Devize Barrel Engine: The Next Step in Combustion Technology

Рет қаралды 55,257

Ай бұрын

Videos of running engine by TunedbyshaneT
• Devize Engines 4 Cylin...
Devize Barrel Engine: The Next Step in Combustion Technology
This engine features, 8 Cylinders which are in an opposed configuration. Then the pistons move via an axial design with the pistons running on a crank plate, or swash plate. For a more indepth video on the engine please let me know, they have more than 1 model, a 4 stroke one and a 2 stroke one. And I have also seen a supercharged version.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @chrisvscars
So, I love the internal combustion engine, but unfortunately it seem like many believe that the Internal combustion engine is a thing of the past. Most manufacturers are pursuing Electric and hybrid solutions, and even goverments are making it harder and harder for real engines to survive. But worry not, there are many independent companies out there developing there own new takes on combustion engines, these new engines are cleaner, stronger and in some cases even smaller that the conventional offerings. Now in the past I have covered some of these awesome engines, and since then they have progressed and in the future I might make some update videos, but today we will focus on something new. This is The Devize Barrel engine.
#Devize #Axialengine #Engine

Пікірлер: 169

@user-if3kj7ut5t Ай бұрын

That thing was smoking like Willy Nelson 😂

@SHSPVR Ай бұрын

Don't you mean more like Bob Marley 🤣🤣

@Rick-qf5de Ай бұрын

Snoop Dogg has had the fire department show up several times....

@diezel74dan Ай бұрын

Smoked even worse than a a worn Turboed Wankel 😅 And its not a opposed cylinder engine?!? Thats not new... But the wave crap are 😘 really don't think much of this. But hopefully it gets out of the KZfaq news state...

@actionjksn Ай бұрын

I think it's a 2 stroke and uses 2 cycle oil mix in the gasoline.

@stephenharvey5932 Ай бұрын

The EPA and green nuts will need clean underwear.

@Karmabim123 Ай бұрын

Far from new, this engine configuration was invented by Anthony Michell who patented it in 1917.

@paradiselost9946 Ай бұрын

nah. lamplough preceded that by a few years. his is a bit unusual with its sleeve valves... and its closer to this design with the yoke and spherical rod ends... michell used thrust bearings on a swashplate. utterly different.

@clasdauskas Ай бұрын

@@paradiselost9946 the video showed both methods although it talked only about the swash plate

@windmolenfarm8030 Ай бұрын

There is an engine that was developed in the 1930s and was certified as an aircraft engine but was overtaken by WWII and never mass produced. It was picked up by Dynacam Company in the late 80s-90s and updated with new metallurgy and technology and was tested in aircraft and Buses and the literature I saw was quite positive. It is like the Barrel engine in profile but instead of the pistons connected to the crankshaft at each end and the combustion chamber in the middle, it was a double headed piston with the solid connecting rod riding a swash plate in the middle so the combustion chambers were at each end and the cylinder heads had rotating valves driven by the each end of the crankshaft. It was a 12 cylinder combustion ends with six double headed pistons sliding back and forth parallel to the crankshaft. The profile was small on the initial Aircraft engine with a weight about 150 lbs and diameter of about 18 inches including piping etc. It produced about 235 HP at 1800 RPM and could idle at about 100 RPM, with good fuel efficiency. They tried to mass market it but the bid engine producers tried to buy them out and when they refused they were essentially run out of business. I don't know what happened to the company product after that. The Big guys and the Venture Capitalists essentiall ruined them. Another victim of "The System".

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

Mine ran on detonation. Regular crank engines can't handle that much force and result in knocking and pinging. Much more power is captured in non- tangical piston rods, no side loads. Very cool, thanks, Chris! 😎👍💚🤙

@user-it7lf7kk8m Ай бұрын

Opposing pistons is not remotely unique. It has been used several times in the past. Problem is emiisions are bad unless you spend a lot of effort because it is usually a two stroke

@robertmorris9275 Ай бұрын

This engine still has reciprocating mass, I know of a rotary working prototype (not a wankel rotary) having massive torque at low RPM, 90 degree firing sequence, only 5 moving parts, very simple design, easy to manufacture, just needs recognition !!!

@joseveintegenario-nisu1928 Ай бұрын

Show It, please!

@ohger1 Ай бұрын

If it works by burning fuel, the only advantages are power to weight ratio - mostly unimportant in automobiles. As an aircraft engine it might be usable if it can be made to be reliable. The problem with any internal combustion engine is that rotational torque is a side effect of combustion, not the primary product. The primary product is heat in any ICE.

@xpgaming6567 10 күн бұрын

Are you talking about the liquid rotary engine That design seems pretty promising

@robertmorris9275 9 күн бұрын

@@xpgaming6567 No my Brother has designed & built a working prototype, it runs better on Hydrogen than it does on petrol.

@oldschool1993 Ай бұрын

I love the Home Depot copper plumbing pipes and Greta will be thrilled with that clean exhaust.

@rickkinsman7400 Ай бұрын

There are plenty of revolutionary designs for ICE's, and some of them have a lot of promise. But the biggest problem is one they all share - getting a major manufacturer to adopt them and install them in their offerings to the market. The major manufacturers have vast engineering departments full of people with a vested interest in keeping anything they didn't invent away from consideration by management. There is no way they are going to assess someone else's design and recommend it to the marketing department for the simple reason that management would say, "If we are using someone else's design, why do we need our own engineers?" As a result, we are all stuck with the same old reciprocating piston engines being eternally modified and complicated, and ever more expensive to maintain and repair.

@thamesmud Ай бұрын

The real issue is it's hard to replace something that's simple cheap and reliable with something expensive complicated and likely to be prone to high wear on the sliding components.

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

Actually, many engines are cheaper, more reliable, and easier to repair and maintain. Planned obsolescence is the name of the game and staying on top of the hill...

@tonydfixertonydfixer9113 Ай бұрын

What fuel was used during this filming? I don't think the emissions billowing from exhaust would win my stamp of approval.

@ATomRileyA Ай бұрын

It runs on the tears of Greta tardberg :)

@xpgaming6567 10 күн бұрын

It's probably making that much smoke because of no catalytic converters Normal cars I think make that much smoke as well it's just catalytic converters get rid of most of it

@tonydfixertonydfixer9113 10 күн бұрын

@xpgaming6567 No, I have worked on gas and diesel engines since I was 14,I'm 72, the diesel engine may be a little dirty but gasoline engines only smoke when piston rings or valve seals fails.

@xpgaming6567 10 күн бұрын

@@tonydfixertonydfixer9113 The smoke was really white that usually means it's burning oil right So maybe some of the seals aren't up to scratch or something I do think catalytic converters do quite a bit though don't they?

@littlebearish Ай бұрын

She's chooching more smoke than a locomotive 🤣

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

I had 6 pistons on each side opposite running on a swash plate. 6 pistons fired at once, 3 on each side. I utilized the Burke stroke... better than two stroke engines. Very powerful clean energy. ❤

@muhammadhaq7773 Ай бұрын

Does it work seamlessly? its really an interesting concept. Helicopters use swash plate without any problems so I think it an work here also. Thanks

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

@muhammadhaq7773 Yes, it was perfect. I did that 20 years ago, it's gone now. I will be revealing my latest invention imminently. 😁👍

@q.e.d.9112 Ай бұрын

As with all these new engines the devil is in the detail. Won’t hold my breath.

@clawhammer704 Ай бұрын

It’ll never pass government emissions requirements.

@Bill-sp8kb Ай бұрын

Gotta get that oil consumption under control.

@joejoejoejoejoejoe4391 Ай бұрын

The barrel engine is a very old idea.

@Bill-sp8kb Ай бұрын

Really? How old is it?

@paradiselost9946 Ай бұрын

try "lamplough". closest to this design with its yoke and spherical rod-ends. or "michel" is another one... uses a swashplate and special thrust bearings... that are still used today in propshafts for ships as they deal with immense loads...

@ImperatorCaesar22 Ай бұрын

So is the reciprocating Otto cycle engine in every car. Doesn’t mean it can’t be improved upon

@Rick-qf5de Ай бұрын

Have you ever taken an automobile air conditioning compressor apart... Some have five seven or nine pistons in a circle... Doing the same thing.... Ford never could build one that would last over 5 years. At one time.. ?

@bowez9 Ай бұрын

@@Rick-qf5deodd I've never had a Ford A/C compressor fail, but I have had Honda compressor fail I go back to 1990 f150, orginal owner and 600k miles, plus numerous other Fords.

@robertbrewer2190 Ай бұрын

Immediate application in military smoke screen production!

@vobchopper Ай бұрын

So, it's an opposed piston sleeve ported two stroke.....hence all the smoke, two strokes do have an impressive power to weight ratio but emissions have always been a problem

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

Check out the one stroke opposed cylinders by Burke, aka The Burke stroke.

@Qassu78 Ай бұрын

So that new next step innovation has been under development for 31 years and it's still not in production. Then it will never be.

@brucethecurmudgeon8538 Ай бұрын

I see all of these new marvel engines as a way to replace the low compression opposed aircraft engines in piston operating airplanes. Currently these engines require 100 octane leaded fuel to prevent detonation. Detonation in aircraft engines is fatal, destroying the engine so fast the pilot can't overcome it. A light weight power plant that can operate on any fuel available is a Godsend for aviation.

@TheBlibo Ай бұрын

There have been many variants to this theme over the last 50 years or so and no one has gon into full scale production because a crankshaft dose it better than any other system . If they were so good why have none of the major manufacturers taken the barrel up, and you can bet that some of them have built there own to evaluate the system

@bentaxelrod Ай бұрын

Love the smoke. Love 2 strokes. Love the reliability of 4 strokes Love the power, simplicity and low cost of electric motors though.

@arnicus208 Ай бұрын

I see friction everywhere inside that thing. Driving4Answers had this idea on a video awhile back. Not a winner, if memory serves

@christiantroy7722 Ай бұрын

It's just the same as a airconditioning pump they just put two together an added fule inbetween

@rogermason5833 Ай бұрын

Yeah, nothing really new here. They combined two wobble plate design rotary compressors to make a multi-cylinder opposed piston IC engine. Novel combination of two old concepts. But what about all that smoke; that will never pass EPA emissions testing.

@stanleyness7230 Ай бұрын

Seems to operate similar to old Hough marine steering pump.

@jesusu.4647 Ай бұрын

It needs a compressor to push air into the cylinders and cooling is possible but not easy. There is a similar concept in development called Innengine.

@RinksRides Ай бұрын

this thing is hilarious! The Napier Deltic lives on!

@joseveintegenario-nisu1928 Ай бұрын

Wikipedia has an interesting article 'Axial (Barrel) engine', very old. Besides the classical book by J K Setright 'Some unusual engines', Douglas Self Site Technology Museum has lots of Info.

@libertarian1637 Ай бұрын

Hybrids still have internal combustion engines.

@onebadapple83 Ай бұрын

Actually this design was used to power torpedos sometime in the mid twentieth century, then revived again in the eighties to power light aircraft called Dynacam. Don’t think it ever really took off though….no pun intended! Great idea and just needs $$$$ to make it reliable and, more important……AFFORDABLE!

@christophecamus3295 Ай бұрын

❤❤❤❤very ininteresting video thanks

@joebaucom4537 Ай бұрын

GREAT

@golgothapro Ай бұрын

I think a 10 piston version with the swash plates mounted static and the PTO derived from the rotating mass might be something to consider because burning oil isn't advantageous.

@dimitriosdardalis6658 27 күн бұрын

I designed this. Matt Jackson is the owner and manager. Matt makes the decisions.

@ChrisVSCars 27 күн бұрын

Will add that in the discriptìon 😆

@dimitriosdardalis6658 26 күн бұрын

@@ChrisVSCars Thanks. Perhaps you can add that I take commissions for design projects. You can add that I have my own engine design that I am promoting, the "Rotating Liner Engine" that eliminates wear and reduces friction in diesel engines. This project is at a very advanced stage of development and also seeks investment. Some corrections. This engine has 8 pistons, four cylinders. It is not a squash plate engine. We have cams that drive the pistons. The cams gives freedom of motion that squash plates do not have. Thank you. D.

@jackdaniels2657 29 күн бұрын

Piston engines will never die. Just needs water

@andrewm6340 25 күн бұрын

Regarding Anthony Michell: indeed, there is plenty of documentation to show that he invented this engine (termed an axial engine in his nomenclature) in the first half of the 20th century in its basic principles, including a version with opposing pistons working on single combustion chambers.

@chisaomusician7752 Ай бұрын

Interesting, it's like opposed piston and rotary combined into one. let's see it run with hydrgogen. It's also interesting that multiple companies are working on the same design. Patents are often the death of a new technology, so it's nice to see that doesn't seem to be an obstacle here... yet I wonder what is preventing someone from trying to patent it? is it an old design? has someone published something to keep it from being patented? There are more questions to ask I think.

@realvanman1 Ай бұрын

Like an automotive air conditioning compressor... for the last 75 years... Combined with the 100 year old design of the Fairbanks Morse Diesel...

@patkelley4071 Ай бұрын

Opposed-piston engines always have cooling issues, with many failed efforts done before. The only successful opposed piston design was a German diesel two-stroke used in a number of aircraft during WW II, with excellent fuel consumption, but like most diesels of the period, lots of toxic emissions. The piston deactivation technique has been used in Cadillac V8 engines, but the dynamic adjustment of fuel feed, valve shutoff, and timing is a challenge to retain engine effectiveness and actually reduce fuel consumption. The friction associated with the heavy swashplate also works against engine durability.

@user-it7lf7kk8m Ай бұрын

Deltic loco and torpedo boat engines were also opposed pistons

@patkelley4071 Ай бұрын

@@user-it7lf7kk8m thanks, I forgot about those.

@IO-zz2xy Ай бұрын

Same as the Duke engine. Big fanfare a few years ago then silence. Same goes for the opposable piston engine that VW were supposedly investing in a few years ago. Crickets. Regards from South Africa

@rogerfroud300 Ай бұрын

I love internal combustion engines too, their interesting, cleverly designed, make great noises and are fun to drive. I also like steam engines for all of the same reasons. However, when Tesla proved conclusively that BEVs are practical, even with their first generation vehicles, it was only a matter of time before ICE went the same way are ECE (steam engines). The end to end efficiency of Steam Engines tops out at a few percent when you factor in mining for coal. It's double digits for ICE and at least three times better if you use batteries and electric motors. It's not just about end to end efficiency though, it's about end to end complexity. Drilling, processing and transporting oil is hideously energy hungry compared to electricity production. When it comes to the power train, BEVs are so simple, like a child's toy compared to ICE. There's simply no way back now we've got this far.

@philipansell Ай бұрын

Hard to beat the Commer TS3. Don't think this does. Interesting though!

@vwfanatic2390 28 күн бұрын

You show animation of a 5 cylinder radial engine. Theirs seems like they changed the swashplate from having sockets over each rod to something different. There will be wear issues with that. Radial engines have been around for at least 100 years. This is a small version of one and if they have a way to control emissions, maybe they have something.

@victoryfirst2878 Ай бұрын

WHEN WILL THIS ACTUALLY BE AVAILABLE SIR ???? I WOULD BUY ONE FOR SURE.

@karltite128 Ай бұрын

No one noticed when the tech, sitting with laptop, cleared the smoke.

@SelectCircle Ай бұрын

Lovely grinding action. How long before it wears out?

@ohger1 Ай бұрын

There are roller wheels in the swash plate.

@SelectCircle Ай бұрын

@@ohger1 How often needing to be replaced?

@ohger1 Ай бұрын

@@SelectCircle I don't have a clue, but I if it uses rollers, it could theoretically last for a long time, but this design has so many problems that it really doesn't matter.

@danw1955 Ай бұрын

This will never fly because it's still essentially a glorified 2 stroke engine. So you're always dealing part of the exhaust charge staying in the cylinders, and part of the intake charge getting out (except with direct fuel injection). At any rate, they can't meet emissions, no matter how you slice it. This combined with excessive complexity, and lubrication and cooling problems make it a no-brainer to look into something else. The Deltic Corporation had a locomotive-sized opposed piston diesel in the 40's and 50's, and while they made good power, they were very dirty and had high maintenance costs. They were finally retired in the 1960's for cleaner burning standard 4 stroke diesels.

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

I worked in AREA 51. There is technologies that make our latest and greatest obsolete. I'm a great fan of barrel engines. I invented one myself. 😁👍😎

@warbuzzard7167 Ай бұрын

🙄

@guyforlogos Ай бұрын

3:10 I’m thinking emissions may be an issue. 🤣

@Krazycat321 Ай бұрын

Oh Boy, big surprise at your modern day automotive AC compressor😂

@yzhao5873 26 күн бұрын

I see the dying structure inside. The flat wobble plate generates sine piston moving pattern that makes low efficiency and unable to survive.

@alfredolarrosa8682 Ай бұрын

Is similar to a Spanish engine Called Inengine.

@God-s_Kingdom Ай бұрын

*Let's Develop the Water Implosion Engine* I have Experience in this Technology!

@hermandegroot1946 Ай бұрын

I think Bristol , UK , made them in the fifties for buses.

@bobdadnaila7708 Ай бұрын

The guys running it in the garage with barebones exhaust, though?

@TheEkimssor 17 күн бұрын

How can I test one in my car?

@shiningirisheyes 22 күн бұрын

Saw another YT on this said only gives useful power at high RPM so eats fuel when it it is slow RPM

@bryanst.martin7134 Ай бұрын

Liquid Piston is interesting.

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

Yes, that has been done, successfully. Amazing engine! Thanks for the reminder! 😁

@lancethrustworthy Ай бұрын

There's that weird no moving parts one where the heat and light generate electricity.

@sandblind Ай бұрын

Looks like it would be nearly impossible to keep the internal friction points properly oiled....

@rjung_ch Ай бұрын

Hey Chris 👍💪✌️

@jamesbishop9156 Ай бұрын

I used composite bearings. Far superior to other bearings.

@fldon2306 Ай бұрын

The engine is a Mosquito Fogger too!!🦟🦟☁️☁️ 😂😂

@PeterGort Ай бұрын

Where’s the blower? Opposed piston engines are inherently two stroke engines with forced induction. This video does not mention it. I think it’s on the side of the barrel engine but is explicitly not mentioned.

@user-sn4xo3pq4z Ай бұрын

Seen engines like this years ago, it is not new.

@786otto Ай бұрын

Nothing that is efficient smokes like that😂😂😂

@larry-om9tg Ай бұрын

A lot of smoke.

@actionjksn Ай бұрын

It looks interesting but he offers very little technical information on it. Like what is the deal on the engine balance and is it a 2 stroke or a 4 stroke, or something else? It also looks like he was showing two different engine technologies. The one without a crankshaft and the one with opposing pistons looks like two different engines.

@gertjevanpoppel7270 Ай бұрын

I work in hydraulic engineering for 30 years and barrel like this is nothing new. All hydraulic axial piston pumps and motors work this way

@MartinSBrown-tp9ji Ай бұрын

Impracticable, To many universal joints parts transmitting the power.

@richardhardin9184 Ай бұрын

No matter what anyone says, EVs are the future car that is now. China will force their competitors to invest in EVs. Range improves almost every month, and prices are definitely getting better. It's just history repeating itself when gas vehicles over took the horse and buggy.

@roberthart9886 Ай бұрын

One of many reason to replace bought and paid for governments

@einrichantoniodean8389 Ай бұрын

All we need is two stroke believe me

@lancethrustworthy Ай бұрын

The types and locations of friction this engine might have trouble me. I hope someone will feed its parameters into a super computer if they haven't already, to see what might happen. What about an electromagnetic system instead of the swash plate? Okay, never mind.

@leewyton7975 Ай бұрын

Is it a 2 stroke ?.???

@edwardconnor3268 Ай бұрын

Id like to see hydrogen run vehicle.

@12Senna Ай бұрын

what is pressure angle between these rotate component ？ they can brag whatever it might be, pressure angle will always expose the truth

@daredoggo Ай бұрын

0:10 you must be behind the times.

@patrickporter6536 Ай бұрын

That looks like an electric motor.

@albertharvey3477 Ай бұрын

Albert Harvey Rotary Engines

@GuyMytrleBeach-cq5no 29 күн бұрын

Also known as Scalzo engine

@ohger1 Ай бұрын

At the end of the day, the first product of this engine will be heat like every other internal combustion engine. Rotational torque is a side effect. This is why internal combustion is dying.

@metalmicky Ай бұрын

If it’s got to go up and down before it goes round and round there’s more work to be done……

@UncleKennysPlace Ай бұрын

I only care about the BSFC. If it's not higher than a conventional ICE, it's not good.

@bubaganoush55 Ай бұрын

😮 Lower BSFC is better than higher BSFC !

@ujmrider Ай бұрын

So it's a mosquito fogger?!

@thamesmud Ай бұрын

Neither new nor revolutionary. Opposed pistons and swashplate engines have histories going back to the 1930's.

@paradiselost9946 Ай бұрын

earlier... seeing as the 1912 books i have were already discussing several designs... yet none were simpke enough, cheap enough, or versatile enough to compete with plain crank and rods in a standard configuration. the biggest issue is the "skewshaft", it puts massive loads on the bearings...

@thamesmud Ай бұрын

@@paradiselost9946 I stand corrected. Most of IC engine development has been ideas ahead of the metallurgy or manufacturing capabilities of the time being re-visited as technology catches up. There has to be a cost or performance benefit for changes to be widely adopted.

@paradiselost9946 Ай бұрын

@@thamesmud lol, even parsons raised the idea of using his steam turbines as compressor/turbine for an ICE... back in 18 whenever, when he filed the patent for his turbine... took a few more years until whittle got the credit... it wasnt a new idea. power steering was invented in the 1700s? or at least, contemplated, sketched, and forgotten... main issue with ALL engine designs IMHO is mechanical advantage. be it a crank or skew/wobble/swashplate... (a rotors eccentric is still a crankshaft.) they make great compressors. the mechanical advantage increases as they approach TDC. that is, the crank can rotate for more degrees with little to no piston movement at TDC, applying a huge amount of force on the piston, whereas in reverse, the immense pressure on the piston does sweet bugger all but slam bearings in a straight line. at half stroke, it can produce the maximum torque, yet by this point the gas pressure has dropped so far, and the work available so much less that its a moot point... most engines start exhausting not far past half stroke... some twostrokes with extreme porting start even before then... (diesel and steam have an advantage here as they can both maintain cylinder pressures for longer, for more rotation of the crank, where it has more advantage.) we have been trained to believe theres only a few engine types... two stroke. fourstroke. turbines. rotors. you only see some of the real "oddities" when you start looking at OLD books... fair enough. they could only teach us so much on any certain topic at school. open any technical sort of book... therell be a diagram of four stroke, two stroke, and in a certain era, rotors... thats it. no need to show you that exotic and super rare exhaust scavenged "twostroke" oil engine used in a small fleet of scottish fishing boats and nowhere else... or the thousands upon thousands of failed rotaries... (might get a sarichs orbital if lucky?) the standard blurb... "an ignited air/fuel mixture that forces the piston down the cylinder producing power..." and thats it... next subject. only the vaguest idea of how things actually work, and plenty of room for misunderstandings, false assumptions, and then there is complete indifference... " i like cats, cars are stupid". so the lack of awareness means any "novel" approach to the same old mechanical principle and mode of operation is "revolutionary"... they arent. they still have all the disadvantages with no advantages. just more disadvantages. fourstroke with crank and valves survived as its so simple, reliable, and cheap. unfortunately its hard to "unlearn" a lifetime of thinking a certain way? poppet valves vs rotary valves... "valve springs take power to compress". yes, yes they do. noone stops to consider that springs release that energy minus a bit of friction and heat as the valve closes again. almost ALL of it... and a poppet valve seals well with pressure only making it better, takes heat, doesnt have too many issues with thermal expansion... rotary valves have never worked out in the long run. whereas i do like sleeve valves... out of all the old engine designs, two seem worth blowing the dust off and rethinking as they are fundamentally different... yet one is only just a very slight change to what we already do! the humphrey pump. think "ram pump with sparkplug and carb". in theory, the highest thermal efficiency of any engine. in practice, fairly good. better than an equivalent engine and pump... WWI interfered, a few big ones were made here and there, then forgotten. didnt get the attention they warrant... true "liquid piston". problem is how to USE that liquid piston! the idea of a self contained hydroelectric plant seems good... or even plain hydrostatic? has to be some way to use a jet of high pressure water... then theres the lenoir cycle. deemed useless for having no compression. superseded by the "vastly superior" otto (beau de rochas) cycle... aka, four banger. thing is, we have these devices now that take waste heat in the exhaust gas, and compress air with it... call them "turbo superchargers" or some silly thing like that... and in compound, they can easily reach several atmospheres of compression... why bother with the compression stroke at all, at that point? only a small change to the current sequence of events in a standard piston engine. "suck bang blow" with a squeeze on the side.

@josephfbuck Ай бұрын

The main problem with that it's way too much metal on metal it's going to require substantial oil pressure and oil Cooling and let alone the fact it has very little capacity for cooling so why it's running on a stand by itself it's not going to have to cool itself they're going to have to build a whole another motor to even withstand the temperatures of pulling a car and cooling itself on hot asphalt let alone you're going to have to run dual oil filter setup because micro particles is just going to eat that motor alive

@mwaldyke Ай бұрын

In terms of efficiency, internal combustion engines are all thermodynamic heat engines, which limits them to about 40% maximum efficiency with the materials available to us. Electric power trains are not thermodynamically limited, and are routinely 90%+ efficient. IC is fundamentally inferior in this respect.

@I-am-that-guy132 Ай бұрын

😅 to begin with I was thinking. What is he talking about? Electric trains? Im pretty sure the ones where I live are diesel electric. Then I realized you said “power trains” 😅