ESE's works engine tuner

[Larry Wiechman]

Is that 38 M/Sec at peak torque, peak HP or maximum RPM?

[wobbly]

Peak power.

[Lightbulb]

some more of the CITS engine here,

http://citsengine.com.au/?page_id=274

It is a pdf of the parts.

http://citsengine.com.au/?page_id=163

[Ocean1]

Your forum name gives it away Ocean1: you think big when it comes to fluids.

Rhino3D hydrostatics are a bit crude. How hard can it be to include an option to output volumes in Litres or cubic Metres?

Oh dear, I must be wrong too

My 10 second, very approximate calc was 129l, assuming original units are cm.

127.5 liters if the "back" is vertical and all lengths are perpendicular to this surface.
According to Catia that is...and after correcting the units from the "default" mm to cm.

And there I found my mistake and crawl back under my rock...
123.3l is a nice number.

Cant run Catia on my iPhone so if a 3D model is of any use you can send a PM.

I made an arbitrary guess re the end panel angles based on the side elevation.

Some modeling app's have mobile versions but the ones I'm aware of are just mesh viewers, no geometry.

[peewee]

Make a dummy out of Polystyrene and work out its displacement Archimedes style.
Or just measure the area you can of it as a squere or rectangle and then average out the additional area into a square or a rectangle.
When I just to measure odd paddocks I just used to brake them into shapes I could easily measure. (Pre GIS)

not long after i posted i realized i could make a dummy from plexiglass fairly easily. this may be the fastest way as my math skills arent very good

frits it may as well be a motorhome since it isnt even running yet when i find some time ill get photos

[SwePatrick]

Interesting

I posted this earlier in thread, but no one gave it much attention

[bjorn.clauw.1]

Ha Ha, yes the wife is not too keen on my home made gyro engine. But what? rely on a Rotax? I don't think so!

Hi flettner, don't know if you have found this (again lengthy) study on hcci. It applies the principle to an existing 2 stroke. Makes for some interesting reading.

https://www.google.be/url?sa=t&sourc...xm0aQkfYmpyUXg

[Frits Overmars]

Hi flettner, don't know if you have found this (again lengthy) thesis on hcci. It applies the principle to an existing 2 stroke. Makes for some interesting reading.
http://www.google.be/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://firebrand.me.berkeley.edu/thesis/chen_thesis.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiqtJO9pcfKAhUKWBQKHX0CBDAQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNGGwXmjgpBSqnGWjcYbvVkzCqo2pw&sig2=GHGFJqbExm0aQkfYmpyUXg

Another paper worth reading. Keep 'm coming Bjorn .

[jfn2]

I asked this in another forum and I'll post it here.
What is the general consensus about how this engine makes better power? Is it from the HCCI combustion process, or due to the piston compression process of the smaller lower cylinder volume?
Also am I wrong in thinking that this engine still needs good blowdown timing since it still is using a rather large divergent pipe therefore still needing the sub exhaust ports?

[JanBros]

it doesn't have sub exhaust ports, maybe this will help you figure out the answer
(I'm not smart enough to give the real answer )

[2005bully]

Some of those directly involved with the project are certainly more adept in answering your question. So this might be going out on a limb. First off we know that the peak power of a conventional 2 stroke relies heavily on the draw from the pipe, we also know in current configurations large case volumes often increase power, and they do so by having a greater volume of mixture available for the pipe to draw from the crankcase. If the primary pump volume were reduced to be ridiculously small, then as the transfer ports open the mixture enters the cylinder with a lot of velocity. Since there is only a small volume available this transfer happens very quickly. (Remember Newtons law where matter in motion wants to stay in motion?) This low volume high velocity mass that has been transferred wants to stay moving, and creates a low pressure behind it in the small primary pump volume. Since the primary pump volume is fed by the reed cage this low pressure reopens the reed valves and pulls additional mixture straight into the cylinder. This additional mixture is delivered to the cylinder with out any mechanical pumping losses. Much of the same principle as how pulse jets operate. Since the most obvious advantage of the concept relies on velocity, the effect would become greater as the velocity is increased.... i.e. higher rpm's.... Hope this answers your questions and feeds more discussion...... Kermit Buller

[Flettner]

Some of those directly involved with the project are certainly more adept in answering your question. So this might be going out on a limb. First off we know that the peak power of a conventional 2 stroke relies heavily on the draw from the pipe, we also know in current configurations large case volumes often increase power, and they do so by having a greater volume of mixture available for the pipe to draw from the crankcase. If the primary pump volume were reduced to be ridiculously small, then as the transfer ports open the mixture enters the cylinder with a lot of velocity. Since there is only a small volume available this transfer happens very quickly. (Remember Newtons law where matter in motion wants to stay in motion?) This low volume high velocity mass that has been transferred wants to stay moving, and creates a low pressure behind it in the small primary pump volume. Since the primary pump volume is fed by the reed cage this low pressure reopens the reed valves and pulls additional mixture straight into the cylinder. This additional mixture is delivered to the cylinder with out any mechanical pumping losses. Much of the same principle as how pulse jets operate. Since the most obvious advantage of the concept relies on velocity, the effect would become greater as the velocity is increased.... i.e. higher rpm's.... Hope this answers your questions and feeds more discussion...... Kermit Buller

I described this process as augmentation, but you word the process much clearer, thank you.

[MotleyCrue]

Do we know for 100% certain that ALL of the flow from the back end of the carb goes through the reed ? The integrity of the drawings is a bit suspect. Is it possible that only some of the flow goes through the reed ?

[Peter1962]

Do we know for 100% certain that ALL of the flow from the back end of the carb goes through the reed ? The integrity of the drawings is a bit suspect. Is it possible that only some of the flow goes through the reed ?

Are you referring to a system comparable to the 1977 suzuki RG 50 with its mix of reed valve and piston port induction ?
But the part of the mixture that does not pas by the reed valve, would need some sort of compression, otherwise it would just be a new application of a technique from almost 40 years ago ?

[MotleyCrue]

Are you referring to a system comparable to the 1977 suzuki RG 50 with its mix of reed valve and piston port induction ?
But the part of the mixture that does not pas by the reed valve, would need some sort of compression, otherwise it would just be a new application of a technique from almost 40 years ago ?

I'm not familiar with the RG50.

I was thinking the piston ported portion of the flow would go under the Ryger piston and be highly compressed by the Ryger piston exiting either all or certain transfers into the cylinder. The reeded portion of the flow would not be compressed by the piston but would operate primarily with exhaust suction through several or all transfers in the cylinder. That way the reed could be accessed by the B and C transfers and maybe the A transfers too, very quickly with the shortest possible route reed to cylinder while still having the high under the piston compression feature.

The reed would be positioned so as not to block or interfere with any of the piston ported flow. The reed wouldn't flow anything until well after the piston ported flow stopped. The piston ported flow would stop going under the piston at maybe 70 degrees after TDC and the reed flow wouldn't start until BDC or so. Am I missing something ?