Rotary valved engines

This Forum is dedicated to the Hobbyist I.C. (Internal Combustion) Engine Community.

Moderators: Harold_V, JackF

wildun
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:13 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand.

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by wildun » Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:17 pm

I have been interested in these designs for a lot of years and they have all been experimented with, but each found lacking in some areas, so no one has actually taken up the challenge of developing them fully.
The Wankel rotary engine ( which more or less brought NSU to it's knees) being a prime example was rushed into production before development was properly finished and because the problems of rotor sealing and wear on the trochoidal bore were not overcome, it quickly brought home to NSU that it is extremely unwise to dive head first into something so radical, however good it seems to be.
Mazda have persevered with development of the Wankel and have made great strides ever since but only with partial success. Wisely they did not forsake the good old piston engine technology - that must tell us something!

The Coates system does look good, although the unlubricated seal technology would still need to be proven in everyday use,- I'm sure that it will work well, but for how long?
In order to get the well established engine manufacturers to forsake their extremely reliable, profitable and well proven existing poppet valve engines for this layout would be nothing short of a miracle!
Very often, new ideas are resolved only under the pressure of wartime needs, an example would be the successful sleeve valve engines developed and perfected by Napier and Bristol in England, - by the end of WW2, they were second to none in reliability, quietness and fuel consumption but all this was unfortunately brushed aside when the turbine engines took over.

The Coates engine has been around for a while and obviously is not being snapped up for the reasons I mention above, this does not mean that it it isn't any good, but there may be other developments about to happen (like electric and hybrid vechiles) and even the use of turbine engines driving generators, although kerosene burning vehicles on the roads would create horrendous smelling fumes,(ie.if the smells you sometimes get through the ventilation systems in airliners when taxying is anything to go by)!

This I admit is getting away from the original posting, but I think these things do need some thought.
However, it doesn't need to stop someone from creating a model from some of these ideas simply for the pleasure of doing so!

JackF
Posts: 1535
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 3:56 pm
Location: Caldwell, Idaho

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by JackF » Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:09 am

Keep up the good coments.

Jack.

magic9r
Posts: 296
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:30 pm
Location: Sheffield, England

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by magic9r » Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:15 pm

Scroll down to June 19th 2013 -

http://www.coatesengine.com/press-releases.html

Yes, imagine just putting Snake Oil, erm, I mean Water in your home generator indeed! :lol:

dly31
Posts: 1042
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 11:29 pm
Location: Northeast Alabama

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by dly31 » Mon Dec 02, 2013 8:41 pm

Back in the 50's a buddy and I saw someone at a carnival running a "Shell Game" where you bet on which of three shells a pea is under. Guys were wagering up to $20, left and right. There was one guy who won fairly regularly, everyone else was losing. I told my buddies that I thought I had read about that game being used to fleece the ancient Egyptians but apparently lots of modern people had never heard of it.

No matter how old the ideas are, there are always some people who fall for things that seem revolutionary without understanding the principles involved. There was a lot of that during the big solar power movement in the 70's.
Don Young

Harold_V
Posts: 17101
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 11:02 pm
Location: Onalaska, WA USA

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by Harold_V » Tue Dec 03, 2013 12:32 am

dly31 wrote:No matter how old the ideas are, there are always some people who fall for things that seem revolutionary without understanding the principles involved.
Seems to be most effective with those who think there's a free lunch. Never ceases to amaze me that what should be considered as intelligent adults still think that perpetual motion is possible.
The only thing I've acquired in my lifetime that was free was a bad time. Seems some folks will willingly give you that little treasure.

Harold
Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.

wildun
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:13 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand.

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by wildun » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:06 am

dly31 wrote:No matter how old the ideas are, there are always some people who fall for things that seem revolutionary without understanding the principles involved.
That should be re-phrased - " just about everyone falls for for things which seem revolutionary without understanding the principles involved".

The world would collapse if what you are suggesting should happen, (ie.everybody needs to understand the principles) actually did happen!
Try telling your wife that last year's model (of whatever) is as good as, or better than this year's model, despite the fact that it is last year's shape!
Ask any car driver how his car engine works and I bet you'd be surprised how few people actually know even the basic principles of how an engine works.

Fact is, everyone (or most people in our type of society) like to see a miracle, or at least something revolutionary happen, because many of them have grown up through the nineteen hundreds where that actually did happen! - but do they want to understand how it actually works? - not a chance!

Guess it's just a bit addictive, like gambling. :roll:

User avatar
ken572
Posts: 2600
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 8:11 pm
Location: Mesa, Arizona. 85201-1517

Re:

Post by ken572 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:55 pm

SteveM wrote:
magic9r wrote:Why rotary valved?
With no reciprocating mass, RPM will not be limited by valve float. When RPM gets too high, the valves can't close fast enough.

On Formula 1 cars, the valves are actively opened and closed pneumatically. That's how they get 18,000 RPM out of them.

Also why my RX7 (an almost 30-year-old design) got 8,000 RPM in the late 70's/early 80's. No valves.

Steve
Steve,

I remember back in the early 1960's, Don Nicholson Engineering built

a New Chevy Drag car with a 409 in it that they retro-fitted with

custom split race needle and roller bearings through out the

entire engine. They were shifting it at 12,500 RPM, very fast,

and no valve float.and torqee for the day. :? 8)

Ken. :D
One must remember.
The best learning experiences come
from working with the older Masters.
Ken.

wildun
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:13 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand.

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by wildun » Sat Dec 07, 2013 6:28 am

Harold_V wrote: Never ceases to amaze me that what should be considered as intelligent adults still think that perpetual motion is possible. Harold
But perpetual motion is possible - speeds of around 30mph were once thought impossible! - Never give up the dream.

I also believe that I'm intelligent! :lol:

User avatar
ken572
Posts: 2600
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 8:11 pm
Location: Mesa, Arizona. 85201-1517

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by ken572 » Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:05 am

Ben,

You should enjoy this.. :D

Bridgestone SR175 Twin – 1967

Dual Rotary Valves Very Fast for it’s size… 8)

http://www.earlyyearsofmx.com/bridgestone175.html

Ken. :)
One must remember.
The best learning experiences come
from working with the older Masters.
Ken.

Harold_V
Posts: 17101
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 11:02 pm
Location: Onalaska, WA USA

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by Harold_V » Sun Dec 08, 2013 2:31 am

wildun wrote:
Harold_V wrote: Never ceases to amaze me that what should be considered as intelligent adults still think that perpetual motion is possible. Harold
But perpetual motion is possible
Not in this universe---unless you know something about physics that is a secret to the vast majority of people.

The laws of physics aren't things man has written ---they are things man has observed--with precious few of then having been proven to not be true. I fully expect the idea of impossible perpetual motion is one of them that is perfectly safe, as you're expecting something free. Nothing is. Not even that "free lunch" we hear so much about. Someone, somewhere, paid for that free lunch, so it isn't really free.

Perpetual motion can't work---for if nothing else, you must overcome friction, which dictates that you must exert more energy than the work you accomplish, regardless of what that work may be. That equates to a net loss.

- speeds of around 30mph were once thought impossible! - Never give up the dream.
There's a fine line that separates reality from fiction. There's no reason why one can't go 30 miles per hour, or, for that matter, 100,000 miles per hour. It just requires the proper mechanism and the necessary amount of energy to accomplish the task. What you're proposing as dispensing 5 quarts from a gallon, and that's not going to happen. At least not in this universe. You're proposing something for free---and nothing is---except a bad time.
I also believe that I'm intelligent! :lol:
If not a little irrational? :lol: (Not meant to be rude---just having a little fun with you.)

It's like the guy who thinks he can put a device under his hood, powered by the alternator, that will split water to hydrogen and oxygen, which will be used to power the vehicle. Sounds real good---but the amount of energy required to split the water will always be greater than the amount of energy recovered by the fusing of oxygen and hydrogen, also not taking in to consideration the resistance in the circuit (a loss via heat). Overall? A net loss, not a gain.

I'm open to your thoughts.

Harold
Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.

wildun
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:13 pm
Location: Auckland, New Zealand.

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by wildun » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:58 am

[ "Perpetual motion can't work"......
"What you're proposing as dispensing 5 quarts from a gallon, and that's not going to happen. At least not in this universe.......You're proposing something for free---and nothing is---except a bad time."
........"If not a little irrational?" ]
_______________________________________________________________

Harold,
In terms of a person's lifetime, perpetual motion is possible. I'm sure that 1 uranium rod would continue to produce constant energy till well after that person had died, so as far as he is concerned it is perpetual motion!
Free meal? - I didn't propose anything or mention a free meal ticket, I just mentioned perpetual motion was possible - you are talking in terms of millions of years, I'm talking in terms of just 100 odd years which surely is sufficient to make the average person feel that the motion is perpetual.
You are obviously an aetherial thinker, I am thinking more like a peasant ( and perhaps to you I am a simple peasant :) ) who only believes in what he sees actually happening !

Let people believe in God, believe in Ancient Alien visitations, dream of uniting everyone by making them all equal, or in this case dream of perpetual motion.
This stuff gives them infinite pleasure and keeps them alive and happy. - Please don't decry their thoughts and efforts or knock down their sandcastles, as in the past some of them have been right despite a lack of great scientific knowledge.
I don't really fit in any of these categories, but am inclined to look on them like amateur goldminers digging through the abandoned tailings of the goldmines of the past, occasionally having a worthwhile find.
Let them believe what they believe, they hurt no one!

BTW, here in New Zealand, why did one of the oil companies buy out Archie Blue and his "water powered" car?

Looking at the purple quotes at the bottom of your posts, where do I fit?

Or am I being irrational. :lol:

Will.

Harold_V
Posts: 17101
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 11:02 pm
Location: Onalaska, WA USA

Re: Rotary valved engines

Post by Harold_V » Sun Dec 08, 2013 4:51 pm

wildun wrote:In terms of a person's lifetime, perpetual motion is possible. I'm sure that 1 uranium rod would continue to produce constant energy till well after that person had died, so as far as he is concerned it is perpetual motion!
I may understand your position somewhat better, but things, to me, are pretty much black and white. I'll comment on that as we continue this interesting conversation.
Free meal? - I didn't propose anything or mention a free meal ticket, I just mentioned perpetual motion was possible - you are talking in terms of millions of years, I'm talking in terms of just 100 odd years which surely is sufficient to make the average person feel that the motion is perpetual.
We're most likely tripping over semantics. You've now provided of your perception of perpetual motion. I've never had an issue with what you speak of----as what you provided in the way of an example, both in your vision of perpetual motion, and the source by which it would be powered lends credence to what I've been saying. The very notion that you make mention of nuclear power provides the little bit of support for what I've been saying--that there is no free lunch. While unimaginable amounts of energy are released from nuclear sources, there are still losses, and that's really what we're talking about, like it or not. Ultimately, the source becomes depleted, albeit in a long period of time.

This example is little different from a flywheel, perhaps one of monumental proportions, where enough energy is stored that it can be called upon for a very long time to provide power----but I think both of us know that the amount of power that can be recovered will always be less than the amount of power that was required to store the energy, and the amount of energy that was used to power the flywheel would have been greater than the amount of energy recovered. That, alone, dictates that there is no free lunch, and that there can be no perpetual motion, a term which implies that a source of energy has no limits--that it can run for eternity, yielding more than was provided. That's really what folks talk about with perpetual motion----a free lunch.
You are obviously an aetherial thinker, I am thinking more like a peasant ( and perhaps to you I am a simple peasant :) ) who only believes in what he sees actually happening !
Just a logical, uneducated thinker.
One can not believe what they see---as things are often not as they appear. An example----some time ago, a youtube presentation was making the rounds. It depicted a candle powering a small light bulb. The individual would light the candle, then suddenly the bulb would glow. Having a basic understanding of electricity, and knowing that wax is not a conductor, to me it was perfectly obvious that its soul purpose was to mislead those who viewed. A magic show, for lack of better description. To me, it was perfectly obvious that the candle had nothing to do with the glowing light bulb, a fact that was betrayed by the subtle sound of a switch being thrown, along with the rather poor timing of the sound of the switch in comparison to the candle being lit.
Let people believe in God, believe in Ancient Alien visitations, dream of uniting everyone by making them all equal, or in this case dream of perpetual motion.
This stuff gives them infinite pleasure and keeps them alive and happy. - Please don't decry their thoughts and efforts or knock down their sandcastles, as in the past some of them have been right despite a lack of great scientific knowledge.
I can provide one very good example why individuals should have both feet squarely planted on the ground, and deal with reality, although the example has little to do with what we're discussing. The principle remains valid, however, as there are cases where being misinformed can prove to be deadly. I'll talk about that, below.
I don't really fit in any of these categories, but am inclined to look on them like amateur goldminers digging through the abandoned tailings of the goldmines of the past, occasionally having a worthwhile find.
Let them believe what they believe, they hurt no one!
If only that was true, and the reason for my comment, above. Here's the real deal, as it occurred for me.

I was engaged in the refining of precious metals, a trade from which I retired, and the trade that took the place of machining in my life. That's what this story is about.

Early in my refining career, a neighbor, unknown by me until we met because of this incident, turned to me for assistance. He, along with his father-in-law and a third party, had spent three months working a remote claim, recovering gold. A placer operation, to help you understand. He turned to me because he felt that he had lost his gold in the recovery process, and hoped I could shed some light on how or why.

After filling me in on the details, and understanding that he had recovered over five ounces, I asked him what the head assay showed. He had no idea what I was asking. I told him it was customary for ore sources to be sampled, so one would understand the potential involved----how much gold could be expected, per ton, so a wise decision could be made to work the claim, or not.

There had been no assays performed.

I asked why he pursued the project.

He told me that they could see the gold, so figured it would be worth the effort.

Turns out it wasn't, as the father-in-law died from a heart attack and couldn't receiver badly needed help, as they were in a remote part of the State of Nevada.

Placer gold tends to be well beaten by nature. Miniscule particles will often be hammered quite flat, so they appear to be much larger than they are, but are very thin, thus there is precious little gold present. That's what he had recovered. Had they paid for a head assay, they'd have known that they couldn't handle the material in great enough volumes to make it profitable. They wouldn't have spent three months of their lives chasing their tails, and the father-in-law may have still been alive. That, none of us can know.
BTW, here in New Zealand, why did one of the oil companies buy out Archie Blue and his "water powered" car?
The real question is, did they? Or is this just one of the tales that are repeated, yet can't be proven? Much like the guy who has a pill which is dropped in to a tank of water, which them provides fuel for the engine. I knew a guy who knew a guy who knew a guy who witnessed the act, yet, strangely, there is no record of that having happened. I strongly suspicion your Archie Blue fits this category. A story that everyone loves to repeat, based on nothing.
Looking at the purple quotes at the bottom of your posts, where do I fit?

Or am I being irrational. :lol:
Chuckle. Hard to say, but I expect that you, like most of us, have things we'd like to believe, true or not. Doesn't make any of us good or bad, it just displays a common human weakness---the one that allows us to dream. Perfectly harmless until we start believing the dream, and our father-in-law has to give up his life as a result.

Harold
Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.

Post Reply