ESE's works engine tuner

[Flettner]

weld the red areas was my plan. is the roof and floor of the manifold supposed to flat like the cylinder exit ? i was just going by how the rsa looked. from what i understand, stainless needs a different welding rod than regular steel. ive got some water on the manifold to see if any rust forms. worst case i may have to get a few different rods and see which one works

Use MG 600's

[senso]

A friend of mine makes exhaust pipes and for either steel(zincor) or stainless he always uses stainless welding rods, but not sure if they are 304 or 316 but I think it is 316 stainless ER something something.

That cylinder is looking great, I assume that in the water jacket there is a huge boss to allow some wall thickness for the hole that you plugged, will you grind that boss to reduce wall thickness?
It seems like you have some 10-12mm of wall thickness in the center of the main exhaust port duct.

[husaberg]

I know how it's done, with a rocker arm ( Ryger ). As Frits said simple, piston and rod are one as we decided before but forget that complicated crank within a crank idea. Round conrod comes down through the "sealed off from oil" guide bush under the piston then terminates at a rocker arm. This arm is anckored at the area where the case reed used to be, there is a solid looking plate covering that hole that looks like it could be more than just a crank case seal, I think something is attached to it. The crankshaft could be connected to this rocker arm further down the fulcrum so the crankshaft stroke is less than 54mm. The problems with bigends are not so much combustion load but load from centripital force so less stroke, less centripital force at higher rpm, no problem with increaseing the combustion load ( leaverage from the arm ). The attachment to the case ( plate ) would need a small secondary linkege to allow for the fact that the lever arm pivots. This attachment linkage could be adjustable to make the piston move higher or lower in the cylinder ie low rpm or high rpm also having a useful effect on the compression and port timing, on the fly. Tell me I'm right!
And I still think they are using combustion pressure to " excite " the crankcase pressure at higher rpm where there is not enough blow down time and higher transfer pressure is needed, probably through a fine wire mesh to take out some of the combustion heat.

And done right you could have a fast / slow piston movement, like an old shaper, fast one way slower the other. Perhaps help with blowdown time?

To be fair, Ken Seeber was the one who noticed the thick alloy cover over the bottom reed housing.

Neil My current take (version 3876)is no crankcase at all. But a reed cavity that extends under the reed valve where the original crankcase reed was.
It is driven by either a diaphragm or as illustrated bellow a flapper valve which has variable linkage stroke or speed.
This flapper runs at 2 or 4 times the crankshaft speed to compress and recompress the mixtures (the reed makes sure there is no reverse flow.)
This mixture which has been compressed into the transfers feed direct to the cylinder allows for faster cylinder filling.
The rate of compression of this mixture,as it is controlled by a variable eccentric is thus speed dependant. So it thus very clean.
I have seen no claims that suggest the Ryger mets FIM rules. so I see this as a valid supposition.
This way the bottom end can be conventional with just a plain big end and pressure feed.

This fits in with what the Ryger looks like.

[wobbly]

Yes, you need to shape the manifold floor/roof as per the exit, and this shape as well as the side port ducts need to taper
down smoothly all the way to nothing at the face where the header starts.
I have tested this numerous times and a proper oval to round transition always makes more power than having the steps.
Even if the manifold is stainless I would weld it with soft mild steel rod, as the stainless material is hard as hell ans a complete bitch to grind.

[peewee]

did some digging and found the ER312 rod is used to join stainless to regular steel. so ill just use that, as it will weld to this manifold regardless what meterial it is. hopefully it isnt to difficult to grind. might do a test run on some scrap to see how easy it grinds. ok so the manifold floor and roof should match the exh exit, no steps. then transition to round at the exit of the manifold. got it . i hate to even ask but why was the rsa125 not that same way ?


senso thnx mate. yes there is a large boss in the water jacket above the exh hole that i grinded out. i didnt even think of it but now the hole is gone maybe i should grind that boss down. anyways today i added alittle more material on the sides just to be sure. got some alloy tubes of various sizes to cut length wise and weld back over the side water jacket

[speedpro]

I know how it's done, with a rocker arm ( Ryger ). As Frits said simple, piston and rod are one as we decided before but forget that complicated crank within a crank idea. Round conrod comes down through the "sealed off from oil" guide bush under the piston then terminates at a rocker arm. This arm is anckored at the area where the case reed used to be, there is a solid looking plate covering that hole that looks like it could be more than just a crank case seal, I think something is attached to it. The crankshaft could be connected to this rocker arm further down the fulcrum so the crankshaft stroke is less than 54mm. The problems with bigends are not so much combustion load but load from centripital force so less stroke, less centripital force at higher rpm, no problem with increaseing the combustion load ( leaverage from the arm ). The attachment to the case ( plate ) would need a small secondary linkege to allow for the fact that the lever arm pivots. This attachment linkage could be adjustable to make the piston move higher or lower in the cylinder ie low rpm or high rpm also having a useful effect on the compression and port timing, on the fly. Tell me I'm right!.

An interesting idea. Re the attachment to the case being a secondary linkage - The problem I see with that is that you then rely on the piston and the bush the rod passes through to locate the bottom part of the rod so that it only moves vertically. If the rocker arm case pivot was fixed and the small secondary linkage was at the rod end of the rocker arm and connected to the bottom of the rod, any forces exerted on the rocker arm by the crankshaft conrod trying to move it horizontally, due to rod geometry, would be resisted by the solidly fixed pivot. Ideally the rocker arm would be as long as possible which would reduce the effects of it pivoting and therefore the horizontal displacement at the rod end. That does put more moving parts and more reciprocating mass at the end of the rocker arm.

The Watts linkage is another thought, with the crankshaft conrod connected to the lower arm at some point inboard of the vertical link. The vertical link at it's centre essentially moving only vertically and connected to the rod to the piston. It would remove any thrust loads from the bush caused by linkage geometry.

A thought I had was along similar lines to Neil in that there was a rocker arm, free to pivot at one end, and with a link at the other to connect to the rod that goes through the bush and seal to the piston. My idea though was that the connection to the crankshaft was via a pin extending each side of the rocker arm fitted with bearings that ran in mirror image tracks machined into the inner faces of the crank wheels. You could machine any track profile you wanted and create dwell at BDC and have a favourable ramp on the power-stroke side that extracted the most power given the pressure rate profiles. Of course there is probably a very good reason why that has never been done. One of which is obviously the precision required in manufacture and assembly. The 2 "crank" halves would be connected together through the centre as there is no rod that rotates through there.

[Flettner]

An interesting idea. Re the attachment to the case being a secondary linkage - The problem I see with that is that you then rely on the piston and the bush the rod passes through to locate the bottom part of the rod so that it only moves vertically. If the rocker arm case pivot was fixed and the small secondary linkage was at the rod end of the rocker arm and connected to the bottom of the rod, any forces exerted on the rocker arm by the crankshaft conrod trying to move it horizontally, due to rod geometry, would be resisted by the solidly fixed pivot. Ideally the rocker arm would be as long as possible which would reduce the effects of it pivoting and therefore the horizontal displacement at the rod end. That does put more moving parts and more reciprocating mass at the end of the rocker arm.

The Watts linkage is another thought, with the crankshaft conrod connected to the lower arm at some point inboard of the vertical link. The vertical link at it's centre essentially moving only vertically and connected to the rod to the piston. It would remove any thrust loads from the bush caused by linkage geometry.

A thought I had was along similar lines to Neil in that there was a rocker arm, free to pivot at one end, and with a link at the other to connect to the rod that goes through the bush and seal to the piston. My idea though was that the connection to the crankshaft was via a pin extending each side of the rocker arm fitted with bearings that ran in mirror image tracks machined into the inner faces of the crank wheels. You could machine any track profile you wanted and create dwell at BDC and have a favourable ramp on the power-stroke side that extracted the most power given the pressure rate profiles. Of course there is probably a very good reason why that has never been done. One of which is obviously the precision required in manufacture and assembly. The 2 "crank" halves would be connected together through the centre as there is no rod that rotates through there.

At the attachment of the rocker to the case there is a second smaller linkage that allows for this side movement, at right angles up or down to the main rocker. This small linkage would be say 20mm long ish. By adjusting the attachment point ( to the case ) of this small linkage you will adjust where the piston stroke occurs in the cylinder, a bit like a seesaw. This adjustment could be by a small eccentric as not much movement would be required and not much force needed.
Simple and easy to build.

I'll have to try and draw something bugger it!

[speedpro]

I fully understand the adjustment system. That adjustment could also be used in my suggested ideas. The "fixed" pivot for the rocker arm would actually be able to move vertically by say about 2mm. It could be varied with revs or load.

[Ocean1]

A friend of mine makes exhaust pipes and for either steel(zincor) or stainless he always uses stainless welding rods, but not sure if they are 304 or 316 but I think it is 316 stainless ER something something.

304 is normal for car exhaust tubing, (the tube itself). 316 tends to work harden and crack, (the tube and the weld).

I use 309 rods to weld mild/medium steel to stainless, a practice I copied from an experienced pro, seems to work OK all things being equal. All things being no stress risers/sudden sectional changes etc.

[Frits Overmars]

"spiritual father"... is the original ideas man still with us?

No need to die first in order to become a spiritual father, Breezy. Harry Ryger is alive and kickin' the two-stroke community.

Frits has gone quiet, you must be close

Your logic leaves something to be desired Yow Ling, just like the wifi on the Sachsenring circuit, where I spent the past couple of days, left something to be desired.
I didn't go quiet by choice, mate.

so the manifold floor and roof should match the exh exit, no steps. then transition to round at the exit of the manifold. got it. i hate to even ask but why was the rsa125 not that same way ?

The RSA indeed had steps at top and bottom of the cylinder/manifold junction; something to do with evolution I'd say, like why men have nipples. But I am with Wobbly on this one.
Moreover, the RSA's exhaust port shape as it has become known through the numerous pictures, is not the latest version; the final version had the port floor raised even higher.

[Frits Overmars]

having a device that controles the volume of the crankcase in the same way as an exhaust valve - so only working in different rev-ranges, like a controlable solenoid that makes the volume smaller or larger- should have been possible/permitted in GP125's ? so at lower rev's a smaller crankcase volume that increases the crankcase preasure and lowers actual blowdown-time (as Frits says, there might be more blowdown than needed at low revs).

I know how it's done, with a rocker arm ( Ryger ). As Frits said simple, piston and rod are one as we decided before but forget that complicated crank within a crank idea. Round conrod comes down through the "sealed off from oil" guide bush under the piston then terminates at a rocker arm. This arm is anckored at the area where the case reed used to be, there is a solid looking plate covering that hole that looks like it could be more than just a crank case seal, I think something is attached to it. The crankshaft could be connected to this rocker arm further down the fulcrum so the crankshaft stroke is less than 54mm. The problems with bigends are not so much combustion load but load from centripital force so less stroke, less centripital force at higher rpm, no problem with increaseing the combustion load ( leaverage from the arm ). The attachment to the case ( plate ) would need a small secondary linkege to allow for the fact that the lever arm pivots. This attachment linkage could be adjustable to make the piston move higher or lower in the cylinder ie low rpm or high rpm also having a useful effect on the compression and port timing, on the fly. Tell me I'm right!
And I still think they are using combustion pressure to " excite " the crankcase pressure at higher rpm where there is not enough blow down time and higher transfer pressure is needed, probably through a fine wire mesh to take out some of the combustion heat. And done right you could have a fast / slow piston movement, like an old shaper, fast one way slower the other. Perhaps help with blowdown time? To be fair, Ken Seeber was the one who noticed the thick alloy cover over the bottom reed housing.

Neil My current take (version 3876)is no crankcase at all. But a reed cavity that extends under the reed valve where the original crankcase reed was. It is driven by either a diaphragm or as illustrated bellow a flapper valve which has variable linkage stroke or speed. This flapper runs at 2 or 4 times the crankshaft speed to compress and recompress the mixtures (the reed makes sure there is no reverse flow.) This mixture which has been compressed into the transfers feed direct to the cylinder allows for faster cylinder filling. The rate of compression of this mixture,as it is controlled by a variable eccentric is thus speed dependant. So it thus very clean. I have seen no claims that suggest the Ryger mets FIM rules. so I see this as a valid supposition. This way the bottom end can be conventional with just a plain big end and pressure feed. This fits in with what the Ryger looks like.

An interesting idea. Re the attachment to the case being a secondary linkage - The problem I see with that is that you then rely on the piston and the bush the rod passes through to locate the bottom part of the rod so that it only moves vertically. If the rocker arm case pivot was fixed and the small secondary linkage was at the rod end of the rocker arm and connected to the bottom of the rod, any forces exerted on the rocker arm by the crankshaft conrod trying to move it horizontally, due to rod geometry, would be resisted by the solidly fixed pivot. Ideally the rocker arm would be as long as possible which would reduce the effects of it pivoting and therefore the horizontal displacement at the rod end. That does put more moving parts and more reciprocating mass at the end of the rocker arm.
The Watts linkage is another thought, with the crankshaft conrod connected to the lower arm at some point inboard of the vertical link. The vertical link at it's centre essentially moving only vertically and connected to the rod to the piston. It would remove any thrust loads from the bush caused by linkage geometry.
A thought I had was along similar lines to Neil in that there was a rocker arm, free to pivot at one end, and with a link at the other to connect to the rod that goes through the bush and seal to the piston. My idea though was that the connection to the crankshaft was via a pin extending each side of the rocker arm fitted with bearings that ran in mirror image tracks machined into the inner faces of the crank wheels. You could machine any track profile you wanted and create dwell at BDC and have a favourable ramp on the power-stroke side that extracted the most power given the pressure rate profiles. Of course there is probably a very good reason why that has never been done. One of which is obviously the precision required in manufacture and assembly. The 2 "crank" halves would be connected together through the centre as there is no rod that rotates through there.

At the attachment of the rocker to the case there is a second smaller linkage that allows for this side movement, at right angles up or down to the main rocker. This small linkage would be say 20mm long ish. By adjusting the attachment point ( to the case ) of this small linkage you will adjust where the piston stroke occurs in the cylinder, a bit like a seesaw. This adjustment could be by a small eccentric as not much movement would be required and not much force needed. Simple and easy to build.

I can see there are several great minds at work here. No doubt you could design a triple-overhead desmodromic five-stroke with threedimensional variable valve timing, but keeping things simple seems to be more difficult than that.
I hope you will permit me to use the above quotes when I ever get around to putting the Ryger history in book form, so we can all have a good laugh, looking back on it.

[husaberg]

I can see there are several great minds at work here. No doubt you could design a triple-overhead desmodromic five-stroke with treedimensional variable vale timing, but keeping things simple seems to be more difficult than that.
I hope you will permit me to use the above quotes if I ever get around to putting the Ryger history in book form, so we can all have a good laugh, looking back on it.

I thought mine was simple, it even had a drawing of sorts.........

[Frits Overmars]

Are you trying to tell me that you don't want to be in the book, Husa?

[husaberg]

Are you trying to tell me that you don't want to be in the book, Husa?

Well I wouldn't go that far just yet. (Small h remember)
I would rather be remembered for that one time I was actually right about something though.

Ps should Pewee look at the FPE engine in regards to the EX outlet.
Where is Mr Paykart it would be nice to hear his thoughts on the Ryger?

[Frits Overmars]

Ps should Pewee look at the FPE engine in regards to the EX outlet.

That would be quite instructive, even though the FPE is based on the 'regular' RSA engine.

Where is Mr Paykart it would be nice to hear his thoughts on the Ryger?

Maybe Francis hasn't even noticed the commotion about the Ryger yet; I didn't write a single letter about it on his 'home' forum www.pit-lane.biz.
In fact I didn't start the Ryger tumult on any forum; I had intended not to spread any rumours until I could back them up with facts, but I was forced to react on posts that others started spreading.