cool thanks, makes sence. now how do they transfer that energy to the shaft? i'll look at the real pics again later to try and figure it out now that i know how the pistons move.
MYT Engine
- Thread starter nickel and dimed
- Start date
Figit090 said:
It transfers power to the shaft via two drums that are attached to each group of 4 piston/pucks. the each drum has a radial arm that extends to a connecting rod of sort. The rod is used to drive a gear that rides along a stationary gear which causes it to travel in a circular path. The two small gears that ride on the stationary gear are also attached to another are which is attached to the shaft. Because the two small gears are forced to travel in a circular path and are linked to the shaft, the shaft is then forced to turn.
Again, its a very simular design to the rotary engine, or well uses the same operating principal, but uses a different type of chamber and also elimiates the eccentric movement associated with a rotary engine.
Rotary i think would be more efficient & simpler.
There numbers dont add up to me and i dont see this being reliable would be nice to see a supra swap one of these engines in and do some dyno pulls of course with the semi sized engine in the myt form i bet it would be more like 300-400hp and have reliability issues. not with oil and friction but more to do with the complex stroke cycle lever system.
There numbers dont add up to me and i dont see this being reliable would be nice to see a supra swap one of these engines in and do some dyno pulls of course with the semi sized engine in the myt form i bet it would be more like 300-400hp and have reliability issues. not with oil and friction but more to do with the complex stroke cycle lever system.
Evilempire1.3JZ-GTE said:
A standard Wankle Rotary engine (10A, 12A, 13B, 20B, ect...); simpler, yes; more efficient, most likely not. Thats the Rotary's downfall, lack of efficiency.
FYI - It's Wankel.
As for efficiency, an engine which accomplishes intake, compression, ignition and exhaust in less than one rotation of the crank sounds very efficient to me.
From the basic illustrations it looks as though this might make for a very reliable engine. There's no valve train to worry about, the only major wear points are going to be the crank bearings (which don't have a shifting load like a 4 cycle engine's rod bearings), piston rings and the seals for the whole chamber (pretty much the head gasket).
As for efficiency, an engine which accomplishes intake, compression, ignition and exhaust in less than one rotation of the crank sounds very efficient to me.
From the basic illustrations it looks as though this might make for a very reliable engine. There's no valve train to worry about, the only major wear points are going to be the crank bearings (which don't have a shifting load like a 4 cycle engine's rod bearings), piston rings and the seals for the whole chamber (pretty much the head gasket).
in a few more decades, ima get one, turbo it, and yeah... it'll be cool
but in all seriousness. i like the idea. its genious. i cant wait to see if it goes past initial testing and prototyping and into some use.
but in all seriousness. i like the idea. its genious. i cant wait to see if it goes past initial testing and prototyping and into some use.
if there was just one movie with it actually running on FUEL. anybody could make a fake demo engine that ran on air....
not to assume he's faking it... but demonstrations like that one in the movie always make me skeptical.
not to assume he's faking it... but demonstrations like that one in the movie always make me skeptical.
CRE said:
Ah yes, thank you for the correct spelling. You would think that after having owened 1 1st gen, 2 2nd gen's and a 3rd gen RX-7, and having just finished build motor number 57 that I could spell Wankel correctly by now.
CRE said:
As for lack of efficiency, I am talking about power produced vs. quantity of fuel used to produce that power.
A well tuned NA piston engine will run in the .45 to .50 BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption) range.
A well tuned turbo piston engine will be in the .55 to .60 BSFC range.
A well tuned NA Rotary will be in the .55 to .60 range.
A well tuned turbo Rotary will be in the .60 to .65 range.
The higher the BSFC number, the less efficient the engine is.
Figit090 said:
Remember, that was in a closed in build and there was no intake track or exhaust system.