On Apr 18, 9:45*am, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 08:27:45 -0500, Robert Nichols





wrote:
On 04/18/2013 02:19 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 16:29:51 -0700 (PDT), BottleBob
wrote:

All:

* *Here's another interesting automotive techie gem.

http://youtu.be/lJ1kxbtsBSU

How do they couple it to the drive line?

How about attaching magnets around the outside and having it spin
inside coils to make a self-contained engine+alternator?

FWIW, it looks to me like this engine violates a basic point of IC
engine design for thermal efficiency. By using a separate combustion
chamber, it multiplies the surface area relative to the volume of
combusted gas. The result is a very high ratio of lost heat to useful
heat.

This is what kills the efficiency of flathead engines. This one looks
worse in that regard.

--
Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This is an inside-out version of the Gnome rotary aircraft engine
circa 1915 or so with the added idea, from much earlier, of a pumping
cylinder. To eliminate the crank, they've got a much larger mass of
metal spinning. Power to weight ratio has to be dismal, plus you've a
hell of a gyroscopic effect. And you're right, to do this, they've
completely thrown away 100 years of combustion chamber shape
development.

These engines show up from time to time, going to be the next Best
Thing. They usually die because they can't be lubed, can't be cooled
and/or suck fuel like demons. Ths one looks like it will probably do
all three. About all they're good for, if the promoters are any good,
is successfully separating money from the wallets of backers. Just
because you can get a 3-D animation cheap these days doesn't mean it's
efficient, buildable or durable.

This one was dreamed up by somebody that had an idea, but didn't know
I.C. engine history and has no way of knowing how to run the numbers.
Another one for a later edition of "Unusual Engines".

Stan