584,826 active members*
5,275 visitors online*
Register for free
Login
IndustryArena Forum > Hobby Projects > I.C. Engines > who can heip me IMPROVE my engine?!?
Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0

    who can heip me IMPROVE my engine?!?

    HI EVERYONE

    My mechanical design aim was to create a power for UAV,MAV, robotics, mini-generators; engine size is very small, can be forged or EDM etching method of mass production. Because the rotor around its axis, uniform rotation, so it can reach a very high speed, high power.

    Currently, power machinery, achieve practical machine are wankel engine, RCV engine, and there is a traditional four-stroke internal combustion engines, two-stroke internal combustion engine, and so on. They have their advantages, but also have their shortcomings. Especially the mechanical size less than 1 cm, the disadvantages of exposure of particularly, RCV engine, the traditional four-stroke internal combustion engine and two-stroke engine with considerable difficulty processing, especially tiny part of the process is more difficult, the production cost is very high, the work reliability was really bad. Wankel engine’s parts relatively few, small size relative high reliability, but cutting machining is difficult, difficult to implement low-cost lot size
    Production.while my engine rotor and stator's face is an irregular surface, machining difficult too, but the face is smooth, in small size, available material in plastic processing technology for low-cost of production and the use of plastic processing methods are forging, EDM etching, forging will not only enable low-cost production quantities, but also can improve the mechanical parts of the structure, part of the strength and surface finish. Adopting EDM etching, can improve parts of sealing and wear resistance, the specific method is: etch out a lot of fine grooves on the moving parts which need sealing, forming the labyrinth, with labyrinth seals, improve sealing performance. and on the sliding contact surface, etching a lot small pits, lubricants, as far as possible remain in these areas, to improve the machinery lubrication performance.
    study the 3D images that I upload on to forums, that structure, you should understand that was not possible work, because the rotor projecting too sharp, not only the room’s sealing cannot be guaranteed, and the normal rotation of the rotor cannot be guaranteed. There are a lot of problems you can see, after all, is a previous primary design!
    If you have the good suggestion, please tell me!
    MY EMAIL [email protected] MSN [email protected]

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    265
    This is a neat design, in Australia there was a similair design principal except the combustion was by 5 cylinder axially spaced around the mainshaft.
    sealing should not be to bad being a spherical motion, slice a sphere and what do you get? A circle of course, combine this with the pricipals of apex seals from the rotary.
    I could imagine you will have to make lapping fixtures to bed down the seals before assembly.
    Being a specialised design requires specialised tooling, so your thinking cap will have to cover those bases as well.
    But going by the integrity of the cad work, design principals, I should say you would be well into that thought process.
    One last word, get a patent ASAP!! Having this stuff in the public domain loses your intellectual property.
    I wish you well and hope to see plenty of build up photos.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0
    Hi D.L
    Thank you for your comment, my design is patented. I would most like to do is to create a valid prototype in order to further research,can you help me get in touch some persons or companies? get together to study of . I think It's a good engine for UAV,MAV,soldier power....

    Friendly!


    Have a nice day!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    265
    I would put together a presentation with 'powerpoint' and try to get an appointment with a representative of the 'orbital engine company' (ralph sarich).
    His company is highly credible and has a wealth of patents on similar designs.
    Or, failing this, maybe approach mazda, ilmor or rotax.
    Really, you should stay confidential with who and what transpires as they could see this as an competitive edge.
    You may even want to ask the moderators to remove this thread.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0

    Smile

    Hi D.L
    Thank you very much! if you can contact the engine research institutions, or engine manufacturing company, is a good thing!

    Have a nice day!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    162
    skip it, and go brushless w/ lithium

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by foam27 View Post
    skip it, and go brushless w/ lithium
    Excuse me, do you mean?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    265
    Thank you very much! if you can contact the engine research institutions, or engine manufacturing company, is a good thing!
    Hi again fu, I am not in the sales game, this needs 'pitching' and you need to do some homework towards this. My understanding is, big organizations want a lot of information in a 20 minute sales pitch. Probably a working model, and a projected market, an understanding of manufacturing cost and designed to keep costs down.

    I cant just jump on a plane at my own expense with no research or preparation and 'cold call' a goliath company for your big break.
    Think of your design a seed, now the tree must grow.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0
    Hi D.L
    "I cant just jump on a plane at my own expense with no research or preparation and 'cold call' a goliath company for your big break.
    Think of your design a seed, now the tree must grow. "

    What means is that?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    265
    Hi again Fu, i am getting an understanding of our cultural difference.
    I was trying to use a 'analogy', sort of like a story along similar lines to describe a thought, or a situation.
    I have worked in sales briefly, selling Supermax cnc mills, with no success.
    But when talking to customers, it was important to relate, make them feel at ease while mindful of your sales goals.
    I invented a few variants of the 4 cycle engine, not as good as yours though.
    My main message is you must learn selling, maybe you already know.

    Anyhow, pardon if my language previously seemed abrupt.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0

  13. #13
    There are always fundemental problems when arriving at a
    combustion chamber shape that is NOT Round or Cyndrical.

    Basically there are two problems:
    1. Maximum thermal efficiency is had with a sperical combustion chamber.
    (Minimum surface area to volume ratio) This is not possible
    without what I call a hydraullic 'Bubble Combustion' process.
    Hydraullic engines have their own set of inherent problems I will not go into here.

    The next-best thing to a pulsing sphere is of course, a conventional cylinder.
    This is WHY cyndrical piston engines are hard to beat, efficiency-wise.
    Just because cyndrical piston engines have been around for more than
    a century does not mean they can be improved upon all that easily.

    2. Losses of combustion gases past the seals are most usually worse in
    a combustion chamber that is not round (additional linear inches of seal
    for the same conbustion volume as a conventional cyndrical combustion chamber).
    Not to mention higher emissions that result from both items 1 & 2.

    These issues above killed the NSU/Wankel Rotary for most applications.
    Nearly every design I've seen that varies from cyndrical combustion chambers
    would tend to suffer from the inherent inefficiency of adding combustion surface area
    and seal area vs the near-perfect cylinder with a 'square' (equal) bore/stroke ratio.

    The main attraction of an opposed-piston engine (aka Deltic, Fairbanks-Morse, etc.)
    is to SPLIT the stroke to two crankshafts, which cuts the piston speed IN HALF
    for the same operating frequency. Allowing a large cylinder to operate at
    twice the RPM of the same cylinder with one crankshaft.

    Unfortunately most of the Opposed-Piston engines have been diesels with
    very undersquare Bore/Stroke ratios (not taking advantage of the RPM potential)
    their undersquare ratios also elongates the combustion chamber, lowering
    thermal efficiency once again.

    So WHY NOT an Opposed-Piston Engine with a combined SQUARE bore/stroke ratio
    Example: 100mm bore, 50mm stroke per crank, giving an overall 100mm x 100mm
    near-vibrationless single cylinder engine capable of TWICE the RPM of a
    conventional engine of same displacement and same bearing/piston speeds.

    In this variation on the piston engine we have the potential to DOUBLE
    the frequency (hp-per-liter) while all bearing velocities remain unchanged.

    I'd like to see that done before we move on towards wierd-shaped chambers
    because it preserves the inherent thermal efficiancy of a cylinder.

    Yes, you now have two sets of rings but at twice the RPM those rings
    would be negated on a linear inches of seal-per-CFM basis.

    If your engine has a reliable high-rpm potential with good breathing
    the additional linear seal lengths and increased combustion surface areas
    could likewise be somewhat mitigated by the higher HP/liter ratio.

    OK, starting to ramble on now....

    Jeff Krause
    http://www.Polyradial.com

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0

    FF engine

    Quote Originally Posted by Deltic_Engine View Post
    There are always fundemental problems when arriving at a
    combustion chamber shape that is NOT Round or Cyndrical.

    Basically there are two problems:
    1. Maximum thermal efficiency is had with a sperical combustion chamber.
    (Minimum surface area to volume ratio) This is not possible
    without what I call a hydraullic 'Bubble Combustion' process.
    Hydraullic engines have their own set of inherent problems I will not go into here.

    The next-best thing to a pulsing sphere is of course, a conventional cylinder.
    This is WHY cyndrical piston engines are hard to beat, efficiency-wise.
    Just because cyndrical piston engines have been around for more than
    a century does not mean they can be improved upon all that easily.

    2. Losses of combustion gases past the seals are most usually worse in
    a combustion chamber that is not round (additional linear inches of seal
    for the same conbustion volume as a conventional cyndrical combustion chamber).
    Not to mention higher emissions that result from both items 1 & 2.

    These issues above killed the NSU/Wankel Rotary for most applications.
    Nearly every design I've seen that varies from cyndrical combustion chambers
    would tend to suffer from the inherent inefficiency of adding combustion surface area
    and seal area vs the near-perfect cylinder with a 'square' (equal) bore/stroke ratio.

    The main attraction of an opposed-piston engine (aka Deltic, Fairbanks-Morse, etc.)
    is to SPLIT the stroke to two crankshafts, which cuts the piston speed IN HALF
    for the same operating frequency. Allowing a large cylinder to operate at
    twice the RPM of the same cylinder with one crankshaft.

    Unfortunately most of the Opposed-Piston engines have been diesels with
    very undersquare Bore/Stroke ratios (not taking advantage of the RPM potential)
    their undersquare ratios also elongates the combustion chamber, lowering
    thermal efficiency once again.

    So WHY NOT an Opposed-Piston Engine with a combined SQUARE bore/stroke ratio
    Example: 100mm bore, 50mm stroke per crank, giving an overall 100mm x 100mm
    near-vibrationless single cylinder engine capable of TWICE the RPM of a
    conventional engine of same displacement and same bearing/piston speeds.

    In this variation on the piston engine we have the potential to DOUBLE
    the frequency (hp-per-liter) while all bearing velocities remain unchanged.

    I'd like to see that done before we move on towards wierd-shaped chambers
    because it preserves the inherent thermal efficiancy of a cylinder.

    Yes, you now have two sets of rings but at twice the RPM those rings
    would be negated on a linear inches of seal-per-CFM basis.

    If your engine has a reliable high-rpm potential with good breathing
    the additional linear seal lengths and increased combustion surface areas
    could likewise be somewhat mitigated by the higher HP/liter ratio.

    OK, starting to ramble on now....

    Jeff Krause
    EVA CASES, EVA CASE DESIGN, Custom Protective Cases, Ever Ready Cases by Designer Jeff Krause
    ipernity: FF Engine principle by Zhe Shi

    Hi Jeff Krause
    Due to network problems, has not replied to you.I design on my page.We can chat.About my design?



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    0

  16. #16

    Ipernity Engine

    Hi Shi Zhe,

    I have followed this thread for a while.
    I do like the design very much for the simplicity of motion,
    good balance and most importantly RPM potential.

    I have been researching scratch-built engine designs for about 34 years.
    The most common problem with non-cylindrical combustion chambers
    and rotary-style combustion is that the allowable combustion frequency
    (per chamber) is usually less than with a con-rod & Piston, so after we add the higher
    chamber surface area and necessary seals then
    conventional Rotaries have issues with clean combustion, thermal efficiency
    and long-term seal wear.

    HOWEVER: If a rotary like yours can breath well at a chamber frequency
    as high or higher than a conventional reciprocating engine then some of the seal issues can
    actually be dealt with easier than on other lower chamber frequency rotary engines.

    You should determine the chamber frequency potential by factoring in:
    1. Pressure-Velocity values of the main spherical Bearing surface
    (just averaging it is OK because of the complex movement).
    Compare this to the average 'Piston Speed' of a comparable Piston Engine.

    2. Mechanical tensile stress at the highest stress area.
    3. Temperatures at the highest tensile stress area.
    4. Calculate the Port Area to Chamber displacement Ratio.

    Once you have these values you can compare them to conventional
    reciprocating designs to see what the performance potential is.

    IF the chamber frequency potential and breathing is good then that is in itself
    a great accomplishment compared to other rotary designs.

    The Seal issues can be solved by trying several seal designs
    matched to the velocities, temperatures and pressures.

    IF a small version of the design could operate at very high frequency
    then it is even possible that NO seals would be needed.
    However for Automotive and industrial use Seals are a must.

    A tiny version with a high compression ratio, made with a
    Silicon Nitride Sphere/Chamber and no chamber seals might be just what
    many people are looking for in a 'Micro-Diesel' engine
    for non-polution-reguated applications like yard equipment and
    man-portable generators.

    Best Regards,
    Jeff Krause

  17. #17

    UAV Makers

    Keep in mind that many of the UAV manufacturers are now
    developing their own engines so you don't have to go to an engine manufacturer to lease patent rights. You can go to the UAV makers themselves.

    This will bypass the NIH (Not invented Here) syndrome that is
    common in a engine desighn department of a large engine manufacturer.

    The engine design department at a UAV maker will be much smaller
    and more likely to be open to embracing your concept for further development.

    Best Regards,
    Jeff Krause

Similar Threads

  1. Search drawing from free piston engine ->stelzer engine
    By Enginetuner in forum I.C. Engines
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-20-2022, 11:13 PM
  2. engine
    By fuhandaigou in forum I.C. Engines
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-22-2010, 08:37 AM
  3. Help to improve Calibration ?s.
    By Stampede in forum Calibration / Measurement
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-06-2009, 06:13 AM
  4. How can I improve the backlash on my X1?
    By digits in forum Benchtop Machines
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 01-28-2007, 12:12 AM
  5. How to improve/upgrade Prototrak Plus?
    By cadsculptor in forum Bridgeport / Hardinge Mills
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-21-2006, 11:21 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •