I first read about this in nasa tech briefs last month.
Has anybody seen this thing first hand?

http://www.gear6.net/2006/04/the_myt_massive.html

Jon Grimm wrote:

I first read about this in nasa tech briefs last month.
Has anybody seen this thing first hand?

http://www.gear6.net/2006/04/the_myt_massive.html

Hopefully it wasn't patented. Because that construction is about 80
years old!
And when you look at the "cylinders" you know why it was given up.


Nick
--
Motor Modelle // Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
DIY-DRO // Eigenbau-Digitalanzeige
http://www.yadro.de

Hopefully it wasn't patented. Because that construction is about 80
years old!
And when you look at the "cylinders" you know why it was given up.

They will have had to make some serious advances in cylinder ring sealing
technology for this to work. That many sets of rings traveling on the same
circular path without the benefit of oil (from below in a conventional
engine) will be a real challenge.

Karl

On Fri, 5 May 2006 10:06:27 +0200, (Nick Müller)
wrote:

Jon Grimm wrote:

I first read about this in nasa tech briefs last month.
Has anybody seen this thing first hand?

http://www.gear6.net/2006/04/the_myt_massive.html

Hopefully it wasn't patented. Because that construction is about 80
years old!
And when you look at the "cylinders" you know why it was given up.


Nick

I cant see how it could possibly work. the leading piston moves as
expected but the trailing piston has the exact same force on it
pushing backwards. the video shows it to move forward as though there
were no resisting force on it.
the design is a load of codswallop. cant possibly function as
indicated.

Stealth Pilot

This is a variation of the old "cat and mouse" engine, with a toroidal track
instead of a cylindrical one (in the original versions, the cylinder axis is
coaxial with the coaxial shafts that drive the "pistons" around. See US
patent 5,433,179 for one example). There was one version with ball shaped
pistons running in a similar toroidal track. Interesting design. I played
around with variations once, but that was for a pump, when Edwards High
Vacuum was looking for novel vacuum pump designs and I worked for the parent
company's R&D center.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Stealth Pilot" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 5 May 2006 10:06:27 +0200, (Nick Müller)
wrote:

Jon Grimm wrote:

I first read about this in nasa tech briefs last month.
Has anybody seen this thing first hand?

http://www.gear6.net/2006/04/the_myt_massive.html

Hopefully it wasn't patented. Because that construction is about 80
years old!
And when you look at the "cylinders" you know why it was given up.


Nick

I cant see how it could possibly work. the leading piston moves as
expected but the trailing piston has the exact same force on it
pushing backwards. the video shows it to move forward as though there
were no resisting force on it.
the design is a load of codswallop. cant possibly function as
indicated.

Stealth Pilot

"Stealth Pilot" wrote

I cant see how it could possibly work. the leading piston moves as
expected but the trailing piston has the exact same force on it
pushing backwards. the video shows it to move forward as though there
were no resisting force on it.
the design is a load of codswallop. cant possibly function as
indicated.


Well it does seem to run on compressed air. Notice that the lead piston
moves forward faster than the trailing one. That seems to indicate some
sort of gearing mechanism around the shaft. However, his website does not
have any mention of running it on any fuels yet and when they run it on
compressed air their body language seems to indicate that they are treating
it like a quart bottle of nitroglycerin. :-)

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

Jon Grimm wrote:

I first read about this in nasa tech briefs last month.

To shed some more light onto that "invention" of torodial "cylinders":

There is a similar concept -looking at the cylinder- that is known as
the "Beck-Motor".
Not that much different is the "Primat-motor".
The other construction -without looking to close at the one posted- is
the "Esselbé-Motor".
The "Esselbé" has been adopted by "Torodial Aircraft Motors Company".
Similar to that one is the Bradshaw-Omega-Motor.


"Beck-Motor":
French construction from 1909 with 8 pistons in a single
torus-"cylinder".

"Primat-motor":
Two pistons. The cylinder is a half circle. Again a torus. No more info
at hand.

"Esselbé-motor":
French construction during WW I, 1912 (so I was off about 10 years with
my first guess). 4 pistons, again a torus as "cylinder". The gear to
drive the pistons looks like a clockwork.

"Torodial Aircraft Motors Company":
Company was in Omaha/Nebraska. Time built 1930. One version air cooled,
the other water cooled.

"Bradshaw-Omega-motor":
Adoption of the Esselbé by Granville Bradshaw in the 1950. He claimed
that this engine is very compact, has low friction and only a few moving
parts. He also intended to build a Diesel engine. 4 samples have been
built and were running. 4 stroke.


'Nuff for googling around or visiting a technical library, guys! :-))

Nick
--
Motor Modelle // Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
DIY-DRO // Eigenbau-Digitalanzeige
http://www.yadro.de

On Fri, 05 May 2006 04:36:09 GMT, Jon Grimm wrote:
I first read about this in nasa tech briefs last month.
Has anybody seen this thing first hand?
http://www.gear6.net/2006/04/the_myt_massive.html

Every time I see someone with a creative new engine design, I can't help
but ask how much waste heat it produces. For the most part, you either
get usable output or waste heat from an engine. What's the ratio
please? If they can't answer the question, or get all evasive, or start
talking about space aliens or USING LOTS OF CAPS AND EXCLAMATION
POINTS!!!!! then you pretty much have the score.

Nick Müller wrote:
Jon Grimm wrote:


I first read about this in nasa tech briefs last month.
Has anybody seen this thing first hand?

http://www.gear6.net/2006/04/the_myt_massive.html


Hopefully it wasn't patented. Because that construction is about 80
years old!


That explains the quite retro look of what appears to be a crank handle
on the left end. G

Jeff


--
Jeffry Wisnia

(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)

"Truth exists; only falsehood has to be invented."

Reminds me a little of the le Rhone radial.. Still, if it runs on
compressed air some maniac could make one with a transparent "cylinder" so
it could be studied a bit more. Not sure it will work at all, frankly, in
terms of producing power though; there seems to be a healthy dose of hokum
here.. ;-)

--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Whatever happened
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : to Porgy Tirebiter?
www.nmpproducts.com
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---