ESE's works engine tuner

[steamroller]

I will post a link but are you 190% sure it is timed correctly?

That was my first thought can not find much about them but my mate did have a motor so just went off that one

[husaberg]

That was my first thought can not find much about them but my mate did have a motor so just went off that one

A guess is you have lowered the reciprocating weight of the piston assembly and also raised the Revs, (plus changed the frame) id say you will have adjust the balance factors on both the crankshaft and the balancer weights.

[steamroller]

A guess is you have lowered the reciprocating weight of the piston assembly and also raised the Revs, (plus changed the frame) id say you will have adjust the balance factors on both the crankshaft and the balancer weights.

Had it on the track today with out one in; it mint down low and up top but mid range its bad

[41juergen]

Frits, if I remember correct you have made an own design of piston pin plugs, made out of PEEK may be? I'm looking for some plugs for my engine and would have access to (standard, means not GFK reinforced) PEEK but no good idea about the design. So if you allow me to ask you if you could give me an idea (or may be sell that idea :- ) )how that plugs would need to look like. Of course I would be able to design "some" plugs but I'm afraid if they would fail (and most probably the first design(s) will) that the engine will be destroyed...
wbr from Hanau
Juergen

[jasonu]

Hi people,

I have a KR150 motor that runs a balance shaft that I would assume would run smoothly. We have put a CNC barrel on it based off a Honda RS125, and now run a 125 piston in it. The motor however now vibrates really badly.

Any suggestions? Is there a ratio to how much weight we should take off the balance shaft to compensate for the 125 piston?

Post a few pictures please.

[F5 Dave]

Regan, as a simple experiment, disconnect the balancer. See where that moves the vibration.

[TALLIS]

I have a KR150 motor that runs a balance shaft that I would assume would run smoothly. We have put a CNC barrel on it based off a Honda RS125, and now run a 125 piston in it. The motor however now vibrates really badly.

Any suggestions? Is there a ratio to how much weight we should take off the balance shaft to compensate for the 125 piston?

I balance my shaft with two large low slung weights. I guess you wouldn't know anything about that. But yes the bike was great on pipe but mid corner was givin some bad vibrations. very good platform to start with.

[MotleyCrue]

If exhaust gas is purposely mixed with the fuel and air mixture, for HCCI which it seems like it is, why bother then with the usual A, B, C porting arrangement to get good cylinder exhaust scavenging which would defeat the purpose.

Why not just aim A, B, C at the exhaust port and blow as much fuel air mixture as possible right out the exhaust port forgetting the whole loop thing then stuff it ALL back into the cylinder so none of the fuel air mixture is left in the port when the port closes. On a regular engine this would go against the grain but the Ryger engine has HCCI, needs no power valve and a regular length pipe seems to work to unheard of rpm levels so somehow stuffing all the mixed up fuel, air and exhaust back into the cylinder before port closing might be realistic.

The fish arent biting so I cant tell if it is over the top, or if it is hitting too close to home to be officially commented on.

[breezy]

so the emissions tested at 5000rpm, if an engine /exhaust system is designed for full power, maybe 10,000 plus. with this engine good emissions results seem wrong. the exhaust only works proper at 10,000 rpm ish.... as the super charging effect is best at 10,000 rpm ish. . the stuffing back of fuel pulled into the exhaust header can only be pushed back best at its designed length....at lower rpm it doesn’t work , it hits the rising piston and probably goes out the stinger as unburned fuel.. no good for emissions..... so could having a port in the piston below the rings on the exhaust side allowing this fuel to return into the area below the piston at the lower rpm be of benefit, if the pressure below the piston at that point is lower than the returning pressure wave from the exhaust wouldnt it just love to pour into that space...?? wouldnt we be in the area of diverging / converging areas. and whilst increasing speed of pressure flow not increasing bulk flow.( my interpertation of a previous post with info from wobbly).

[MotleyCrue]

so the emissions tested at 5000rpm, if an engine /exhaust system is designed for full power, maybe 10,000 plus. with this engine good emissions results seem wrong. the exhaust only works proper at 10,000 rpm ish.... as the super charging effect is best at 10,000 rpm ish. . the stuffing back of fuel pulled into the exhaust header can only be pushed back best at its designed length....at lower rpm it doesn’t work , it hits the rising piston and probably goes out the stinger as unburned fuel.. no good for emissions..... so could having a port in the piston below the rings on the exhaust side allowing this fuel to return into the area below the piston at the lower rpm be of benefit, if the pressure below the piston at that point is lower than the returning pressure wave from the exhaust wouldnt it just love to pour into that space...?? wouldnt we be in the area of diverging / converging areas. and whilst increasing speed of pressure flow not increasing bulk flow.( my interpertation of a previous post with info from wobbly).

Seems to make some sense to me, except Frits said looking in the exhaust port we wouldnt see anything unusual moving the piston top to bottom. I think thats what he said, but I am not sure, those little tidbits of info are spread out all over the place and my memory is not the best.

Also with HCCI and a lean mixture (I'd bet they use a lean mixture as well as exhaust and ultra retarded timing to make the HCCI work), any fuel air mixture that does not get put back into the cylinder or crankcase through the exhaust port might actually burn in the pipe. Might. If it does then emissions would still be good and fuel economy while not perfect would still be better than for a regular two stroke due to the recycling effect.

Even if this is not in the Ryger engine, I think it still has some merit, blow the motherload as directly as possible into the exhaust port through the cylinder then stuff it all back in somewhere, some into the cylinder and some into the crankcase, % of what goes where depends on rpm. Probably with this setup the regular size stinger could support 70 HP which seems to be what the Ryger is using.

Thing is at severe overrev nothing gets stuffed back into the crankcase but instead fuel air mixture gets pulled out of the crankcase into the exhaust. If there is enough raw fuel air mixture sitting in the port when the exhaust opens next time around it could light off and make the pipe work better by sort of exploding down the pipe reaching the converging cone sooner so the pipe sort of works at insane revs. Maybe there is a point of balance reached.

[mr bucketracer]

Regan, as a simple experiment, disconnect the balancer. See where that moves the vibration.

we did , was better without it , good up stairs but mid range was ugly , just put it back in and took a pot luck guess at machineing meat of the weights, still vibrating but 50% better as a guess over what it was

[TZ350]

My pick is that the balance shaft and crankshaft should each be 50% of the reciprocating mass (piston assembly plus upper conrod). So that at mid stroke the balance shaft and crank balance out each other and at TDC and BDC together they balance out a 100% of the reciprocating mass.

Early on Thomas demonstrated how to balance a single cylinder crankshaft. Some of the early posts below.

Looking at the connecting rod it is easy to see that the Big End goes round and round and is all rotating mass. And the little end goes up and down and is all reciprocating mass.

Pic-1 Find the weight of you're Reciprocating Mass.

Then Balance Factor C = A/B ........

The KISS method of balancing a single cylinder 2 or 4-stroke. Its all in the pictures:-

And a bit more to think about:

The percentages quoted are "mass".

The forces generated by the reciprocating mass increases linearly as a function of the rate of reciprocating.

The force generated by the rotating mass increases as a square of the rate of rotating.

Therefore, even though at standstill the rotating mass only exerts a force equal to say 60% of that exerted by the mass of the reciprocating parts, as the engine speed increases the forces generated by the rotating parts increases at a greater and greater rate and eventually equals the force being generated by the reciprocating parts. If engine speed continues to increase the forces generated by the rotating parts will exceed the forces generated by the reciprocating parts. The forces mathematically only equal each other at a single engine speed. We want that speed to be close to the operating speed.

On a single the forces at 90deg to the cylinder bore are unopposed regardless of the % used as there is no force generated by reciprocating parts to oppose them. 90deg V-twins are wonderful.

Reminds me of Phill Irvings comments on page 107 " It is quite useless to postulate any particular balance factor as being the ideal; so many considerations enter into the matter.............................do not be misled into rebalancing your engine just because one of your pals with an entirely different machine thinks he has some magic formula"

"Suck and See" seems to be a big part of getting the engine balancing right.

[husaberg]

we did , was better without it , good up stairs but mid range was ugly , just put it back in and took a pot luck guess at machineing meat of the weights, still vibrating but 50% better as a guess over what it was

Might be a good idea to take a squiz at the crank as well Scott.

[speedpro]

I've also found having the engine solidly mounted helped. My theory at the time was that the original slightly flexible engine mount allowed the engine to get a "buzz" going. When solidly mounted it couldn't get the whole bike "buzzing". As has been said there is no real slid magic % as there are lots of factors affecting the vibrations. You should be reducing counterbalance on both the crankshaft and the balance shaft. In the direction of piston travel the masses act in unison but at 90 degrees they counteract each other. If you remove mass from only one then you will be altering that counteraction which is at 90 degrees to piston travel. Irrespective of piston weight and rpm they probably should remain at about the same ratio.

[Frits Overmars]

Frits, if I remember correct you have made an own design of piston pin plugs, made out of PEEK may be? I'm looking for some plugs for my engine and would have access to (standard, means not GFK reinforced) PEEK but no good idea about the design. So if you allow me to ask you if you could give me an idea (or may be sell that idea :- ) )how that plugs would need to look like.

For what engine, Jürgen? Jan Schäffer of Langtuning or Martijn Stehouwer of Emot might be able to supply you with the type of piston plug you need.
Re the material: it'd not PEEK. I wish; the stuff I finally found most suitable is a lot more expensive.
The pics show the plugs in a FOS-piston and a comparison of the Pankl RSA-piston pin and a FOS-plug.