LOL i love these concepts ! , if the people knew just a little about internal combustion engines , physics and air flow dynamics , then maybe they would be laughing as hard as i am LOL , all that reciprocation mass at 30,000 rpm i would pay it see that ! , and thats before we get into chamber design vs BSFS ! then theres the extreme energy losses that the 90 deg pin to wave wheel will create, one word " Physics "
The large wave crank with the Yolk around it. Have the outer Yolk still. The wave crank piston can move up and down inside the Yolk and each side of the wave crank piston is then a double ended piston.
Use a two stroke mechanism on each end. It can be geared to be a 4-stroke if need be. Keep it simple. Then only one moving part.
Pistons 1 and 3 would be exploding simultaneously, while piston 2 would be by itself, creating an asymmetrical force cycle, ergo, your piston would be banged way harder going down than up.
Also, your main piston would be subjected to combustion inside and out, creating double the heat of a normal piston. F1 parts, maybe ?
And how in blazes will you be inserting air and gas inside a piston ?
The idea has merit, but the realisation might be problematic.
How are you doing on your engine? Do not give up...but you may have to change a few things as you go. At least you are trying. Good luck in your progress. Capt,n John RCuniverse
You should be careful having your fuel cell mounted so close your crank arm. If you hit it you would have to have a company come in and try to cap it before orange soda contaminated your ecosystem. CNN would have live cameras watching the cleanup 24 hrs a day. LOL
Good luck on you engine, you video is very entertaining.
I had way to many mechanical comments on this. it would take up all of your comment page. so ill just say this. it wont work in the real world. and its horrablly inefcient in the dream world also.
@Aarius1972 horribly inefficeint? a standard engine and a car today runs on a 4 stroke motion, it loses momentum 4 time for 1 explostion, this design fires on the up and the down movment and has less moving parts, less change in direction per explotion equals more efficent, less moving parts less friction contact points which equal more efficentcy. u r seeing a crude mock up to show the concept not machined persise engine with bearings
@ray618ray I do understand that this is a mock up and I tottaly get your Idea and concept. my comments were not ment to teardown your demonstration. but I see way to many problems and enginering just to replace a reliable and cheap engine that is already widely used. for instance, I get that the pistons are stationary and the cylinders move. thats cool but how do you seal up the cylinder. you need a slotted hole to hold the pistons in place, but you also need to oil them. I can go on but I wont.
My biggest question would be regarding how are you bringing the air and fuel into the cylinders. Secondly do you have any idea how much force a normal piston places upon a crankshaft? The whole motor would fall apart just like your model is.......other then that it's definitely something different
This engine has many fundamental problems. It biggest error is that it has way too much energy sapping reciprocating mass. A standard modern engine only has the very light weight aluminium pistons and the conrod to worry about. In this engine you not only have the whole cylinder, which needs to be heavy to cope with the massive combustion pressures. You also have the yoke assembly which would also need to be massive and heavy to be strong enough.
LOL i love these concepts ! , if the people knew just a little about internal combustion engines , physics and air flow dynamics , then maybe they would be laughing as hard as i am LOL , all that reciprocation mass at 30,000 rpm i would pay it see that ! , and thats before we get into chamber design vs BSFS ! then theres the extreme energy losses that the 90 deg pin to wave wheel will create, one word " Physics "
bainracing 6 days ago
Why have the cylinder and pistons?
The large wave crank with the Yolk around it. Have the outer Yolk still. The wave crank piston can move up and down inside the Yolk and each side of the wave crank piston is then a double ended piston.
Use a two stroke mechanism on each end. It can be geared to be a 4-stroke if need be. Keep it simple. Then only one moving part.
NearAbbeyRoad 3 months ago
Comment removed
NearAbbeyRoad 3 months ago
Roy. This idea is very close to what we have done. Have a look at the shepherd engine.
shepherdengine 10 months ago
can you ad to your model and show the valve train and how it works.
Aarius1972 10 months ago
great idea but can't have intake and exhaust ports for pistons 2 and 3.
theyellow240z 11 months ago
Pistons 1 and 3 would be exploding simultaneously, while piston 2 would be by itself, creating an asymmetrical force cycle, ergo, your piston would be banged way harder going down than up.
Also, your main piston would be subjected to combustion inside and out, creating double the heat of a normal piston. F1 parts, maybe ?
And how in blazes will you be inserting air and gas inside a piston ?
The idea has merit, but the realisation might be problematic.
drfleau 11 months ago 2
How are you doing on your engine? Do not give up...but you may have to change a few things as you go. At least you are trying. Good luck in your progress. Capt,n John RCuniverse
engineman327 1 year ago
You should be careful having your fuel cell mounted so close your crank arm. If you hit it you would have to have a company come in and try to cap it before orange soda contaminated your ecosystem. CNN would have live cameras watching the cleanup 24 hrs a day. LOL
Good luck on you engine, you video is very entertaining.
DoyleRotary 1 year ago
I had way to many mechanical comments on this. it would take up all of your comment page. so ill just say this. it wont work in the real world. and its horrablly inefcient in the dream world also.
Aarius1972 1 year ago
@Aarius1972 horribly inefficeint? a standard engine and a car today runs on a 4 stroke motion, it loses momentum 4 time for 1 explostion, this design fires on the up and the down movment and has less moving parts, less change in direction per explotion equals more efficent, less moving parts less friction contact points which equal more efficentcy. u r seeing a crude mock up to show the concept not machined persise engine with bearings
ray618ray 10 months ago
@ray618ray I do understand that this is a mock up and I tottaly get your Idea and concept. my comments were not ment to teardown your demonstration. but I see way to many problems and enginering just to replace a reliable and cheap engine that is already widely used. for instance, I get that the pistons are stationary and the cylinders move. thats cool but how do you seal up the cylinder. you need a slotted hole to hold the pistons in place, but you also need to oil them. I can go on but I wont.
Aarius1972 10 months ago
My biggest question would be regarding how are you bringing the air and fuel into the cylinders. Secondly do you have any idea how much force a normal piston places upon a crankshaft? The whole motor would fall apart just like your model is.......other then that it's definitely something different
dschumann06 2 years ago
This engine has many fundamental problems. It biggest error is that it has way too much energy sapping reciprocating mass. A standard modern engine only has the very light weight aluminium pistons and the conrod to worry about. In this engine you not only have the whole cylinder, which needs to be heavy to cope with the massive combustion pressures. You also have the yoke assembly which would also need to be massive and heavy to be strong enough.
qwertypenis 2 years ago
what are you going to do for valves - it could be quite complicated???
dansmith57 2 years ago
That's funny, go man.
OverUnityNow1 2 years ago
ha ha
Grousuba 2 years ago