Lubrication in toroidal engines

[Kenneth Mann]

I'm approaching 67, my two older grandchildren are 26, and 25, then five more 16 and younger.

I've got you by a couple.

KM

 

[RonL]

I've got you by a couple.

KM

Years, or grandkids ?

Along the thoughts of torodial and free piston designs, one can look at "bounce engines".
IIRC a design for diesel fuel and an electric generator control, has been funded for reasearch at Sandia, or some other lab. I'll see if I can find it and post a link.

Ron

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2009/advanced_combustion/ace_08_vanblarigan.pdf

 

[Danger]

Over the years I have always been intrigued with the various engine designs, some good and some a bit strange. I usually keep these references, however.

Do you have anything about the 'K-cycle' design? I love that sucker, but I haven't seen anything about it in over 30 years. It worked on a swashplate principle, with opposing pistons. It was about 350 ci, and put out close to 700 hp on regular aspiration and regular gasoline. It looked like a couple of galvanized trashcans welded together at about a 30° angle. Since I fist saw it on a CTV report, I had the impression that it was a Canuck design, but have since learned that it was developed in the US.

 

[nucleus]

Since I fist saw it on a CTV report, I had the impression that it was a Canuck design, but have since learned that it was developed in the US.

Somebody done tell you wrong! It was definitely designed in Manitoba, mostly at the University of Manitoba. I know because I had the pleasure of seeing it running there!

The engine and cycle was invented by Dr. Haaken Kritiansen, who was an aeronautical engineer at an airline in Winnipeg before going to the University as a professor. The K-cycle is a new cycle, it was I believe the only new cycle invented in the last century.
Here is the US patent for it:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...XT&s1=4157079.PN.&OS=PN/4157079&RS=PN/4157079
There is another patent with better drawings etc.
http://members.shaw.ca/zenonp/Misc/KCycle.pdf
Another forum here:
http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread/t-142394.html

 

[Danger]

Thank you, Nucleus! I was sure for so many years that it was developed in Manitoba, but the only reference to it that I could find on-line said that it was a Yank thing. You have restored my faith in my limited memory, and screw the net references.
That was one nasty little piece of equipment. Do you have any idea what became of it?
And by the bye, might I assume that you are a fellow Canuck?

 

[Kenneth Mann]

Years, or grandkids ?

Years - - -

 

[Kenneth Mann]

Here is another relatively recent toroidal engine design. Note, that the pistons in this one don't continue in the same direction. The main attraction of these is the promise of a highte power density, but they also have drawbacks that must be overcome.

KM

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/11/oscillating-piston-engine-that-thing-got-a-toroid-in-it/"

 

[Kenneth Mann]

Just to show the fact that these engines are not new, here are a couple of posts that go back a bit. I suspect that one of these is one that I ran across in literature years ago.

KM


http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/POWER/unusualICeng/toroidalIC/toroidalIC.htm"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing-piston_engine"

 

[chhitiz]

Here is another relatively recent toroidal engine design. Note, that the pistons in this one don't continue in the same direction. The main attraction of these is the promise of a highte power density, but they also have drawbacks that must be overcome.

KM

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/02/11/oscillating-piston-engine-that-thing-got-a-toroid-in-it/"

yeah i have seen that one. even the MYT one. don't seem to be generating much interest of investors

 

[Kenneth Mann]

yeah i have seen that one. even the MYT one. don't seem to be generating much interest of investors

Actually, investor interest is not a good measure. I have noticed that ideas conceived in the US don't get good investor interest as do European ideas. Europeans seem to be better at sponsoring ideas. A perfect example seems to be the three basic practical ICE engine thermodynamic cycle inventions, the Brayton Cycle (invented first), the Otto Cycle and the Diesel Cycle. All three were done as piston configurations. Otto and Diesel Cycles got a lot of development, mainly in Germany, and the Brayton Cycle configuration was largely ignored.

American investors just don't support their inventors well. I think that a lot of that has to do with the fact that our laws don,t support our inventors well.

KM

 

[mgb_phys]

I was always thought these were clever - and they worked.
They ran big locomotives for 40years.

 

[Danger]

First, the thing didn't move at all. Now, it's moving too fast. Anyhow, if I'm interpreting it correctly, the intake port on the left bank is the only one that gets opened. You have seriously confused me.

 

[Kenneth Mann]

http://godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message707632/pg1" might be of interest. I don't know about the operation of this engine, but the narrator mentions that it uses its bio-diesel fuel for lubrication.

KM

 

[RonL]

http://godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message707632/pg1" might be of interest. I don't know about the operation of this engine, but the narrator mentions that it uses its bio-diesel fuel for lubrication.

KM

This is a good example of the many types of design work going on, also it shows why so many people have tried and failed, getting their inventions developed into real life applications,(5 years and 4 million dollars).

I do have a little resistance to his statement about the size and power of the engine that would power a car.

Overall it is a very positive show of what might be ahead in the world of design.
I also have a strong belief that electric energy used to produce steam can work in a design much like this, the need for combustion of a fuel should only be in much larger power applications.

Ron

 

[Kenneth Mann]

Do you have anything about the 'K-cycle' design? I love that sucker, but I haven't seen anything about it in over 30 years. It worked on a swashplate principle, with opposing pistons. It was about 350 ci, and put out close to 700 hp on regular aspiration and regular gasoline. It looked like a couple of galvanized trashcans welded together at about a 30° angle. Since I fist saw it on a CTV report, I had the impression that it was a Canuck design, but have since learned that it was developed in the US.

I tried a couple years ago to send you an article reference on the strange engine configuration I think you are referencing. It appeared in one of the "Mechanics" magazines in the seventies. BTW, you need to clean out your inbox. It's full! (Under "Private Messages".)

KM

 

[Danger]

I know that the box is full, Ken. I'm still in the midst of moving. I'm not willing to delete any of my PM's, any more than I would discard a letter or a birthday card. I will try again, but so far my attempts to 'save as txt' haven't been successful. You can contact me through the PF e-mail forwarding service which will send you to my personal e-mail account. I will then forward you my real e-mail address. In the meantime, I have you on my 'friends' list, so you can communicate with me through that avenue as long as it doesn't involve anything that you don't want others to see. My internet just got re-connected this afternoon, and the first thing that I did was accept your friendship request. I'm usually very wary of such requests, but you have proven yourself worthy. (That probably doesn't sound right... what I mean is that your posts have lead me to trust you. You show an integrity that is essential to the continuation, and propagation, of PF.) And beside all of that, you just come off as being really cool.

 

[hhn2002]

This is a good example of the many types of design work going on, also it shows why so many people have tried and failed, getting their inventions developed into real life applications,(5 years and 4 million dollars).

I do have a little resistance to his statement about the size and power of the engine that would power a car.

Overall it is a very positive show of what might be ahead in the world of design.
I also have a strong belief that electric energy used to produce steam can work in a design much like this, the need for combustion of a fuel should only be in much larger power applications.

Ron

your engine it appears is a steam-electric engine configuration. or in effect an modern steam engine relying on electricity to heat water to create steam instead of direct fire.
the problem i see with that is because it relies on a thermodynamic stage heat loss(energy loss) is a concern. no matter the configuration or design of the pistons or cylinders energy will be lost through heat dissipation unless i can be considerably insulated without over heating the engine itself to cause rapid wear. also considering that its only power resource is electricity there are already electric motors that can do the job without involving thermodynamics as a crucial stage. i don't mean to sound like i am trying to pull you down, so sorry if I've offended you but i just wanted to state my oberservations.

what the world craves for is an engine that is revolutionary in its efficiency or utilizes a fuel source that is abundant and less pollutant. a completely electrically driven car requires heavy batteries as its main fuel storage unit and until battery technology is greatly improved electrically driven cars are not in favor. also batteries have a limited limited life span(which are expensive to replace), slow recharge times, and limited ranges.

 

[Kenneth Mann]

I know that the box is full, Ken. I'm still in the midst of moving. I'm not willing to delete any of my PM's, any more than I would discard a letter or a birthday card. I will try again, but so far my attempts to 'save as txt' haven't been successful. You can contact me through the PF e-mail forwarding service which will send you to my personal e-mail account. I will then forward you my real e-mail address. In the meantime, I have you on my 'friends' list, so you can communicate with me through that avenue as long as it doesn't involve anything that you don't want others to see. My internet just got re-connected this afternoon, and the first thing that I did was accept your friendship request. I'm usually very wary of such requests, but you have proven yourself worthy. (That probably doesn't sound right... what I mean is that your posts have lead me to trust you. You show an integrity that is essential to the continuation, and propagation, of PF.) And beside all of that, you just come off as being really cool.

Unfortunately, I don't understand the inner workings of PF to use most of its features. I need help from someone in understanding the "email forwarding service" or communication through the "friends" list. I could use help from someone on these (and other features). BTW, my mailbox is not full.

KM

 

[Danger]

BTW, my mailbox is not full.

That, alas, is irrelevant. Through some peculiarity of the system, I can't send a PM when my own box is full. I also seem to have forgotten how to do the e-mail transfer, but I'll look into it later.
For the 'friends' contact, go to 'My PF' at the left of the top menu bar. Click on that to open your control panel, then on 'Contacts & Friends'. That'll open a window on the right with all of your friends shown. Click on my name (or whoever you want to access), and it will bring up a new screen in my section. There's a text box where you can enter your message and send it just like a PM.

 

[hhn2002]

That, alas, is irrelevant. Through some peculiarity of the system, I can't send a PM when my own box is full.

^most likely because sent PMs are by default saved too.