New animations half rotate engine:








And in scale 1:1 350 ccm intake volume:
http://www.new4stroke.com/halfrotatedxf.dxf

Regards Andrew

 

Honestly, I think it just looks flawed... I'd like to see a working example. I would think it would be similar to a rotory - low on torque with quirky seals, but I wouldn't expect it to rev to well even with the short "Strokes". I like the out of the box thinking though.

 

Agree on the out-of-the-box thinking, but the biggest problem with the piston engine is the total 180* in forces when the piston is traveling up and down -- this is what the rotary solves, but of course it has it's own fair share of problems.

This seems like it would be even more hurky-jerky than a piston engine. On a piston engine, at least the piston slows and "dwells" at/near TDC and BDC before changing direction....this looks like it is a much more sudden change in direction. Wouldn't expect any kind of revs or smoothness from this design, but hey, I don't build engines and would love to be proven wrong!

 

I know what you meant, but generally speaking you want shorter strokes if you're looking to rev

 

I'm happy to be asking about this state of affairs is more ..:wave:

Maybe there is a part of the answer ..

Now you can go back to my engine project new4stroke that you very much approve of ..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency

And now this. My engine new4stroke is the most vital advantage, even though it does not appear on any animation ..
Many people have spoken out about the efficiency of four-stroke engine, was stating with such engine already reached peaks of efficiency possible, and to get it to improve by 2% "The great issue" about three bilion dollars a year on research ..
Because they thought impossible, that you can make a difference when it comes to basic parameter or friction, which presented the current position of Wikipedia.
Meanwhile, my engine, changing the ratio of friction to the size of the intake air through the engine. So, but it's something that everyone seemed so far out that is constant and unchanging.
And here's the joke ... my engine, even though it is built on a base the size of a two-cylinder engine, 600 ccm, geometrically speaking, sucks about 950 ccm ... (in fact much greater).
So as if normal engine but with an additional 3 1/6 cylinder .. but the cylinder does not. This increase in the displacement give only two intake valves piston located in the cylinder head. And there may be nothing revolutionary, were it not that these pistons with rods they turn TWO TIMES slower than the basic pistons ... In connection with this, the force of inertia, which is realized as the additional volume (350 ccm) are swept up four times smaller (which I also take into account the Wikipedia)
So in general we can say that this "extra cylinder", if it could be adjoined to the basic operating system of the twice the speed, with the same parameters as the pistons sucking friction should have only 88 cc. So the difference 350 - 88 = 262 ccm, otzymujemy for free, with my engine system ... We can say that in relation to its basic size 600 ccm. Friction has been reduced by as much as 43%. suction against displacement in the traditional way ...
With modesty will not ask where my 43/2 x 3000000000000 = 64 bilon $ .... which do not have the "Great" lecture every year on the 2% increase in efficiency ....

And the real efficiency gain can be easily demonstrated mathematically ...



And of course, what Daniel suggested must take place within the limits of reasonable operation of the engine...

I can understand a lot, even that can be
stunned silence, but not for so many years ...

Also understand that it may be hard to admit to the fact that I thought differently, but I think that should be a hit in the chest and publicly admit to mistakes. Because we all now see that the PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE engine can zoom in on a lot of ...


I think it is a step by step to resolve these problems, but probably need to order, then it will be easier for us to understand next.



Andrew

 

Well, as everyone on the forum knows, I started publishing about my new4stroke engine 15 years ago. By courtesy, this thread exists to this day and everyone who reads it up to that time is already familiar with my structure, and probably many like it, although it requires a deep understanding. I tried to explain it successively. But now, courtesy of SAE, I can also enter the competition. annually organized by her - "Create the Future". Here is my application for this competition.
https://contest.techbriefs.com/2021/...-stroke-engine
And I think that forum readers know even more about my project than it is described there. Thanks to this, they understand it better and can vote for my project. But for credibility, in order to apply (and not only to mine), you need to register on this page, here: https://contest.techbriefs.com/account/registration
I hope that many of you who spoke warmly about my project will vote for my project. Thank you in advance ..

Andrew