Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 4 votes

New engine


  • Please log in to reply
1792 replies to this topic

#1701 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 09 June 2018 - 02:04

here is an explanation of why these crankshafts break
  ... in aviation, there are also such cases ...       http://repository.am....pdf?sequence=1
 
do something like your Lycoming, Merlyn?
 
Andrew  :smoking:


Advertisement

#1702 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 09 June 2018 - 04:12

So since all of your designs rely on crank-like linkages, how are you going to prevent those failures?



#1703 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 12 June 2018 - 13:45

So since all of your designs rely on crank-like linkages, how are you going to prevent those failures?

Here in my hand the engine shaft from my new4 stroke ..

image280.jpg

 

And because of the fatal mechanical distribution of the crankshaft forces, several cases of failure of the same shaft 

 

ukrecone_waly_img%5B1%5D.jpg

 

A 8 times greater torque (first gear and differential transmission), they transfer to the wheels of the half-axle, which can be seen in the picture of the gearbox with the diverter, from the engine of which the shaft comes ...
they have a diameter of 25 mm and a long length ..
I have never seen a failure in these half-axes.
That is, to transfer 8 times more torque, this dimension is enough ..
fiat-126p.jpg
 
The title is an explanation of why the classic crankshaft is a fatal construction and despite the large dimensions it bursts .. as seen in the pictures .. Here a little about the crush of such shafts, which even without load, under their own weight can be bent.
 
This is called the springing of the crankshaft.
On this link, how are you measuring this springs when the engine is standing. As a result of these crushing, the shafts are breaking up in the middle of their life, despite the fact that they are relatively thick ...
This causes a fatal rule of the "crankshaft" in its very construction.
 
 
SINGLE-supported cranks have no faults. Here is an example, from a locomotive, such a one-way crank in addition, on springs, which causes additional wheel movement. The power transferred is some couple of thousand horsepower ...
I have never seen damage ...
 
lokomotywa.jpg

 

I have never seen damage ...
So a single-sided crankshaft is no longer so emergency, because it does not have this bending, as well as its design must be sufficiently strong.
 
And here is my design lever, to Feliks Roller, which is basically quadruple, and can be supported on the bearing in the cylinder axis, without causing any bending of my shaft ...
Only at the ends will be full bearings determining Feliks Roller
 
lever.jpg

 

 

Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:



#1704 pierrre

pierrre
  • Member

  • 81 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 18 June 2018 - 03:29

The Sylvester-Kempe mechanism is another straight-line linkage.

 

the genius of this being the table wont collapse on load...amazing



#1705 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 19 June 2018 - 01:59

As it turned out, it's worth getting to know the history of the United States ... 
 
 
American Civil War 1861-1865. History talks about Abraham Lincoln and how he contributed to the excellent progress of technology as a result of the moment of this war, choosing the idea of ​​the Swedish immigrant Jon Ericsson to implement ...
 
 
it's about the steam engine of the "Monitor" ship, which contributed to the victory of the Union, but later sank in bad weather. Since then, these genius technical solutions have been covered by the ocean. It was only after 140 years, an attempt was made to extract the "Monitor" engine, it was retrieved in 2001 and reconstructed for the next 10 years.
Thanks to this, they saw the light of day and became popular only, the technical solutions that were used there during the entire 150 years, when the ship was covered with the ocean, they were not remembered too much ..
Here, the history of the project and the way in which this ship and the steam engine was created .. here is also a movie about how the engine model works.
 
 
I of course independently invented Felix Roller for a multi-cylinder engine, replacing the classic crankshaft, but I noticed that the engine "Monitor also had a part of my Felis Roller, and this solution worked well, in the engine 250 KW of power. Clearly, it has two such Shafts with levers, for longitudinal displacement of power. Also, the power take-off wheel is supported on one side (on the other only timing drive)
After covering the "Monitor" engine, I was very happy that my relationship had already been tested practically, but only for two cylinders .. It lay hidden under the water these 150 years .. but now everyone knows about it and can see that the solution works ... for 150 years, no one took it into account .. My Feliks Roller system I designed for 8 cylinders and 16 pistons ((Feliks Commer TS4) .. with the reception of the main power, on the crank shaft one-sided supported .. On the other hand it can be a small crank driving the shaft going to the front of the engine, driving the water pump, fan, generators and compressor, but flexibly coupled ... (as in "Monitor" driving the timing) Here is the animation that I made, showing how the main engine system The Monitor was working.
 
giphy2.gif
Yes, this story is coming round and that's why it's worth knowing .. This is the history of the United States ..
 
Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:


#1706 Joe Bosworth

Joe Bosworth
  • Member

  • 637 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 19 June 2018 - 20:31

Feliks

 

I perceive a known problem in your spate of broken crankshafts shown in your post #1703.

 

Before I say more, can you share information on the circumstances of the shown failures in rev ranges and time under load for the crank failures shown?

 

Your failures are highly similar to a failure pattern that I solved for a major world manufacturer in 1970 but want more insight to your problem before I comment further.

 

Regards


Edited by Joe Bosworth, 19 June 2018 - 20:31.


#1707 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 1,447 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 20 June 2018 - 06:13

the genius of this being the table wont collapse on load...amazing


A very clever mechanism.

#1708 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 1,447 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 20 June 2018 - 06:16

As it turned out, it's worth getting to know the history of the United States ... 
 
https://en.wikipedia...iki/USS_Monitor
 
American Civil War 1861-1865. History talks about Abraham Lincoln and how he contributed to the excellent progress of technology as a result of the moment of this war, choosing the idea of ​​the Swedish immigrant Jon Ericsson to implement ...
 
https://www.battlefi...-cheesebox-raft
 
it's about the steam engine of the "Monitor" ship, which contributed to the victory of the Union, but later sank in bad weather. Since then, these genius technical solutions have been covered by the ocean. It was only after 140 years, an attempt was made to extract the "Monitor" engine, it was retrieved in 2001 and reconstructed for the next 10 years.
Thanks to this, they saw the light of day and became popular only, the technical solutions that were used there during the entire 150 years, when the ship was covered with the ocean, they were not remembered too much ..
Here, the history of the project and the way in which this ship and the steam engine was created .. here is also a movie about how the engine model works.
 
https://www.youtube....h?v=VWn8gQ9Ykpk
 
I of course independently invented Felix Roller for a multi-cylinder engine, replacing the classic crankshaft, but I noticed that the engine "Monitor also had a part of my Felis Roller, and this solution worked well, in the engine 250 KW of power. Clearly, it has two such Shafts with levers, for longitudinal displacement of power. Also, the power take-off wheel is supported on one side (on the other only timing drive)
After covering the "Monitor" engine, I was very happy that my relationship had already been tested practically, but only for two cylinders .. It lay hidden under the water these 150 years .. but now everyone knows about it and can see that the solution works ... for 150 years, no one took it into account .. My Feliks Roller system I designed for 8 cylinders and 16 pistons ((Feliks Commer TS4) .. with the reception of the main power, on the crank shaft one-sided supported .. On the other hand it can be a small crank driving the shaft going to the front of the engine, driving the water pump, fan, generators and compressor, but flexibly coupled ... (as in "Monitor" driving the timing) Here is the animation that I made, showing how the main engine system The Monitor was working.
 
giphy2.gif
Yes, this story is coming round and that's why it's worth knowing .. This is the history of the United States ..
 
Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:


It still seems to be a crankshaft engine to me - it wouldn't operate without the crank wheel part.

#1709 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 20 June 2018 - 07:35

But it does at least resolve the sidethrust forces in nice rotary bearings rather than sliding.



#1710 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 20 June 2018 - 22:26

Feliks

 

I perceive a known problem in your spate of broken crankshafts shown in your post #1703.

 

Before I say more, can you share information on the circumstances of the shown failures in rev ranges and time under load for the crank failures shown?

 

Your failures are highly similar to a failure pattern that I solved for a major world manufacturer in 1970 but want more insight to your problem before I comment further.

 

Regards

 

Big thanks to Joe for helping me with these complicated technical problems. Only people like you, who have devoted their whole lives with a big heart to motorization, know the answers to them and want to share it with others .. But these broken walls are not mine, I only have them pictured, because in Poland they produced 4 000,000 of the exemplifiers of this engine, and it was easy to find these few pieces damaged in this number. I also had such a shaft in my engine, but I never used it for a long time, that's why the tired stories omineły .. But the story is, as you probably remember, for many years .. The first of this accident, were engines of the "Graf Zeppelin" .
 
 
Thank you very much for wanting to help me solve the problem ...
Andrew  :wave:

Edited by Feliks, 20 June 2018 - 22:26.


#1711 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 20 June 2018 - 22:31

It still seems to be a crankshaft engine to me - it wouldn't operate without the crank wheel part.

Do not be puritanic when it comes to cranks ... one crank wheel can be instead of 16 crank. Particularly, it is time to replace this most expensive rotational part of the engine ..

 

 

Andrew 



#1712 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 20 June 2018 - 22:36

But it does at least resolve the sidethrust forces in nice rotary bearings rather than sliding.

Yes, it can not be 100% but much better than in a traditional system ...

 

Well, this is the next part of this war ...
monitor_and_merrimac.jpg
 
And here Monitor engine after extraction, but still not preserved ..
monitorold1.jpg
 
Here is an elegant first prototype of the Monitor .. short Feliks Roller.
 
monitorold.jpg
 
 
Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:


#1713 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 23 June 2018 - 18:55

Here's the version of you tube Monitor's basic animation ..
 
 
Andrew  :)


#1714 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 24 June 2018 - 15:53

Well now here is a picture as I imagine my Feliks Roller. This is the version of Felix Commer4 of course a two-stroke version. in which the main torsion forces are transmitted through the maximum large areas of the "connecting rod", and are supported at the point where they work, and do not cause bending, as in the classic crankshaft. That is why it does not tend to fatigue the matariału. and relatively long trouble-free work .. And a little lower costs of doing....

 

16tlokow4.jpg

 

Well, of course, the masses reciprocating a little smaller ..  :)

 

Andrew   :smoking:  :smoking:


Edited by Feliks, 24 June 2018 - 15:58.


#1715 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 28 June 2018 - 00:16

Here a little bit about how this multi-fuel engine works ..
 
 
 
 obviously instead of the crankshaft, my extra 4 (3) cylinders,
 
 
air%20side%20crakshaft.jpg
 
 which double the power and thanks to the lightness of the masses I think that it can be 500 horsepower ...
 
 
Andrew :smoking:  :smoking:


#1716 Joe Bosworth

Joe Bosworth
  • Member

  • 637 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 03 July 2018 - 12:05

Feliks

 

I perceive a known problem in your spate of broken crankshafts shown in your post #1703.

 

Before I say more, can you share information on the circumstances of the shown failures in rev ranges and time under load for the crank failures shown?

 

Your failures are highly similar to a failure pattern that I solved for a major world manufacturer in 1970 but want more insight to your problem before I comment further.

 

Regards

 

I posted the above #1706 and you replied with #1710 that indicated that you did not have further detail.  Then in #1714 above you raise the matter of fatigue failure.  Which gets me back to the fact that the photo in #1703 depicts failures very much in keeping with a spate of failures I had in a new industrial plant back in 1970.

 

To keep this story concise, I was using industrial derivatives of engines from a very well known manufacturer. Within a few days of startup the engine broke its shaft at the cheek of the output main bearing.  Fortunately we had an installed spare so we put that into service and lo and behold it also had an identical failure at the same point in its life cycle.  Needless to say, I  not happy and called the technical experts of the division supplying the engines.  Got the fully expected response, not their fault, thousands in service etc.  Must be an installation fault, etc.  I re-checked all possible extraneous factors and found all ok. 

 

I smelled a rat for sure as a simple calculation showed that failures occurred at close to 3 million force cycles, almost exactly at the point that a low stressed metal fatigue would occur plus the failure faces showed all the characteristics of pure fatigue failure.(At this point in my racing career I had seen about every kind of failure that you come up to and was good at analysis and testing).

 

I ordered a couple of new engines to get us running again plus a complete shaft assembly.  On getting the shaft assembly I got our machine shop to build me a set of vee block supports at the main bearings and to source an air motor driven energy exciter to attach to the statically supported assembly.  Needless to say, I set up my test with an oscilliscope to measure

frequency and displacement.  Started the exciter and increased the force frequency.  I hardly needed the scope as at a point the shaft assembly practically jumped out of the vee blocks.  The frequency was almost exactly at the second resonance point of the RPM that we were operating at!

 

Back on the phone to the supplier's tech types; response was my findings were impossible.  Thousands in service etc and that had designed out al resonances of operating RPM.  Fortunately I said I would show up the next day with my test rig and they could see for themselves as they were within a convenient trucking distance from our plant.

 

On arrival the next day, set up the test rig and a couple is low level techy types came out of the office to shoot down my test.  My previuous results were replicated.  Well you can imagine that in a few minutes all the techy type big shots were at the test site to view.

 

In the meantime, one of the factory floor types sidled up to me in his bib overalls and chew of tobacco in his cheek and quietly mentioned to me that they had just changed the weight of the assembly and mine were the first off of the new type.  He sidled away before being noticed but zingo that was all I needed to know.

 

Re-ran test with all the big wigs in attendance.  Expected explanations of impossible, thousands etc.  Until I quietly asked whether they had made any changes to weight or configuration recently?  Almost total silence ensued and they excused themselves for an internal discussion as I was invited to fresh coffee and newspaper to read in the board room.

 

Needless to say that in a few minutes they sheepeshdly came back and advised that they would make good with new equipment and spares at no cost!!

 

Regards :clap:



#1717 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 03 July 2018 - 22:23

Great story Joe!!! Got any more like that?



#1718 PJGD

PJGD
  • Member

  • 111 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 04 July 2018 - 00:23

GG, I am sure that he has - but in the mean time I can offer something similar:

 

Back in circa 1974 I worked as a junior technician at an R&D lab within the diesel part of the Lucas Industries empire.  To keep the lab in the black, we rented out our dynamometer facilities to all and sundry; Ford Truck and also the Tractor Division were regular customers.  But then at some point, the BMC part of British Leyland hired us to run a durability test on a diesel engine then under development.  It was a four cylinder engine of about 2.2L with an IDI combustion system.  To us, it looked like a petrol engine but with a diesel cylinder head, in other words a cheap and simple conversion of an existing light duty engine; not something designed for purpose.

 

I was responsible for instrumenting and installing the engine in the test cell coupled to a Heenan & Froude DPX water brake, and then setting up the automatic protection unit so that it could run overnight at the customer-specified speed and load.  The initial baseline performance tests went well, and the next day it seemed to run quite happily so I left it to run overnight.  When I came in the next morning, the engine was quiet having shut down due to low coolant circulation; I then noticed that the engine had shed its fan belt.  Clearly, I had not checked for correct tension before starting the test.  After sorting that issue, we set it running again, and the next morning it had shed its belt again.  At this rate, we were not going to meet the customers time schedule, but after discussions with them they asked us to continue.

 

The problem continued, and I think that they may have come down from Longbridge to check on our set-up but found no fault and it began to look more like an engine problem.  We proposed that we instrument the crank nose with a torsiograph (Sunbury Instruments, IIRC), which we did (there was no torsional damper back then), and I don't remember the exact result but I seem to recall something close to 2 degrees (I assume peak-to-peak, and not +/-).  We got permission to run at a different speed after that.

 

Several morning later, I came in and again all was quiet but this time the shutdown was due to no speed signal.  This time, all the bolts attaching the flywheel to the crank had sheared causing quite some damage!  BMC sent us a new crank and flywheel which we installed along with a new torsionally soft cardan shaft.  At this remove, I don't recall any further failures; BMC paid us for all the extra work, but it was clear that their idea of a fit-for-function product was marginal at best

 

PJGD



#1719 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 04 July 2018 - 07:52

BL had a long history of trying to turn petrol engines into diesels, and when I was there (1978 to 1984) NONE of them was fit for purpose. Our particular bugbear was Iceberg, a diesel version of the Rover V8. (LandRover made petrol and diesel versions that used a common block, but they were dreadful engines in either form). I don't understand why they thought they could do this, the engine guys were pretty cluey. The A+ turbo engine prototype did 100 hours at full power at the first attempt. That's the signoff test that means you have an engine worth trying to develop.

 

They did come up with a decent diesel eventually, I think they worked with Perkins to design it.



Advertisement

#1720 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 04 July 2018 - 07:53

Joe, I guess they hadn't retuned the TV dampers.



#1721 Joe Bosworth

Joe Bosworth
  • Member

  • 637 posts
  • Joined: May 05

Posted 05 July 2018 - 05:51

I posted #7016 above as an example of how even the big guys with almost infinite tech support can make big fubars and to perhaps provide Felix with a bit of guidance in his endeavours.  I can share bits of my experiences in race car and engine development and driving while at the same time I was climbing the corporate tree with international corporations. 

 

Had a fair bit of success with both, by the time I had the above mentioned fatigue experience I had faced the starting flag more than 250 times (a lot more later) and had, with and through others, been involved in several race car and engine developments.  Not long after 1970 I had corporate control twice of 800 men and women engineering departments and ended up running a 3500 person group of tech and trades people.

 

I had a lot of good guidance through these efforts but two in particular come to mind relative to this forum.  Colin Chapman was known to be driven by, “Simplify and add lightness”,  Howard Head effectively invented the composite snow ski that displaced wooden skis as well as nearly the first to develop composite and larger faced tennis racquets.  He was quoted by the sage advice, “The idea for an invention is only 5 percent of the job. Making it practical is 95 percent”.

Both thoughts were prominent in my corporate and race car experiences as getting good ideas is relatively easy; being sure that people have a specific objective in mind as well as boundaries to work within insures that a real solution will be the result of their efforts.

 

I pass this on trusting that those who sometimes put forth good ideas in this thread can gain by taking heed.

 

By the way Grunt, I can share my fubars as well but this is probably not the time or place.  Somebody want to start a Fubar Thread?

 

Regards :wave:



#1722 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 July 2018 - 01:17

I posted #7016 

Regards :wave:

 

Yes, this is the right way. First, a sports car, the greater part of which is technology, and then gained experience to produce better things ... and pass on further experience ... but for big ideas, everything is different and new experience has to be acquired ... Al to you must have the athlete's heart ... It's good that you have it, Joe..  :wave:

 

Now, when I was surprised by the Polish inventor Tadeusz Tański from 1925, but in my new Feliks Roller gaze, this simple engine system was created ......
 
 
ted Tadeusz%20Tanski%201925.jpg
 
This is 12 cylinder dual boxer or H engine .. name Feliks-Tański engine.. 
Its movable parts are a double piston, a single piston pin, and Feliks Roller with lever...
 
 
tan1.jpg
 
Now there is NO lateral force of the piston and the croshead also ...
 
Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 07 July 2018 - 01:48.


#1723 kikiturbo2

kikiturbo2
  • Member

  • 827 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 July 2018 - 14:41

what about crank stifness?

 

also, lateral load will depend on the friction in the slider mechanism on the ends of the "crank"


Edited by kikiturbo2, 07 July 2018 - 19:34.


#1724 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 July 2018 - 21:05

what about crank stifness?

 

also, lateral load will depend on the friction in the slider mechanism on the ends of the "crank"

Because it has the ability to move linearly along the "crank" it will be 0.1 working force, and that it is already much smaller than in the classic system, it will not work at first, just trace the forces in the mechanism I drew above .. in the moment when in a classic system the force works in 100% of value (90 deg) here, decrease to obsolete 0
So that in total this friction will be only some trace amount, we can practically skip ... ..
 
it may have an average value below 1% of "traditional" strength...
 
Andrew   :smoking:   :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 07 July 2018 - 21:17.


#1725 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 20 July 2018 - 04:44

The principle of operation Feliks --Tanski engine with roller shaft

 

 

feltan4.gif

 

Andrew :smoking:  :smoking:



#1726 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 20 July 2018 - 07:49

So where does the sliding motion take place? The oscillating arm is changing length as the pistons move.



#1727 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 20 July 2018 - 10:37

So where does the sliding motion take place? The oscillating arm is changing length as the pistons move.

 

These brown elements can be made of Teflon with bronze or graphite .. They have relatively large surface cooperation, so the pressures will not be large .. so they can be done this way ..

 

tan222.jpg

 

 

Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:



#1728 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 20 July 2018 - 20:07

Only one part of the multi-cylinder H engine can be seen on my animation. As you can see from the history, it can be 24 cylinders .. the order of ignition can also be seen in wikipedia .. If we properly think, the customs of the main cylinder system from Felix Roller, may not have ANY ONE SCREW to twisting ..  :wave:

 

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

 

Formel 1 too :

https://en.wikipedia...h_Racing_Motors

https://rafaelschelb.../11/23/60s-h16/

 

https://en.wikipedia...Lycoming_H-2470

https://en.wikipedia.../Fairey_Monarch

https://en.wikipedia...Whitney_XH-3130

H-Engine_4_strouke.gif

https://en.wikipedia...ce_Eagle_(1944)

https://en.wikipedia...ki/Napier_Sabre

 

 

Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:



#1729 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 23 July 2018 - 17:06

Well, I would not describe it better ...  :lol:  

 

 

 

16tlokow4.jpg

 

Andrew  :wave:



#1730 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 22 August 2018 - 00:12

Yes, the "Monitor" Memorial Museum is in New York. I am writing that a steam fire pump invented and built by John Ericsson has saved London before burning ...
So inventor John Ericson contributed to the good history of England.
And my engine Feliks -Commer is a bit like that of a hand-operated fire pump ...
 
 
fire_pump.jpg
 
 
 
 
fire%20pump.jpg
 
 
 
Andrew  :smoking:


#1731 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 11 September 2018 - 23:09

We'll be back in time a bit, for the first project ...

 

Here with a sketched diagram in cylinders. the basic standard norm poped by the timing.
You can see a huge difference in capacity volume and its asymmetry ..
Adding well-done gasodynamic phenomena, the volume of one cylinder can even be 700 ccm of really sucked air, with a basic piston of 300 ccm.
Well, it's a little not  surprising to receive this 200 hp at 5000 rpm with 1 liter of basic capacity ..
 
volume1.jpg
But of course I understand that my experience and knowledge is not needed for anyone ... You can start from the very beginning and ... lose a few years to get what I already know ...
 
 
Andrew :smoking:


#1732 pierrre

pierrre
  • Member

  • 81 posts
  • Joined: June 17

Posted 16 October 2018 - 10:52

Only one part of the multi-cylinder H engine can be seen on my animation. As you can see from the history, it can be 24 cylinders .. the order of ignition can also be seen in wikipedia .. If we properly think, the customs of the main cylinder system from Felix Roller, may not have ANY ONE SCREW to twisting ..  :wave:

 

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

 

Formel 1 too :

https://en.wikipedia...h_Racing_Motors

https://rafaelschelb.../11/23/60s-h16/

 

https://en.wikipedia...Lycoming_H-2470

https://en.wikipedia.../Fairey_Monarch

https://en.wikipedia...Whitney_XH-3130

H-Engine_4_strouke.gif

https://en.wikipedia...ce_Eagle_(1944)

https://en.wikipedia...ki/Napier_Sabre

 

 

Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:

coventry climax 180° sixteen cylinder used a similar system and crankshaft failure was rampant


Edited by pierrre, 16 October 2018 - 10:52.


#1733 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 02 May 2019 - 00:56

Feliks-Tański  engine animation  video 

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=FoiBCDRjza4

 

Andrew :wave:


Edited by Feliks, 02 May 2019 - 01:02.


#1734 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 18 May 2019 - 16:32

Well, here is the way to create a vacuum - different in my Red Baron Windmill ... but now the first Newcomen steam engine called atmospheric, has an inaccurate name .Because actually it is a vacuum-driven engine, which gives condensed water vapor underneath the piston. In my case, this underpressure - it receives differently, from the wings put up in the wind and brought on to entrust the earth through a pipe with a large cross-section. And on the surface of the earth such a motor with pistons driving generators .. It is the most effective way, because virtually thanks to good piston sealing,  vacuum  we will not lose any losses .. thanks to this the efficiency will be high and no moving element can be seen in principle, except the rotating axis of the generator ... ..
That is why it is worth knowing the history of technology, because it contributes to the creation of new inventions.
here more about this Newcomen engine. , which may be useful to my Windmill Red Baron ... and we will have an efficient motor with a piston seal class, used to produce electricity from the wind ...
Well, it is definitely not a heat engine .. so talking about temperatures is pointless.  :smoking:
 
9V.jpg
 
 
 
 
Andrew :wave:

Edited by Feliks, 18 May 2019 - 16:34.


#1735 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 19 May 2019 - 05:29

 

... but now the first Newcomen steam engine called atmospheric, has an inaccurate name .

 

There is a reason these were called atmospheric engines.

 

Firstly, it is not the vacuum which drives the piston - it is the atmospheric pressure - which being greater, drives the piston.

 

Secondly, most later high-pressure steam engines - certainly marine ones, use a low temperature condenser on the exhaust side of the piston engine. This ensures that the low pressure side of the final stage piston has a vacuum of similar magnitude to the Newcomen engine. Consequently both atmospheric and high-pressure steam engines benefit from a vacuum on the low pressure side of the piston and it would be inaccurate to differentiate the two by calling the Newcomen a "vacuum" engine.


Edited by gruntguru, 19 May 2019 - 05:30.


#1736 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 19 May 2019 - 15:39

There is a reason these were called atmospheric engines.

 

Firstly, it is not the vacuum which drives the piston - it is the atmospheric pressure - which being greater, drives the piston.

 

Secondly, most later high-pressure steam engines - certainly marine ones, use a low temperature condenser on the exhaust side of the piston engine. This ensures that the low pressure side of the final stage piston has a vacuum of similar magnitude to the Newcomen engine. Consequently both atmospheric and high-pressure steam engines benefit from a vacuum on the low pressure side of the piston and it would be inaccurate to differentiate the two by calling the Newcomen a "vacuum" engine.

 

Well, this name could have been, if this type of engine was only a steam engine .. But if we have the same engine now, only the vacuum is not due to steam, and vacuum, for example from the venturi nozzle is the name of the vacuum engine, however, is more appropriate ..  I think so ..

Aerzen_Machines_Ltd_GQ_GR_positive_displ

 

It's enough to have such a rotary engine on this underpressure, but it has a slightly worse type of seal and it is easier to build than the Newcomen multi-cylinder....

 

 

 

Andrew :wave:



#1737 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 19 May 2019 - 22:21

But if we have the same engine now, only the vacuum is not due to steam, and vacuum, for example from the venturi nozzle is the name of the vacuum engine, however, is more appropriate ..  I think so ..

 

 

Andrew :wave:

Agreed.



#1738 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 1,447 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 21 May 2019 - 14:08

 

Well, here is the way to create a vacuum - different in my Red Baron Windmill ... but now the first Newcomen steam engine called atmospheric, has an inaccurate name .Because actually it is a vacuum-driven engine, which gives condensed water vapor underneath the piston. In my case, this underpressure - it receives differently, from the wings put up in the wind and brought on to entrust the earth through a pipe with a large cross-section. And on the surface of the earth such a motor with pistons driving generators .. It is the most effective way, because virtually thanks to good piston sealing,  vacuum  we will not lose any losses .. thanks to this the efficiency will be high and no moving element can be seen in principle, except the rotating axis of the generator ... ..
That is why it is worth knowing the history of technology, because it contributes to the creation of new inventions.
here more about this Newcomen engine. , which may be useful to my Windmill Red Baron ... and we will have an efficient motor with a piston seal class, used to produce electricity from the wind ...
Well, it is definitely not a heat engine .. so talking about temperatures is pointless.  :smoking:
 
9V.jpg
 
 
 
 
Andrew :wave:

 

 

 

 I presume the idea is to lead the low pressure off to a "vacuum" motor.  There would be no point in having a wing/aerofoil shape - a simple circular horn-shaped venturi would be better.  Would this arrangement be more efficient at gathering wind energy than a turbine of the same diameter?  - possibly - could be worth some thought and/or testing.   



#1739 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 22 May 2019 - 05:08

No, Feliks' nemesis, the Betts law still applies. Basically, if you extract all the energy from the incoming airstream it all piles up behind the exhaust and can't go anywhere.



Advertisement

#1740 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 22 May 2019 - 23:34

No, Feliks' nemesis, the Betts law still applies. Basically, if you extract all the energy from the incoming airstream it all piles up behind the exhaust and can't go anywhere.

but the air stream is not a dm, it is a large stream, with a very fine period of mass and not some of its smallest parts.

 

and do not tell me that the mass unit is mass per second ... :lol:

 

Andrew  :smoking:



#1741 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 23 May 2019 - 22:06

Would this arrangement be more efficient at gathering wind energy than a turbine of the same diameter?  - possibly - could be worth some thought and/or testing.   

Not likely. Wind turbines are very efficient and have a large capture area for the price. Imagine building a 200m diameter funnel or venturi then keeping it pointed into the wind.



#1742 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 23 May 2019 - 23:23

Betts still applies. i do wonder if an array of fixed deflectors could be erected, basically rectangular poles at angles, to push more air into a standard turbine. They would at least be cheap.



#1743 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 24 May 2019 - 03:53

Without generating turbulence or eddies that might be detrimental to the turbine.



#1744 Kelpiecross

Kelpiecross
  • Member

  • 1,447 posts
  • Joined: October 10

Posted 24 May 2019 - 13:15

 That bastard Betz and his bloody Law again. 

 

 One of the mysteries (to me at least) of wind  turbines is the fact that the frontal area of the two or three skinny blades is a fraction of the total disc area (maybe as little as 5%?).  You (or I) would think that a lot of the wind would slip past the blades unmolested and into the distance like "a fart through hessian pyjamas"  (Old Korean saying).

  Presumably the rotational movement of the blades intercepts a much higher percentage of the wind than the blades' frontal area would suggest.  My vague suggestion of a venturi/collector was intended to ensure that a lot more of the airstream was made use of.

  One of the assumptions of Betz's Law was that there was "an infinite number of blades" (Wiki) - presumably meaning that there was no wind leakage (not more fart jokes) past the blades.  A typical farm windmill seems to try for a much higher percentage of  wind capture with its high percentage of blade area. 

 

 I find wind turbines very interesting - but I don't think they are a sensible alternative to a proper Whiteman's power station.  These new Thorium reactors look promising.        



#1745 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 29 May 2019 - 01:17

Not likely. Wind turbines are very efficient and have a large capture area for the price. Imagine building a 200m diameter funnel or venturi then keeping it pointed into the wind.

 

So I would rather advise you to read my posts carefully, because then I have to repeat myself .. Well, if you can imagine, maybe I can imagine how a podnica would have to be for this funnel with a mean of 200 meters. I used to give zory earlier, so it should not be difficult, But it is, as you can see. Well, this streamer would have to have more than 10,000 MW and it has not built or built such a node yet ... quickly ...
I also see that unfortunately there is no imagination, because you do not have to put such a nozzle on the wind, because it is unproductive, in contrast to children's windmills. You have to build such four nozzles, for every side of the world, always one will be set close to the wind .. at the sea, it is enough to go to the sea. But to invent new solutions, having a faint idea about it, it is out of place ...
Below, once again gives calculations and dimensions of nozzles that would be needed, so that all of Poland would have electricity from them. Probably for England 3 such sets are enough .. But you also need to learn such generators 2000 MW build, but for some plumbing, divide then on smaller streams ..
 
venturi%2011%2020000%20MW.jpg
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Venturi%20100m.jpg
 
 
 
 
 
Andrew  :smoking:


#1746 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 29 May 2019 - 01:37

Well, I think that Lord Kelvin with his skills in aerodynamics, he would certainly say that you can not build such a thing, "because there is nothing for free" ...
I also do not recommend to employ Betza, with his "mass for a second" because here she would have to change the one to "mass per minute". In addition, physicists from nuclear power plants, probably also on my project will be skeptical about the .. and some losers, entrust his realizations, to show that you can not ...
 
Andrew :smoking:  :smoking:


#1747 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 5,641 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 29 May 2019 - 09:19

Betz isn't about units, it's about what happens to the exhaust air. if it has no Kinetic Energy left, it can't move, so it blocks the exhaust of your windmill.



#1748 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 6,708 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 30 May 2019 - 22:21

 

So I would rather advise you to read my posts carefully, because then I have to repeat myself .. Well, if you can imagine, maybe I can imagine how a podnica would have to be for this funnel with a mean of 200 meters. I used to give zory earlier, so it should not be difficult, But it is, as you can see. Well, this streamer would have to have more than 10,000 MW and it has not built or built such a node yet ... quickly ...
I also see that unfortunately there is no imagination, because you do not have to put such a nozzle on the wind, because it is unproductive, in contrast to children's windmills. You have to build such four nozzles, for every side of the world, always one will be set close to the wind .. at the sea, it is enough to go to the sea. But to invent new solutions, having a faint idea about it, it is out of place ...
Below, once again gives calculations and dimensions of nozzles that would be needed, so that all of Poland would have electricity from them. Probably for England 3 such sets are enough .. But you also need to learn such generators 2000 MW build, but for some plumbing, divide then on smaller streams ..
 
venturi%2011%2020000%20MW.jpg
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Venturi%20100m.jpg
 
 
 
 
 
Andrew  :smoking:

 

 

So I have looked at this post - for longer than I would like, and found the two problems in your formula quite quickly.

 

It is not possible to produce the 56.26 m/s at the venturi section. If the free air velocity is 5 m/s, the velecity in the entrance of your venturi will NOT be 5 m/s. Because of the restriction , most of the free air will flow around the entry to the venturi.

 

The total power present in a cross section slice of wind is easy to calculate - 1/2 x mdot x V^2. A modern wind turbine can extract about 30% of that so even ignoring Betz law, the available power is 3 times what is currently possible - not 300 times!!!!



#1749 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 31 May 2019 - 17:11

 

The total power present in a cross section slice of wind is easy to calculate - 1/2 x mdot x V^2. A modern wind turbine can extract about 30% of that so even ignoring Betz law, the available power is 3 times what is currently possible - not 300 times!!!!

 

It is a pity that I have to run my children and show me where they are making mistakes. Here is the exact RIGHT PATTER for calculating the power of the windmill on Google.
according to my, equally true, this example of 80 meters, and 15 m / s will give us 5 x 5 x 5 x 80 sqrt / 1530 = 14, 117 MW, or even a little less than the example of google 16, 300 MW ..., or my designs they are reliable. And its most important part, is the wind speed to the third power, in both patterns ..
 
and this can not be discussed any more. :smoking:  :smoking:
 
Andrew  :smoking:  :smoking:


#1750 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 872 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 31 May 2019 - 17:57

So I have looked at this post - for longer than I would like, and found the two problems in your formula quite quickly.

 

It is not possible to produce the 56.26 m/s at the venturi section. If the free air velocity is 5 m/s, the velecity in the entrance of your venturi will NOT be 5 m/s. Because of the restriction , most of the free air will flow around the entry to the venturi.

 

 

so too, when it comes to the venturi nozzles, we score a 10-fold increase in the wind speed in the throat, which results from the difference in their cross-sections and the exact flow of air in the inlet and throat. This ratio is 10 to one, but the flow it will be laminar, i.e. the output cone will be less than 7 degrees. This causes that the venturi nozzle MUST be so long that this LAMINAR FLOW would be created. this is the same condition as in the plane, that the speed of the plane MUST BE MORE, from the critical one, that the carrier force would arise. Because if this speed is not there, the plane falls like a rock down. That's why we have to have an airport to get that speed ... :smoking:
 
I mean it is in the venturi nozzle, and its shape must be consistent with the theory of laminar flow, otherwise we do not get a full flow. but jesligo we will get this speed in the throat will be 10 times greater than the input. So instead of 15 m / sec we get 150 m / s. :smoking:  :smoking:
Well, I advise you to say your sentences Einstein changed in his profile, because Einstein knew little about aerodynamics, and my solution, he would be more practical for people than his atomic matters .. You can choose from my lyrics .. :lol:
 
Andrew  :smoking: