Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: smokingfrog

Tell me, please, that no one is believing this hocum.


10 posted on 11/20/2009 9:32:05 AM PST by glide625
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: glide625

In theory, power to weight ratios like this are possible, as I noted about the SSMEs. However, until a version is tested in a practical application, I will reserve judgment on its veracity.


14 posted on 11/20/2009 9:49:46 AM PST by kosciusko51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: glide625

I think somebody posted something about this about a year ago, where the guy was looking for investors. Most of the posters seemed pretty skeptical about it then too. Perhaps this demonstration at the SAE will provide some insight one way or the other.

The way I see it, the one thing that could perhaps be quite useful about this is the fact that the engines are so small that you could easily have some type of setup where you could have multiple engines in one vehicle, and add or remove them as needed. Like a pickup truck where you would just use one engine for everyday around town driving. Going on a long trip - perhaps over the mountains and need more power? Just plug in another engine. Towing a trailer or other extra cargo? Just plug in a third engine.


15 posted on 11/20/2009 11:08:21 AM PST by smokingfrog (I'm from TEXAS -- what country are YOU from?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: glide625

It is Hokum. He claims the pistons don’t touch the “cylinder”, only the rings. If this design were to actually run, the force pushing the pistons out axially would be tremendous. Think of the “shoot around a corner” rifle, same thing.

I dont see any robust coupling of the piston to the shaft. There appears to be a disk on the inside diameter of the piston/cylinder, perhaps there is a slot cut in the piston which engages the disk. Can’t tell from the videos. That would allow it to function as an air motor for short periods of time.

Combustion creates heat. There appears to be no provision for cooling except for some very abbreviated fins on the outside of an entirely aluminum combustion chamber/cylinder arrangement.

All the while claiming power to weight ratios better than a turbine? We should remember why titanium, monel, stainless, and so forth were invented; to survive the heat that comes out the back end of a jet engine.

It’s a scam.


22 posted on 11/30/2009 6:48:17 AM PST by ecomcon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: glide625
...no one is believing this hocum.

Not me. It's been around quite a while and all I have seen are the same videos of him pumping air through one, absolutely nothing to support his power and efficiency claims.

There might be something in the effective reduction of reciprocating mass but I don't see (as someone else posted) a robust means of transferring power to the shaft at any respectable output level, especially if used as a Diesel. You don't have to be a ME to envision some tremendous forces at play in whatever is connecting the pistons to the shaft.

Everything is a compromise and I don't see the advantage outweighing the mechanical issues. And besides - shaving weight and reciprocating mass doesn't necessarily turn into increased efficiency (turbine, Wankel).

It makes an interesting air pump though.

30 posted on 11/30/2009 4:19:15 PM PST by Clinging Bitterly (MMM MMM MM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson