Intake Valve and Feliks' ideas

[J.A.W.]

Why 4-stroke?

Seems like needless 'wear & tear' on all those articulation joints, for 1/2 the useful work..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKcAYMb5uk4

Still waiting..

[Feliks]

Always every two connecting rods and two cranks on the crankshaft in a 4 cylinder engine are always less ..




Andrew

[J.A.W.]

Andrew, you do realize - this is a forum, no?

So how's about a bit of enquiry-feedback, rather than an implacable monologue?

Anyhow.. seems you've evidently abandoned the original piston-in-head, & advanced spoon-bending ideas,
& are now 'channeling' Newcomen, eh Watt?



Or, maybe..

[Feliks]

Had the twilight of long crankshafts ready to be ready ... ?




The connector between the arms as they will have the diameter of the main bearings of the main crankshaft, this should be enough....


Andrew

[Feliks]

Peaucellier Due crosshead ..




Andrew

[Feliks]

"Metallica" played in Krakow on his concert cover "Dżem" with whom I worked as a sound designer in 1984-1987. Here also "Dżem" from my work time


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbqPNpy ... e=youtu.be


https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xrffaj


Andrew

[J.A.W.]

Nevermind - 'Enter the Sandman'.. Andrew..

How is it.. 'Feliks' - hasn't figured it out as a 2T..

Since.. if he simply adds a mirror image pair of pistons.. (to the other end of his rods)..
..then with every stroke being.. a power-stroke.. it must cube the useful work done..

[Feliks]

Nevermind - 'Enter the Sandman'.. Andrew..

How is it.. 'Feliks' - hasn't figured it out as a 2T..

Since.. if he simply adds a mirror image pair of pistons.. (to the other end of his rods)..
..then with every stroke being.. a power-stroke.. it must cube the useful work done..

yes, this is something like an old good thing ... now we can imagine that 3 such mechanisms side by side on a common main axis, but driving only these four wheels .. you can then even 12 people take on such a vehicle and work together for a ride .. With pistons completely the same .. as with people .. And for sure it will be more efficient than traditional, multi-cylinder .. And much simpler to do ...

http://www.railroadhandcar.com/projects ... family.mp4

Andrew

[Feliks]

Principle of operation of a 6 cylinder engine with a crosshead, Watt type, Peaucelier or Feliks line crosshead .. So what gives us ... no friction piston by cylinder, so we can give up the oil for lubrication (oil pumps too), and gives 15% torque increase. Possibility of excellent cooling of the pistons with water, which will increase the compression ratio by 2 units. this is the next 10% .. Well, ecology, no oil burning, and less NOx, because in the chamber lower temperature ..

And the lack of crankshaft, because one crank with the connecting rod is hardly called a shaft ... if the engine has 16 cylinders .. :rolleyes:



http://www.railroadhandcar.com/projects ... family.mp4

Andrew

[J.A.W.]

So why not add another 6 pistons, & get twice the power output - using 6 double-length ( mirror-image) cylinders..

Balance/torque-thrust would surely benefit from a 120 degree input arrangement too, no?

Perhaps an inverse-transverse 'Deltic' type of mech' set-up - might provide a usefully stronger & compact device?

[Feliks]

In other forum :
Posted Today, 10:46

Greg Locock, on 06 May 2018 - 06:13, said:

"You think that 15% of the IMEP is absorbed in sidethrust on the pistons? Don't think so, most of the FMEP is piston rings."


Well, unfortunately this is not true ... But so far people have thought so ... If you liked playing with a calculator, which I published a few posts above, then you probably already knew how much the reaction of the piston to the cylinder ... Publishes again with my setting value, and clearly see that this force reaches even 30% of the value of the force giving the torque .. derived from the combustion of fuel .. Contrary to appearances, the force of pressure on the piston ring piston is small compared to this force, because it is in the pressure of relatively the small force coming from the bending of the piston ring, which, as you probably know, we can easily squeeze with fingers ... ..... So that the force in comparison to the force of lateral force is many times smaller, if the engine performs heavy work .. And is independent of the load of the engine, it has practically constant value ... independent of the engine load.
Here you have a screen shot in the picture, because as you can see, you do not like to play with calculators.

http://mechanicalexpressions.com/explor ... orque.html




Andrew

[PhillipM]

So long as you completely ignore the fact that:
a) the rings are tensioned against the walls by the gas pressure, not just the installation pressure and
b) the piston side thrust is taken by a very large pad with decent oil film thickness and where the side thrust is highest also has the highest velocity, so they're mainly in full hydrodynamic lubrication, and hence very little friction comparitively.

[Feliks]

So long as you completely ignore the fact that:
a) the rings are tensioned against the walls by the gas pressure, not just the installation pressure and
b) the piston side thrust is taken by a very large pad with decent oil film thickness and where the side thrust is highest also has the highest velocity, so they're mainly in full hydrodynamic lubrication, and hence very little friction comparitively.

Nothing completely scramble, as you try to suggest it. The rings also rub like a piston going up and there is no pressure .. Minimum can be greater as there is a stroke of work.

In the case of the connecting rod and the crankshaft taken by a very large pad with decent oil film thickness, so there is almost no friction .. So that the engine works almost without friction .. and the forces of inertia are probably omitted ...

On another forum about these rings

"Greg Locock, on 07 May 2018 - 09:51, said:

Go out to the garage. Take the head off an engine. Turn it over with a torque wrench. Take the piston rings out. spin it over with your hand. Measure the torque. Get back to us.

I thought you'd actually worked on engines?

Greg Locock, on 07 May 2018 - 10:54, said:

Or even more simply, drop a piston without rings through the cylinder, then try and push just one ring down the cylinder.

To be fair neither of these shows the inertia and combustion related loads on the skirt, "



You defend a lost case ... well in the next post you have a little thought ...
Yes, the piston in the cylinder itself, without the rings, if it is cold, it is not well-matched at all ... it's the stone you put into the hole ...
But if you heat it up from the temperature at which it works, it's not so easy ... it has a strong resistance ... I did it as I matched the pistons manually with a file, a cylinder ...

Now, if you put on rings, then only seemingly this strength increases ... it's a lot of strength at the start, because then it slides lightly and you can even push it out of the cylinder without caution ... It's just the moment you start, which is really big ... but then no longer ... Yes or no, all these activities are done calmly hands, that is, they are not bigger than a few pounds of strength .. ..

But as you have noticed in the conclusion of the second post, the power while running the engine with combustion, as well as without it, at high speed, coming from the forces of inertia, is already a completely different dimension ..

Let's say that the piston has a diameter of 80 mm, i.e. its surface is 50 cm square. The combustion power which produces pressure of about 50 kg / cm2 is on this surface. The total power is 50 x 50 = 2500 KG. this is 2, 5 TONS of pressure on the piston .. if we take the lateral part of this force, (pressing on the cylinder) even if we take these 15%, it will be a force with a piston with a cylinder of about 375 kG, which is many times more, than you can do it with your hand when pushing the rings ...

And getting rid of it has a significant impact on the real efficiency of the engine ..
Therefore, as you "overheat" the engine for high revolutions, in 2 seconds, its speed again drops to small ..

Andrew

come with me ..

[gruntguru]

Let's say that the piston has a diameter of 80 mm, i.e. its surface is 50 cm square. The combustion power which produces pressure of about 50 kg / cm2 is on this surface. The total power is 50 x 50 = 2500 KG. this is 2, 5 TONS of pressure on the piston .. if we take the lateral part of this force, (pressing on the cylinder) even if we take these 15%, it will be a force with a piston with a cylinder of about 375 kG,

. . . and if the friction coefficient at the piston skirt is 0.1 (it is much less than that), the drag on the piston due to this lateral force is 37.5 kg ie about 1.5% of the axial force on the piston.

[Feliks]

[. . . and if the friction coefficient at the piston skirt is 0.1 (it is much less than that), the drag on the piston due to this lateral force is 37.5 kg ie about 1.5% of the axial force on the piston.

http://www.marinediesels.info/Theory/Th ... Guides.htm
So, exceptionally, because it's about a completely new novel, I'll explain what's here.
Here you have, step by step, how much this side force in the motor of the pump is. Note that for 90 deg it is 50% of the main force and is 46 TON (or 120 TON), i.e. oil will be 4, 6 tons. The work is done on the length 2, 5 meters at each stroke. So it is 4.6 TONS drawn on a distance of 2.5 meters, that is for 9 cylinders at a distance of 22.5 meters - without lubrication .. Multiplying this by the number of revolutions per minute 102 will give us 2,300 meters in each minute .. Repeat 4 , 7 TONS for a distance of 2.3 kilometers without any lubrication in a minute ... .. So much energy loses the ship's engine every minute of its work, due to the existence of this force ..
in such a low-speed engine of inertia they do not play a role ...
But in an engine with a speed of 10,000 revolutions per minute, there are inertia forces that are three times higher than gas and play a leading role when it comes to friction.

Andrew