opposite reaction force on the block, i.e vibration.
It could be improved by adding balance shafts which counteract the displacement of mass but it would rob power and efficiency. I'd rather put up with vibration.
I can see manufacturing cost being the problem. Almost no vibration, if counterbalanced properly. Very nice design.
thekaxmax 5 months ago
It looks like a standard boxer egnine to me, with an updated crankshaft.
szlatyka 8 months ago 16
cool so you've taken the flat style piston engine (boxxer) and made it more complicated.
congratulations, you deserve a prize!
71 people have never seen a boxxer engine.
sdfE36 9 months ago 21
It's hard to back up engine efficiency. This is still a reciprocating piston engine, and inherently loses more efficiency to friction than other Otto-cycle engines, such as the Wankel Rotary. The Scotch Yoke used to translate oscillation to rotation creates more friction and is a less reliable part than a conventional crankshaft. The problem inherent in all 2-stroke engines is their emission of unburnt fuel, reducing efficiency and increasing carbon and noise pollution levels.
SchizoFilms 10 months ago 2
The weakness of this engine is excessive wear around the yoke portion, not fixable.
rickcain2320 11 months ago 4
Usually you have pistons going out at the same time for balance, but in 2 cycle your power strokes are staggered. Maytag model 72 had a 2 cycle engine where pistons fired same time ,but they were striving for vibration free operation more than staggered power strokes. I`v seen your setup in older refrigerator compressors
chuckbear1961 11 months ago
Будет ужасная вибрация.Its only VIBRATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
papaVasyaA 11 months ago
the most efficient engine ever built is the IRIS engine concept and is going through testing currently in order to pass safty regulations but should be commercialized within a decade or so.
eveilslayer 1 year ago
These conspiracy theories are killing me. Check the wikipedia entry, specifically the engineering critique. This thing really isn't that hot.
n68188 1 year ago
looks like a 2 cyl boxer engine to me...
Kalcijs777 1 year ago
@Kalcijs777 more a V2 at 180°
Felyxorez 1 year ago
With a few modifications it would make a good steam engine.
KenMacMillan 1 year ago
This is an almost direct copy of the COMMER KNOCKER built over 50 years ago. That was a dud and so is this.
velcroman11 1 year ago
This is not the same a a boxer engine.
The difference is that the connecting rods do not oscillate and are not directly connected to the crankshaft like in a boxer or other common engines (ie inline and V)
mecon92 1 year ago
It is a scotch yoke crank for a modern engine. The design is as old as the steam engine. Originally these engines were produced for pumping water out of quarries.
The note says "ever built" the picture isnt of one built, its a computer simulation.
wi11y1960 1 year ago 3
I like the shepherd engine better.
btester1 1 year ago
no not even close
HDFoxra 1 year ago
is that two cylinders?
blueeyes2015 1 year ago
OMG...
this is just a BOXER (flat) engine..
there are about 10 million Subarus using it right now.
gomunkul 1 year ago
@gomunkul This is the exact opposite. In a boxer, the pistons directly across from each other move in and out at the same time. A 180 degree crank with opposed cylinders (like Subaru).
jamesandrew2000 1 year ago
I like this idea but i am with coby4861 that it will create a lot of vibration you must move both the pistol in opposite direction.
kburman6 1 year ago
all wrong = the vibration would tear the engine apart even with the heavy counterweight making the engine have to work harder and balance & stress on the crank causing catostrofic failure , the crank should look more like a bike crank and the pistons should go out at the same time , but then it would be a boxer engine and has allready been done so back to the drawing board , nice try though
AxSxKxONE 1 year ago
Also, you lube the pistons how? This would burn as much oil as my 2 stroke dirt bike!
donkeytits1 1 year ago
isnt it just a boxer
lolzordje123 1 year ago
@lolzordje123 The movement of pistons in a boxxer engine oppose eachother (Like boxxers touching their mitts to eachother before a fight) whereas in this one both pistons move in the same direction. Boxxers typically negate their vibrations, this engine would amplify it two-fold.
RomeoReject23 1 year ago
Good point, the reason I think is because there would be less people buying there vehicles due to them using only half the amount of oil that they now do. It would hurt the oil companies too much. Even the ones producing and operating inside America. So basically it would be like saying that all they basically care about is that the more people who buy and pay for gas, then the more money they get to have.
brendonmilligan07 1 year ago
I have seen this before it can get up to 60,000 RPM my friend has the plans to this and some photos of the original from the 1950'
wootencarmona 1 year ago
It isnt a simple boxer engine?
Rathouse21 1 year ago
The mechanical loss would be greater, than to an engine rod.
Renwysocki 2 years ago
it looks like it would cause excessive vibrations
coby4861 2 years ago 128
@coby4861 the vibration would be partially negated by the counterweights on the crank, and i'm sure if you made a 4, 6, or 8 cylinder version of this, there would be absolutly no problem.
ivankoran 1 year ago
@ivankoran than it would be just a Boxer engine...
no hard math in it...
zbljk 1 year ago
@coby4861 does that big balancing cam make you think so..
m8rown 1 year ago
@coby4861 there is a weight on the crank that look like its designed to counterbalance the pistons. though i wonder whther this is actually that effective in lowering vibrations.
samsmall12 1 year ago
@coby4861 wouldnt you be able to cancel out those vibrations using a 4 cylinder version?
elevadon 1 year ago
@coby4861 Radials have the same theory with a master rod.
linadsenoj 1 year ago
@coby4861 Think about how much your little weed wacker engine vibrates. Now make that big enough for a car haha
musclekid13 1 year ago
My engines offers greater output and efficiency.....
EngineTechnology1 2 years ago
Russel Bourke built many versions of this engine in the 50's and 60's. One mounted on an outboard engine lower assembly that powered a boat exceptionally well, in fact the engine actually sheared the prop pin.
He built a much larger 4 cylinder version for trucks.
Of course they were all 2 stroke cycle engines, the object of using the Scotch yoke, was to draw the fresh charge into a small chamber, isolated from the crankcase.
It is NOT a boxer engine, the pistons work together and don't "box".
everdadful 2 years ago
face it it's a boxer engine really init :)
lukey1019 2 years ago
nope, if you notice each piston shares one long connecting rod that passes through the crank. It does share a block layout that is similar to a boxer, however this motor is 2 stroke and most boxer's i have seen are 4.
casperfaust 2 years ago
What is the benefit of isolating the crankcase center?
getoffmyinternet 1 year ago
@getoffmyinternet
Couse this is like a two stroke engine, when the piston moves up it creates a small vacuum under it that sucks fuel in and then compresses it and it goes into the cylinder
rocketman468 1 year ago
No side loading of the piston walls. 20% of the total friction in an engine is from the piston rings on the bore walls. Zero side loading means you can use much thinner rings under much less compressive load = less friction. This type of crank is called a 'Scotch Yoke' and is as old as the hills.
evildrome 1 year ago
The oil companies dont care about efficiency of the engines used. In fact there were cars that had efficient engines like the audi A2 and the VW Lupo. Their production was stopped because there were not enough clients. The efficent engines exist, but noone buys them. Oil industry is not the enemy of efficient engines! It is THE CLIENT!
io9487 2 years ago 112
@io9487 :
These cars were hardly marketed, and were just an exercise for the car makers.
Car makers dont care about small super efficient cars. Carmakers care about added value, and there is none of that in a cheap small car.
electrique527 2 years ago
@io9487 The A2 was just a Polo (or SEAT Ibiza), nothing more.
And the Lupo just a VW made in Brasil.
N3on86 1 year ago
@io9487 i guess you missed the fact that we, the client, get trashy looking cars .. are we 2nd class clients??? Tesla Motors FTW! It is proven fact that there is a lobby behind the scenes which influences improvements so go back to sleep instead of misleading the people away from reality.
GamlGandalf 1 year ago
@io9487 Says you, you are not the Oil company or the general public. Efficiency in gas powered engines shouldn't even matter, We should be moving to Electric of hydro engines, but the oil companies buy out any working patent and bury them so they cannot be made. They want you to keep buy their gas.
GilHeron 1 year ago
@GilHeron I totally agree with you bro, and with lithium batteries getting better so quickly its only a matter of time before someone will make electric cars a reality to the public
otoakki 1 year ago
@io9487
noone wants a gutless wonder. there are many factors to consider in an engine for a car... power to weight ratio, power to size ratio, power to fuel consumption (efficiency), production costs, reliability and repair costs.
TAPriceCTR 1 year ago
@io9487 Wait till the fuel prices climb. THEN there will be a new attitude.
gilberteriksen 3 months ago
yes it is a 2-stroke.. its the scotch yoke which makes it so efficient, it owuld work but then the oil companies wouldn;t make so much money so thats why we are not driving more efficient vehicles. we have to technology to run off of basically nothing but its all about a corrupt government and oil profits these days
71stingray 2 years ago
Most technologies that where abandoned were in fact disadvantageaus compared to an OHV fourstroke or had high developement risks ,which is in fact sad for these technologies. This is business, but for example Wankel found his investors.
io9487 2 years ago
there is no such an engine that just some dumbasses imagination
2pimpinout 2 years ago
Looks like a scotch yoke crank setup to me - used on steam engine valve gear when Otto was in dypers LOL
trevortrevortsr2 2 years ago
I had an old Evinrude snowmobile, 1966 model which had horizontally opposed cylinders. It was 2 stroke.
TheRancherman61 2 years ago
This engine has a better fulcrum to push on at TDC. Conventional engines are the exact opposite. This means a difference in power that makes it to the output. Vibration, too.
viperman5686 2 years ago
that wouldnt even work!!!
skaterking225 2 years ago
Of course it would.
chrisjpxxx01 2 years ago
Ít´s just a 2 strokes engine with an efficient void pump in the crankshaft
ermestosobalatronca 2 years ago 3
=2cyl 2stroke boxer engine
lachaine160390 2 years ago
Looking at it, It's basically a two stroke.
DocWolph 2 years ago 3
the navy use something like it in their aircraft carriers. it's powerfull but got no fuel efficiency and get over heated easy. we pay that gas bill, so they won't care! ja ja ja
futuristictech 2 years ago
does not seem that revolutionary to me. It's still a start-stop engine which wastes energy.
quickieflyer 2 years ago 4
no 2nd class vibration
jeflagoon 2 years ago
love how ppl think theyre experts in everything .. xD muahahah
gonzalo4to 2 years ago
i think this engine would cause too much vibration from the 2 pistons moving in the same direction. the boxster has kind of the same layout, but with a crank shaft allowing the pistons to move in opposite directions, balancing out the side to side vibration
05mustangguy 2 years ago 2
have u heard of an inline engine?
TypeR891 2 years ago 2
@05mustangguy - oh yeah. But ... you ought to see the vibration when they are moving in opposite directions. !!!
shimon174b 2 years ago
The crank type is known as a Scotch Crank. Been used on marine engines, usually pumps, for a long time as it originated in the Steam days.
I have designed a feed pump (for a steam plant) using the same technique.
Deffinetly less moving parts, but it is far from balanced. You have a huge mass of 2 pistons moving in the same direction.
Also the acceleration of the piston is larger than with a con rod because the con rod is always straight and not angled. Less moving parts is better though.
maltelec 2 years ago
Old technology is been on aviation a long time in 4, 6, 8 and more cilinders running on magnetos and yesiamanalien is right this is been on volkswagen beatle (out of the market in 2004) since day one and yes the crank is balanced.... on airplanes is (lycoming)2500rpm and (continental some of them) 2700 rpm`s for five minutes
coolsatiro 2 years ago
Let's not forget the Subaru and boxters either.
Magnuspire 2 years ago
You're talking about a standard flat layout, not a bourk.
Lamnont 2 years ago
the VW beetle was a traditional 4 stroke horizontally opposed engine. The two opposing pistones moved in together and out together, not left right like this engine.
mattloxfl 2 years ago
This is NOT how a Bug engine works: They are standard reciprocating engines. There has NEVER been a Bourke cycle engine in a aproduction car. My Dad improved upon the Bourke's basic flaw (ever-changing cylinder volume) by a modification to the crank yoke, which allowed a static combustion volume. Tried to get it funded by Carter's O.E.R.I, in the early 80s but never got far..;:(
Kburgboy 2 years ago
Aviation flats and VW/porche engine have pistons in the same position going towards and away from the crank at the same time... two dif crank pins at the same longitudinal position
BriKuz 2 years ago
The crank & piston design I have seen in Hermetic refer. compressors
bam6474 2 years ago
The piston motion is purely sinusoidal. No harmonics. With a suitable balance shaft this could be balanced way better than a normal engine.
Circlotron 2 years ago
This engine reminds me of the Volkswagen Beetle engine. If you may it a 4 cylinder engine instead of two and did it right, there would be very little vibration. Make it air cooled and you have the next generation of beetle engine :P
yesiamanalien 2 years ago
A boxer is more efficient.
szlamx 2 years ago
Not practical, too much vibration. How about instead of both traveling the same way, both travel the oppisite way. That would be a smoother running engine and unless this is a two stroke it would even out the power
AOO08DOYOUHEAR 2 years ago
Just put two of them in the car, both facing the oposite way.
Lamnont 2 years ago
bourke engine is technically a 1 stroke engine, there are two power strokes for each revolution.
OriginalUsernameHere 2 years ago
OriginalUsernameHere: No, this engine has 2 piston. 2 stroke and 4 stroke refer to the stages in each combustion chamber, not the number of power cycle by revolution, else a v8 would be a 1 stroke having 8powercycle/2revolution.
atsidlm 2 years ago
Actualy there wouldn't be too much vibration, because the Comprestion of gases in one cylinder would act as a shock absorber. I wouldn't be less vibrant than any of the straigt, or V configurations.
Lamnont 2 years ago
I've always wondered how you would take care of balancing issues. i guess that's why there are none around.
bobosharkey 2 years ago
This would be great for powering a pump.
oc5nsli341nforce4 2 years ago 3
Since both pistons are moving in the same direction this engine would tear itself apart at high speed. BMW (motorcycle division) has been using this configuration for years - both out both in.
zzman17084 2 years ago 4
Well yes it would tear itself apart at high speeds, all engines will, I think though it would be more workable than most engines on the market. Since the coprestion of gases in one cylinder acts as a shock absorber.
Lamnont 2 years ago
and in what way is this entitled "most efficient engine"? pballer2005 hit the nail on the head
fangus503 3 years ago
same thing as a boxer engine only with a reworked crank.
pballer2005 3 years ago
No not really, boxxer engines dont run flat cranks i.e the opposing cylinders are not 180 degrees out of phase with each other. A boxxer four fires all four cylinders sequentially not two at a time.
doo0T 3 years ago
Nice. How complicated is the engine to both build and maintain compared to 2 and 4 stroke engines?
supertrix101 3 years ago
Judging by the lack of cam shaft, I think it would be fairly simple.
Lamnont 2 years ago
Vibration of that engine would be awful. Why not use traditional crankshaft?
B5DI 3 years ago
there is no vibration.
robby844 3 years ago
what do you mean there is no vibration? Do you not see the reciprocating mass that is the crank follower ring, conrods and pistons. Its being thrown side to side with the force of combustion explosions of course there will be an equal and opposite reaction force on the block, i.e vibration.
It could be improved by adding balance shafts which counteract the displacement of mass but it would rob power and efficiency. I'd rather put up with vibration.
doo0T 3 years ago 3