This design could actually be used as a vacuum engine, since they're actually three stroke engines: intake-cooldown-power/exhaust.
In the usual designs, the movement of the piston allows only a pretty short cooldown stroke, decreasing efficiency. This rotary design here possibly offers a longer cooldown stroke, allowing a higher pressure difference to form, thus increasing efficiency. and since the power stroke is based on the PD between intake and exhaust, it may even is possible to charge it!
@johandegrote I have drawings that are in a dwg format. Send me your email address so I can attach the file and send it to you. My email address is cohenatoak2@yahoo.com
@railrdr523 nooooooooo duuuuuuuuuuuuh! the engine your talking about is called a wankel and has been in mazda's rx- series, currently the rx-8. i was talking about the idea of an air-powered engine being stupid. daood416 thought the idea of internal combustion-izing it was bad when in reality that is the only way it would work
No it is not. You can see numerous videos showing the operation of a Wankel motor on You Tube. It is very different mechanically and in principle from the motor shown in this video.
A second rotor within a second cavity that is rotated 180 degrees relative to the first cavity would reduce the vibration substantially. To completely eliminate vibration, three rotors would be required. The two outer rotors would move identically. The middle rotor would be 180 out of phase and equal in mass to the outer rotors combined.
To eliminate vibration, the forces generated by one moving rotor must be balanced by equal but opposite forces generated by other rotors. Since 2 rotors at 180 or three at 120 are displaced along the axis of rotation, the moving masses of these rotors would set up a vibration perpendicular to this axis. My description of a three rotor arrangement mentioned in my previous reply should compensate for all unbalanced forces.
The original drawings were pencil on paper. That's the bad news. The really bad news is that I misplaced them. The only record of this design is the motor itself. I hope there's enough visual information in the video for you to replicate the design. Let me know if a few key dimensions would be of any help.
You'll need access to a lathe and a vertical milling machine. I need your email address to attach a dwg file. Also could you give me some information about your application. I'm just curious. Are you located in Berkeley, Ca.?
Your observation is correct. Torque will be high for most of the rotary "stroke" of this design.Since there are many air motor designs that are well established, I don't think a patent is worth the effort. I have a design for a four cycle IC version that uses three moving parts and fires four times per shaft revolution. I've attempted to prototype this design, but have not been able hold the much tighter tolerances required. I hope to show it to a mechanical engineer who can evaluate the design
Yes I built it (over 30 years ago using a Maximat7 lathe/milling machine combo). I resurected my interest in this device because I have an idea for an internal combustion version. This will take some time to develope and prototype. I never measured torque,which is not linear. I just wanted to see if the design actually worked.
you have the engine running on air and you have ideas for internal combustion? You were 30 years ahead of your time dont go back 60 years by talking about internal combustion.
@Daood416 the engine only runs on air because it is compressed with an external energy source. it all reality the engine would have to run by compressing its own air. that would require energy and since we know we cannot have unity much less over unity the engine would quickly stall after boing started. therefore the idea of an air powered engine is pure fantasy. fyi, people try the simple things before moving on to the complex things such as internal combustion.
This design could actually be used as a vacuum engine, since they're actually three stroke engines: intake-cooldown-power/exhaust.
In the usual designs, the movement of the piston allows only a pretty short cooldown stroke, decreasing efficiency. This rotary design here possibly offers a longer cooldown stroke, allowing a higher pressure difference to form, thus increasing efficiency. and since the power stroke is based on the PD between intake and exhaust, it may even is possible to charge it!
4lge 6 months ago
wow, this is nice and do you have still the drawings of it. I will try it under steam. Greatings from Holland.
johandegrote 7 months ago
@johandegrote I have drawings that are in a dwg format. Send me your email address so I can attach the file and send it to you. My email address is cohenatoak2@yahoo.com
seymour100 7 months ago
@railrdr523 nooooooooo duuuuuuuuuuuuh! the engine your talking about is called a wankel and has been in mazda's rx- series, currently the rx-8. i was talking about the idea of an air-powered engine being stupid. daood416 thought the idea of internal combustion-izing it was bad when in reality that is the only way it would work
jonathanstensberg 9 months ago
lol, nice desing and the sound gives me the giggles.
demonofrazgriz333 10 months ago
Nice work
Mitsimad 1 year ago
Does air go into the area inside the rotor too?
RevanantGod 2 years ago
yes
seymour100 2 years ago
Path of least resistance ftw!
RevanantGod 2 years ago
at hotmail com
berkeleychem 2 years ago
is that the air version of the wankel motor ?
subwoofspeak 2 years ago
No it is not. You can see numerous videos showing the operation of a Wankel motor on You Tube. It is very different mechanically and in principle from the motor shown in this video.
seymour100 2 years ago
a eyekle motor lmao
30GB 2 years ago
would a second "rotor"dampen or offset the vibration?
isamike 3 years ago
A second rotor within a second cavity that is rotated 180 degrees relative to the first cavity would reduce the vibration substantially. To completely eliminate vibration, three rotors would be required. The two outer rotors would move identically. The middle rotor would be 180 out of phase and equal in mass to the outer rotors combined.
seymour100 3 years ago
what about running 3 rotors in 3 separate housings at 120 degrees instead of running running 2 at zero and 1 at 180? if i make any sence.
isamike 3 years ago
To eliminate vibration, the forces generated by one moving rotor must be balanced by equal but opposite forces generated by other rotors. Since 2 rotors at 180 or three at 120 are displaced along the axis of rotation, the moving masses of these rotors would set up a vibration perpendicular to this axis. My description of a three rotor arrangement mentioned in my previous reply should compensate for all unbalanced forces.
seymour100 3 years ago
hi seymour100
could you send me specs so i could build one as well
as looking for air motor for science project in australia
romans6464 3 years ago
The original drawings were pencil on paper. That's the bad news. The really bad news is that I misplaced them. The only record of this design is the motor itself. I hope there's enough visual information in the video for you to replicate the design. Let me know if a few key dimensions would be of any help.
seymour100 3 years ago
Detail drawings are now available as a dwg. file. I can send them to you if you're still interested.
seymour100 2 years ago
hi ! can u send me a copy i would like to build one for a rc boat
berkeleychem 2 years ago
You'll need access to a lathe and a vertical milling machine. I need your email address to attach a dwg file. Also could you give me some information about your application. I'm just curious. Are you located in Berkeley, Ca.?
seymour100 2 years ago
That looks like it could get some serious torque with the leverage the "piston" has. Get a patent and see what you can do for marketing, great idea.
pikespeakrally 3 years ago
Your observation is correct. Torque will be high for most of the rotary "stroke" of this design.Since there are many air motor designs that are well established, I don't think a patent is worth the effort. I have a design for a four cycle IC version that uses three moving parts and fires four times per shaft revolution. I've attempted to prototype this design, but have not been able hold the much tighter tolerances required. I hope to show it to a mechanical engineer who can evaluate the design
seymour100 3 years ago
wow, thats sweet. seriously though, get a patent on that ASAP
myotheraccount1981 4 years ago 4
wow did you build that / what will it pull at x psi?
wrenchmandan 4 years ago
Yes I built it (over 30 years ago using a Maximat7 lathe/milling machine combo). I resurected my interest in this device because I have an idea for an internal combustion version. This will take some time to develope and prototype. I never measured torque,which is not linear. I just wanted to see if the design actually worked.
seymour100 4 years ago
you have the engine running on air and you have ideas for internal combustion? You were 30 years ahead of your time dont go back 60 years by talking about internal combustion.
Daood416 3 years ago
@Daood416 the engine only runs on air because it is compressed with an external energy source. it all reality the engine would have to run by compressing its own air. that would require energy and since we know we cannot have unity much less over unity the engine would quickly stall after boing started. therefore the idea of an air powered engine is pure fantasy. fyi, people try the simple things before moving on to the complex things such as internal combustion.
jonathanstensberg 1 year ago