THIS INSANE NEW Engine SHOCKS The Entire Car Industry! 

Agreed, it’s definitely a 2 stroke engine. The opposed piston design is great for getting high efficiency. However, the swashplate driven by rollers via piston rods won’t yield much torque due to the extremely low effective driven lever angle, low torque results in low efficiency. Furthermore, as a result of the low effective lever angle, there will be extremely high friction load on the roller and swashplate and likely to result in relatively limited life of both, but more likely the roller. Didn’t show it running as I think torque provided will be very low especially at low speeds. Personally, I’d do away with the inefficient swashplate design.

The "One Stroke" aspect is pure marketing. This is an opposed piston cam engine. The arrangement is interesting and unusual, but not revolutionary. The thing is opposed piston engines are typically pressure charged to assure good scavenging. That leads me to believe that the blower on their example Miata isn't just there to make more power, but is a vital piece of the package. Good video explanation of an interesting mill.

The wavy component is actually called a swash plate in the hydraulic pump world. Interesting design.

It is an axial swash plate opposed piston uniflow two stroke. All of this has been done. I seriously doubt it can be built to match the emissions and durability of a conventional four stroke piston engine regardless of how much development is invested in it.

There are 1-stroke internal combustion engines - they are called jet turbines.

It is impossible to have a single (or "one") stroke piston driven engine as the "stroke" refers to the direction the piston travels. This is a two stroke piston driven engine as the piston travels "down" (one direction/one stroke) on the power/exhaust stroke, and then returns "up" (one direction/one stroke) on the intake/compression stroke. The turbine and rotary (Wankle) engines could possably be considered a single stroke engine because their propulsion mechanisums travel in a circle (one direction). But they are based on a diffrent consept.

Not insane, Not new, Not shocking just clickbait. The RU-vid channel made me a sucker and they made money from me.

Here is a true single cylinder design. A floating piston In a single cylinder, ported on both ends like a two stroke. On start a magnet or an air compressor would pull the piston tight against one cylinder. Once ignition takes place the starter apparatus lets loose and 2 crank sensors pick up the pistons travel igniting the opposite side driving the piston the opposite way. Computer controls mixture to increase decrease compression. Power is harnessed through the exhaust. I came up with that in the amount of time it took to write this.

As a direct engine replacement for the typical engine-transmission arrangement, maybe for subcompact cars (smart car, mini cooper weight class) or motorcycles, yes. For larger vehicles (civic and larger) no. However, this would likely be a very good design for a hybrid where all it is doing is turning a generator to feed power to an electric drive motor and battery pack. Also this would be a great small package for your typical back up generator where a steady rpm is held for long periods of time.

Guess this is more of a 2-stroke oposite pistons engine... Another of those videos

I see two issues: 1. Much like worm gears, swash plates are good at driving, but not so good at being driven. The torque discussion in this video is spot-on. 2. It seems to me that the lateral force the swash (wavy) plates exert on the piston rollers would be extreme and difficult to counter by using the cylinders alone as effective journal bearings. I'd be interested to see longevity test results with the engine under load. And, if I may, I'm not sure I understand the logic (as explained) behind how intake/exhaust is coordinated. I don't see how exhaust gases (which are undoubtedly at higher than atmospheric pressure) could possibly leave any sort of vacuum behind when exiting the combustion chamber. And from the animations, it appears that the exhaust port and intake port are opened and closed at the same time, which would allow exhaust gases to exit out the intake port since, again, exhaust gases are undoubtedly at higher than atmospheric pressure. If the animations are to be trusted, then I suspect the purpose of the supercharger is not to increase the power output, but simply to overcome the pressure of the exhaust gases and ensure that they go out the exhaust port as they should. Indeed (again, if the animation is to be trusted), with the exhaust port and intake port opening and closing at the same time, there is no way a supercharger can possibly increase power output since the open exhaust port will prevent the supercharger from compressing the gas before combustion takes place. It would be like trying to pump up a tire that has a big hole in the sidewall. Therefore, I suspect the purpose of the supercharger is solely to overcome exhaust gas pressure in order to ensure that the exhaust gases flow out the exhaust port, and not out the intake port. If this is the case, then the supercharger is actually not doing that much work and need not be all that "super" in its ability to compress air, which is not at all a bad thing. Other than that. I think this design has potential. But I like the Koenigsegg engine better for its clever design that doesn't require conversion of linear force to torque.

Pretty similar to the William Hopkins patent from the late 50s. His also drove a wavy disc and had cylinder ports instead of valves. The difference is that the piston rotated in the cylinder as it moved up and down. He was around 19 or 20 when he patented his engine, and I was 11 at the time. We met while camping in South Dakota and corresponded for several years. His patent number is 2,962,008 (11/29/1960)

I would call that a cam plate, instead of a wavy component.

This reminds me of the lack of reliability of the 1.0 Ecoboost-engine.

I think the correct name for the "shared shaft" that connects the Wavy Components is actually "jaggy metal turny-stick".

Which positive displacement compressor have you fitted to your rotary engine? How was it applied? Thank you very much.

Back in the 90's Orbital came up with a "modern" version of a 2 stroke engine. All OEM companies signed up w/ Orbital to do feasibility studies with production potential, however nothing came of it. The piston port remains a major issue in terms of durability and emissions. All 2 stroke engines require that the piston ring is restricted from rotating, and surely there is a steel pin in the ring groove that prevents the ring from rotating. If the ring rotated, the gap end of the ring would get hanged on the piston port edge, inlet or exhaust. So, when you prevent the ring from rotating, the same fragment of ring circumference endures excessive wear near the exhaust port and shortly begins to loose it's sealing effectiveness, which affects emissions down the road. Did they solve this hurdle in this case?

Thanks for the video! I am curious about long-term reliability/performance tests.

Those rollers will wear out really fast. There is a huge pressure and friction on those pieces with the surface.

exhaust piston runs hot all the time? how are the mmissions from it?

Developing an ICE engine at this point is futile. There will never be enough demand to warrant it.

The engine was designed as a 'range extender' to power a generator at a fixed RPM so torque isn't an issue. They have a Mazda Miyata running for more than a year and I've seen it go up and down hills so it must have some torque.

Interesting design. Regarding torque output, does it need to be poor at low revs? I use to own a 1000cc V-Twin and the torque output from that was pretty insane from just 2 cylinders. I suppose it all comes down to design. But you are right, engine design seems to have got stuck in a loop. This would be pretty cool to see on a production vehicle.

The Germans built a diesel version for an airplane during ww2.

Swash plate is as old as the hills and a one stroke engine has a double acting piston. A steam engine of the double acting type is a one stroke engine. An engine with the cross head to conrod set-up with a blower for scavenging both ends might work as like it did for the two stroke diesels that had a wet sump. Every tdc is a hit and every bdc exhaust leaves the top and more fresh charge on the side. That engine has powered torpedos since at least ww2. Some used compressed air and others actually had an air tank so it could burn fuel. It's a cool engine but not a one stroke and certainly not new, the pioneers from a hundred years ago behind this thing are long gone.

this is a marvelous invention now at a single combustion twice the power very very smart, fuel efficient, space efficient, and material efficient to produce also its easier to maintenance since its too small.

Having a one stroke engine is like walking while your legs only go foward, never returning back

Nice and simple, yet is it reliable? That is before the other two issues is it efficient and low cost? And as engines go as useful is it at workable RPMS, Touque, and Horsepower?

Reciprocating steam engines are 1 stroke.. Most steam locomotives are 1 stroke.

Apart from the swash plate this look pretty similar in operation to the "Tilling Stevens 3" 2 stroke diesel of the 50s and 60s as used in Commer lorries. That engine had 6 opposed pistons operating a single crankshaft through rockers. Different yes but the principles of combustion look the same. And what about the Daddy of them all? The 18 cylinder "Deltic" engine.

This could be beneficial for those who are unable to afford a four wheeler around the world. Hope it would be available in coming years with the cheaper price.

Here we are watching new technology..which is very easier than any engine..and most efficient..so it doesn't matter how much it strokes..light weight..and low fuel consumption..with low mentinence..awesome invention...

A true "one-stroke" engine would be a gas turbine engine. Where intake, compression, combustion, and exhuast are all occuring at the same time, at all times. Thus, we are left with just one process or "stroke" I dont think a 1 stroke piston engine could exist, its operation is contradictory to any less than 2 strokes, as no matter what the piston will always need to oscillate between up and down, strokes 1 and 2.

The direct fuel injection rather than fuel injection before the intake valve is going to make this engine not last long at all. The carbon buildup is going to be ridiculous.

Duetz we’re doing this in diesel powered trucks in the 1950’s/60’s

Looks very good engine, hope they can make hybrid with this.

This fits into the cam type of barrel engine. Barrel engine designs have been around almost as long as conventional IC engines. Most proposals have been for aero engines. One attraction is smaller cross section. None of them ever went into production. Their one main enemy has always been heat. Now could this work as a range extender. Yes it likely could. But so could a small fixed speed gas turbine.

They’ve been using this type of design in hydraulics for some time. This is how we’ve had pumps that can run at more than 6,500 psi for years.

The dyno information on this engine would prove interesting.

Could this be used as a small aircraft engine because of it's power to weight ratio ? Just asking.

I would think the pressure on the "wavy thing" in trying to convert energy to 90 degrees would be very inefficient.

I thought initially that this video would be an advertisement for the engine. Instead, it turned out to be an honest review of what is known about the engine.

You will never replace the technology of today it’s allready very advanced

Use as a range extender would eliminate range anxiety for me so let's see it used that way. Maybe the 1 stroke terminology is derived from the fact that you have 2 strokes, 2 pistons in 1 cylinder which equals 1.

A smaller, higher rev model would be great to power a generator for a hybrid.

3:25 the message on screen from Elon Musk 😂

The industry won’t let it happen. Too much invested in the piston engine…….😳

I can remember from the 60s Roots Group (hence the Roots supercharger) had an opposed piston two-stroke supercharged diesel engine, which was widely used. It had two crankshafts for the two blanks of opposed pistons. Overall not a very efficient engine I understand but it was mass produced. For many years

I was. Hoping to. HEAR. it. Run. !!!

This would be an ideal generator in a hybrid car. Allowing in car charging while running the ICE.

Nice inventions bro

From a mechanical point of view the part that I see being trouble is the roller at the end of the piston. The "wavy plate" is spinning in a circle, so the exterior is moving faster than the interior part. That would put a lot of stress on the bearing in the roller. It seems like that part would be quite troublesome a lot more often than you might think due to the different stresses applied on the interior and exterior of the roller.

Awesome!

The problem in the motorcar industry is, you can have a engine that gives you 50km on 1 liter with 500hp but if they don't want your engine in there vehicle then your engine is worthless.

This engine seems like it could be a great candidate for a twin charger setup with a Roots or Screw charger handling the off idle / low rpm torque issue that I'm sure the engine suffers from due to the really short effective stroke, then a Turbo taking over in the higher RPM range. Granted, it would obviously add more weight but I bet it could have a really nice torque curve and be in the 300+ hp range without much issue and would still probably be an overall lighter package than any aluminum block Inline 4. By doing a twin charger setup with a Roots or Screw style (i.e., positive displacement pump) Supercharger handling the Low RPM side of operation, you could get rid of the variable compression mechanism which eliminates a wearing item / additional failure point and possible reduce a little bit of weight in the process.

This is a opposed piston 2 stroke engine, those have been around for more then half a century in large diesel engines...

Soooooo, as a child somebody was fascinated by an automotive AC compressor and took it to a different level

It's still a reciprocating engine. Like all reciprocating engines, there are inertial effects because the pistons move up, reverse & down, reverse.

Concisely delivered evaluation, interesting and informative. I had at one time designed an automobile-targeted jet engine which General Electric found interesting, which sat vertical, and was short and squat. Later, I did an 8 piston internal combustion design quite analegeous to the one you show, also short and squat, vertically oriented. It had only two moving parts in the power train, and four rotating valve mechanisms driven by a single gear. The design required hardly anything akin to an engine block as we think of them. Not a serious commercial effort; no one is going to bust the market wide open with radical designs very easily, as you point out.

In the last 50 years there were about 20 different sorts of such engines, but no one of them was able to finde way in mass production. P.S.: Even when this engine runs great, it is 100 years too late.

this is not a "new" invention. It is just a variation on a theme. It was patented in 1885 by Daimler.

What I like about those new revolutionary engine designs is you never actually see them running. And they eventually fade away because they were a scam or just too impractical to be built.

This is an interesting concept engine that has potential. The thing that bothers me is that in the video, there was clearly a supercharger attached but no visible drive belt actually driving it. The 2 stroke diesel that's still being used today uses a gear driven blower for operation. 2 stroke engines operate on a pressure differential for the intake and expulsion of exhaust gases. We don't know enough about this engine to know exactly how this works. If this engine does in fact have a functional supercharger attached, then where was the belt drive? I like the engine design myself, but I think the designer is trying to over-sell it. 120hp on a opposed piston naturally aspirated engine displacing 500cc is a bit hard to believe without a power adder of some kind. I could be wrong but my years of engineering tells me that something is off with this.

I like the healthy criticism of the author. Definitely, it's just another implementation of two-stroke opposite piston design, widely used in German submarine diesels or Ukrainian T64, T84 tanks or BTR4 APC. More of marketing, less of technologies. Substituting piston rods and crankshaft with wavelike structure may have some sense. However, it may be similarly used in standard four-stroke engines as wells. Nothing revolutionary, sorry.

The biggest drawback of this company is they are liars. Calling a two-stroke engine a one-stroke engine for whatever reason is a big fat lie. The trust factor just went out the window.

Is the sideways stress to the piston mitigated by friction of piston to the cylinder wall? Or are there linear bearings?

IS THIS FOR REAL? THE IDEA IS NOT NEW, I SAW PLANS OF A SIMILAR DESIGNED ENGINE 40 YEARS AGO, BUT STRUGGLE TO SEE HOW THE PISTONS ARE SECURED TO STOP THE OPPOSING PISTONS CRASHING, THERE IS STILL NEEDS FOR CONNECTING RODS. ALSO THE POWER DELIVERY TRANSFER FROM THE PISTONS TO THE WAVEY ROLLER COASTERS DOES NOT SEEM AS EFFICIENT WAY OF ROTATION AS A CONVENTIONAL ENGINE.

The biggest weakness of two-stroke engines is its oil burning property, which renders them unacceptable in terms of pollution reduction efforts.

Light airplanes would love this

4:17 this frame seems to show some of the oil passages and bearing surfaces. Note the rollers look pressure feed as do the lower piston to cylinder wall areas. These are critical tribological features to get right or there is no hope for long life & good power density.

In short a two-stroke opposed piston uni-flow barrel (or drum) type engine using what is effectively a swash plate connecting system. Note uni-flow engines require forced induction to work well so turbo or super charging is needed. Only interesting part was varying the relative positions of the swash plates to vary the compression ratio which may have benefits in running different types of fuel as well as running higher boost pressures at high rpm. Still doesn't address the issues of high wear and friction that piston ported and swash plate engines have though. Good video 👍

Interesting vid! Even if it is a little weak in the Miata, remember it is only .5L. Why limit the displacement to such a small size if low end torque is a concern?

I think this engine has a lot of potential with a variation in design and combination with 4 stroke technology. Steeper wave plates with more room would give greater torque down low.

Reminds me of a yoke swash plate mechanism in aircraft oil pumps

I'm glad I watched the whole video before commenting. All the issues you raised had occurred to me and were driving me mad. So glad you covered them. Clearly no 2-stroke engine can work without some form of forced induction, whether this be from under-piston supercharging, turbocharger or bolt-on supercharger (as seen in the video footage). They will have a tough time patenting any aspect of this engine as all these methods have been used before in some form or other, for example, opposed piston engines were once common in marine and rail transport engines. The "wavy component" is not new either. It has been tried before in compressors, engines and pumps and has also been called a wobble plate (based on the "swashplate" concept) many designs go back over a hundred years.

It wasn’t specifically pointed out in the video, but there is a brief image of a coin balanced on top of, what I presume is, a running engine. Very impressive. While the application volume would be low, it intriguingly seems that the characteristics of this engine would make it highly suitable for powering power light piston, Cessna size, aircraft. What with it’s compactness, low weight, low vibration and mechanical simplicity. In addition, a lack of low-end torque would not be the detriment in aircraft, like it would be in automotive applications.

There are millions of one-stroke engines produced every year. They are called “guns.”

the 'shown' supercharger, is just a common airfilter.. But I agree that little torque can be expected from this engine without a crankshaft

Imagine this little engine (or smaller) powering a generator to link on a EV motor. Jep,...I like that.

The company has openly stated that their engine is more similar to a two stroke but works as a single stroke; it has the direct injection of a two stroke without burning oil in the same way as a two stroke. Additionally, one of the ICE institutions also said it is worth calling it a one stroke in light of this.

What stops the piston roller from leaving the track of the ‘wavy component’? Seems that if the combustion doesn’t occur (no fuel or spark), then the piston stays up the bore and the roller leaves the wavy track - then smacks into the roller as the crest comes back around.

To me it looks an 8 cylinder two stroke engine. Can say two 4 cylinder two stroke engine bolted together on top.

I was glad when, a third of the way through the video, he said it's a 2-stroke engine, not a 1-stroke. Apart from the opposed piston arrangement, which complicates the design, It has fairly classical 2-stroke type scavenging, opening the inlet and exhaust ports at the same time, so it is unlikely to be as efficient as a 4-stroke, as a small amount of the uncombusted intake gasses will escape through the exhaust port before it closes. The video says at one point that it doesn't burn oil - which is an advantage - no quibbling about that. However, the video doesn't expand on how that is achieved. Does it have a sump? My first thought was "Does it use 2-stroke oil?" - but I guess it doesn't. However, pistons *_do_* need lubricating. It says, though, that the combustion chamber in a regular 2S is located above the piston, and combustion energy is transferred to the piston, but the conbustion chamber doesn't contribute to the motion. It only absorbs the heat generated - but this engine has pistons on both sides of the combusion chamber, allowing more efficient absorbtion of combusion energy. I guess it runs a lot hotter, then! Is that good? Most engines have cooling, either by a water jacket and radiator, or by cooling fins. How does this one get rid of the heat? However - regardless of its advantages, it has a bigger problem than that! In a few years, it looks like internal combustion engines will be banned in new cars, so this engine has a future of about 10 years at best. Probably less! When motorists stop buying fuel, a lot of fuel stations will close. Fuel will become difficult to find - and its price will go up, so all I.C. engines will become unpopular - including ones with a "wavy component".

What about cooling and cooling fluid circulation ? I'm sure heat is generated and air cooling doesn't seem ideal to maintain decent working temperatures !

Oh look, the Dyna Cam engine and the Opposed Piston engine, had a Baby!

Napier built this 100 years ago

I used to work with a British design engineer (Mechanical) in the 70's, and he used to mention and explain "a" or "the" "wobble-plate motor"...... so it's been around for a while, although it may now be better developed. This looks like what my workmate was explaining and chatting about.

In the past there were great inventions, but big oilcompanies were against it, because they did want just one thing, a lot of millions😢

Could this support a turbocharger to force air into the combustion chambers? If so, I could see this being handy for small homebuilt aircraft.

What's to stop the pistons from spinning in place?

i cant help but see a couple of opposing compressor pumps. Like found on your pressure washer pump. They work very similarly except they're powered by a separate motor. This is a melding of those two concepts together

how is the piston pulled back on the intake stroke if its a roller ?

Strange the super charger you point out is an air cleaner dash????

That's funny, I tried and failed to build such an engine years ago on a used Hydrostar hydraulic motor. It ran but not well. Direct injection and the dual sided piston system might have helped a lot.

Very similar to pushpull structure of electonical output stage amplifier! At which rotation speed is provided the power?

the piston presses on the wavy tray at an inefficient angle, how is the performance so good? jean-louis

This is a TWO-stroke swash-plate engine.

Single stroke engine many are being used to day, Fire arms!

I like the wave plate and opposed piston design. Thats pretty cool.

How is it cooled and lubricated? Life expectancy?