View Full Version : ESE's works engine tuner
lucf
10th July 2017, 00:54
Jan is correct, I did a simulation of what I think a Ryger engine looks like. In the simulation I assumed good scavenging and good normal combustion. The layout is a stepped piston with the step smaller than the main piston, unlike the traditional stepped pistons where it is bigger than the main piston. The rest is just gas-dynamics and plenums. If this is close to the Ryger in its current format I do not know.
331683
Very wise Vannik to be carefull with your conclusion !
Vannik
10th July 2017, 07:09
Very wise Vannik to be carefull with your conclusion !
Luc I still hope it will come to something. And in this case I do not know what it is that I do not know.
SwePatrick
10th July 2017, 08:30
Can someone help me?
I need to get my inlettract correctly tuned in hunt for power.
I´m not too good at calculation on this, can someone please help me, i´m adding a picture of my inlet.
The length isn´t correct, but the diameters is.
I have reached to this date 71.35hp on the sprocket at 12800rpm (one cylinder 211.2cc, methanol)
https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/19942835_10155120233029475_5321055692735535528_o.j pg?oh=d69d294ffbf336f0ba4d911ccf8ca78d&oe=59C9FF57
Norman
10th July 2017, 08:32
Luc, maybe you are not able to answer, but do you think we will see additional patents covering the Ryger engine concept in the near future?
lucf
10th July 2017, 09:04
Luc I still hope it will come to something. And in this case I do not know what it is that I do not know.
A matter of time Neels !
JanBros
10th July 2017, 11:05
Here is a new realtime power graphic and some proofs of the powergraphics which I published before.
https://www.facebook.com/luc.foekema/media_set?set=a.10207444870239010.1073741881.18054 54134&type=3&pnref=story
ok Luc, I agree with you. there are things happening inside the Ryger we don't know of. sorry, "didn't" because I was tired of the entire discussion and decided to built my own Ryger version. This afternoon I took one cylinder of my KR1. I quickly made a piston, spacer with a seal for under the cylinder, shortened the conrod to 90mm (just cut-and-weld-it-back-together job), cut the baffle of the exhaust, welded an intake on the back of the cylinder to fit some reeds and you know what ? it ran great from first kick. Started making some calls so I could put it on a dyno this evening and just got back home .
you are right : it is an amazing principle but you guys still have some work , as my Rygerised KR1 made ALMOST 80 BHP ! BEFORE 10.000 rpm ! that is better than my tuned KR1S engine on only 1 cylindre ! check out the realtime evidence :
http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv357/winner_evo/RD%20RGV%20Hybrid/421Dynograph_zps3f169626.jpg (http://s699.photobucket.com/user/winner_evo/media/RD%20RGV%20Hybrid/421Dynograph_zps3f169626.jpg.html)
also tested the max rpm, but I didn't dare to go above 25.000 because of the welded conrod :innocent:
Luc, do you believe this ?
wobbly
10th July 2017, 11:07
Here is the inlet of a KZ10C ,this starts to resonate with the reed petal frequency and the case volume at around 12500, with peak Hp at 13500.
In EngMod you can see this happen as the case depression drops below atmospheric at the same time as the positive return wave in the inlet goes positive.
This creates a huge + and - pressure ratio effect on the reeds between BDC and TPO and opens them very quickly and early.
The same situation exists in the Aprilia RSA in that it is mechanically very hard to get the inlet short enough to work correctly at those rpm.
Flettner
10th July 2017, 12:12
ok Luc, I agree with you. there are things happening inside the Ryger we don't know of. sorry, "didn't" because I was tired of the entire discussion and decided to built my own Ryger version. This afternoon I took one cylinder of my KR1. I quickly made a piston, spacer with a seal for under the cylinder, shortened the conrod to 90mm (just cut-and-weld-it-back-together job), cut the baffle of the exhaust, welded an intake on the back of the cylinder to fit some reeds and you know what ? it ran great from first kick. Started making some calls so I could put it on a dyno this evening and just got back home .
you are right : it is an amazing principle but you guys still have some work , as my Rygerised KR1 made ALMOST 80 BHP ! BEFORE 10.000 rpm ! that is better than my tuned KR1S engine on only 1 cylindre ! check out the realtime evidence :
http://i699.photobucket.com/albums/vv357/winner_evo/RD%20RGV%20Hybrid/421Dynograph_zps3f169626.jpg (http://s699.photobucket.com/user/winner_evo/media/RD%20RGV%20Hybrid/421Dynograph_zps3f169626.jpg.html)
also tested the max rpm, but I didn't dare to go above 25.000 because of the welded conrod :innocent:
Luc, do you believe this ?
Ha ha, hail the new King! Step aside Luc, see Jan Bros has proof too :clap::clap::clap:
Love it!
Flettner
10th July 2017, 12:25
Here is the inlet of a KZ10C ,this starts to resonate with the reed petal frequency and the case volume at around 12500, with peak Hp at 13500.
In EngMod you can see this happen as the case depression drops below atmospheric at the same time as the positive return wave in the inlet goes positive.
This creates a huge + and - pressure ratio effect on the reeds between BDC and TPO and opens them very quickly and early.
The same situation exists in the Aprilia RSA in that it is mechanically very hard to get the inlet short enough to work correctly at those rpm.
So how short should the port be, in an ideal (no carburetor) 125 rotary valve world?
F5 Dave
10th July 2017, 12:55
Hardly too late in competition everyone wants the latest and greatest .................but got to have the runs on the board first. IF the engine lived up to the hype last years champ would be cutting laps around tracks with a mountain of youtube clips to look at.
Cmon Neil I expect that you already have the variable length version in progress but working on variable diameter throttle body in combination ;)
wobbly
10th July 2017, 18:06
Sorry Flet but with a RV that is a very hard question to answer , as the situation with that engine is highly dictated by the wave actions affect on the carb.
In that scenario the shorter the inlet the better it goes, but that isnt due to inlet length tuning.
The reed engine operates using the 3rd harmonic in the inlet tract and you can see that working in the sim.
But I have never spent hours trying to optimize an RSA so cant really help with what length works best when you take the carb signal issue out of the equation.
Jannem
10th July 2017, 20:40
Still very much in the learning mode and limited in capability to contribute at level this thread is going... Hope you don't mind.
With a lot of discussion of the blowdown and exhaust reversion to the transfers, it made me wonder if reeds in transfer ports have been tried? I'd expect so. Just something that made me wonder, if there could be a benefit.
SwePatrick
10th July 2017, 20:41
Here is the inlet of a KZ10C ,this starts to resonate with the reed petal frequency and the case volume at around 12500, with peak Hp at 13500.
In EngMod you can see this happen as the case depression drops below atmospheric at the same time as the positive return wave in the inlet goes positive.
This creates a huge + and - pressure ratio effect on the reeds between BDC and TPO and opens them very quickly and early.
The same situation exists in the Aprilia RSA in that it is mechanically very hard to get the inlet short enough to work correctly at those rpm.
Nice =)
I got 0.45 polini carbon blades on an almost std kx250 cage.
I just ported the stuffer to receive flow from my 43.5mm carb.
The picture i added doesn´t show all things.
If looked from above one could see that i diffuse the flow some before hitting the petals.(the cage are wider at front, as normal)
I also use 2 big petals instead of 8 small ones.
As i don´t have Engmod i have used trial and error method ;)
And coming from a history of stereobuilding in my car in my youth, i know that different diameters of a tube resonates completely different if having the same length.
Rule of thumb, bigger diameter=longer tube to resonate in same Hz.
I feel at this point all my tricks up my sleeve is getting used.
I dynoed my old 132cc honda 44hp to the sprocket = 0.33hp per cc
I dynoed this 211cc kawa to 71.35hp to the sprocket = 0.33hp per cc
In both engines i dunno what to do next *lol*
And i see a red line here, at 0.33hp per cc my knowledge is the limit.
Rgds.
Patrick
That looks awesome wobbly.
Here is what I am doing at the moment. The studs get in the way of going for bigger b ports, the situation leaves me as only being able to make c ports. I was planing on two ports but if you think one bigger ones is better then I will go to that.
My question kind of got lost in the argument that followed. Would you go for one or two c ports in a situation like I am faced with. There is little room to make the b transfer any bigger due to studs being in the way.
One of the pictures shows where some one did a single port previously on another cylinder I'm just trying to find the best way.
SwePatrick
10th July 2017, 22:14
My question kind of got lost in the argument that followed. Would you go for one or two c ports in a situation like I am faced with. There is little room to make the b transfer any bigger due to studs being in the way.
One of the pictures shows where some one did a single port previously on another cylinder I'm just trying to find the best way.
When welding that much, weld some more ;)
move the rear studs more backwards to allow you to increase size of B-ports more to the rear.
Then use a normal boost c-port.
rgds
adegnes
11th July 2017, 03:33
The Spx is back!
All I did was throw in some random value but humongous jets = 1hp over my best on gasoline. This is looking promising! It's nowhere near tuned at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vsTcdz7ACE
wobbly
11th July 2017, 08:19
As in the TZ cylinder I posted the trick to getting the best port/ducts into the casting was to bore the stud holes slightly oversize,then fit wasted
studs.
The studs screw into the case, and get ground away where the duct needs to gain area.Then the stud is drilled and threaded from the top, and the head held down with cap screws
into this thread.
In your case it looks easy to gain a heap of B duct,and thus increase the port - with a hook as well.
Single C ports work better than two, as several manufacturers have used both, but always revert to the single ( TZ250 V twin is good example )
Thanks guys, the class doent allow me to weld on the cases I can do what I like to the cylinder, so moving the studs is not really a possibility. I do like the idea of making shortened studs and then grinding them that's an easy way to get more B-port.
Ok one C port it is.
When I make the c port there is plenty of room to put a hook in that, while it would add to the flow I thought maybe it may not be a good idea as it would be the highest flowing port. Or is not an issue and hook it anyway
chrisc
11th July 2017, 13:02
Here is the inlet of a KZ10C ,this starts to resonate with the reed petal frequency and the case volume at around 12500, with peak Hp at 13500.
In EngMod you can see this happen as the case depression drops below atmospheric at the same time as the positive return wave in the inlet goes positive.
This creates a huge + and - pressure ratio effect on the reeds between BDC and TPO and opens them very quickly and early.
The same situation exists in the Aprilia RSA in that it is mechanically very hard to get the inlet short enough to work correctly at those rpm.
Hey wob, the comment "2/3 off reed block length". Is that supposed to be "2/3 of the reed block length"? If so how come you haven't modeled it using the full duct length?
A few guesses: 1) maybe to take into account the reed block protruding into the duct, 2) maybe using length as a way to manipulate the flow/volume in engmod because it's a rectangular duct rather than a tube?
peewee
11th July 2017, 18:06
this is just my amatuer way of thinking but on most all cylinder reedvalvers ive seen , the C passage is crap. very short and sometimes partially clogged by the reed block so how much good is it doing anyways, no matter how much magic dust you sprinkle on it. i liked to spend most of my time making A and B the best they can be
husaberg
11th July 2017, 19:08
The Spx is back!
All I did was throw in some random value but humongous jets = 1hp over my best on gasoline. This is looking promising! It's nowhere near tuned at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vsTcdz7ACE
Good to see you back Adegnes
You might find your needle jet is acting as a Mainjet as this will also limit the ammount of fuel that will flow. In this senario no amount of using bigger jets will make any difference at all.
If the needle jet is replaceable try a larger needle jet and Needle combo. Together with a richer cutaway.
If you can't get suitable needles for the carb You can richen the needle easily by simply making it thinner, Or just make you own needles.
I see summer has arrived as well.
wobbly
11th July 2017, 19:29
Re the studs for moving ducts to make them bigger.
You dont need to move the thread in the case - if you needed to, the stud could be 13mm say , with a stock 8mm thread into the case,but if the 13 was eccentric
you could bore the cylinder oversize and offset, then locktite the stud correctly aligned into the case.
The TZ shown has 8mm in the case,but 13mm stud diameter, and approx 1/2 this bigger size is ground away when making the inlet wider and adding 3 port Exhaust ducts.
Re the reed block modelling.
This was tested on a fully instrumented dyno with a CR125 for a Uni PhD thesis and checked against the wave action shown in EngMod.
The intake is modeled with 2/3 of its actual length as distance from the carb mouth to the reed block port opening, changes depending upon how much tip lift the petal has.
Fully down it is right to the reed block end, fully up and the tuned length changes to a much shorter effective length.
The 2/3 length is a good working average.
Re the B port hook.This scavenging technique clears away residual combustion gases in a completely dead flow area just in font of the C port.
With no hook, the two B port flows crash into each other, loosing a heap of directional control, and they then effectively block off the C port flow that is trying to attach to the rear wall.
Done right, the C port drags the B port flow into the correct loop direction ( leaning tower ) with it.
Grumph
11th July 2017, 19:36
Wob, enlighten me, new nicasil from our mutual friends at NZ Cylinders and I'm told to use castor base as an assembly lube for the bores.
The tip came from you apparently.
I've done it and will wait with interest to see how the bores bed in.
Any comment as to the reasoning behind it ?
adegnes
11th July 2017, 19:58
Good to see you back Adegnes
You might find your needle jet is acting as a Mainjet as this will also limit the ammount of fuel that will flow. In this senario no amount of using bigger jets will make any difference at all.
If the needle jet is replaceable try a larger needle jet and Needle combo. Together with a richer cutaway.
If you can't get suitable needles for the carb You can richen the needle easily by simply making it thinner, Or just make you own needles.
I see summer has arrived as well.
Good to be back!
Before this dyno session I had a go with a drilled out needle jet but the same needle(thinking the leakage at closed throttle would just add some to whats supplied by the pilot circuit) Did not work too well. It would start, but die soon after or instantly if I gave it throttle. A larger needle and needle jet sounds like the way to go. Doesn't seem lean up top tho, could be sufficient with just a thinner needle as you say.
I'll look through my collection and see if I've got any, or sand down this one.
I'll also have a closer look at the pilot circuit to see if there's still some restrictions in there.
This could just be the common alcohol problem of liquid fuel just passing through the engine. It is literally pouring out the exhaust.
I'm very happy with the "effortless" 1hp power gain and look forward to seeing what will come out of this!
SwePatrick
11th July 2017, 20:11
Good to be back!
Before this dyno session I had a go with a drilled out needle jet but the same needle(thinking the leakage at closed throttle would just add some to whats supplied by the pilot circuit) Did not work too well. It would start, but die soon after or instantly if I gave it throttle. A larger needle and needle jet sounds like the way to go. Doesn't seem lean up top tho, could be sufficient with just a thinner needle as you say.
I'll look through my collection and see if I've got any, or sand down this one.
I'll also have a closer look at the pilot circuit to see if there's still some restrictions in there.
This could just be the common alcohol problem of liquid fuel just passing through the engine. It is literally pouring out the exhaust.
I'm very happy with the "effortless" 1hp power gain and look forward to seeing what will come out of this!
Alex, In my Facebook group the guy named 'hilmersson' have been quite successful with nitro, he might have all your answers you need.
Feel free to ask him public in group.
Would love to see a good discussion on nitro =)
Rgds.
F5 Dave
11th July 2017, 20:30
Never tried funny fuel but if can direct you to about page 1 of this epic thread, pull the mainjet out and if it runs but dies when open the needle isn't restricting full open.
chrisc
11th July 2017, 21:32
I think I could learn something from hearing about the design intent of this FOS Malossi pipe (quoted post directly below) and/or the matching cylinder.
331722
... Here are some numbers to play around with. Exhaust pipes don't come any simpler than this, but don't let that fool you; this pipe was good for eight championships. ...
I put this pipe into engmod and noted the % almost match the 'FOS exhaust concept' which is unsurprising.
301223
I'm unsure why there is no stagger on the transfers, noted on the design as all being 130 degrees. Wouldn't it be better to maximise the exhaust aux port size for more blow down and open the A ports later to prevent the short circuiting? Maybe opening all at once is a compromise but a comment from Wobbly sticks in my head as "enhance midrange power if the A port opens first, or enhances peak and overrev power if the B port opens first." I understand this is due to "the port to open first, flows last" rule due to flow reversal.
The pipe seems to have a long tuned length at 714mm and the ignition was noted at 16 degrees at 13,000rpm. Maybe I'm being presumptuous but the engine seems to be designed to make peak power somewhere around the 13,000rpm mark. Isn't that a bit low for a 50? Maybe there were mechanical limits but engmod reckons this 50 of mine spinning at 14,000 has a mean piston speed of 19m/s. Engmod notes this as being slightly under the 20m/s considered as "performance" and nothing like the 25m/s of "high perf". Am I foolish to be trying to design this 50 to make peak power around 14,000rpm?
Was this Malossi engine runing on unleaded fuel?
adegnes
11th July 2017, 22:40
Alex, In my Facebook group the guy named 'hilmersson' have been quite successful with nitro, he might have all your answers you need.
Feel free to ask him public in group.
Would love to see a good discussion on nitro =)
Rgds.
Thanks, I'll do that!
Never tried funny fuel but if can direct you to about page 1 of this epic thread, pull the mainjet out and if it runs but dies when open the needle isn't restricting full open.
Thanks. Probably a wise move to avoid ending up with melted parts again, tho it seems to be well rich on full throttle.
I'm not sure if the 1/8 throttle bog is lean, could be "drowning".
I'll lift the needle in the next session to see if it gets better/worse. It seems to happen at the point were the needle's straight upper section is going into the first taper and is beginning to let fuel through.
Another note, it is acting alot like before I found out the powerspark was more retarded than it should be when running gasoline - going flat at higher revs. I'll start adding in advance when I've got the carb sorted.
shnaggs
12th July 2017, 02:30
Jan is correct, I did a simulation of what I think a Ryger engine looks like. In the simulation I assumed good scavenging and good normal combustion. The layout is a stepped piston with the step smaller than the main piston, unlike the traditional stepped pistons where it is bigger than the main piston. The rest is just gas-dynamics and plenums. If this is close to the Ryger in its current format I do not know.
331683
Vannik, How could you simulate this when the sim wont allow you to get the CCR into the Ryger realm? Or am I missing something?
Vannik
12th July 2017, 07:22
Vannik, How could you simulate this when the sim wont allow you to get the CCR into the Ryger realm? Or am I missing something?
How high is high? There is quite a large chamber at the bottom of the cylinder, almost all the way around that is part of the bottom compression chamber. At least that is how it looks in the homoligation papers and in the patent papers.
TZ350
12th July 2017, 07:47
I am not sure why the pictures appear upside down. Maybe because its a 4T, ...... :facepalm:
331727
For something different we spent an evening finding the sweet spot for a 4T's exhaust length.
331725331726
Started with an overly long pipe and cut it back in short sections, 50mm then 25mm at a time.
After that we worked on the inlet but in only 10mm then 5mm steps.
adegnes
12th July 2017, 08:25
I am not sure why the pictures appear upside down.
331727
For something different we spent an evening finding the sweet spot length for a 4T's exhaust.
331725331726
Started with an overly long pipe and cut it back in short sections, 50mm then 25mm at a time.
After that we worked on the inlet but in only 10mm then 5mm steps.
Always fun to mix it up a bit!
Jannem
12th July 2017, 08:38
274209
And why is there a shadow (clean area) on the piston next to cylinder wall area between the ports? I would have expected the area in front of the transfer ports to be washed clean from the fresh mixture, not between the ports.
Maybe, even probably. But not certainly. Clear patches on pistons can also be an indication of hot spots. Yeah, those simple two-strokes.....
Old post, but seems worth commenting.
I'd say because fuel wash at the piston top in the combustion temperatures cannot be viewed the same as washing parts. Clean areas are the ones that are not fuel washed and vice versa.
Take a polished piston and put a single drop of fuel in the center of it. Then burn it with a torch. Repeat as many times as it takes to get patterns in live engine. Will take forever, but eventually you will find accumulation of carbon (fuel is hydrocarbon) where you repeatedly put that drop. the rest will be clean.
Saw this doing wet flow tests of 4-stroke chamber. The black areas are the ones where fuel "washes".
I know many experts disagree, but that's my .02.
wobbly
12th July 2017, 09:59
Re the running in of a newly Nicasil cylinder.
The best way is to use a HEAP of castor based oil plastered all over the piston and bore, and when first started only slowly idle the thing for 5 mins with NO throttle.
The castor has a very smooth wear characteristic on parts that should match closely ( bore wall,rod bore etc ) and at idle with no throttle
there is very low combustion pressure that doesnt push the ring out hard onto the bore.
This prevents the micro scratches that run up the bore randomly from seemingly perfectly smoothed port edges, due to the ring pressure.
The idea has proven itself on dozens of new bores, with the vertical scratches ( that soon disappear as the bore surface is rubbed away by the ring ) being non existent in new cylinder builds.
And regarding piston darkening - you can substitute " cooler area " with "fuel washed " as the combustion process only burns on a black surface on the piston where it gets hot
enough to do so.
If your squish is working correctly, there will be no black marks in that area as it will be cooled by the boundary layer at TDC.
I have seen countless engines where the piston is clean alloy directly in line with a port divider - ie no cooling flow to prevent oil deposits burning on a coating.
Lightbulb
12th July 2017, 11:58
Thanks for this explanation. So do you think this is a direct result of the fuel not being atomised enough by the time it has gone through the transfer ports? If there was more turbulence, or more happening to smash up the air fuel mix, do you think this will still be happening?
Thanks again,
Neil
Old post, but seems worth commenting.
I'd say because fuel wash at the piston top in the combustion temperatures cannot be viewed the same as washing parts. Clean areas are the ones that are not fuel washed and vice versa.
Take a polished piston and put a single drop of fuel in the center of it. Then burn it with a torch. Repeat as many times as it takes to get patterns in live engine. Will take forever, but eventually you will find accumulation of carbon (fuel is hydrocarbon) where you repeatedly put that drop. the rest will be clean.
Saw this doing wet flow tests of 4-stroke chamber. The black areas are the ones where fuel "washes".
I know many experts disagree, but that's my .02.
TZ350
12th July 2017, 12:47
page 1770 ........ :niceone:
Jannem
12th July 2017, 18:08
Thanks for this explanation. So do you think this is a direct result of the fuel not being atomised enough by the time it has gone through the transfer ports? If there was more turbulence, or more happening to smash up the air fuel mix, do you think this will still be happening?
Thanks again,
Neil
I think several things have an impact. As you'd expect, better atomisation leaves less residue. Carburetion, higher pressure differential across T-port can help or hinder atomisation. Transfer port shape has an impact how well the fuel stays in suspension, direction where it's likely to wet, if that's going to happen.
As Wobbly stated (if I understood correctly), the good squish action cleans up the perimeters from wet fuel and keeps it cooler preventing (or reducing) burn there. Fuel on piston top will burn, but less cleanly than atomised mixture and leaves soot.
Carbon formation on top of the piston, under the chamber, may also improve combustion as it forms an insulating layer retaining more heat in the combustion.
you can substitute " cooler area " with "fuel washed " as the combustion process only burns on a black surface on the piston where it gets hot enough to do so.
I have seen countless engines where the piston is clean alloy directly in line with a port divider - ie no cooling flow to prevent oil deposits burning on a coating.
There is a contradiction in how you state this if you'd expect burning fuel on the surface to leave a carbon residue. -> Fuel burns where its hot enough. -> Clean in line with divider where there is no cooling flow to prevent burning.
So I take it your thinking is that burn on wetted surface does not leave a residue?
Greg85
12th July 2017, 22:06
Here is the inlet of a KZ10C ,this starts to resonate with the reed petal frequency and the case volume at around 12500, with peak Hp at 13500.
In EngMod you can see this happen as the case depression drops below atmospheric at the same time as the positive return wave in the inlet goes positive.
This creates a huge + and - pressure ratio effect on the reeds between BDC and TPO and opens them very quickly and early.
The same situation exists in the Aprilia RSA in that it is mechanically very hard to get the inlet short enough to work correctly at those rpm.
Hello wobbly here is the admission reed box modena mkz new homologation 2016 engine tested on the dyno not very good 43.44hp original carton by testing a standard reed box we made a good a 44.93hp what do you think a problem of resonance or the Direction of flow? thanks331736
Greg85
12th July 2017, 22:18
331736[/ATTACH]
this is result of dyno test
Frits Overmars
12th July 2017, 23:29
A 7 thou plastic shim at 45 deg is very close to 0.25mm and works very well on model engines. ..Other times I use a 4 thou shim and sit it on the piston crown and poke it to the side of the ports.If you use shims as thin as that, there is a risk that they will get pinched between the cylinder bore and the top land of the piston if you force the piston upward with some effort. That is why I chose a 1 mm shim Neil. It also gives me better control over that 45° angle.
Lightbulb
12th July 2017, 23:51
I figured that would be the case for full sized engines. But with 2.5cc engines and only a 14mm stroke, 1 mm shim is a lot.
You going to the F3D world champs?
Neil
Frits Overmars
13th July 2017, 00:46
I figured that would be the case for full sized engines. But with 2.5cc engines and only a 14mm stroke, 1 mm shim is a lot. You going to the F3D world champs?Yes, 1 mm is a lot in an engine that small, but that won't matter. Of course with so small a bore I would use a 1 mm bicycle wheel spoke instead of a shim, so that the exhaust port's top curvature (if any) won't influence the height reading. Well alright, it might also be a 0,5 mm spoke :D.
I'm afraid I won't be able to make it to the F3D races in Sweden Neil. But if you are coming over anyway, Germany is just around the corner...
Frits Overmars
13th July 2017, 01:01
hey guys im making the swingarm longer by 5". im not much experience in structure design but heres my idea...Peewee, in addition to every advice that has already been given, and to which I fully subscribe, I'd like add two points.
1: Make the cut as close to the rear axle as can be combined with inserting internal strengthening profiles of the correct length.
2: Can't you add some form of triangulation? That would kill two birds with one stone: much less stress on the welds and a much stiffer fork.
Frits Overmars
13th July 2017, 01:37
I think I could learn something from hearing about the design intent of this FOS Malossi pipe and/or the matching cylinder. I'm unsure why there is no stagger on the transfers, noted on the design as all being 130 degrees. Wouldn't it be better to maximise the exhaust aux port size for more blow down and open the A ports later to prevent the short circuiting?Chris, the reason could not be any simpler: the A-ports were already that high when the cylinder left the factory.
The pipe seems to have a long tuned length at 714mm and the ignition was noted at 16 degrees at 13,000rpm. Maybe I'm being presumptuous but the engine seems to be designed to make peak power somewhere around the 13,000rpm mark. Isn't that a bit low for a 50?Design rpm was 13300 and that would indeed be pathetically low for a 50 cc racer. But my intention was not to build a 50 cc world beater; I merely wanted to modify a mass-produced engine so it could be used in moped races by guys and girls who had to finance their hobby with newspaper delivery. That Malossi cylinder fitted various moped and scooter engines and it did not require much work to turn it into a winner back then.
The mods, in case you are interested, were:
Raising all transfers to 130° and widening the B-ports to 14 mm.
Raising the main exhaust to 194°.
Raising the auxiliary exhausts to 188° and squaring the windows.
Was this Malossi engine runing on unleaded fuel?Yep.
Greg85
13th July 2017, 08:27
331741
this is result of dyno test
Here is the result for the modena the other result was a tmkz10b
SwePatrick
13th July 2017, 09:23
Enjoy! (videoclip)
(trying to sort out fuelstarvation)
https://youtu.be/bEKxrJZGeTQ
One of the pulls is 72.9hp calculated crank hp at 13150rpm.
I got this problem with starvation with softer reedpetals, i got a mikuni 70l/h pump driven by crankhousepressure.
I figure the pulses are weaker at high rpm, reed is almost constant open.
Rgds.
wobbly
13th July 2017, 10:07
The reed block in the Modena seems like a good idea to split the flow and direct it toward the transfer entry area.
But the problem as I see it is that bending the flow sideways like that will immediately cause a flow reduction in total.
And this ignores the fact that a large amount of the flow in a normal " square " reed block, flows over the outer sides, not just thru the curtain area at the tip.
I have a picture of a reed with the opposite idea, this gives the side spill over flow room down the sides to flow along the reed box side walls toward the transfer entries.
Two other things, it appears to make good mid power, but falls over in the top end.
Does that reed have a soft petal on top and a stiff petal on the bottom - TM use the same petals now ( soft ) but use two stiffeners on the bottom.
The other thing to look at would be a spacer between the stiffeners and the main petals, some reed makers use this idea along with cutting away the to reed
near the clamp to soften it.
PS - now do you know why not one fast Modena is being used in the 1st 3 rounds of the Euro Champs - all TM KZ10C , maybe two Vortex.
guyhockley
13th July 2017, 10:16
I think several things have an impact. As you'd expect, better atomisation leaves less residue. Carburetion, higher pressure differential across T-port can help or hinder atomisation. Transfer port shape has an impact how well the fuel stays in suspension, direction where it's likely to wet, if that's going to happen.
As Wobbly stated (if I understood correctly), the good squish action cleans up the perimeters from wet fuel and keeps it cooler preventing (or reducing) burn there. Fuel on piston top will burn, but less cleanly than atomised mixture and leaves soot.
Carbon formation on top of the piston, under the chamber, may also improve combustion as it forms an insulating layer retaining more heat in the combustion.
There is a contradiction in how you state this if you'd expect burning fuel on the surface to leave a carbon residue. -> Fuel burns where its hot enough. -> Clean in line with divider where there is no cooling flow to prevent burning.
So I take it your thinking is that burn on wetted surface does not leave a residue?
Couple of examples:
guyhockley
13th July 2017, 10:19
Wonder if this stuff would be of any use for our purposes?
http://www.greenstuffworld.com/en/reusable-blue-stuff/2-blue-stuff-mold-4-bars.html
SwePatrick
13th July 2017, 10:24
The reed block in the Modena .....
Answering me?
Yes, i got soft petals at top and stiffer at bottom.
Actually i dont have any stiffeners at all.
I can´t really say it falls over, at 13300rpm i got 27ms pistonspeed.
It still produces 68hp to the crank at ~13600rpm, after that i aren´t man enough the keep the throttle open ;)
I also got 40.6Nm at ~12600rpm
A screenshot of top of the register, i havent got rest of register in front of me now, but it starts pulle quite hard already at 8500-9000 rpm, i remember averagehp though, between 9500 to 13100rpm, this is almost 59hp
https://scontent-arn2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/19983831_10155130856894475_1203493199659810291_o.j pg?oh=67872d358cd109d093dbdf8ac243f6d9&oe=59C44F82
peewee
13th July 2017, 11:45
Peewee, in addition to every advice that has already been given, and to which I fully subscribe, I'd like add two points.
1: Make the cut as close to the rear axle as can be combined with inserting internal strengthening profiles of the correct length.
2: Can't you add some form of triangulation? That would kill two birds with one stone: much less stress on the welds and a much stiffer fork.
early on, I had thought about using 6mm thick plate and welding a arch on the bottom side of the arm like the photo. similar to what they would do in a differential housing to stiffen it. problem is, I wasn't sure how necessary it was but extra strength never hurts I guess and I could still weld it on. I assume this is what you meant by triangulation ?
wobbly
13th July 2017, 13:31
The Modena reed thing was in answer to Greg85.
Pretty crap power for the supposed very latest design in KZ engines, maybe thats why Roland is no longer working for them.
Lightbulb
13th July 2017, 15:00
I have a piece of balsa wood with the shim sticking out at 45 deg. So it pokes through the port on the edge of the piston. I move it slowly til you see want to move. I then lock up the crank shaft, and can then use a depth mic to get the height. I was using a plate in the back and a screw pushing through to the flywheel. My newest one is a plate that locks the crank by the prop washer and a cup plate that pulls against the crank and onto the crankcase from bearing seat. Fairly crude but works and is portable. So I can hold it to the light etc to see what is going on. I have the other shim sitting on the bottom of an other piece of balsa wood also for the transfer ports. But I am finding that a led light in the transfer port and looking at that is just as good and no added calculations are needed. The best idea I had was locking the crank in position so I can measure the heights. Due to the interference fit of the piston at TDC, I take all my measurements based off BDC. I have 0.200 inch liner shim I use when measuring the stroke. That way I am not pushing the piston through the interference fit zone. I find this helpful when doing the induction timing. Bike pistons are a lot more difficult because of the clearance they have at the piston top and the chamfer/break they have on the edge of the crown, as well as the curved crowns.
Neil
Larry Wiechman
13th July 2017, 15:23
The Modena reed thing was in answer to Greg85.
Pretty crap power for the supposed very latest design in KZ engines, maybe thats why Roland is no longer working for them.
Didn't Roland develop a version of Frits' 24/7 reed cage?
Greg85
13th July 2017, 20:30
The reed block in the Modena seems like a good idea to split the flow and direct it toward the transfer entry area.
But the problem as I see it is that bending the flow sideways like that will immediately cause a flow reduction in total.
And this ignores the fact that a large amount of the flow in a normal " square " reed block, flows over the outer sides, not just thru the curtain area at the tip.
I have a picture of a reed with the opposite idea, this gives the side spill over flow room down the sides to flow along the reed box side walls toward the transfer entries.
Two other things, it appears to make good mid power, but falls over in the top end.
Does that reed have a soft petal on top and a stiff petal on the bottom - TM use the same petals now ( soft ) but use two stiffeners on the bottom.
The other thing to look at would be a spacer between the stiffeners and the main petals, some reed makers use this idea along with cutting away the to reed
near the clamp to soften it.
PS - now do you know why not one fast Modena is being used in the 1st 3 rounds of the Euro Champs - all TM KZ10C , maybe two Vortex.
Thank you for the answer wobbly, reed petal is 0.36 is bottom 0.25, yes roland abandoned the project v-flow the engine I had originated from the homologation (prototyp) after modena my sent standard reed box and the new casing I had not so long ago that I have not tested yet but by changing the old cylinder casings I arrived at something nice..but I lost the low regime has to do with the new, yes wobbly I know tm is for me anyway the best engine of the world I have 3 with the last tmkz10c black
331763331762
Frits Overmars
13th July 2017, 21:35
Didn't Roland develop a version of Frits' 24/7 reed cage?Yes he did, amongst other projects that would never get the blessing of the FIM-CIK governing body, like fuel injection: far too sophisticated :devil2:
331765 331766 331767 331768
Rolands 24/7 version was not fit for sale to the general karting world anyway: too complicated. The FIM-CIK has forbidden any form of electronics except ignition
(it's a miracle that they don't insist on flintstone ignition), so Roland had to find a mechanical way of actuating the reeds.
He used a cam on the crankshaft which required that the reeds' inertia and movement path were kept to a minimum. Hence the two carbon fibre reeds, whereas a servomotor would have enabled the use of a much simpler single reed. But servomotors are electrickery...
331769 331770
Frits Overmars
13th July 2017, 23:21
I had thought about using 6mm thick plate and welding a arch on the bottom side of the arm like the photo... I assume this is what you meant by triangulation ?Hardly; I was thinking more like this:
331771
Haufen
14th July 2017, 07:42
Yes he did, amongst other projects that would never get the blessing of the FIM-CIK governing body, like fuel injection: far too sophisticated :devil2:
331765 331766 331767 331768
Rolands 24/7 version was not fit for sale to the general karting world anyway: too complicated. The FIM-CIK has forbidden any form of electronics except ignition
(it's a miracle that they don't insist on flintstone ignition), so Roland had to find a mechanical way of actuating the reeds.
He used a cam on the crankshaft which required that the reeds' inertia and movement path were kept to a minimum. Hence the two carbon fibre reeds, whereas a servomotor would have enabled the use of a much simpler single reed. But servomotors are electrickery...
331769 331770
Thanks for the pictures. Can you also tell us about the results? Or can you invite Roland so that he can tell us? I am sure we'd all be eager to listen.
Haufen
14th July 2017, 07:50
I dynoed my old 132cc honda 44hp to the sprocket = 0.33hp per cc
I dynoed this 211cc kawa to 71.35hp to the sprocket = 0.33hp per cc
Are those both single cylinder engines? If so, then your skills might have improved a lot without you even noticing.
In my opinion, 0,33hp per cc is really a lot for the 211cc engine. Not so much for the 132cc. But bigger displacements are always more difficult to get to high specific power outputs.
Niels Abildgaard
14th July 2017, 20:31
I feel at this point all my tricks up my sleeve is getting used.
I dynoed my old 132cc honda 44hp to the sprocket = 0.33hp per cc
I dynoed this 211cc kawa to 71.35hp to the sprocket = 0.33hp per cc
In both engines i dunno what to do next *lol*
And i see a red line here, at 0.33hp per cc my knowledge is the limit.
Rgds.
Patrick
Power is a port area thing.It is better to compare power per piston square cm.
An Aprilia RSA was 55 horsepower on 23 square cm equal to 2.4
The Honda thing 44 divided by 24 equal 1.8 and the Kawa 71 divided by 32 equal 2.2 horsepower square cm piston
It is a shame that 125 engines for karts and bikes have to be single cylinder.
A 100 ccm twin can do the same and be a much nicer engine vibrationwise.
SwePatrick
14th July 2017, 20:49
Are those both single cylinder engines? If so, then your skills might have improved a lot without you even noticing.
In my opinion, 0,33hp per cc is really a lot for the 211cc engine. Not so much for the 132cc. But bigger displacements are always more difficult to get to high specific power outputs.
Yes,, both single cylinders
The 211cc engine is running on Methanol, the 132cc was running unleaded 98.
I have actually now dynoed 72.91 as peak.
Sorted out some fuelissues.
Frits Overmars
14th July 2017, 22:58
Thanks for the pictures. Can you also tell us about the results? Or can you invite Roland so that he can tell us? I am sure we'd all be eager to listen.I think I already did tell, some time ago.
With the same obligatory 30 mm carburettor, the 24/7 engine produced 5 hp more than the standard engine, and revved 500 rpm higher.
The injected engine had good driveability; anything more would be for Roland himself to reveal.
I could invite Roland to tell us here but I'm not sure if he has sufficient English. We always speak German when Italians are listening, and vice versa :devil2: (Roland is from Süd-Tirol, the German-speaking part of Italy). Besides, he is always pressed for time. And when he finds some time, he gives lectures to interested youngsters.
331785 331786
Frits Overmars
14th July 2017, 23:10
Power is a port area thing. It is better to compare power per piston square cm.That is true if you wish to compare thermal load on the pistons, Niels. If you want to judge the sophistication of an engine, it is customary to compare Mean Effective Pressure values. That involves some calculation, but there is also an easier approach: horsepower per cc per 1000 rpm.
No matter which approach you choose, 71 sprocket-HP out of a 211 cc engine, even when it is running on methanol, is quite respectable.
Jannem
15th July 2017, 15:54
Let's see if I can delete this...
wobbly
15th July 2017, 17:28
Any program for comparing ports must compensate for for both the axial and radial angles.
Port chordal width * height is pretty much useless for anything meaningful.
Its the effective FLOW width* height * cosine up angle* open period ( for Specific Time Area ) that is used in EngMod.
Peter1962
15th July 2017, 21:02
I think I already did tell, some time ago.
With the same obligatory 30 mm carburettor, the 24/7 engine produced 5 hp more than the standard engine, and revved 500 rpm higher.
The injected engine had good driveability; anything more would be for Roland himself to reveal.
I could invite Roland to tell us here but I'm not sure if he has sufficient English. We always speak German when Italians are listening, and vice versa :devil2: (Roland is from Süd-Tirol, the German-speaking part of Italy). Besides, he is always pressed for time. And when he finds some time, he gives lectures to interested youngsters.
331785 331786
Frits, do you know if Roland has plans to experiment with your 24/7 system on other types of 2 stroke engines where the rules do not prohibit such a device ?
Frits Overmars
15th July 2017, 21:46
I don't think so; he is tied up to his elbows in kart engine development.
dtenney
16th July 2017, 01:10
Frits....was the power curve for the 24/7 motor showing better HP and torque everywhere versus the stock Modena engine? Do you know at what rpm the reeds were opened? It would be interesting to see the results from testing the motor on a kart to see if the power improvement on the dyno yielded quicker lap times on the track.
Frits Overmars
16th July 2017, 01:58
Frits....was the power curve for the 24/7 motor showing better HP and torque everywhere versus the stock Modena engine? Do you know at what rpm the reeds were opened? It would be interesting to see the results from testing the motor on a kart to see if the power improvement on the dyno yielded quicker lap times on the track.I cannot discuss the powercurves here; I will leave that to Roland if he chooses to do so.
Like I wrote, and as you may have noticed in the pictures, the reeds were opened by a cam on the crankshaft because the use of a servomotor would not be allowed.
So at low rpm the reeds opened and closed with every revolution of the crankshaft. At higher rpm their inertia prevented them from completely closing and at even higer rpm they simply stayed open.
Jannem
16th July 2017, 04:20
Any program for comparing ports must compensate for for both the axial and radial angles.
Port chordal width * height is pretty much useless for anything meaningful.
Its the effective FLOW width* height * cosine up angle* open period ( for Specific Time Area ) that is used in EngMod.
Is that effective flow area the traditional "mean area" that is the area to the mid angle between opening and closing of the port measured from opening? Is that calculated directly from radial area (chordal not used in the calculation)? edit:with angle corrections?
Forgetting the mean area concept, wouldn't chordal width be the effective flow width? edit:when corrected for angles.
Edit: The way I thought the areas should be calculated:
1. Calculate chordal width of the port
2. Compensate that and height for axial and radial angles
3. From that, calculate mean area (based on mean angle between opening and closing) from opening of the port
Any help indicating where I went wrong would be appreciated.
Frits Overmars
16th July 2017, 05:32
Is that effective flow area the traditional "mean area" that is the area to the mid angle between opening and closing of the port measured from opening?There is no 'mean area'.
The mean area was an approach, thought up by Gordon Jennings when he tried to explain the concept of time.area in his Two-stroke Tuner's Handbook of 1973,
when mere mortals had no access to computers. The 'mean area' approach provided some insight in the matter, but it was not exact.
Jennings based his time.area ideas on an SAE-paper written by Naito and Nomura, the engineers who developed the 125 cc and 250 cc four-cylinder Yamaha GP racers. These gentlemen did not sit on their findings but made them available to the world right after Yamaha withdrew from Grand Prix racing, which was very commendable and almost unheard of, especially for a Japanese company.
Naito and Nomura published time.area values for inlet, transfer and exhaust, and Jennings quoted those as the optimum values.
The inlet and transfer values were pretty close, but the exhaust value was far from optimal; it was only the maximum that could be achieved with a single exhaust port. If Naito and Nomura had thought of auxiliary exhaust ports, they would have come up with a much larger exhaust time.angle value and a big leap in horsepower.
Returning to Gordon Jennings: he apparently neglected the importance of blowdown time.area, which still makes itself felt to this day.
I do recomment reading his book, but one should never take anything written for granted (except when I wrote it, of course :p).
331813
EDIT: I tried to upload the whole book, but it's too big.
F5 Dave
16th July 2017, 06:35
I must find it, think I know which stack it is at the bottom of. He makes an amusing anecdote of the calculations that may be possible if one had access to a computer at home.
How easy it is to feel smart with the benefits of time (as I tap away at my supercomputer telephone lying in bed)
Jannem
16th July 2017, 06:43
There is no 'mean area'.
The mean area was an approach, thought up by Gordon Jennings when he tried to explain the concept of time.area in his Two-stroke Tuner's Handbook of 1973,
when mere mortals had no access to computers. The 'mean area' approach provided some insight in the matter, but it was not exact.
Jennings based his time.area ideas on an SAE-paper written by Naito and Nomura, the engineers who developed the 125 cc and 250 cc four-cylinder Yamaha GP racers. These gentlemen did not sit on their findings but made them available to the world right after Yamaha withdrew from Grand Prix racing, which was very commendable and almost unheard of, especially for a Japanese company.
Naito and Nomura published time.area values for inlet, transfer and exhaust, and Jennings quoted those as the optimum values.
The inlet and transfer values were pretty close, but the exhaust value was far from optimal; it was only the maximum that could be achieved with a single exhaust port. If Naito and Nomura had thought of auxiliary exhaust ports, they would have come up with a much larger exhaust time.angle value and a big leap in horsepower.
Returning to Gordon Jennings: he apparently neglected the importance of blowdown time.area, which still makes itself felt to this day.
I do recomment reading his book, but one should never take anything written for granted (except when I wrote it, of course :p).
331813
EDIT: I tried to upload the whole book, but it's too big.
Thanks, that's where I got this concept from. What puzzles me is that Engmod screenshots here quote "Mean eff area" which look a lot like the Jennings mean areas and reported STA values seem to be based on those. Perhaps for "universal" comparison purposes, even if the simulation wouldn't use them in any way?
wobbly
16th July 2017, 09:39
The inclusion of Mean Eff Area,I think was just an afterthought on Neels part - due to the legacy of Jennings etal,no one uses it.
What is important is that the STA numbers for the Blowdown and Transfers is well proven to work effectively for the vast majority of engines.
At the extremes of very low or very high specific output the problem is that we are dealing with a single dimensional simulation and by definition
this is ultimately limited in what it can achieve.
In any sim the STA number for the Ex is basically useless,as lifting the port floor and increasing the bottom corner rads has way more effect ( positive )
on eliminating short circuiting and increasing the duct velocity.
A real good example of a very high power anomaly is the RSA Aprilia sim.
In this the raw numbers dont seem to match what the dyno says is possible.
This is due to the fact that the transfers are pretty much described perfectly, but the Ex in the engine has a huge radius on the timing edge.
Thus the real Cd of this port is way in excess of what a simple EPO description would indicate.
But I have done hundreds of sims on a huge range of race engines and the end result if one realizes and uses small fudges to more accurately reflect reality,
has proven time and again to be very accurate.
A factor of around 12% drop going from the crank power result in the sim, will be seen on a DynoJet ( and yes I know that rig has a big inbuilt power fudge,but the comparison works way more often than not ).
Haufen
16th July 2017, 10:14
I think I already did tell, some time ago.
With the same obligatory 30 mm carburettor, the 24/7 engine produced 5 hp more than the standard engine, and revved 500 rpm higher.
The injected engine had good driveability; anything more would be for Roland himself to reveal.
I could invite Roland to tell us here but I'm not sure if he has sufficient English. We always speak German when Italians are listening, and vice versa :devil2: (Roland is from Süd-Tirol, the German-speaking part of Italy). Besides, he is always pressed for time. And when he finds some time, he gives lectures to interested youngsters.
331785 331786
That sounds like a nice improvement! Do you happen to know if this is 5 hp more than an ideal kart reed setup, or if it is 5 hp more on the engine which was optimized for the 24/7 and then run with closed reed cage (and eg a crankcase compression ratio which had been optimized for the 24/7 setup)?
Then just tell him that there are many interested youngsters here on the board (I guess some on the outside and the inside, others more on the inside than the outside but who cares really). From what I recall there are several people on the board able to translate the occasional german or italian sentences or words. Should be manageable I'd say.
peewee
16th July 2017, 16:17
heres what I have so far, 3.5" inside the existing arm. probly start welding tomorrow. no turning back now so don't say it will break and ill wreck :laugh:
Lightbulb
16th July 2017, 21:05
Remember one test with first piston and Rygerised Ns 250 cylinder with sleeve from my racing days.
Raised boost windows, halfway between Ex open and main transfers open. Started and it feels very different, something very reactive, and little more revs.
Outside was cold April rain, so I cant test on road and decide to rise even more, just 1 mm after Ex open. Started it and immediately feel engine laziness. It revs, but not fast as before. On the road was slow acceleration with terrible noise. But maybe without pipe would be different. So feel sorry, that not tested with with halfway boost.
Piston in photo from std. engine, just for better view
With your work so far, have you equalled the power of the std 125 yet?
Early days I know.
Neil
Jannem
16th July 2017, 21:06
The inclusion of Mean Eff Area,I think was just an afterthought on Neels part - due to the legacy of Jennings etal,no one uses it.
What is important is that the STA numbers for the Blowdown and Transfers is well proven to work effectively for the vast majority of engines.
At the extremes of very low or very high specific output the problem is that we are dealing with a single dimensional simulation and by definition
this is ultimately limited in what it can achieve.
In any sim the STA number for the Ex is basically useless,as lifting the port floor and increasing the bottom corner rads has way more effect ( positive )
on eliminating short circuiting and increasing the duct velocity.
A real good example of a very high power anomaly is the RSA Aprilia sim.
In this the raw numbers dont seem to match what the dyno says is possible.
This is due to the fact that the transfers are pretty much described perfectly, but the Ex in the engine has a huge radius on the timing edge.
Thus the real Cd of this port is way in excess of what a simple EPO description would indicate.
But I have done hundreds of sims on a huge range of race engines and the end result if one realizes and uses small fudges to more accurately reflect reality,
has proven time and again to be very accurate.
A factor of around 12% drop going from the crank power result in the sim, will be seen on a DynoJet ( and yes I know that rig has a big inbuilt power fudge,but the comparison works way more often than not ).
Thanks, this is helpful to compare the results. One thing I immediately noticed comparing my 60cc single ex.port to TZ's single exhaust port 125cc with similar bore/stroke ratio, that single ex.port gets progressively better with decreasing displacement. Probably not big news for the pros, but enlightening for newbie, like myself.
Did a quick comparison between 125cc vs. 60cc with differing bore/stroke combos and ex.port widths. Used simply port width % of the bore and 10% of stroke height, assuming port position to be same vs. stroke.
128cc with 1.08 B/S, 74% port produces same area/cc as 60CC with 1.13 B/S and 58%.
Square would compare to 60% and 0,86 B/S to 63%.
If both are 70% ports, area/cc is about 40% bigger in the 60CC.
If you compare the 60CC with 70% port to square B/S 50CC with 70% port, the 50cc has 20% more ex. area/cc for only 20% less displacement. Square 40CC with 70% port would have whopping 40% more area/cc than the 60CC mentioned.:blink:
It seems also that if you are inclined to increase displacement of single ex.port engine either by boring or stroking, the stroking would be beneficial from ex. perspective, although more challenging for other timings. From transfer flow perspective, it's not so easy to say which one would be better...
Of course, it's been discussed here often that square with good transfers and triple exhaust is the way to go, if you get to choose. Emphasis on the triple ex increasing with increasing displacement.
Frits Overmars
16th July 2017, 22:57
Do you happen to know if this is 5 hp more than an ideal kart reed setup, or if it is 5 hp more on the engine which was optimized for the 24/7 and then run with closed reed cage?
With the same obligatory 30 mm carburettor, the 24/7 engine produced 5 hp more than the standard engine...
just tell him that there are many interested youngsters here on the board... Should be manageable I'd say.Just what would you manage? Rolands spare time? I'm sure he will be very grateful if you can find him a couple of free minutes now and then :D.
Haufen
16th July 2017, 23:40
Just what would you manage? Rolands spare time? I'm sure he will be very grateful if you can find him a couple of free minutes now and then :D.
Just making sure I understood correctly. An increase in performance of 11% in a competition engine is not peanuts.
I was referring to the language barrier, if there should be any. And I was thinking that, if he finds time to educate others, he might as well do it on this board from time to time. The ratio between the number of people he can reach per minute of time invested is quite good.
lucf
16th July 2017, 23:49
guess about the conrod everybody seem to know better it than we described !
Martin1981
17th July 2017, 01:43
ok thanks very much
Jannem
17th July 2017, 03:06
In any sim the STA number for the Ex is basically useless,as lifting the port floor and increasing the bottom corner rads has way more effect ( positive ) on eliminating short circuiting and increasing the duct velocity.
Is this typically the case with single ex. ports as well?
Frits Overmars
17th July 2017, 04:22
Yes
Frits Overmars
17th July 2017, 04:30
331823
In my above post I beat the system :D.
guyhockley
17th July 2017, 05:08
15 juli 2017 180 gelezen
Developping a Ryger
Is Ryger a fairy tale?
<snip>snip...
Initially it was mr. Ryger
<snip>snip...
mr. Ryger himself
snip...
I have no comment to make on the viability, or otherwise, of the Ryger engine, and, just a small point, but I thought it had been established that there is no-one actually called Mr Ryger?</snip></snip>
peewee
17th July 2017, 07:34
i thought ryger was a real person. now you say its only fictional character ?
Muciek
17th July 2017, 07:56
He had a account here for brief moment if I remember correctly , there was some problem with something (posting or account approval) and then it all went go as it is now.
wobbly
17th July 2017, 08:49
" At this moment, there is no reason, not to be proud of the result we have achieved till so far."
And there is the big issue with all of us Luc.
You may be proud,but all we have seen is made up graphs and complete rubbish so called " back to back " data plots of a Ryger Vs a KZ.
Any data plot should show a real KZ making at least 45Hp at 13500,it doesnt, so its bullshit.
If we were given just ONE real dyno sheet of some believable Ryger result, we would all clap and be very happy for you and the future of 2T in general.
Your move.
trevor amos
17th July 2017, 10:18
"He who thirsts for an answer must first stock up with a lot of patience".
A prophetic observation from Isaac Babel the Russian author, I guess he didn`t have the Ryger engine in mind for he was shot by Joe Stalin for exposing some of the secrets the paranoid Russians wanted to keep from the free world. Makes you think though!
Trevor
jonny quest
17th July 2017, 10:48
Not to call Frits out on this, but when Frits drove Ryger kart I seem to recall his ride review seemed pretty positive
Jannem
17th July 2017, 17:13
If Ryger delivers it wont take long for it to be banned from racing. Then what? They better have a bike manufacturer lined up to bring it to the open market, where restrictions do not exist.
Jannem
17th July 2017, 17:43
With the importance of blowdown and transfer STA over the traditional angle*area/cc, has anyone developed a similar "rule of thumb" graph showing blowdown and transfer STA vs. peak power rpm to help choosing the port timings and areas?
Jannem
17th July 2017, 18:06
It's been mentioned several times that the transfer entry radiusing to the bore (see pic below) is worth proven HP. Does that area get masked by the piston, when transfers begin to open? (In RSA, where it originates from.)
331829
Below is supposedly a RSA factory piston. The pin plug has been discussed before, how about the modifications? Is that big hole a dead end lightening one?
331830
jellert
17th July 2017, 18:23
15 juli 2017 180 gelezen
Developping a Ryger
Yes yes let the hate flow through you. You keep calling out the established professionals (we all know who you mean), even though you still have zero races under your belt. Doesn't Mr. Ryger get sick of your unprofessionalism?
Re the cost of running a KZ. I don't think the high level teams really care much about cost, as long as they win. Could be good for the lower level teams though.
Peter1962
17th July 2017, 19:14
I have no comment to make on the viability, or otherwise, of the Ryger engine, and, just a small point, but I thought it had been established that there is no-one actually called Mr Ryger?</snip></snip>
Ryger = Harry Gerrits
2T Institute
17th July 2017, 19:25
Does anyone knows:
[/B]
1. How many hours a piston last in karting engines which want to win a race?
2. How often should it be changed in a season in order not to loose to much power?
3. How much is the total cost of pistons in one season, in case of 10 races?
4. How much hours are spend to change those pistons every time?
Please write your reviews and answers to those 4 questions here below!
https://www.facebook.com/notes/luc-foekema/preface-publication-ryger-engine/10207485252128532/
1. 1 hour track time
2. 1 hour
3. $700AUD or 700Euro
3 30 min or between heats.
If I put an hour on a piston I will have a spare or a piston to do a practice day on
lucf
17th July 2017, 20:02
1. 1 hour track time
2. 1 hour
3. $700AUD or 700Euro
3 30 min or between heats.
If I put an hour on a piston I will have a spare or a piston to do a practice day on
Thanks 2T Institute !
Frits Overmars
17th July 2017, 20:42
With the importance of blowdown and transfer STA over the traditional angle*area/cc, has anyone developed a similar "rule of thumb" graph showing blowdown and transfer STA vs. peak power rpm to help choosing the port timings and areas?You may want to take a look here Jannem: https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/171300-Oddball-engines-and-prototypes?p=1131055052#post1131055052
guyhockley
17th July 2017, 22:48
Ryger = Harry Gerrits
That was my point. If you're being open and honest why keep using a pseudonym...
There's a possible irony in the name for the scandinavian market. I used to work with a danish bloke and he called smokers rygers!
lucf
17th July 2017, 22:51
" At this moment, there is no reason, not to be proud of the result we have achieved till so far."
And there is the big issue with all of us Luc.
You may be proud,but all we have seen is made up graphs and complete rubbish so called " back to back " data plots of a Ryger Vs a KZ.
Any data plot should show a real KZ making at least 45Hp at 13500,it doesnt, so its bullshit.
If we were given just ONE real dyno sheet of some believable Ryger result, we would all clap and be very happy for you and the future of 2T in general.
Your move.
Wobbly, This was about the conrod ! next the piston ?
koenich
17th July 2017, 23:01
don't forget to bash the 'experts' again luc :facepalm:
lucf
17th July 2017, 23:45
don't forget to bash the 'experts' again luc :facepalm:
Was not it that they attacked the Ryger concept? or did I read it wrong?
Norman
18th July 2017, 03:19
[QUOTE=lucf;1131055514]15 juli 2017 180 gelezen
Developping a Ryger
Is Ryger a fairy tale? With those fenominal properties it may look like it and however some people does call it that way, it is certainly not. Initially it was mr. Ryger not meant to design an engine with more power, but to make a clean 2 stroke which should make the 2 stroke engine more important again. At that time I was looking for more power and therefore initially less interested, but along the way that changed when also mr. Ryger himself was pleasantly surprised by the high power including the corresponding speeds. At that time it was still the question of where all that power came from, until you are seriously searching for an explenation. We from Ryger told everything we have experienced in the past and of which we became enthousiastic to tell around. May be we better should not have done this, because many people won’t believe this, which we fully can understand.
///
Could the Ryger be functioning due to a resonance effect in the intake to transfers to cylinder, set into action by the piston suction and compression? And, the expansion chamber mostly contributing so as to get the engine into "internal" resonance rpms? The closer to true resonance the more suction into the "compression/transfer channel chamber" and higher pressure in the transfer channels at TPO? At TPO the released compressed pulse causes a suction wave behind it? The compression under piston and in the transfer is done without the temperature increase you would se going through a conventioal rotating comressor. The air has also not been pre heated in the crankcase. The relatively compressed cold air goes into the cylinder in a turbulent way getting some exhaust gas to mix with giving (spark assisted?) HCCI?
Am I totally lost in space here?
guyhockley
18th July 2017, 03:31
Yes
I don't know... Do spaces not count?
Frits Overmars
18th July 2017, 03:49
You can try for yourself.
JanBros
18th July 2017, 04:45
or did I read it wrong?
I'm not an expert , by far not. but yes, you have read all the latest comments wrong.
what everybody here (or almost everybody) wants to see is plain and simple : a real proven dyno that somewhat prooves the claims that have been made. although nice that you take time to try and explain the Ryger, it is too little too late. The damage is done, the hype is over. too much talk without proof. even the latest "more realistic dynonumbers" mean nothing to anybody here. I'm sure you guys have real dyno-graph's from the Ryger as well from a KZ for comparison, why not post them ? if the numbers you gave are 100% correct you can just as well post the real evidence.
As long as that hasn't been done, the Ryger-story is a fairy-tale just like my Rygerised-KR1 : no one believes I've done that just as no one believes you guys have done what you claim.
Peter1962
18th July 2017, 04:47
Was not it that they attacked the Ryger concept? or did I read it wrong?
Luc, what is the point discussing this ? There is no hard data, no independently measured HP curve, no real world testing against a competitive KZ engine. An that is not our fault. Would it not be better to stop the claims until mister Gerrits can deliver proof of concept ? I for one would prefer to wait for an extra year, in stead of speculating and expecting that people are going to "believe" claims without proof. No hard feelings.
koenich
18th July 2017, 05:25
well said Peter and without any hard proof for like 2 years every bit of second questioning and keeping critical shouldn't surprise anyone. now on top bashing people sure helps to make you look really professional...
Norman
18th July 2017, 08:00
Luc, what is the point discussing this ? There is no hard data, no independently measured HP curve, no real world testing against a competitive KZ engine. An that is not our fault. Would it not be better to stop the claims until mister Gerrits can deliver proof of concept ? I for one would prefer to wait for an extra year, in stead of speculating and expecting that people are going to "believe" claims without proof. No hard feelings.
As an amateur, I like the Ryger concept and find the lastest information very interesting and positive, but I also agree, presented results from an independant test would definately be prudent asap. Not at least in respect to the professional tuners/engine builders making a living out of their two-stroke know-how. I think Mr. Ryger otherwise has to continue to accept that for each new, or re-statement, there will be hard questioning from many directions until such results are presented, no matter how good the theory behind the claimed results seems to be.
Niels Abildgaard
18th July 2017, 08:06
Has the Ryger engine company cheated a lot of investors here?
Concerning short connecting rods it can be relevant to se another croshead engine type like the worlds biggest and most efficient ships diesels.From memory some conrods are shorter than 3 times halfstroke.
A lot of simple Honda engines are used for carts that are hired for half an hour by amateurs and tourists.
If that can be cleaner and more fuel efficient why not?
One of the reasons for anger was a statement that HCCI can do 30000 rpm .
This has been proved many times over by model diesel aircraft engines invented by a swiss mechanic 1942.
So why so angry?
Flettner
18th July 2017, 11:29
Seems odd that suddenly Ryger is interested in divulging the inner workings of the Ryger engine now? I think it's been realised that it's almost too late, with several Ryger concepts under construction / test now, the information will be out anyway with or without Rygers help. I think they are worried about being yesterday's news.
Proof is in the winning!
WilDun
18th July 2017, 18:21
Has the Ryger engine company cheated a lot of investors here?
One of the reasons for anger was a statement that HCCI can do 30000 rpm .
This has been proved many times over by model diesel aircraft engines invented by a swiss mechanic 1942.
So why so angry?
May be true Niels, but "Mr Ryger" himself (or his shadow Luc.) has just stated that he set out to make a cleaner engine. However, that would not fit well with that particular model aircraft engine, it would have been anything but clean!
Also don't forget that it was probably only able to achieve 30,000 rpm (or whatever) by virtue of it's relatively tiny size!
So, (in the case of "Mr Ryger's engine) in my opinion, this would render both the 'cleanliness' and 'rpm' arguments invalid - those engines really can't be compared to each other!
Yes I do agree with others that the proof of the pudding (ie a Ryger in a race!), is in the eating ( ie race results).
Lightbulb
18th July 2017, 22:37
Norman, You might be onto something with that insight of yours. These simple engines are not really so simple, and the more I look into them, the more I realise that there are areas I have over looked. As to the Ryger who knows. It is obvious it is not just a matter of changing the arrangement and then making a world beating engine. In saying that, even with the patent papers being published, it is still not obvious how it actually works to be making the power that is being claimed. Even those who have embarked on making a copy from ideas gleamed from where ever they can, are not getting the same results as that of the Ryger engine and we have to ask why? It could be as simple as something that we all as a collective that have read the patent have over looked and may be looking on the wrong areas to where it makes it power from.
Anyway, a good puzzle helps to keep the mind agile.
Neil
WilDun
19th July 2017, 00:12
I was thinking about the " too short" rod needed to fit inside the lower piston dia ( too short in most peoples eyes) - does that piston need to be round? why couldn't it be a narrow rectangle shape or maybe a similar shape to the pistons used in the V4 four stroke Honda racer (of the eighties)?
This acting as a crosshead and leaving plenty of room for a longer rod to be accommodated?
Sealing of the "gland" could still be achieved - after all, if they could seal Wankel rotors against the combustion forces there, then surely in this case it would be a piece of cake!
- Or is my line of thought too far outside the "square" ? :rolleyes:
Peter1962
19th July 2017, 05:55
On july 5th one of our members already pointed to the patent pending papers, to this day this is the only information that we have. Here is the link to the documents. (Yes, its legal mumbo jumbo but in the world of patents this is the way to proceed). https://register.epo.org/application?number=EP15179826&lng=en&tab=doclist
The patent has not been granted, this could be the reason that the ryger equipe is talking without saying anything.
The description is on the "abstract" page, 14 pages in total, be sure to print out all pages because page 13 and 14 would be missed otherwise.
A question for katinas : did you base your experiment on these drawings ? They are out and public since february 2017.
70 hp without being dependent on the pipe? What if there is a second piston under the "dividing plate" on the same conrod? With some reed valve hocus pocus that could provide 2 crank cases with twice the pumping action of a normal 2-stroke.
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk
JanBros
19th July 2017, 07:09
I'm a bit lost : when do you need bigger or smaller diameters for the expansionpipe , and more specific from difuser up to belly ?
bigger diameters give higher suction pulse ? so am I right in thinking that when less energy is used pushing the piston down, a bigger diameter helps the pipe pull harder, so bigger is needed when :
lower rpm for max HP ?
more exhaust port timing ?
lower compression ratio ?
lower exhaust temp ?
WilDun
19th July 2017, 11:18
Could the Ryger be functioning due to a resonance effect in the intake to transfers to cylinder, set into action by the piston suction and compression?..........
Am I totally lost in space here?
It's the "Doodlebug Effect" maybe! :msn-wink: but you do have many valid points
...... meanwhile the "Great Ryger Debate" rages on ..... all over TZ's little bucket thread (where concrete results are also to be found) - seems like WW2 all over again!
jasonu
19th July 2017, 11:49
It's the "Doodlebug Effect" maybe! :msn-wink: but you do have many valid points
...... meanwhile the "Great Ryger Debate" rages on ..... all over TZ's little bucket thread (where concrete results are also to be found) - seems like WW2 all over again!
https://www.google.com/search?q=don%27t+mention+the+war+gif&tbm=isch&imgil=W5_Z4tomSUUQHM%253A%253B-1h_PTz1wup7eM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fimgur.c om%25252Fgallery%25252FANxFt&source=iu&pf=m&fir=W5_Z4tomSUUQHM%253A%252C-1h_PTz1wup7eM%252C_&usg=__xpi0nI5_idBchdpwgseLETY91EI%3D&biw=1024&bih=691&dpr=1.25&ved=0ahUKEwi2kYXKgpTVAhUB9WMKHY2_B3QQyjcIQQ&ei=c55uWfaLDIHqjwON_56gBw#imgrc=W5_Z4tomSUUQHM:
WilDun
19th July 2017, 13:11
Maybe I shouldn't have described it as a war, that's really got nothing to do with it! - "The Doodlebug effect" was just describing the pulsejet, (as used in the "Doodlebug" flying bomb!).
But instead of having a raging debate, how about trying to work out some possiblities as to how it actually might work, instead of demanding answers, ie whether it uses resonance or whatever to achieve the results it is reputed to be able to achieve.
Having said all that though, I don't have the knowledge required to do that, but I believe there are a few guys here capable of doing just that!
- perhaps they are playing their cards close to their chest!
wobbly
19th July 2017, 17:38
We have spent so much time on here trying to work out what could possibly be at work within the Ryger to meet the original claims of 70Hp and 30,000 rpm
that we all got sick of the whole thing.
Mainly due to getting no believable info from Harry or Luc.
Nothing has changed, except the new downward spiral from the original claims - but still, the new reduced claims are still unproven.
jonny quest
19th July 2017, 19:19
Luc, please answer this about the Ryger.
Does it use a needle bearing type for the lower rod bearing?
Pursang
20th July 2017, 00:34
There are some very knowledgeable people out there that completely disagree with Me, Frits and Jan about the Ex duct cooling principle.
Roland Holzer in his last iteration of the Modena kart engine made the duct alot shorter, saying that this allowed the pipe ( header,spigot ) to heat up faster
when exiting corners.
Franco at TM has a radical new design in CAD that completely insulates the duct from water cooling with an air gap.
I plan on completely disproving the whole hot duct idea ( or making an idiot of myself ) by very soon having a brand new TM cylinder ceramic coated inside the duct.
This coating surface will be VERY hot where in contact with the retained air/fuel charge.
Doing exactly this process on the Britten made a heap of power, and doubled the water boil time when the bike was warmed up ( as the small rad was ducted correctly
for forward motion,not sitting still ).
It will have only one of two results on the 2T - 125 , instant detonation due to overheated gas being pushed back into the cylinder, or the engine will make more power due to
more heat energy being transferred into the pipe.
Just a very small maybe - would be both effects occur simultaneously. But deto kills engines,so that trumps the other effect every time.
The dyno will not lie,as will the deto sensor on the head.
Even if I am wrong I WILL tell everyone the result,as it has caused some very heated ( pun intended ) discussion, with lots of Italian arm waving in the process.
And of course I would REALLY love to finally prove that The Great Leader was talking out his arse about a hotter duct being better - though he sort of already did that with
his Chinese funded fiasco.
With a bit more than an academic interest in exhaust duct cooling, I'm very interested in the potential value of a ceramic coated duct.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/WEBPOSTS/KIWI+ESE/exhaust+duct+Std.jpg
In my simplistic approach to these things, it looks to me the the only real advantage to extensive water-cooling of the transfer duct is to provide thermal stability.
Thus enabling "careful tuning" to control the point of detonation.
The Negative to this heavy temperature management is removal of heat/energy from the exhaust pulse and the addition of heat to the charge in the duct.
Plus the need to dispose of the captured (& wasted) heat/energy.
As it has been determined, polishing the piston face, allows it to reflect, rather than absorb the heat of combustion.
It follows (to me) that polishing the duct and header pipe should produce a similar result.
Allowing hot exhaust to pass through without depositing heat AND allow cool transfer charge to enter and leave without picking up extra heat (Win-Win?)
Polishing ducts and headers could, perhaps, also be simulated by a process something like this...
.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/WEBPOSTS/KIWI+ESE/jet+hot.JPG
It's smooth & shiny, contains silver and is highly heat reflective.
It is claimed to reduce the external temperature of headers by around 150C. AND that's After heating the steel tube from the inside.
So the heat reflection is internal at the steel to coating junction. Heat reflection without the physical conduction could/should be much higher(?)
.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/WEBPOSTS/KIWI+ESE/graphreduction.jpg
Might be just speculation & wishful thinking......or the next Great Step Forward in 2 stroke technology & performance.
Cheers, Daryl.
Vannik
20th July 2017, 06:03
15 juli 2017 180 gelezen
Lateral forces
The disadvantage of a short conrod, such as the lateral force is rising. Ignoring an offset pistonpin the highest forces for the Aprilia with a 120 mm conrod are at 26° atdc and are about 1796 Nm or 183 kg. For the Ryger with a 90 mm conrod by the same pressure it is 2404 Nm or 245 kg, so 34% higher.
Special Ryger influences
In a normal 2 stroke the lubrication is mixed in the fuel and because less lubrication is better for the 2 stroke process, all bearings under the piston are lubricated very minimal. So when the engine has to made maximum power like in a racing engine, the bearings in the conrod has a real short life. This is one of the most important differences with a Ryger were those bearings last much longer. And also the higher lateral forces are much less serious in a Ryger engine due to by far much better lubrication.
1. Because the crankshaft is rotating in oil and spread out this to the downside of the piston and cylinderwall. The lubricating looks more like a 4 stroke engine.
2. Beside the Ryger has no tilting effect of the piston, it has been eleminated for almost 100%. That is why the lateral forces are far much better devided over the surface of the upper and downside of the piston.
End conclusion
In a Ryger a short conrod is the best solution and is certainly not what is told by the experts ‘ridiculous and totaly impossible’. In fact it is more full the opposite situation. Despite the short conrod, this part will show significantly less wear in a Ryger in comparing with a soon old-fashioned 2 stroke !
I thought it a good idea to investigate the size of the piston side thrust force (N) in a normal 125cc engine with different conrod lengths. The attached picture shows those forces for a conventional 125cc engine and in each case the power and combustion pressure was the same. I cannot do this for the Ryger as I do not know the pressure history in the combustion chamber:
331856
motogpdriver
20th July 2017, 07:46
I thought it a good idea to investigate the size of the piston side thrust force (N) in a normal 125cc engine with different conrod lengths. The attached picture shows those forces for a conventional 125cc engine and in each case the power and combustion pressure was the same. I cannot do this for the Ryger as I do not know the pressure history in the combustion chamber:
331856
btw does the ryger use variable compression ratio?
read this somewhere: The engine (1) also includes features for varying the compression ratio so as to increase the engine efficiency
I dont know if this was mentioned before:bleh:
lucf
20th July 2017, 08:15
I thought it a good idea to investigate the size of the piston side thrust force (N) in a normal 125cc engine with different conrod lengths. The attached picture shows those forces for a conventional 125cc engine and in each case the power and combustion pressure was the same. I cannot do this for the Ryger as I do not know the pressure history in the combustion chamber:
331856
Thanks Neels, for your investigation. I wrote that I also used the same burnig pressure.
In comparing only the conrod, the same pressure is the only good starting point.
OopsClunkThud
20th July 2017, 09:00
I was thinking about the " too short" rod needed to fit inside the lower piston dia ( too short in most peoples eyes) - does that piston need to be round? why couldn't it be a narrow rectangle shape or maybe a similar shape to the pistons used in the V4 four stroke Honda racer (of the eighties)?
This acting as a crosshead and leaving plenty of room for a longer rod to be accommodated?
Sealing of the "gland" could still be achieved - after all, if they could seal Wankel rotors against the combustion forces there, then surely in this case it would be a piece of cake!
- Or is my line of thought too far outside the "square" ? :rolleyes:
a rectangular lower piston shape would give a flat surface to spread the side thrust over.
WilDun
20th July 2017, 09:51
a rectangular lower piston shape would give a flat surface to spread the side thrust over.
That's what I figured, and at the same time the possibility of being able to fit a longer rod deeper into this piston/crosshead (or whatever it might be called).
This of course would essentially divide the "pumping chamber" - or is it "crankcase" ?? into two parts and I have no idea how that would affect gas flow etc or how it would tie in with blocking off the exhaust port! - (with all this resonance talk, do they need to block it off :rolleyes:).
It wouldn't necessarily need to be a flat ended rectangle, It could be a round piston with the sides cut away as much as is necessary to accommodate small end bearing/s ( in the web formed by the flat sides of the "rectangle"). I'm sure the sealing around this shape would be quite achievable.
To me, the length of the present rod just isn't sensible! - why is it short anyway? :confused: - even a 25mm taller engine wouldn't have hurt anything, just look at present day four strokes, the head is as tall (and heavy) as the rest of the engine! Guess it has something to do with making it a conversion based on other engines.
I haven't sat down to try and work it out however - just a passing suggestion which might be crap and can be ignored. (but perhaps someone might consider it worthwhile to have a look and tell me if and where I'm wrong).
wobbly
20th July 2017, 12:18
The square piston idea isnt necessary as with the guide bush/seal/pushrod within the spacing plate there, is no side thrust on the piston.
But Luc seems to hint that the short rod makes more power - now from a pure physics standpoint,the short rod dwells at BDC longer then the opposite at TDC.
So with whatever internal trickery is at work,in this case the 90mm rod must overcome the its natural horrendous angular side forces on the guide bush/rod with a better Delivery Ratio
for the overall system to make more power.
OopsClunkThud
20th July 2017, 12:29
from a packaging perspective the one thing I like about the concept is the prospect a 90° V with shared crank journals (even retrofit to 4T). now just add a bit of turbo to bring back the primary pumping efficiency...
F5 Dave
20th July 2017, 13:04
. . . . now just add a bit of turbo to bring back the primary pumping efficiency...
Oops. There goes your packaging, erm. . , package.
Flettner
20th July 2017, 14:04
Ok Luc, seeing as you are here, let's discuss something you can talk about. The FOS type cylinder concept, can you point out to us why your setup didn't work? You certainly did give this concept a good go by building a working prototype but what happened? Why did you give up on it?
WilDun
20th July 2017, 14:43
The square piston idea isnt necessary as with the guide bush/seal/pushrod within the spacing plate there, is no side thrust on the piston.
But Luc seems to hint that the short rod makes more power - now from a pure physics standpoint,the short rod dwells at BDC longer then the opposite at TDC.
So with whatever internal trickery is at work,in this case the 90mm rod must overcome the its natural horrendous angular side forces on the guide bush/rod with a better Delivery Ratio
for the overall system to make more power.
Thanks Wobbly, I do realize I'm not up with the play and maybe not quite grasping the theory of the thing - be patient with me, you'll get there :facepalm: ...... I am talking about the lower part of the piston (ie small dia part of the piston / piston rod / crosshead or something) - an integral crosshead really, being roughly rectangular - and not necessarily flat ended, basically the whole piston would be roughly the shape ( possibly longer and slimmer across the flats in the skirt) of the old slipper type pistons used in Manx Nortons etc. This odd shaped "rod"/ piston skirt being sealed by an equally odd shaped seal in the plate of course.
However, the apparent theory behind the short rod blows all that out of the water! but I must say that those horrendous side forces still have to be taken up by something, which means friction (and equally horrendous wear) - I need to wind myself up slowly and get to understand all this stuff which I have not paid a lot of attention to previously! :laugh:
husaberg
20th July 2017, 17:05
That's what I figured, and at the same time the possibility of being able to fit a longer rod deeper into this piston/crosshead (or whatever it might be called).
This of course would essentially divide the "pumping chamber" - or is it "crankcase" ?? into two parts and I have no idea how that would affect gas flow etc or how it would tie in with blocking off the exhaust port! - (with all this resonance talk, do they need to block it off :rolleyes:).
It wouldn't necessarily need to be a flat ended rectangle, It could be a round piston with the sides cut away as much as is necessary to accommodate small end bearing/s ( in the web formed by the flat sides of the "rectangle"). I'm sure the sealing around this shape would be quite achievable.
To me, the length of the present rod just isn't sensible! - why is it short anyway? :confused: - even a 25mm taller engine wouldn't have hurt anything, just look at present day four strokes, the head is as tall (and heavy) as the rest of the engine! Guess it has something to do with making it a conversion based on other engines.
I haven't sat down to try and work it out however - just a passing suggestion which might be crap and can be ignored. (but perhaps someone might consider it worthwhile to have a look and tell me if and where I'm wrong).
The square piston is so 1970's
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEDEL4CQ_gc
lucf
20th July 2017, 19:15
Ok Luc, seeing as you are here, let's discuss something you can talk about. The FOS type cylinder concept, can you point out to us why your setup didn't work? You certainly did give this concept a good go by building a working prototype but what happened? Why did you give up on it?
All information about FST-twostroke-design https://www.facebook.com/notes/luc-foekema/fst-twostroke-design/4080202582494
breezy
20th July 2017, 21:41
I thought it a good idea to investigate the size of the piston side thrust force (N) in a normal 125cc engine with different conrod lengths. The attached picture shows those forces for a conventional 125cc engine and in each case the power and combustion pressure was the same. I cannot do this for the Ryger as I do not know the pressure history in the combustion chamber:
331856
how about an engine with a 38mm piston and 54mm stroke and 90mm conrod length.? isnt the lower part of this rygers piston where the most piston thrust would occur? could the high pressure oil supply to the oil hole in between the piston rings help centralies the upper piston within the cylinder reducing any piston thrust force?
Lightbulb
20th July 2017, 22:14
LucF, did you ever try a liner with the exhaust ports coming out of the liner being inclined 20 to 25 deg, and the transfer passages also inclined at the 15 to 20deg ? The Paw engine company made some small changes to their cutters making the liner back in 08, and gave a 5k performance improvement. So from 15 k to 21,500 rpm from a small geometry change to their radial port engine that was designed and made since the late 1960's.
Neil
lucf
20th July 2017, 22:47
LucF, did you ever try a liner with the exhaust ports coming out of the liner being inclined 20 to 25 deg, and the transfer passages also inclined at the 15 to 20deg ? The Paw engine company made some small changes to their cutters making the liner back in 08, and gave a 5k performance improvement. So from 15 k to 21,500 rpm from a small geometry change to their radial port engine that was designed and made since the late 1960's.
Neil
Yes Neil, we tried several portangles.
We still can change to the old concept of 70hp at 17.500rpm and max rpm of 30k.
But we don't want to sell an engine which runs to easy to 30k.
That we will leave that to anyone who want it.
This is the current Ryger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJbxxdzhESA
jellert
21st July 2017, 00:18
Yes Neil, we tried several portangles.
We still can change to the old concept of 70hp at 17.500rpm and max rpm of 30k.
But we don't want to sell an engine which runs to easy to 30k.
That we will leave that to anyone who want it.
This is the current Ryger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJbxxdzhESA
The way you put it makes it sound like the max RPM can't be limited with the ignition. Am I right? Very interesting if that's true.
WilDun
21st July 2017, 00:28
The square piston is so 1970's
Yes Husa, a 'windup' was really all I could have expected!! - at least I tried and I'm sure Luc will already be back on the drawing board feverishly working on the modifications! :yes: :rolleyes:
Pursang
21st July 2017, 00:39
The square piston is so 1970's
https://s3.amazonaws.com/WEBPOSTS/KIWI+ESE/the+70's.jpg
And This is a Bad Thing?... because???: ;)
lucf
21st July 2017, 03:48
The way you put it makes it sound like the max RPM can't be limited with the ignition. Am I right? Very interesting if that's true.
Right, its not allowed to change ignition !
Yes Husa, a 'windup' was really all I could have expected!! - at least I tried and I'm sure Luc will already be back on the drawing board feverishly working on the modifications! :yes: :rolleyes:
No reason to change anything !
Michael Moore
21st July 2017, 04:07
I don't know when Jeff Henise will get time to reduce the size and post some photos of his killer TZ350 engine project (wobbly guided him on the design) here or on his highwaymanbikes.com website but those of you on FB can see some there
https://www.facebook.com/jhenise/posts/10155500252306228
I've attached a sample photo.
cheers,
Michael
Jannem
21st July 2017, 09:20
70 hp without being dependent on the pipe?
Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk
Supersonic exhaust port.
Flettner
21st July 2017, 12:50
Yes Neil, we tried several portangles.
We still can change to the old concept of 70hp at 17.500rpm and max rpm of 30k.
But we don't want to sell an engine which runs to easy to 30k.
That we will leave that to anyone who want it.
This is the current Ryger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJbxxdzhESA
So Luc you are saying there are two Ryger engine designs?
The new one is not just a de rated version of the original?
2T Institute
21st July 2017, 14:01
Yes Neil, we tried several portangles.
We still can change to the old concept of 70hp at 17.500rpm and max rpm of 30k.
But we don't want to sell an engine which runs to easy to 30k.
That we will leave that to anyone who want it.
This is the current Ryger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJbxxdzhESA
Looks about as fast as a Clubman J motor
jasonu
21st July 2017, 14:08
Looks about as fast as a Clubman J motor
Any 2 stroke put up against a bunch of lawn mower engines will always look good.....
Flettner
21st July 2017, 15:36
The Ryger engine answer must lie in the free piston engine. How do these engines oscillate to such high frequencies with no where near enough blow down time area. Not pipe dependent AND I would image they would be a form of HCCI once up and running under load ??
I don't know enough about these engines apart from a few articles I've read over the years, but I understand they have a similar high pressure transfer system.
Husa will find pictures I imagine. (I hope)
https://youtu.be/OVWZFdb_AGc
http://www.google.com/patents/US8127544
Jannem
21st July 2017, 17:22
Supersonic exhaust port.
1. Not in the patent, as sonic nozzle is not patentable.
2. Small entry area-> longer effective working stroke.
3. Pressure ratio is there
4. Shapes common knowledge
5. Flow speed at contraction mach1, but mass flow increases. No blowdown issue.
6. Extracts heat from exhaust to accelerate flow. -> efficiency & no heat problems from exhaust. Can run it lean,
7. Eliminates reversion, making it insensitive to the pipe.
8. Requires an intake system that is separated from exhaust and can deliver.
Sounds exotic, but proven technology with no foil hats required.
Now, where is the flame suit. :)
Flettner
21st July 2017, 17:29
1. Not in the patent, as sonic nozzle is not patentable.
2. Small entry area-> longer effective working stroke.
3. Pressure ratio is there
4. Shapes common knowledge
5. Flow speed at contraction mach1, but mass flow increases. No blowdown issue.
6. Extracts heat from exhaust to accelerate flow. -> efficiency & no heat problems from exhaust.
7. Eliminates reversion, making it insensitive to the pipe.
8. Requires an intake system that is separated from exhaust and can deliver.
Sounds exotic, but proven technology with no foil hats required.
Now, where is the flame suit. :)
some examples?
Jannem
21st July 2017, 18:06
some examples?
Free design calculators all over the google. Area ratio defines exit velocity and shape is important not to have shock waves in the nozzle.
In the 4-stroke world an engine builder (who had worked for Lockheed-Martin) claimed to have used that approach (among others) in the Bob Glidden's engines for unbeatable row of pro-stock victories. Got a lot of suspicion from experts for that claim:
http://theoldone.com/boss429head/index.html
Saw years ago his design for an updated port, with 1.6" ex.valve for pro-stock engine. Might still have it somewhere on my computer... :)
Of course, anyone can claim anything over the internet, but what would be the reasons based in physics why it wouldn't work? It's been utilized in the aircrafts forever. Of course not applicable in the traditional 2-stroke with connected intake and exhaust.
edit: For the efficiency side, in addition of being able to run it lean without heat issues, the inertia from exhaust will pull a vacuum in the cylinder for reduced pumping losses.
lucf
21st July 2017, 19:30
Supersonic exhaust port.
Yes necessary in a normal twostroke, but Ryger is not a normal 2 stroke !
So Luc you are saying there are two Ryger engine designs?
The new one is not just a de rated version of the original?
If you have read it well than you know why it has to be changed last year.
Every user can change it back to 30k, but at his own risc.
Beside there will be like in a normal 2 stroke much more to change, but that we leave for the experts.
The homoligation has not been changed and ofcourse no HCCI
Looks about as fast as a Clubman J motor
If you are experienced enough, than you can eliminated what is not important.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJbxxdzhESA
husaberg
21st July 2017, 19:54
The Ryger engine answer must lie in the free piston engine. How do these engines oscillate to such high frequencies with no where near enough blow down time area. Not pipe dependent AND I would image they would be a form of HCCI once up and running under load ??
I don't know enough about these engines apart from a few articles I've read over the years, but I understand they have a similar high pressure transfer system.
Husa will find pictures I imagine. (I hope)
https://youtu.be/OVWZFdb_AGc
http://www.google.com/patents/US8127544
?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Pescara_avec_turbine.gifhttp://www.freikolben.ch/var/m_c/c3/c38/27529/1589057-e49dad1d1a445cf6ffff81817f000101.gif
Jannem
21st July 2017, 20:34
Yes necessary in a normal twostroke, but Ryger is not a normal 2 stroke !
Nope, normal two stroke wouldn't work with supersonic port, because you would lose pulsing and extract intake charge to the pipe, without any way to return it. Close to sonic, yes.
Or maybe it could work timed right, but without the pipe supercharging effect. So, if you are not doing it, maybe you should give it a thought. :)
lucf
21st July 2017, 20:50
Nope, normal two stroke wouldn't work with supersonic port, because you would lose pulsing and extract intake charge to the pipe, without any way to return it. Close to sonic, yes.
Or maybe it could work timed right, but without the pipe supercharging effect. So, if you are not doing it, maybe you should give it a thought. :)
I see supersonic in my answer as a very fast flowing duct, no more.
In a Ryger it's far less critical.
Jannem
21st July 2017, 21:26
Jumping out of the Ryger discussion back to regular 2-strokes:
What could be achieved, If you could run properly timed (relative to trasfers) much smaller than norm exhaust port with massive mass flow capability, but would lose the pipe supercharging? Effectively you could expel all the exhaust, keep things cool and pull a vacuum to the cylinder with late transfer opening and more area available for transfers.
A bit like FOS engine without pipe effect and blowdown limitation, very little heat and charge contamination?
With reciprocating exhaust slide valve you could run also very straight and non-directional, efficient, transfer ports. Could use the 24/7 reed for intake to get it started.
Lot of torque down low, linear response, rev it to the moon, good efficiency, lean mixtures without heat issues, simple structure and after reading about it in the internet -public domain. :)
Jannem
21st July 2017, 22:54
I see supersonic in my answer as a very fast flowing duct, no more.
In a Ryger it's far less critical.
I don't know the specific capabilities and limitations of Ryger, but every IC-engine with regular exhaust port is limited in performance by increasing pumping losses and heat. How is the power output in the mopeds limited? -Exhaust restriction. :)
lucf
21st July 2017, 23:07
I don't know the specific capabilities and limitations of Ryger, but every IC-engine with regular exhaust port is limited in performance by increasing pumping losses and heat. How is the power output in the mopeds limited? -Exhaust restriction. :)
Yes Ryger also, but not the same !
Again "Ryger is not a normal 2 stroke!, so don't think in normal 2 stroke !!"
husaberg
21st July 2017, 23:21
I don't know the specific capabilities and limitations of Ryger, but every IC-engine with regular exhaust port is limited in performance by increasing pumping losses and heat. How is the power output in the mopeds limited? -Exhaust restriction. :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_WYUTtrYiA
Jannem
21st July 2017, 23:47
Yes Ryger also, but not the same !
Again "Ryger is not a normal 2 stroke!, so don't think in normal 2 stroke !!"
No need to shout or take it personal. My comment was not about Ryger or 2-strokes, but in general about IC engines.
As I said, I have very little knowledge about Ryger engine. If your design allows conventional exhaust area, that will not lead into escalating pumping losses and heat with the discussed power and rpm levels, meaning the improvement comes from the intake side and combustion, it's all good. Those are the available options in any IC engine AFAIK. Edit: And of course friction and other losses, also discussed by you.
There are many ways to skin a cat and improve existing technologies. And it's great that people are still innovating IC-engines even at the brink of mass use of the electric powered stuff.
Jannem
22nd July 2017, 00:16
Just for general interest, Ford applied for a patent to supersonic carburetor in the 70's, which used shockwaves to atomize fuel for better distribution and combustion. I suppose emergence of EFI killed it.
https://www.google.com/patents/US4206158
breezy
22nd July 2017, 07:13
Yes Ryger also, but not the same !
Again "Ryger is not a normal 2 stroke!, so don't think in normal 2 stroke !!"
hi Luc,.. so.. we can say that this engine has a linear moving piston with little or no side thrust on the upper piston part.... different from a normal 2 stroke yes ?
the crankcase is in no way connected to the bottom of the cylinder/barrel except via the oil way through the piston between the piston rings.. different from a normal 2 stroke yes?
that the lower ports beneath the piston feed the higher transfer ports above the piston under a higher pressure... not the same as a normal 2 stroke yes?
that the port roof angle of each transfer port is the same as a run of the mill rotax junior barrel transfer port 2 stroke yes?
the exhaust/ port plays no part in the power achieved by this engine.. unlike a normal 2 stroke?
if you cant answer all, i will understand:brick:
Norman
22nd July 2017, 08:23
Maybe Luc will tell you/us that the flow into the cylinder is so violent when the engine comes into resonance that the mix will have problems escaping out through the exhaust?
///
the exhaust/ port plays no part in the power achieved by this engine.. unlike a normal 2 stroke?
if you cant answer all, i will understand:brick:[/QUOTE]
Flettner
22nd July 2017, 10:10
So what is this all about? Even if someone were to guess the answer, Luc can't confirm anyway! Lose lose situation, and more likely guide us away from the important stuff.
Interesting that Luc keeps coming back to this thread. Perhaps we are a little more civilized than some other sites😊
lucf
22nd July 2017, 10:46
hi Luc,.. so.. we can say that this engine has a linear moving piston with little or no side thrust on the upper piston part.... different from a normal 2 stroke yes ?
the crankcase is in no way connected to the bottom of the cylinder/barrel except via the oil way through the piston between the piston rings.. different from a normal 2 stroke yes?
that the lower ports beneath the piston feed the higher transfer ports above the piston under a higher pressure... not the same as a normal 2 stroke yes?
that the port roof angle of each transfer port is the same as a run of the mill rotax junior barrel transfer port 2 stroke yes?
the exhaust/ port plays no part in the power achieved by this engine.. unlike a normal 2 stroke?
if you cant answer all, i will understand:brick:
Only the last is not correct, I did write exhaustpipe undepended for the rpm, which is something else.
Ofcourse the exhaustport plays a part when it is about power, but far less when it is about rpm, may be even not at all.
We first discovered that when the engine runs smoothly to 30k unless the homologated pipe which is dedicated for max power at about 13k.
breezy
22nd July 2017, 12:57
Only the last is not correct, I did write exhaustpipe undepended for the rpm, which is something else.
Ofcourse the exhaustport plays a part when it is about power, but far less when it is about rpm, may be even not at all.
We first discovered that when the engine runs smoothly to 30k unless the homologated pipe which is dedicated for max power at about 13k.
Luc, as you have reduced the rpm levels down to a lower figure , is this achieved by changes to the amount of fuel inducted or size of transfer ports?
ken seeber
22nd July 2017, 15:29
Instead of all this frustrating & “getting us nowhere banter”, why don’t we all just put in, say $20 each, and buy an engine. Then give it to Wobbly to test. When it’s all over, irrespective of the outcome, put it into the Christchurch museum next to the Britten with a placard saying “????????”
I vote Husa as #1 coordinator, seems a trustworthy dude :niceone: ...maybe a Gofundme page?
Michael Moore
22nd July 2017, 15:37
Ken, do you folks down under use the expression "don't buy a pig in a poke?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_in_a_poke
it seems to apply here. :)
cheers,
Michael
husaberg
22nd July 2017, 16:06
Instead of all this frustrating & “getting us nowhere banter”, why don’t we all just put in, say $20 each, and buy an engine. Then give it to Wobbly to test. When it’s all over, irrespective of the outcome, put it into the Christchurch museum next to the Britten with a placard saying “????????”
I vote Husa as #1 coordinator, seems a trustworthy dude :niceone: ...maybe a Gofundme page?
:laugh::laugh:
you do have to wonder why they are worried about secret squirel stuff i thought they had an international patent.
Ken, do you folks down under use the expression "don't buy a pig in a poke?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_in_a_poke
it seems to apply here. :)
cheers,
Michael
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtier%27s_Reply
We have that, plus the emperor new clothes in NZ anyway.
plus other bag variations mostly suited to Waimate
331882
jamathi
22nd July 2017, 16:42
Jumping out of the Ryger discussion back to regular 2-strokes:
What could be achieved, If you could run properly timed (relative to trasfers) much smaller than norm exhaust port with massive mass flow capability, but would lose the pipe supercharging? Effectively you could expel all the exhaust, keep things cool and pull a vacuum to the cylinder with late transfer opening and more area available for transfers.
A bit like FOS engine without pipe effect and blowdown limitation, very little heat and charge contamination?
With reciprocating exhaust slide valve you could run also very straight and non-directional, efficient, transfer ports. Could use the 24/7 reed for intake to get it started.
Lot of torque down low, linear response, rev it to the moon, good efficiency, lean mixtures without heat issues, simple structure and after reading about it in the internet -public domain. :)
I once tried the 50cc Bultaco without exhaust pipe.
Power went down from 17Hp to 2,5 Hp.
Later I did the same at Aprilia.
Power loss was only 36HP....
lucf
22nd July 2017, 19:06
Ken, do you folks down under use the expression "don't buy a pig in a poke?"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_in_a_poke
it seems to apply here. :)
cheers,
Michael
If you were right Michael, than I got never be interested in the past and would not spend one word about Ryger.
Read well how and why I get involved. https://www.facebook.com/notes/luc-foekema/preface-publication-ryger-engine/10207485252128532/
husaberg
22nd July 2017, 19:52
If you were right Michael, than I got never be interested in the past and would not spend one word about Ryger.
Read well how and why I get involved. https://www.facebook.com/notes/luc-foekema/preface-publication-ryger-engine/10207485252128532/
Luc especially ironic considering my own spelling, but, Maybe try copying that FB page into MS word and turn on the english option (this is not a dig btw)
I realise English is not your first language. but it might be a bit better polished as below.
Developing a Ryger
Is Ryger a fairy tale? With those phenomenal properties it may look like it and however some people does call it that way, it is certainly not. Initially it was Mr. Hendrick Gerrits had not meant to design an engine with more power, but to make a clean 2 stroke which should make the 2 stroke engine more important again. At that time I was looking for more power and therefore initially less interested, but along the way that changed when also Hendrick himself was pleasantly surprised by the high power including the corresponding speeds. At that time it was still the question of where all that power came from, until you are seriously searching for an explanation. We from Ryger told everything we have experienced in the past and of which we became enthusiastic to tell around. May be we better should not have done this, because many people won’t believe this, which we fully can understand.
The reason why it took so much time to get the production ready for an engine, which we can guarantee for 100% is:
1. We do not have a 100-man department for development behind us, like Aprilia or Honda does have.
2. It is also not a development of an existing two stroke engine, but a completely new designed principle. This makes it much more complicated, than a simple development, on what many other technicians have prepared for you in many years before your time.
3. And we can’t spend more hours than we have done till so far over the years. So of course this took some time, and afterwards more than we could imagine, for which we are very sorry !
At this moment, there is no reason, not to be proud of the result we have achieved till so far. Now that we are going to answer all the wishes of the opponents one by one, the strong wind from several people will go down. And with so much strong winds of the most famous two stroke experts, the result will only be more beautiful for Ryger. For there will be a time, they will have to acknowledge that they are totally wrong.
In the meanwhile, we are continuing to highlight parts of the Ryger publication that will be very surprising to most. I've already mentioned (on forums), the for a two stroke strange interdependency of the exhaust pipe and the temperature (physics as I told before) of which both items I will come back later. First I will start with:
The connecting rod
The start with the connecting rod length is because it is labeled by the experts as the most impossible good detail. Extremely high lateral forces, which will be impossible to use! Yes for sure in a normal twostroke I agree, but Ryger is not a normal two stroke, so I disagree for a Ryger engine. The reality for a Ryger is completely reversed, the shorter the conrod, the greater the piston acceleration and the better the Ryger principle works. Longer conrods have been tested, but the result got worse.
Lateral forces
The disadvantage of a short conrod, such as the lateral force is rising. Ignoring an offset piston pin the highest forces for the Aprilia with a 120 mm conrod are at 26° atdc and are about 1796 Nm or 183 kg. For the Ryger with a 90 mm conrod by the same pressure it is 2404 Nm or 245 kg, so 34% higher.
Special Ryger influences
In a normal 2 stroke the lubrication is mixed in the fuel and because less lubrication is better for the 2 stroke process, all bearings under the piston are lubricated very minimal. So when the engine has to made maximum power like in a racing engine, the bearings in the conrod has a real short life. This is one of the most important differences with a Ryger were those bearings last much longer. And also the higher lateral forces are much less serious in a Ryger engine due to by far much better lubrication.
1. Because the crankshaft is rotating in oil and spread out this to the downside of the piston and cylinder wall. The lubricating looks more like a 4 stroke engine.
2. Beside the Ryger has no tilting effect of the piston, it has been eliminated for almost 100%. That is why the lateral forces are far much better divided over the surface of the upper and downside of the piston.
End conclusion
In a Ryger a short conrod is the best solution and is certainly not what is told by the experts ‘ridiculous and totally impossible’. In fact it is more full the opposite situation. Despite the short conrod, this part will show significantly less wear in a Ryger in comparing with a soon old-fashioned 2 stroke !
Next chapter ‘the piston’ to be continued !
husaberg
22nd July 2017, 20:26
Ryger engine patent
EP3128149 A1
https://www.google.com/patents/EP3128149A1?cl=it
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=EP&NR=3128149A1&KC=A1&FT=D#
as frits and Norman have already posted
F5 Dave
22nd July 2017, 20:33
Ken, have you not been paying attention? He never ever ever finishes anything ever.
I bet his wife spends most of her life scraping plates of unfinished meals.
lucf
22nd July 2017, 20:42
Ryger engine patent
EP3128149 A1
https://www.google.com/patents/EP3128149A1?cl=it
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=EP&NR=3128149A1&KC=A1&FT=D#
Mr Husaberg, or what ever your name is? you don't have any respect for the personal privacy?
Is not it a right to everyone to be free to write under a nickname? which the most of us does !
So delete those names, because I will stop my futher introduction about Ryger.
This does not count for you only but also for Peter1962 and anyone else who make this infringement.
And I don't blame myself that my English is not my best language, but as long as anyone understand what I mean, this is full unimportant!
husaberg
22nd July 2017, 20:51
Mr Husaberg, or what ever your name is? you don't have any respect for the personal privacy?
Is not it a right to everyone to be free to write under a nickname? which the most of us does !
So delete those names, because I will stop my futher introduction about Ryger.
This does not count for you only but also for anyone else who make this infringement.
And I don't blame myself that my English is not my best language, but as long as anyone understand what I mean, this is full unimportant!
What privacy, its a publicly available documents including trademark applications
In-fact it you have posted his name yourself on ocassions on other forums, Or did you forget you had done that that?
You post with terms such as Mr Ryger when this name is a fable, a fairy tale, if you don't not want his name to be used, simple stop refering to MR ryger as being a real person. you could instead refer to him as the unamed original creator of the ryger concept ,but you consistantly choose not to.
If you want me to delete the name you could ask politely, then i will then do so, that is the adult way rather than attempt to threaten people.
sidecar bob
22nd July 2017, 20:56
Mr Husaberg, or what ever your name is? you don't have any respect for the personal privacy?
Is not it a right to everyone to be free to write under a nickname? which the most of us does !
So delete those names, because I will stop my futher introduction about Ryger.
This does not count for you only but also for Peter1962 and anyone else who make this infringement.
And I don't blame myself that my English is not my best language, but as long as anyone understand what I mean, this is full unimportant!
The shit is already on the internet ya faggot.
Plus, most people couldn't really care less about it.
How does one apply to become an Internet Policeman?
lucf
22nd July 2017, 21:16
What privacy, its a publicly available document.
In-fact it was only a couple of days ago you posted his name yourself, did you forget you had done that that.
You post with terms such as Mr Ryger when that is a fable, a fairy tale, if you don't not want his name to be used stop refering to MR ryger as being a real person. you could instead refer to him as the original creator of the ryger concept ,but you choose not to.
If you want me to delete the name you should ask politely, then i will then do so, that is the adult way rather than attempt to threaten people.
The polite way I did before, but when no answers are coming the only way is to do it in public.
And you are in violation of a legal right. Talking about polite questions spoken ??
husaberg
22nd July 2017, 21:22
The polite way I did before, but when no answers are coming the only way is to do it in public.
What polite request ?you have never made one single previous request to me for anything at all, as for answers you have never asked me a single question.
So i am quite confused as to what you are taking about?
lucf
22nd July 2017, 21:54
The climate remains hostile and this does not seem to end.
In addition, no one here seems to provide polite personal privacy.
So I finally decided to quit, and my decision is now final.
But I guarantee you regret it, because there was still much to be said about what's happening in a Ryger.
Madness
22nd July 2017, 21:59
http://www.tootsuite.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/Na-na-na-na-na-2.jpg
breezy
22nd July 2017, 22:49
Instead of all this frustrating & “getting us nowhere banter”, why don’t we all just put in, say $20 each, and buy an engine. Then give it to Wobbly to test. When it’s all over, irrespective of the outcome, put it into the Christchurch museum next to the Britten with a placard saying “????????”
I vote Husa as #1 coordinator, seems a trustworthy dude :niceone: ...maybe a Gofundme page?
yep... even if he blows the money on beer.. i can live with $20 for enlightenment:niceone:
TZ350
22nd July 2017, 23:41
At the moment I can not say anything about the engine power characteristic and reliability, only passion as soon as possible to start the engine and to hear is it.
Started it yesterday and revs like, like crazy chainsaw.
One thing about Ryger engine, which might have been expected, and it has proved after first static test, it is very low mechanical noise. Very lovely.
Thank you, youtube - Rygerised ..... https://youtu.be/OnLMIMiXoR8
This, pipe header on video, from Ns 400 3 cylinder, is too long and last time I rode ns 400 two years ago, max power around 10000 rpm. Carburetor and ignition not tested anywhere, so this video only to hear whether it works or not.
Before the test, I was thinking that the engine will fail after 10s, but not. So now, I want only ride and feel what it is (with proper header) , before engine fail.
I like Katinas approach and the way he has shown us what he has been doing with his Ryger like engine. With Lucf quitting the thread in a huff, I probably won't miss the endless evangelical and pointless talk about the Ryger cart engine but I do hope he will be back someday because we love it when people are real about what they are doing.
trevor amos
23rd July 2017, 02:10
I`m with you Nigel, must be worth $20 each to get an engine for Wob to analyse, great idea Ken, stops the propaganda in one hit!
Trevor
Jannem
23rd July 2017, 02:34
I once tried the 50cc Bultaco without exhaust pipe.
Power went down from 17Hp to 2,5 Hp.
Later I did the same at Aprilia.
Power loss was only 36HP....
That... is kinda low without the pipe. :facepalm:
Larry Wiechman
23rd July 2017, 07:26
Instead of all this frustrating & “getting us nowhere banter”, why don’t we all just put in, say $20 each, and buy an engine. Then give it to Wobbly to test. When it’s all over, irrespective of the outcome, put it into the Christchurch museum next to the Britten with a placard saying “????????”
I vote Husa as #1 coordinator, seems a trustworthy dude :niceone: ...maybe a Gofundme page?
Aside from the published patent information, the Ryger crew can't produce an intelligent, detailed technical paper that explains the merits and function of the product.
How long would you expect to wait for a running engine?
F5 Dave
23rd July 2017, 07:57
Oh no lucf, please don't go, we are sorry, how we will cry for forgiveness so you can abuse us some more with sanctimonious posts.
Bet he's just a troll with nothing to do with the project anyway.
sidecar bob
23rd July 2017, 08:24
Aside from the published patent information, the Ryger crew can't produce an intelligent, detailed technical paper that explains the merits and function of the product.
How long would you expect to wait for a running engine?
It smells like an elaborate scam to separate fools from their money.
A lack of transparency, a reluctance to publish actual names.
Some apparent track record at a track nobody likes or uses, no technical papers.
Reminds me of these idiots.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=210598
Norman
23rd July 2017, 08:48
Instead of all this frustrating & “getting us nowhere banter”, why don’t we all just put in, say $20 each, and buy an engine. Then give it to Wobbly to test. When it’s all over, irrespective of the outcome, put it into the Christchurch museum next to the Britten with a placard saying “????????”
I vote Husa as #1 coordinator, seems a trustworthy dude :niceone: ...maybe a Gofundme page?
I put myself in line for this. I am prepared to contribute with $200. Benchmarking is a good thing!
sidecar bob
23rd July 2017, 08:56
I put myself in line for this. I am prepared to contribute with $200. Benchmarking is a good thing!
I'm not about to sift through 500 pages, but wasn't this engine supposed to rev over 30,000 rpm in the beginning & now it's under half that?
Can someone confirm if that is the case, or have I got mixed up there?
I'd be prepared to bet that one of these engines will be very difficult to source for any contributor to this forum.
oldjohnno
23rd July 2017, 11:20
I used to be baffled by the way the development of novel designs would often plod along for years, seemingly making little progress and never really making it to market. Often the new design had very little merit anyway, but still they continued on with development.
It never made any sense to me until I had first hand involvement with the (Australian) government R&D assistance scheme. The benefits are very generous, and if you can make a good case that the only practical way to test and develop your idea is in actual real-world usage then you might find yourself being able to claim almost every single cost incurred in the day to day running of your business. Of course, when you have a cash-cow like that you don't want to perfect your project too quickly; the longer you can prolong the program the longer the dollars keep pouring in.
Whether or not this is what's happening with the Ryger I don't know, or even if there are schemes like this in place there. But I have no doubt that the scheme is being scammed by some, and that the sole purpose of some projects is to enable the playing of R&D games. It turns out that the inventors and designers of some of these flaky devices aren't fools at all - they know exactly what they're doing.
WilDun
23rd July 2017, 12:41
I don't want to keep on ranting about it all, but down here, there was a Kiwi guy (in Australia) who took advantage of that very situation and who made heaps from an outrageous "new engine" even to the extent of setting up a bogus factory and he hoodwinked some very well known people and got them to invest in it.
He did do a spell in prison though - that was probably 30 years ago.
We have had a few people on here with absolutely, no interest at all on what is actually going on with others on the thread, instead, just their stuff! - me, me, me! and they have slunk off, never to be seen again when people challenged them!
BTW,- I need to stress that I certainly am not saying that Lucf is in any of these categories though!
He does invite controversy however and with his "drip feed" technique (on info) he does have control - whether it is intentional or not I don't know, but ..... many people are still interested in Luc's stuff whether or not this is true and would want to understand it.
I probably won't endear myself to Luc by saying all this (and I'm sure he will read this) but ...... Luc, there are many other people here
who are still very interested in the Ryger and would like to discuss it, but not at all interested in huffs or tantrums.
Not a very clever thing to do ie. going off in a huff when you (in effect) invite challenge, then you can't take the heat when they do! - I'd say "harden up" and don't play silly games unless you can handle the result!
Just come back and carry on, get used to Kiwis and Aussies and how they "sling off" at each other, they tend to say what they think at the time but when you get to know them and their ways, they are mostly good guys ......... oh, and then there is Husa! ;)
Jannem
23rd July 2017, 18:17
It seems triple exhaust benefits from contracting the nozzle to 75%, but single only to 90%. Can anyone explain the reason why single would like to run at lower speed? Say in a case where you run the single port in small cc engine and you get the blowdown STA where it needs to be for the revs.
Ours is at 80%, and I'm wondering what to do with it.
Jannem
23rd July 2017, 18:35
With a bit more than an academic interest in exhaust duct cooling, I'm very interested in the potential value of a ceramic coated duct.
In my simplistic approach to these things, it looks to me the the only real advantage to extensive water-cooling of the transfer duct is to provide thermal stability.
Thus enabling "careful tuning" to control the point of detonation.
The Negative to this heavy temperature management is removal of heat/energy from the exhaust pulse and the addition of heat to the charge in the duct.
Plus the need to dispose of the captured (& wasted) heat/energy.
As it has been determined, polishing the piston face, allows it to reflect, rather than absorb the heat of combustion.
It follows (to me) that polishing the duct and header pipe should produce a similar result.
Allowing hot exhaust to pass through without depositing heat AND allow cool transfer charge to enter and leave without picking up extra heat (Win-Win?)
Polishing ducts and headers could, perhaps, also be simulated by a process something like this...
It's smooth & shiny, contains silver and is highly heat reflective.
It is claimed to reduce the external temperature of headers by around 150C. AND that's After heating the steel tube from the inside.
So the heat reflection is internal at the steel to coating junction. Heat reflection without the physical conduction could/should be much higher(?)
Might be just speculation & wishful thinking......or the next Great Step Forward in 2 stroke technology & performance.
Cheers, Daryl.
I think Wobbly is going to test it and publish the results. If I understood correctly, the more experienced guys here expect the result of thermal barrier coating in exhaust to be negative, as it is not a perfect insulator but has it's own thermal mass leaving the surface superheated after the exhaust gas has passed. This heat is then passed to the intake charge following the exhaust.
I don't see any reason why polishing the duct and even the piston exhaust side would do any harm. But wouldn't expect all that much in terms of performance either.
Flettner
23rd July 2017, 18:42
No wonder Luc got angry, he made a fatal mistake, said something he shouldn't have. I am sure the Ryger is unmasked now. Harry will not be happy:facepalm:
These Ryger clones all won't work because they are missing one thing, the new thing! Well its not new at all it was suggested way way back at the beginning but subsequent red herrings have put us off track ( the 'leaked' patent papers ).
They need a new PR manager, I hear Shawn Spicer is available now, he couldn't do as bad a job as Rygers present spokesman :msn-wink:
Good one Rumpelstiltskin, thank you.
Lightbulb
23rd July 2017, 18:48
No wonder Luc got angry, he made a fatal mistake, said something he shouldn't have. I am sure the Ryger is unmasked now. Harry will not be happy:facepalm:
These Ryger clones all won't work because they are missing one thing, the new thing! Well its not new at all it was suggested way way back at the beginning but subsequent red herrings have put us off track ( the 'leaked' patent papers ).
They need a new PR manager, I hear Shawn Spicer is available now, he couldn't do as bad a job as Rygers present spokesman :msn-wink:
Good one Luc, thank you.
Hi Neil, can you show me the info I missed out on?
Thanks ,
Neil
Flettner
23rd July 2017, 18:50
Hi Neil, can you show me the info I missed out on?
Thanks ,
Neil
You didn't miss out, you know.
lucf
23rd July 2017, 20:07
I don't want to keep on ranting about it all, but down here, there was a Kiwi guy (in Australia) who took advantage of that very situation and who made heaps from an outrageous "new engine" even to the extent of setting up a bogus factory and he hoodwinked some very well known people and got them to invest in it.
He did do a spell in prison though - that was probably 30 years ago.
We have had a few people on here with absolutely, no interest at all on what is actually going on with others on the thread, instead, just their stuff! - me, me, me! and they have slunk off, never to be seen again when people challenged them!
BTW,- I need to stress that I certainly am not saying that Lucf is in any of these categories though!
He does invite controversy however and with his "drip feed" technique (on info) he does have control - whether it is intentional or not I don't know, but ..... many people are still interested in Luc's stuff whether or not this is true and would want to understand it.
I probably won't endear myself to Luc by saying all this (and I'm sure he will read this) but ...... Luc, there are many other people here
who are still very interested in the Ryger and would like to discuss it, but not at all interested in huffs or tantrums.
Not a very clever thing to do ie. going off in a huff when you (in effect) invite challenge, then you can't take the heat when they do! - I'd say "harden up" and don't play silly games unless you can handle the result!
Just come back and carry on, get used to Kiwis and Aussies and how they "sling off" at each other, they tend to say what they think at the time but when you get to know them and their ways, they are mostly good guys ......... oh, and then there is Husa! ;)
Thanks WilDun,
I think your are the only one who does think that way.
Everything I wrote here and elsewere including the first part of the Preface Publication, is real and nothing but the truth!
But no one believes it and the only replies are mud and infringement on privacy.
It is a big shame for all those "experts" including Jan Thiel, Wayne Wright (Wobbly), that they can't imagine were the power comes from. Were are all those intelligent brains?
Believe me: "within a few years no one can win a race without a Rygerised engine".
And I'm Dutch so not made of stone, and when I say "final" than this it is and will never change.
Kiwibiker never get any information from me any more !!
The whole situation has been set up by one man, Jan Thiel and everybody walks blindy after him.
He will blame his name for the future which will be clear after the first race we do. .
You should be really crazy when setting up a whole factory and paying a lot of money for patent,
as the claims we did were untruth, and also be very stupid for anyone who believe this !!!
Sorry for people like you and only regards to them.
Luc
jellert
23rd July 2017, 20:25
Thanks WilDun,
I think your are the only one who does think that way.
Everything I wrote here and elsewere including the first part of the Preface Publication, is real and nothing but the truth!
But no one believes it and the only replies are mud and infringement on privacy.
It is a big shame for all those "experts" including Jan Thiel, Wobbly, that they can't imagine were the power comes from. Were are all those intelligent brains?
Believe me: "within a few years no one can win a race without a Rygerised engine".
And I'm Dutch so not made of stone, and when I say "final" than this it is and will never change.
Kiwibiker never get any information from me any more !!
Sorry for people like you and only regards to them.
Luc
Wow you are delusional, you just don't understand do you? Talking smack all the time with nothing to show for, no wonder people are critical. Even now you keep criticizing the established professionals and calling them by name no less. As if their previous accomplishments mean nothing!
You're crying about the law and infringement of privacy, again something you don't seem to understand. When something is publicly available, you are not infringing on their privacy. The man chose to be a public figure when he filed those patents.
I don't know where in Holland you're from, but where I'm from people can take a hit from their peers and realize they are being a d*ck.
Flettner
23rd July 2017, 20:46
It's up to Luc if he wants to play with us, we don't need him but he needs us, the general twostroke public! That's if they want to sell anything. Can you imagine Yamaha going off their face at new, potential customers. Maybe it's a new B&D sales technique.
Don't completely rubbish Ryger, they may have somthing after all, but what a half arsed way of selling the idea. I can't imagine a worse product release!!
husaberg
23rd July 2017, 20:59
Kiwibiker never get any information from me any more !!
Sorry for people like you and only regards to them.
Luc
It's up to Luc if he wants to play with us, we don't need him but he needs us, the general twostroke public! That's if they want to sell anything. Can you imagine Yamaha going off their face at new, potential customers. Maybe it's a new B&D sales technique.
Don't completely rubbish Ryger, they may have somthing after all, but what a half arsed way of selling the idea. I can't imagine a worse product release!!
I aggree.
https://media.giphy.com/media/3xz2BtrwQ2wIBeciAw/giphy.gif
Maybe he should also ask for his account to be deleted also.
F5 Dave
23rd July 2017, 21:11
Hey Lucf, I thought you said it was final and you weren't coming back. And yet here you are. More lies. Or are you just spineless?
Just a troll aren't you?
Flettner
23rd July 2017, 21:36
Kiwibiker never get any information from me any more !!
Luc
Ha ha, I think he realizes hes already said too much:sweatdrop
husaberg
23rd July 2017, 22:02
Ha ha, I think he realizes hes already said too much:sweatdrop
Frits said when he posted the patent a while back (that had mr rygers real name in it btw):laugh:
that i doesn't show why it makes power, looking at it its true
but if you look at this animation of a cross head two stroke you will see an aditional chamber location that potentially gives it a decent size crancase volume to beath from
Cross head engines are also very efficent as theey don't have the side thrust.
ignore the text
http://i.makeagif.com/media/7-23-2017/C4OmxG.gif (http://makeagif.com/gif/clean-two-stroke-cits-v-twin-engine-rising-pivot-valve-no-sound-C4OmxG)
Jannem
23rd July 2017, 22:41
I'm a bit concerned that the speculation around this topic, admitting having participated, will put the thread off the track it's intended purpose and reduce the participation of the very knowledgable contributors. That would be a great loss.
TZ350
24th July 2017, 00:13
It's up to Luc if he wants to play with us, we don't need him but he needs us, the general twostroke public!
Totally agree, it's up to Luc how he wants to play it, and you are right we don't need him or to be manipulated by Ryger to create a sales buzz.
Hopefully one day Luc will bring something with him and join us at the table where the food is honest and things are shared openly.
331910
jonny quest
24th July 2017, 03:26
Luc isn't spamming this site. This site isn't an outlet for Ryger sales.
If the Ryger is going to be a winner or a flop, who cares. What we care about is taking engines to the next level.
Either way, we'll learn. That's the bottom line. It would be a shame if Luc stopped posting.
OopsClunkThud
24th July 2017, 04:30
looks like a rectangular lower portion to the piston is not covered in the patent
SwePatrick
24th July 2017, 08:11
Honestly..
30mm carburetors don´t flow any 70hp at ~15000rpm, noway!
Especially not when engine isn´t depending on the pipe.
Without showing all calculations i get that a 30mm pipe flows about 162cfm at 28" pressure.
This is roughly 38hp
But!
If an engine can pump higher pressure than 28" you can get more power, turboengines for an example.
Or, tuned pipe on an twostroke..........
And at 30000rpm friction will be so high that it overcomes engines production of power.
You should be happy if engines can get out about half the power to incoming axle in gearbox.
Luc states that it is lower friction as the piston don´t rock in the bore, true.
But still, geometry with 90mm rod to 54mm stroke is really hard, i figure the lower sealant on piston will have to be changed quite often.
You got a ratio of 1.66 (stroke rod ratio).
And that´s good for engines running at about 8000-9000rpm, if running higher you drasticly shortens servicetimes.
Piston might have a longer life, but lower seal.....
Fabio15
24th July 2017, 08:41
Came across the is"new" ryger pic....Or at least I've never seen it before
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi1.wp.com%2Fhooniverse .com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F02%2FEP47-150-Ryger.jpg%3Fresize%3D450%252C450&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhooniverse.com%2F2017%2F02% 2F21%2Ffalse-neutral-47-geeking-out-on-two-strokes%2F&docid=Uak4Ve807rtpcM&tbnid=Hh2DgiIhNoeIOM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwiB2_2JnaDVAhVG4mMKHaMKAxcQMwidAShdMF0. .i&w=450&h=450&client=ms-android-verizon&bih=280&biw=598&q=ryger%20engine&ved=0ahUKEwiB2_2JnaDVAhVG4mMKHaMKAxcQMwidAShdMF0&iact=mrc&uact=8
http://hooniverse.com/2017/02/21/false-neutral-47-geeking-out-on-two-strokes/
wobbly
24th July 2017, 10:36
Jannem,the area reduction difference for the 3 port ( or T port ) Vs a single port is due simply to the amount of Blowdown available in relation to
the total effective Ex port area.
The 3 port is capable of WAY more BMEP than a single port and all the extra area is above the transfers.
In the end the ideal velocity in the duct where it flows thru the nozzle is around 0.8 Mach max,higher or lower looses power.
As Frits says, the relationship should be tied to the actual Blowdown capability, and when I get time ( yea right ) I will look at forming some sort of formula for this.
peewee
24th July 2017, 11:35
its official ! my welding is terrible and fabrication skills maybe even worse but who cares :lol:. rear joints are done and now to just get the chain alignment in the ballpark and do the front joints
Pursang
24th July 2017, 12:32
I think Wobbly is going to test it and publish the results. If I understood correctly, the more experienced guys here expect the result of thermal barrier coating in exhaust to be negative, as it is not a perfect insulator but has it's own thermal mass leaving the surface superheated after the exhaust gas has passed. This heat is then passed to the intake charge following the exhaust.
I don't see any reason why polishing the duct and even the piston exhaust side would do any harm. But wouldn't expect all that much in terms of performance either.
Think about how a vacuum flask works. There are 3 heat transfer processes, unless you manage all of them, together, at once, your coffee gets cold.:cold:
cheers, Daryl.
peewee
24th July 2017, 17:12
As Frits says, the relationship should be tied to the actual Blowdown capability, and when I get time ( yea right ) I will look at forming some sort of formula for this.
i think it was jan that once said blowdown can be improved without enlarging the window but rather by making the passage geometry better. i suppose the rsa windows were as large as they could be and and he found some way to improve more with a change in the passages. alot of people (on other sites) only look at how big they can enlarge the window with little regard to the other small details
jamathi
24th July 2017, 17:53
i think it was jan that once said blowdown can be improved without enlarging the window but rather by making the passage geometry better. i suppose the rsa windows were as large as they could be and and he found some way to improve more with a change in the passages. alot of people (on other sites) only look at how big they can enlarge the window with little regard to the other small details
One of the ways to improve blowdown was to raise the exhaust port bottom....
I did not find out the limit of this because I stopped working.
But I think the exhaust bottom could eventually have been as high as the transfers top.
All you really need is the blowdown....
Jannem
24th July 2017, 18:00
:facepalm:
Shit. How wrong I was in my thought process about supersonic exhaust not working in a regular 2-stroke... On the contrary, It's got to be best thing since sliced bread. I'll explain when I get to my computer.
peewee
24th July 2017, 18:17
One of the ways to improve blowdown was to raise the exhaust port bottom....
I did not find out the limit of this because I stopped working.
But I think the exhaust bottom could eventually have been as high as the transfers top.
All you really need is the blowdown....
hi jan. maybe im mistaken but i thought the rsa aux ports had a larger sweep than the rsw which gave alittlr more power ?
Flettner
24th July 2017, 18:19
I though wobbly said the exhaust couldn't go supersonic.
Jannem
24th July 2017, 19:18
I though wobbly said the exhaust couldn't go supersonic.
And he was correct. In a regular exhaust, where the area in the pipe side of the contraction is not shaped like a supersonic nozzle, you will get shockwaves in the contraction when flow speed reaches mach 1, choking the flow to the speed of sound.
If you have the area behind the contraction shaped correctly, the flow speed will break the sound barrier and accelerate to supersonic speeds taking energy from the heat of the fluid, effectively cooling it. The flow speed at the contraction will remain at mach one, but mass flow through it will increase. This is nothing fancy and can be done with pressure ratios much lower than exhaust. The Ford patent I posted previously used that phenomenon in the intake side to atomize fuel in the carburetor.
Now, the reason why I thought SS exhaust would not work for regular 2-stroke was that I initially thought that SS flow after contraction would block the wave action in the pipe. It wont. SS port will actually both magnify wave supercharging effect and keep the pipe in tune for much longer range.
The reason for keeping the pipe in tune is direct result of being able to break the speed of sound in a partial length of the pipe after the contraction, which means the pulse makes the overall back and forth trip faster helping the pipe stay in tune. Edit: speed increasing with the pressure ratio->with power.
The magnified wave tuning comes from the phenomenon that the flow does not stay supersonic forever behind the contraction, but slows down depending on the pipe area changes and the pressure in the cylinder decaying, creating a shockwave (sonic boom when flow is returning to subsonic) in the pipe, which will then reflect back from the reverse cone and will give a remarkable shove back at the exhaust closure.
The whole fun in this is that it's all is achievable from a piece of scrap metal turned in a lathe to fit your exhaust pipe into the cylinder. Can there be any simpler and non-intrusive modification to be tested with better potential?
Area expansion rate vs. distance from contraction is where it's at to make the flow go supersonic. And the shapes and area changes don't need to be anything fancy for speeds for slightly above mach 1 either.
Jannem
24th July 2017, 19:55
I'm hoping that I would get critique to this from Frits. It shouldn't be in his NDA with Ryger, as it makes it's power from naturally aspirated intake side, better combustion and reduced losses, not from supersonic exhaust. This is nothing fancy but 2 dollar modification based on public information anyone can try.
Flettner
24th July 2017, 19:56
Ok, make one and show us.
Flettner
24th July 2017, 20:17
A normal twostroke goes flat as it runs out of blow down time area. So if you have an engine that will apparently bypass this requirement, how?
More exhaust time area can be had if you blocked up the transfers. The blow down phase could continue all the way to BDC, and what a lot of time area we would have there. Now pressure is low enough, open the transfers.
If the crank case is a low volume high pressure unit, transfer will shoot up.into the cylinder, inertia might be such that transfer will continue well past the normal time transfer stops right up until when the transfers shut. Normally wasted stroke as I understand transfer is usually all over by 30 degrees ABDC. We are shifting the phasing around.
How do we shut the transfers off until the pressure equalizes? One way valves (reeds) in the transfers, that's how. We are not dealing with a soft inlet pules like a standard large capacity crank case, the inlet will be much sharper (and powerful) like a fourstroke. Fourstroke don't have extra cylinder capacity to shove the extra fuel air into like a crank case but yet they over fill their cylinders somewhat by the powerful induction inertia.
A short rod will help this.
This was suggested early but for what ever reason didn't stick. With what we know now its more relevant than ever, in my opinion.
Frits Overmars
24th July 2017, 20:36
The whole fun in this is that it's all is achievable from a piece of scrap metal turned in a lathe to fit your exhaust pipe into the cylinder.
Can there be any simpler and non-intrusive modification to be tested with better potential?
I'm hoping that I would get critique to this from Frits... This is nothing fancy but 2 dollar modification based on public information anyone can try.Gimme a break Janne. There's only 37 minutes between your supersonic-post and your 'hoping to get critique' and I'm still trying to get my brain into gear (long night).
Your ss-post contains some remarks that I would have phrased differently, but your 'piece of scrap metal turned in a lathe to fit your exhaust pipe into the cylinder'
is spot-on.
You may have encountered the 50cc-pipe I posted some time ago. Yes, there is that 'piece of scrap metal', locally reducing the exhaust duct cross flow area.
331923
jamathi
24th July 2017, 20:53
hi jan. maybe im mistaken but i thought the rsa aux ports had a larger sweep than the rsw which gave alittlr more power ?
No, the sand cores were exactly the same!
There never were different cores for the RSA.
But the water circulation of the RSA was better..
The aux ducts remained the same for some years, 3 or 4 I think.
But the central duct was changed many times!
Frits Overmars
24th July 2017, 21:02
A normal twostroke goes flat as it runs out of blow down time area. So if you have an engine that will apparently bypass this requirement, how?
More exhaust time area can be had if you blocked up the transfers. The blow down phase could continue all the way to BDC, and what a lot of time area we would have there.
enough to rev a 125cc engine to 30.000 rpm :msn-wink:
Now pressure is low enough, open the transfers. If the crank case is a low volume high pressure unit, transfer will shoot up.into the cylinder, inertia might be such that transfer will continue well past the normal time transfer stops right up until when the transfers shut. Normally wasted stroke as I understand transfer is usually all over by 30 degrees ABDC. We are shifting the phasing around.
Normal transfer reaches its maximum flow velocity some 10° to 20° after BDC. At 30° after BDC; it's slowing down, but still flowing in the desired direction.
How do we shut the transfers off until the pressure equalizes? One way valves (reeds) in the transfers, that's how. We are not dealing with a soft inlet pules like a standard large capacity crank case, the inlet will be much sharper (and powerful) like a fourstroke.
Fourstroke don't have extra cylinder capacity to shove the extra fuel air into like a crank case but yet they over fill their cylinders somewhat by the powerful induction inertia.
Fourstrokes don't have the extra horsepower of an equally-big two-stroke either; not even half of it.
A short rod will help this. This was suggested early but for what ever reason didn't stick. With what we know now its more relevant than ever, in my opinion.Neil, the Ryger's single exhaust port that wouldn't even provide enough blowdown for 10.000 rpm, seems to have put some wonderful ideas, unhibited by any NDA,
in your mind. Would you consider changing your nickname to Luc 2.0? :devil2:
Flettner
24th July 2017, 21:11
Ok? Luc 0,2 gives in.
I guess I would like to so much believe there is something in it, as many of us would.
It's just hard to let it go. Is there a Rygers Anonymous one might join?
husaberg
24th July 2017, 21:14
No, the sand cores were exactly the same!
There never were different cores for the RSA.
But the water circulation of the RSA was better..
The aux ducts remained the same for some years, 3 or 4 I think.
But the central duct was changed many times!
When did the CNC machining of the duct occur?
Also what disc valve did you you on the dyno for the RSW mule i noticed there were many variantions on shape as well as timing.
which i assume were variations for indidual tracks?
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=304808&d=1414826610
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=312224&d=1432538053
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=303408&d=1413017658
Frits Overmars
24th July 2017, 21:23
Ok? Luc 0,2 gives in. I guess I would like to so much believe there is something in it, as many of us would. It's just hard to let it go. Is there a Rygers Anomus one might join?No need to give in or let go, Neil. I was trying to imply, without saying it aloud, that you might be on the right track :psst: I was writing between the lines :D.
Jannem
24th July 2017, 21:39
Gimme a break Janne. There's only 37 minutes between your supersonic-post and your 'hoping to get critique' and I'm still trying to get my brain into gear (long night).
331923
:) I didn't mean immediately, but when you are able to...
A normal twostroke goes flat as it runs out of blow down time area. So if you have an engine that will apparently bypass this requirement, how?
What limits the mass flow capability of blowdown making the area so critical? I'd expect it to be the speed of sound. Although I enjoy thinking about these things, I don't claim expertise, so I may be wrong. I do like the idea of reeds in the transfer ports...
Ok, make one and show us.
I will. Once I get around it, I will post the results, whatever they are. That may take some time with our project though.
In the spirit of this thread however, here's what I intend to try:
Contracting the exhaust area to mach 1 at distance from the bore, where there is room for expansion after it. I'm probably already there with 0.8 exit area with single port. Likely I wont need to shrink the port further.
Starting from contraction increase the area with mild convex shape. At distance of 0,93*diameter of the contraction should be at 1,425*area of the contraction and continue with mild concave shape aiming 1,52*Ac at distance of 1,25 Dc. This area should match the diameter of the header. Errors in the high side with lengths and low side with areas should have less risk of spoiling the results afaik.
Will need to measure and calculate if I can get the contraction and header diameters to match properly while keeping the contraction small enough.
So, anyone willing to have fun in my expense before I get there is welcome to do so. It's foil hat or chocolate fish. Although I have no idea where that chocolate fish thing comes from.
I'm a bit worried though. Nothing more fun than ww public embarrasment. :)
Edit: Whether the nozzle should be closer to the cylinder and way smaller to actually help blowdown, I don't know... Doing that would allow bigger area ratios for higher speeds though, so it shouldn't take away from the total mass flow.
Frits Overmars
24th July 2017, 22:14
What limits the mass flow capability of blowdown making the area so critical? I'd expect it to be the speed of sound.
Speed of sound and available time.
In the spirit of this thread however, here's what I intend to try:
Contracting the exhaust area to mach 1 at distance from the bore.. Starting from contraction increase the area with mild convex shape....
Will need to measure and calculate if I can get the contraction and header diameters to match properly while keeping the contraction small enough.I think there is still a lot to be found there.
Jannem
24th July 2017, 22:23
I think there is still a lot to be found there.
Available time could be extended with transfer reeds like Flettner suggested...
331923
How did the ex port area of the cylinder compare to the area of the contraction?
Frits Overmars
24th July 2017, 23:34
Available time could be extended with transfer reeds like Flettner suggested...
How did the ex port area of the cylinder compare to the area of the contraction?Reeds in the transfer ducts would give too much flow resistance, and decreasing the transfer angle.area like Flettner suggested will cost power.
Anyway, he was talking about high-pressure scavenging as a consequence of a small under-piston volume, and we haven't got anything like that.
The exhaust port area in the Malossi cylinder you are talking about, equals Ř 26,3 mm; the contraction in the exhaust duct was Ř 24 mm. But that is hardly relevant because:
A- It's the blowdown area that counts and not the total exhaust port area.
B- The exhaust outflow is only sonic over a part of the total blowdown period.
C- the contraction in the exhaust duct not only plays a part in flow energy recovery; it also influences the Helmholtz frequency of the exhaust system,
so you cannot vary it at will; you'll have to find a compromise.
Jannem
24th July 2017, 23:55
Starting from contraction increase the area with mild convex shape. At distance of 0,93*diameter
This area should match the diameter of the header.
It's been long time since I tried to get my head around SS nozzles, but the reason for convex expansion was that it was less sensitive for disruption of ss flow and in this case it also flows better backwards which is needed for pipe action.
Match to header diameter for same reasons.
Michael Moore
25th July 2017, 03:38
i think it was jan that once said blowdown can be improved without enlarging the window but rather by making the passage geometry better.
How common is the use of a flow bench among 2T tuners? Scott Clough uses one, and they are a normal part of 4T cylinder head porting, but I've rarely seen anyone mention using them to optimize 2T port shapes.
cheers,
Michael
Frits Overmars
25th July 2017, 05:19
How common is the use of a flow bench among 2T tuners? Scott Clough uses one, and they are a normal part of 4T cylinder head porting, but I've rarely seen anyone mention using them to optimize 2T port shapes.Maybe because they do not want to alert their competitors? Joking apart, I know several good tuners without a flow bench. But the best in the business swear by it.
Jan Thiel even used it to flow cooling systems.
breezy
25th July 2017, 07:09
...........
Norman
25th July 2017, 07:20
A normal twostroke goes flat as it runs out of blow down time area. So if you have an engine that will apparently bypass this requirement, how?
More exhaust time area can be had if you blocked up the transfers. The blow down phase could continue all the way to BDC, and what a lot of time area we would have there. Now pressure is low enough, open the transfers.
If the crank case is a low volume high pressure unit, transfer will shoot up.into the cylinder, inertia might be such that transfer will continue well past the normal time transfer stops right up until when the transfers shut. Normally wasted stroke as I understand transfer is usually all over by 30 degrees ABDC. We are shifting the phasing around.
How do we shut the transfers off until the pressure equalizes? One way valves (reeds) in the transfers, that's how. We are not dealing with a soft inlet pules like a standard large capacity crank case, the inlet will be much sharper (and powerful) like a fourstroke. Fourstroke don't have extra cylinder capacity to shove the extra fuel air into like a crank case but yet they over fill their cylinders somewhat by the powerful induction inertia.
A short rod will help this.
This was suggested early but for what ever reason didn't stick. With what we know now its more relevant than ever, in my opinion.
What if everything sort of takes place at an higher pressure/pressure diff level? If we have a high compressed crankcase just before TPO and the pressure in the cylinder is a higher (not too far off the transfer) due to the comparably small exhaust port. Cylinder pressure (and some exhaust) will be pushed into the transfers, but as the volume there is much smaller than on a conventional engine, the pressure in the transfers will increase quick and also delay the inflow of exhaust into the transfer but also delay the outflow of the fuel/air mix. Next, we will have a bounce back in the other direction. The exhaust (first part) in the transfers will to a large extent go out together with the cylinder exhaust "left over". The mix in the transfers, behind the exhaust part of the gas ther, will very strongly be pushed into the cylinder as the pressure in the transfer decreases. At the same time the exhaust port opening is narrowing which means that a relatively limited amount of the fresh mix escapes. I have learnt here that not that much more mix than the volume from the transfers goes into the cylinder. But in this case this load has a pretty high pressure and at a fairly low temperature. The quick inflow will swirl for good mixing between fuel and air. What do you think?
shnaggs
25th July 2017, 08:29
Lucf, How is the Ryger on reed longevity??? If all our assumptions are correct, the Ryger must eat reeds for breakfast, brunch, elevenses, lunch, afternoon tea and dinner:crazy:
Haufen
25th July 2017, 08:37
What if everything sort of takes place at an higher pressure/pressure diff level? If we have a high compressed crankcase just before TPO and the pressure in the cylinder is a higher (not too far off the transfer) due to the comparably small exhaust port. Cylinder pressure (and some exhaust) will be pushed into the transfers, but as the volume there is much smaller than on a conventional engine, the pressure in the transfers will increase quick and also delay the inflow of exhaust into the transfer but also delay the outflow of the fuel/air mix. Next, we will have a bounce back in the other direction. The exhaust (first part) in the transfers will to a large extent go out together with the cylinder exhaust "left over". The mix in the transfers, behind the exhaust part of the gas ther, will very strongly be pushed into the cylinder as the pressure in the transfer decreases. At the same time the exhaust port opening is narrowing which means that a relatively limited amount of the fresh mix escapes. I have learnt here that not that much more mix than the volume from the transfers goes into the cylinder. But in this case this load has a pretty high pressure and at a fairly low temperature. The quick inflow will swirl for good mixing between fuel and air. What do you think?
The more recent types of gardening and forrest tools work like this. Some even use stratified scavenging, so that they scavenge exhaust gas, then air and then mixture of air and fuel. Trapping efficiencies of above 90% of the fuel are not uncommon with these engines, whereas 80% (on the pipe) would be very good for a conventional 2-stroke.
Unfortunately this gives hot and diluted mixture for the combustion process. Not a big problem for the lower specific output of these engines, but for high power you'd want cold and pure mixture.
Larry Wiechman
25th July 2017, 08:57
How common is the use of a flow bench among 2T tuners? Scott Clough uses one, and they are a normal part of 4T cylinder head porting, but I've rarely seen anyone mention using them to optimize 2T port shapes.
cheers,
Michael
Do any of the modern simulation software packages allow flow data as an input?
These electronic manometers coupled with a rotary encoder look very tempting.
http://cavanaughracing.com/cdproflow.html
2T Institute
25th July 2017, 14:38
How common is the use of a flow bench among 2T tuners? Scott Clough uses one, and they are a normal part of 4T cylinder head porting, but I've rarely seen anyone mention using them to optimize 2T port shapes.
cheers,
Michael
Say hello to Scott next time you see him and tell him we have chicken soup in Australia :laugh:
This ain't suck/squeeze/bang/blow world in a two stroke at least 2 things are happening at any 1 point in the cycle a gain in one area usually leads to a loss in a opposing area. Lots of work for no net gain. Next one is as Frits enlightened many of us years ago, it isn't just the raw number of the flow out of the duct to look at it's what happens after those streams exit the ducts and interact with one another.
Next we don't need to optimise our shapes, just look at a RSA cylinder and that is as optimised as you can get.
The dyno is as good as any, if it doesn't make more power decide if its worth pursuing. 3D CFD is far more enlightening its not that cut and dried as more flow more power
jamathi
25th July 2017, 19:06
How common is the use of a flow bench among 2T tuners? Scott Clough uses one, and they are a normal part of 4T cylinder head porting, but I've rarely seen anyone mention using them to optimize 2T port shapes.
cheers,
Michael
The first flow bench I got was at Garelli, in 1982, I learned a lot from it.
When I started work at Aprilia I was amazed there was no flow bench.
But one was bought very quickly....
Very good, above all, for exhaust duct development!
A smaller duct with more flow always improved power!
For scavenging it does not make much sense....
As the various flows must slow down each other.
But we did it anyway, to check eventual differences.
It was also helpful for improving the cooling system.
As the water circulation must be as quick as possible, to prevent hot spots...
No cylinder ever left Aprilia without having been flowed!
The exhaust duct was flowed with the piston in different positions:
1mm open, then 2 and 3mm, the blowdown, fully open.
And the auxiliaries and the central ducts separately.
The transfers were flowed with the piston in 4 positions
25% open, 50%, 75% and fully open
TZ350
25th July 2017, 20:24
And he was correct. In a regular exhaust, where the area in the pipe side of the contraction is not shaped like a supersonic nozzle, you will get shockwaves in the contraction when flow speed reaches mach 1, choking the flow to the speed of sound.
If you have the area behind the contraction shaped correctly, the flow speed will break the sound barrier and accelerate to supersonic speeds taking energy from the heat of the fluid, effectively cooling it.
The whole fun in this is that it's all is achievable from a piece of scrap metal turned in a lathe to fit your exhaust pipe into the cylinder. Can there be any simpler and non-intrusive modification to be tested with better potential?
Sounds great, Jannem if you get to make and test one, please post the results.
Tim Ey
25th July 2017, 21:48
It was also helpful for improving the cooling system.
As the water circulation must be as quick as possible, to prevent hot spots...
No cylinder ever left Aprilia without having been flowed!
Jan, I am curious. How much needed the cooling circuit of the cylinder to flow on a bench to be stated a good cylinder?
What were your boundary conditions?
Regards
Tim
Frits Overmars
25th July 2017, 23:48
These electronic manometers coupled with a rotary encoder look very tempting. http://cavanaughracing.com/cdproflow.htmlNice stuff; it will ease operating a conventional flow bench.
It won't however correct the shortcomings of a conventional flow bench: much lower pressures and temperatures than in a firing engine, and no pulsed flow.
marsheng
26th July 2017, 00:10
haufen let me ask something about the extension. on each end where its machined down to fit inside the arm. the machining will produce sharp inner corners. do you think i should make these inner corners have a small radius instead or it isnt critical ? i always thought a crack can form at sharp corner but maybe this situation isnt a big deal. cheers mate
Remember that aly looses a lot of strength when welded. It softenes quite a bit. Some structural bits are heat treated to get the strength back.
MattPatterson
26th July 2017, 01:00
Hi Guys,
This is my first post here. Spent many an evening trawling through this thread. Have to say, the knowledge and tips that have been shared is astonishing, and long may it continue.
Great to see the projects people are working on too.
The only trouble is that I should be working and not reading this thread, but there's so much to learn that work will have to take a back seat until I'm all up to date. And as it's 8pm here in Thailand, I think that I'm allowed a tea break.
Cheers.
breezy
26th July 2017, 08:47
Has anyone ever heard of a ' lean burning 2 stroke engine"... past or present?:sherlock: i read recently about 4 stroke lean burners wondered if it had been tried on a 2 stroke...
philou
26th July 2017, 09:57
Informations for flowbench => http://www.hpt-sport.us/goflow.htm
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.