Principles That Makes My Engine SUPER-EFFICIENT ( Part 3 , please read below)

[motormonkey]

Read a kinematics of mechanisms book.

[motormonkey]

Your design performs almost exactly the same as a normal 4-cycle engine, the only difference being that your engine will suffer great mechanical losses because of the quick changes in momentum of your gear configuration. That's the wonderful thing about the crank shaft mechanism. The change in momentum at TDC and BDC (top-dead-center and bottom-dead-center if you didn't already know that) is smooth, so losses are minimized.

[motormonkey]

The crankshaft is designed to have little travel near the mid-point and end of the cycle. It is a sliding mechanism. It is at these points in the cycle that the gasses are being pressurized. The crank shaft also has to have time to become vertical, as this will decrease stresses in the shaft (because it is now being loaded axially).

[moparman240]

Yes the conventional crank shaft has minimal movement at the ends of the stroke however this modle #3 has absolutly zero movement for almost 180 degrees of crank gear travle and the whole time the block has to slide from one side to the other. We build modles to test theorys and this modle visably shows the flaws. Dont think of it as a failure just a discovery of one more way that does not work.

[TheGodziLac]

This is interesting, you live in the Philippines, but the music at 1m40s sounds Hungarian. Where can you get there Hungarian pop music?

By the way, your engine would be impressive, but wouldn't it be proun to strong vibration at higher revs? Although the Wankel-engine should have the same problem and we know that everything can be balanced. And what about the friction?

[calcdn]

There is still time that is takes to reverse direction...if you watch the center ring gear it still goes though the same actions as a crank, but it has to slide up and down as it goes back and forth. Gears take more energy to move, you have friction of up and down, faster wear than a bearing…I’m sorry but this is just YouTube Hype

[died4hislove]

FOR THE COMPLETE EXPLANATION please watch the video response below (Eliminate Conventional Engine's 30 % Piston Delayed Travel To Be Super-Efficient ).

[strokex1]

kill the music, put something much softer to not distract your presentation.

[Rydn]

dont fit*

[Rydn]

Anyone has an oppinion, though. I admire what you did @died4hislove is not that easy to come up with that kind of ideas, and here on internet everyone is a dick and dont waste a chance to hate someone.

Your "problem" is this: When you design something, after the theorical job, yo must make practical tests. Your design must be efficient and easy on the paper. But in real life, high speeds rotations and asymmetric designs fit. Vibrations would be too violent and the engine will eventually broke.

[801kangaroo]

you have no comentry on your videos to try and explain what the hell is so speacial about ur idea you just pointed at shit ? i cbfed trying to figure it out i watcthed all your vids just so i could write .....doucheBAAAAAAG!

[kirishumen]

your model #3 is disturbingly similar to a potent vibrationdevice sir. its supposed to have more than 4 pistons right?

[KarriKoivusalo]

Besides the fact the energy transfer is exactly the same in both examples, there are other problems: the piston acceleration at the either end would demolish the engine totally, and the crank would disengage from the gears the moment there is combustion on the top of the piston.

[Rorzzer123]

you're doing it backwards... push the pistons you goose

[GHOSTTOYS]

all those test are for nothing ... instead of turning he gear try pushing on the piston , because if you turn the gear yes it sticck to it but if you aply presure on the piston it will skip all the time each time it will reach the end , or you will have to make sure the gear will always stay close to the rest or it will skip all the time , some time it work one way not the other . just like the screw gear

[lacko989]

the best thing in video is music xD

[livdinion]

the moment or torque how you want to call it is greatly reduced, Momentum=force times arm (length),yes your model uses the force better but due to small torque i could not see this in automobiles.the full piston stroke could not be 100% efficient,the fuel burns,piston is pushed by the heat,but the heat dissipates,the quantity of heat is not constant during the whole stroke,please correct me if i'm wrong.the system is not 100% efficient because of the friction between the teeth of the sprokets

[gianlucazs]

@livdinion the piston is not pushed by the heat, but by the preassure made by the combustion of the fuel. But the problem in the model proposed by this guy is the position of the piston in transition, the piston needs to have less pressure in the compartmen so it can go back again to the starting position, remember that the piston only works with pressure and does not make any effect while it is going back, so the transition needs to be done without much effort to the piston. (excuse my english)

[Gunner3210]

Work is only done ( ie energy is expended ) only when things move. So regardless of how the reciprocating mechanism is designed, it does the same amount of work. So the efficiency will not change.

It might be a hard concept to understand, but it is all freshman year physics. I suggest you show this to a professor/instructor at a local college and get a more detailed explanation.

[Gunner3210]

@atomrocketcar They don't use less energy. They just cause the fuel to burn with higher compression ratio. For otto-cycle engines, a higher compression ratio produces mechanical power with greater efficiency.

However that is not the point I was making. Mechanical linkages have nothing to do with engine operation. The video shows an improvement for a mechanical linkage. It has nothing to do with turbos or better spark plugs. Read my post again.

[atomrocketcar]

@Gunner3210 for some reason i cant spell my way out of this, so i fold, i'll delete my post and say this

i love trolling, woot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

turbos are more efficent, think aboot this, it shoots in more air, and air contains 02 and nitrogen which is free fuel?....yea compression be higher but people in charge are not making em to save gas, they make em to make car go faster and burn more fuel, not my fault, my turbo gets 31 mpg, my gas car automatic gets 45mpg, no not a geo metro, rocketcar

[pjaxy]

@atomrocketcar the purpose of turbos is to suck more air in so you can put more fuel in (air/fuel ratio is the same). Turbos actually make engines less efficient because it introduces back pressure. The incentive of using a turbo is increasing power without increasing engine size

[SnowRocker88]

If you really want to increase the efficiency of an engine, get rid of the reciprocating mass in something like the Wankel rotary or toroidal engine.

[pjaxy]

@SnowRocker88 this is so true. And unfortunately, this Super-Efficient Engine introduces more reciprocating parts than traditional ICE. Not to mention, friction surfaces

[tinolino58]

All those new mechanical movements dont change anything within the combastion cycle. Only compression - decompression is in charge of thermodynamical efficiency. Engine friction is smal regarding the output of a piston engine. Back and forth moving masses do not need power at all. Its all transfered into the crankshaft to speed up.. Capito?

[v8pasi]

U hav lots of ideas and ur quite handy, but u need to learn a lot, u don't know even the basic stuff. Go to the library or search from net and learn and learn and.....

[v8pasi]

friction with conventional short rod takes less power than heavy back and forth moving mass with long con. rod. Ur super efficient engine has very heavy b and f moving parts, even more friction and it's also too complex. Ur gear system can't handle the power from piston unless they are very very heavy and it takes again more power.

If u move crankshaft from centerline to the powerstroke side u got less angularity, and in the exhaust stroke there's anyway less pressure against cylinder wall.

[ve2zzz]

Again here....

What is this disease ????

You try to EXPLAIN the working of an engine....

Okay...

But WHY taht crappy music ? A narration would be 1000 times more worthy !!!!