ltljohn Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 So what do you engineer types know/think about this concept?? Brickley Engine Link to comment
DaveTheAffable Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 So what do you engineer types know/think about this concept?? Brickley Engine I... dunno. In a traditional engine I understand the piston skirt having friction, but for the rest of it there are only two friction points. The wrist pin, and the crank. On the Brickley I counted 4 pivot points, and two shared pivot points per piston. That makes equiv 5 pivot/pressure/energy transfer points per piston. Then again, he's an engineer, and I'm just affable. Link to comment
Calvin (no socks) Posted December 20, 2008 Share Posted December 20, 2008 Looks like a nightmare. Design is one thing, manufacture and production is another. Build one, design a valve train that has low friction, get all the bugs out, make it pass emissions without melting. Refine materials for longevity, test and certify. I have worked on some farked up, complicated beyond belief machinery. Engineers make it work, mechanics keep it working when the real world interacts with the design.....This makes electric cars look good... I'm no engineer...I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night...but it looks like it came from the century before the last century, reminicent of an oil derrick or V-twin. Asbestos underwear on! Link to comment
Couchrocket Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 OK, Mitch... we're waiting! Link to comment
Quinn Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 Sounds like he needs to write to Ford or Chryler. I understand that they're looking for some new ideas. Link to comment
bakerzdosen Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 I'm sure it's just me, but that video looks a little, um, well, let's call it "suggestive" or "bump and grind-esque." Link to comment
Ken H. Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 Seems like it would be a bit of a packaging challenge with the pistons so high above the crankshaft, no? Link to comment
bmweerman Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 I am no engineer, but that seems like a lot of reciprocating mass to be throwing around the top end. Link to comment
ShovelStrokeEd Posted December 21, 2008 Share Posted December 21, 2008 Might work at the speeds shown in the video but, piston skirts have a reason for existence. Namely stabilizing the piston in the bore to eliminate ring flutter. I also see a goodly number more pivots in the system than a conventional crank layout. Each of those adds some friction. Also a lot of mass floating around that has to be started and stopped. Maybe less than a conventional engine but, I don't like lots of parts and there are lots of parts in this configuration. Link to comment
ltljohn Posted December 21, 2008 Author Share Posted December 21, 2008 Might work at the speeds shown in the video but, piston skirts have a reason for existence. Namely stabilizing the piston in the bore to eliminate ring flutter. I also see a goodly number more pivots in the system than a conventional crank layout. Each of those adds some friction. Also a lot of mass floating around that has to be started and stopped. Maybe less than a conventional engine but, I don't like lots of parts and there are lots of parts in this configuration. Those issues are addressed in the text. Link to comment
Albert Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Might work at the speeds shown in the video but, piston skirts have a reason for existence. Namely stabilizing the piston in the bore to eliminate ring flutter. I also see a goodly number more pivots in the system than a conventional crank layout. Each of those adds some friction. Also a lot of mass floating around that has to be started and stopped. Maybe less than a conventional engine but, I don't like lots of parts and there are lots of parts in this configuration. Those issues are addressed in the text. Hmm, he indicates he's reduced the number of connecting rods from 4 to 1. While this may be true in a purely semantic sense, in reality it appears he's just moved the complexity and friction points "above" the single connecting rod. In fact there appears to be many more sources of friction in this design than in a traditional piston - rod - crank design. Based on a picture (even a nice moving one) I can't say if friction is reduced but I'd be skeptical until I saw more than the designer's claims. Link to comment
motoguy128 Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 I am no engineer, but that seems like a lot of reciprocating mass to be throwing around the top end. I agree, lots of reciprocating mass. I'm thinking redline will be around 2000RPM. That's stepping bakc to the 1920's in engine performance. Wer already dop this with engines used for pumps genrators, construction equipment. This engine might have some practical application as a low speed positive displacement metering pump that needs a lot of inertia with high viscosity fluids. Newtons Law also tells me that no matter the number of pivot points, you will still likely have a similar amount of friction when trasnfering a force from linear to rotational. So you're only spreading the load form 5 pivots points to 3, which in some cases can increase overall friction. Link to comment
FlyingFinn Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 I'm sure it's just me, but that video looks a little, um, well, let's call it "suggestive" or "bump and grind-esque." No it's not just you. Somehow that engine animation looks like it should be R rated.... -- Mikko Link to comment
Mister Tee Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 All I can say to the guy is go ahead and build one, and show us some real performance numbers. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.