This is an animation of Massive Yet tiny - MYT engine. Everything inside the video is true and similar to the real engine performance, except slow-motioned.
Combustion always happen at the same place of casing. Uneven heating is going to create a big challenge for manufacturers. There are so many rotary engines designs that works on paper, but almost impossible to mass manufacture.
@Texmurphy51 you have a point but turbines are often air cooled and run at much hotter temps and HP's than regular piston engines. Materials exist with a good chance of solving these problems.
correct. The valve can be installed (with a spacer and porting the head) in a piston engine head to do what you suggest. It would be a litle more complicated. cfm. and gas needs to be re mesured. and msd. need to be installed.(and maybe a cam with more duration and lift.) this would depend on the space available in the combustion chamber and some other factors. ci. & gas milage needed.
i saw this. but now im just happy someone has brought this great design to life n hopefully if the oil barons dont get involved it will be in every vechicle on earth.
@Texmurphy51 That is not what it says. What box are you talking about? Didn't we conclude that the picture was of the propposed alternator? The heat-limitation of modern steels is well over 800 C. before softening becomes an issue. Conventional engines cannot exceed or come too close to the boilingpoint of their lubricant (250 C), or friction and wear skyrockets. This is due to the radial loading of the pistons that would dig into the wall. The MYT engine has no radial pistonload.
Remember... HP = Torque [ Ft x Lbf ] x RPM / 5252 .... the Drive Shaft's Torque is important here not the RPM's. Basic Horsepower math can tell you how many pounds per feet can be displaced per efficient Torque on the Drive Shaft. This is what's important not the total RPM's lol
@kmarinas86 "TORQUE density at the SHAFT of a 14" MYT engine is 16X MORE than its 1.7L chamber implies." And last but not least, this above may in fact be an understatement. The reason for the understatement that the compression ratios in a rotary engine with this piston configuration may be engineered to be higher. Angel Labs claims that 70:1 is possible with the MYT engine. This can justify Angel Labs' claim of 20hp/lb power density for the single chamber 14" MTY engine.
@Texmurphy51 I just found out that this (MYT) engine is already in production, as part of a biodiesel electrical generator. According to the specs, all engines up to 145kW are air-cooled. I'm not sure how they pull it off, but I can take some guesses: 1. Diesel engines are cooler and more efficient than gasoline-engines. 2. There is no load or friction between the "pistons" and the housing aside from the rings. 3. They use oil mixed in the biodiesel. (Fact, but might be irrelevant)
@Texmurphy51 This is true, but the production costs and complex engineering required makes and keeps it as a high-end, high-cost powerplant. This is simply...simpler. Less surface exposed to the heat etc...
This is very interesting!!! But the question is will the manufacturers who have billions invested in the current technology be willing to scrap the older stuff and start afresh? Or will it take new companies and start ups to take this technology and change things from the outside?
@Texmurphy51 You do realize that you are contradicting yourself? The heat transfer to the engine from the hot gasses is proportional to area. Assuming no difference in thermal efficiency, this means that the excess heat will escape primarily through the exhaust. Wich is not the case: diesel-engines count as IC and can have a documented efficiency of over 50%. This engine is already for sale as part of a generator that runs on biodiesel. No sparkplugs, just compression = higher eff.
@Texmurphy51 Where did you see the picture? I have not. Generators are indeed rated at continous power. Why do you assume this is different? Variable speed generators have been in use and perfected in windturbines for decades. Where did you get the information about cooling and size?
Thanks for the graphic, i think the concept is fabulous, but my concern is sealing; there are too many leak paths and the air will leak in to the crank case.
@Texmurphy51 Yes, and diesels readily achieve over 40%, up to 50% efficiency. Not 25%. I have seen no efficiency claims beyond the theoretical points and improvements pointed out. The empirical data from the specs of the generator: 145 W, air cooled six-inch engine. The discussion was about weather this engine-design was advantageous over standard engines. Unless you care to actually present some points against this design, or debunk the ones I made, you have nothing more to say.
"But if you drive your car in first gear it doesn't go fast but has a lot of torque, that's because the RPM on the output shaft is reduced by the transmission. " contradicts the whole thing you want to say - the whole paragraph.
You don't understand. The amount of RPM's isn't important to the DriveShaft. Remember it's HP = Torque [ ft x lbf ] x RPM / 5252. As long as your engine can produce enough Torque who cares about the RPM's.
I don't think it will ever work. How is it lubricated? From what I can see, there is no way to keep the sliding pistons lubricated while keeping the oil away from the combustion areas...
How are the pistons cooled? They are getting heated from both sides. What is the valve system. I presume like a two stroke. The output shaft seems to refuse a smooth rotation. I would doubt the reliability of this very much :( But if it does work. The first people on the bloc will be the aircraft man'frs. due to its weight and size.
@Texmurphy51 It stays "powerplant: MYT-6. Air cooled, 40 - 145kW." the dimensions are specified as 6-inch radius engine. The website SELLS these powerplants. Why do you assume it is peak power? As you yourself said, generators are rated at continous power, not peak. I totally agree: We need more facts. But from the theoretical point of view, there is nothing to contradict the existing ones. I will not reply untill you answer the question: Is this design superior?
@chaorrottai There is no proof that a rotating vane engine would be more efficent than a normal reciprocating engine. The built in gearbox uses up power (mechanical drag), big number of rotating parts with big circumferences produce high drag all the time. Big ammount of power strokes uppers the fuel useage. In adition this thing will have huge flexibility issues because of high rotating mass. Its useless as a engine for automotive aplications, the only use i see is for industrial engine.
@Texmurphy51 The picture text says: "Synchronous alternator like this likely to be used with the engine". You have no support in your previous claims about cooling and size. This is not a free energy device, nor has it ever been claimed as such. Variable generators are indeed not required, but they allow the engine to operate at any RPM:s. Something you said was impossible. Maybe you should answer the question instead of diverting: Is this design better than normal engines?
@Texmurphy51 Yes it's a diesel. Haven't you been reading ANYTHING I've been writing? The claims are accurate for the same RPM; cylinder volume is equevalent to truly enormous 4-stroke engines. 4-stroke only combusts once every other revolution. Since when did you see a 200 HP engine that was air-cooled and 6-inches across? The generator is exactly that. 145W =(approx) 200 hp. The enormous HP ratings you see is for the 14-inch model.
@Texmurphy51 Pour bleach in the lubricant and the piston will melt too, radiator or not. Friction is might only be 3% of the internal engine losses, but 3% of 200HP is still 4.5 kW of thermal energy. And this skyrockets with overheat. And I have no Idea what you mean to say by hotblock, melted pistons etc. Naturally they CAN go that high, but wear and friction gets too high to be practical. Why can't you answer the question? Is this engine design better than regular engines?
@Texmurphy51 Naturally there will be both, don't think I've said otherwise. But your claim about "maximum 25% for IC" is pure bull. Non-reciprocation. No radial load on the "pistons" (much less friction). Long dwell at maximum compression. Slow revolving but high torque engine. Are these things present on this engine and do they positively effect efficiency? Are the three first exclusive to the MYT over conventional engines? Take your time.
@Fatoshi000 Translated: "Believe what you want; my time is too valuable to read your comments about how you think this works! I did my research/homework, and since you did not agree with my facts, you did apparently did not check your work. Even though I think the design is the shit, it doesn't work-that's sad. You must listen to me, but I DON'T want to listen to you. You got that? Don't answer to that last one; that's just a rhetorical question."
it can be done. i am working on a patent for a diferent valve sistem that allows the piston to charge gas and air at the same time that the piston is heading the upper position. and with the direct ingection (like the new lincoln mks) this can be done. but we need to wait until i finish to pay. this is not a easy prosess but it will be done next year with god's help.
@chaorrottai It's a different mechanical build, and it has less HP than your miracle worker states. This is a stupid configuration for a internal combustion engine, and in any way is it fuel efficent. If i would like to have huge power and low weight of the engine i would go for external combustion (turboshaft engine AKA gas turbine).
rotation has to be uniform. the noise it's going to be a problem. pretty close to be a good design. keep the good work and don't let nobody use your design for the wrong porpuses. create for a better world tomorrow, not to destroy it.
to be honest , when i first saw this animation, i was extremely upset. Since i was 8 years i was obsessed with anything mechanical n since then had designed so many machines and engines that would of changed the automotive industry but no one took me seriously because of my age n lack of schooling. i had designed an engine with the same principal n worked on it for 7 years, to be honest i beleive mine is a way better design, then when i was about to seek help for patenting it,
I am in a quite same situation, hopefully it's my 2nd year only and working different than this. Hope we both get enough money for stupidly overpriced patents.
im not some master engineer but if the spark plugs were to fire a fraction of a second too early or late, wouldn't the whole engine just stall completely? because at that point there would be no combustion at all. at least in a regular 4 stroke the badly timed ignition would leave SOMETHING to work with.
@Texmurphy51 Because, in your own words, generators are rated at continous. It's the universal standard. It explicitly says air cooling. And why not? Just what thermodynamics are you reffering to? What laws of physics are violated? If this violates the laws pf physics, that SHOULD have been your no.1 argument right off the bat. And perhaps actually stating wich ones while you're at it. Do you even know yourself?
@Texmurphy51 I saw the picture, but unlike you I read the text. The claims I made are merely quotes directly from industrialgreenpower. MYT-6 engine. Air cooled. 145 kW. 145kW = approx 200hp. I have support. You do not. Now, instead of making excuses and trying to project your faults onto me, maybe you should FINALLY answer the question: Is this engine design better than regular engines? If not, argue logically. Saying "No" doesen't count as an argument.
@Texmurphy51 I read variable 40 -145 kw, air cooled. It is specified as MYT-6, meaning 6-inch diameter. 200 horsepower, get it?? The info about the engine is on the angellabs website, the generator is on industrialgreenpower. DO YOUR HOMEWORK BEFORE YOU MAKE STUPID STATEMENTS
bill gate invented the computer out his garage but this guy smashes bill he might as well open his own car companey since the big 3 are concerned about everything ealse but 150 miles to the gallon time will tell what happneds
@nkristian You are silly this isnt a NEW technology at all in fact there is over 90 years of development in this tech and the USA uses it in torpedos to this day. So while there maybe problems look into DUKE ENGINE 5 cylinder axial engine. Laugh at yourself.
