If it's water-cooled it's no longer a vintage mower / go-kart / mini-bike engine . (I might get away with a water-cooled head)
I could use any 175 cc engine, I've got a nice KDX sitting in the shed, but there's nothing very memorable about that.
Back to Cooling, ultimately the're all air-cooled, the water is just a heat transfer medium.
But I believe I need 3300 X the amount of water to absorb the heat, so 82500 litres of air/min.
I haven't found a figure for the flow restriction of a radiator, but say 50%. and assume its heat transfer ability is 100%.
Now I need 165 m3/min. or 2.75 m3/s. In my application, I'd need a radiator around 500mm2
and another 3hp.
Another interesting option would be to duct that mass flow of air over the engine, add the 50% (25 hp) of 'wasted heat', then nozzle it out the back, and generate 40lb of thrust. Add to that, the wasted heat out through the exhaust, say another 10lb and now I've got 50lb of thrust. (222 newtons)
If the bike weighs 500lb (186kg, with me aboard
Ok maybe 200) I can accelerate at 1.2 m/s and reach target velocity in around a minute.
No! actually I've still got the engine power as well, so
50hp equivalent. Target velocity in 25 secs, Terminal velocity in 39.
That's the Right Stuff!
Regarding the tubing ducts, (I'm sure I was just postulating & never, ever threatening), I remember Jan wishing that the internal radii could be Much Larger than was available in the RSA cylinders. Problem solved. Plus, I'll have a cooler charge because they are insulated and not in contact with the cylinder walls. ( Try some silicon oven mitts, they're great.)
If the tubing ducts are reluctant to start flowing, once they are flowing they should also be reluctant to stop?? Couldn't that increase the pressure at the port and the initial transfer flow acceleration at Tr opening?
Might need to adjust the diameters to achieve harmony at peak rev.
I could put cable-ties around the hoses and adjust them progressively.
My Brain Hurts,
cheers, Daryl.
Bookmarks