The invention relates to a rotary machine with eccentric piston, that can be a pump, compressor, pneumatic motor, hydraulic motor or internal combustion engine.

I cannot post links.Please go to YouTube -rotary piston engine tarnaveanu emil-
I'm expecting your opinions.

Heloooo.....,anybody there? :confused:

I looked at it and yes it looks way to complicated the Wankel rotary is far better.

hmmm......:rolleyes:

Are you sure?
Please can sombody put the link from wankel from wikipedia and rotary piston engine tarnaveanu from youtube .
Thanx.

I heard that GM killed the Wankel engine for whatever is the reason.

I heard that GM killed the Wankel engine for whatever is the reason.

Money, they could sell the other engins, for more profit.

But you may see a come back in the future.

Mazda produced a few recent generation cars with them in them.

It is a Rotary Piston.It is mor that engine.
Ex pump+hydraulic motor= hydraulic transmission of torque

Piston will be attached to the engine , acting as a pump, while another piston will be attached to the wheel, acting as a hydraulic motor , whereas a liquid will circulate between the two pistons through a flexible cable, without the need to use axis and toothed wheels.

Can i move this thread to General Science & Technology ?

Can i move this thread to General Science & Technology ?

Do you consider the topic - not engineering?

Please have patience.My English is not good.I use Google translation.
I posted this thread in order to convince you how important is the rotary piston.
Then I ask for help engineers to make it work this principle.( My specialty is industrial automation engineer.)Are used to working in the community becauseI'm able to do an automatic system, I must first understand the principl and what the engineers wants.
I've been on different forums on the web.I was kicked out before I can say something, without saying why.
One told me:Spam endorsing concept engine.I do not understand why.
For several days I stop and think what happened to people?What is wrong with them?Or I am wrong?
So, if someone is willing to carry a conversation and try to make rotary piston functional, I am ready.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrbDU_n1jqM

Read more on rotary engines here (http://www.mazdausa.com/MusaWeb/displayPage.action?pageParameter=modelsMain&vehicleCode=RX8#/performance/renesisRotaryEngine). This is a commercial engine. If you have some new ideas, talk to Mazda.

That is the problem.
Everyone understands: rotary piston =engine.
Rotary piston is not a engine..
Ex:With rotary piston you can have a hydraulic transmission off torque.(really so important)
You can have high yield pump,etc.
I know perfectly Wankel engine.
If I wrong somewhere, please delete it and warned me where I was wrong.
The second time I do not.

Provide a detailed sketch what you are talking about.

I will give patent which unfortunately is in Romanian.
The drawings are correct.
The operating principle is translated into English.

The invention relates to a rotary machine with eccentric piston, that can be a pump, compressor, pneumatic motor, hydraulic motor or internal combustion engine. According to the invention, the rotary machine has a cylindrical piston (1) mounted in a cylindrical housing (2) tangent to the inner cylindrical wall of the cylindrical housing (2), the cylindrical piston (1) being provided with a sealing piece (3), wherein a rotary blade (4) can glide, said blade being integral with a driving shaft (5) whose rotation axis concides with the axis of the cylindrical housing (2), the rotary blade (4) being in permanent contact with the inner cylindrical wall of the cylindrical housing (2); between the rotation axis of the cylindrical piston (1) and the axis of the cylindrical housing (2) there is provided an eccentricity (e).

http://bd.osim.ro/pdf/122000-/122100-/122160.pdf

I asked the name of rotary piston, patent office gave the name:ROTARY MACHINE WITH ECCENTRIC PISTON.
Classification received the patent is (2006.01) F01C 1/348 and secondary (2006.01) F04C 2/348.
It really so important.Search other patents with such classification.
Until now is not reciprocating rotary piston.Wankel is pistonless rotary engine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_piston_engine

If you are the inventor, go to your government or an engineering college, build a prototype and see if there is a higher efficiency than normal IC engines. Report back. I have a contact at Lancia, we could do something about it.

Our government is busy with something else now.
We have not engineering college.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXZuRB4P-x8

Using rotary piston in building cars, is one of usability.
As so important is its use in obtaining electricity.
The simplest is using it to pump.
His efficiency is much greater than any pump.
It uses a lot of energy to power a city with drinking water.

I read the theard "electric/water powered cars coming yet?"
At the end I wanted to talk about the engine but I do now.

I present my opinion about a new engine.

The first step is to develop source of compressed gas at a pressure of 4At-6At.
Little pressure to not need cooling and small loss to discharge gas.
Four-stroke engine abaut:loses 40% of energy is lost through cooling,also 30% is lost through the flue gas discharge,32% of energy goes to wheels.Mechanical losses and incomplete combustion 8%.
Put a burner in the tank.Mixture of intake is taken from a rotary piston
and fed into the burner of tank.(This is the principle. I think the air will be compressed and the fuel will be injected).
Fuel can be anything that arde.Butan, alcohol, gasoline, oil, etc..
Burner must be for cobustibilul used.
Until now, could not ensure efficient combustion airflow needed
to 5At.Rotary piston can.

So,5At pressure is maintained with an automated system.

A rotary piston is attached to pressure 5At.
Rotary piston is usable area 100mm x 100mm = 10000mm = 100cm square square
Force 500Kgf = 5x100 = 5000N
200mm arm = 20cm
torque results 5000 / 5 = 1000N / m

High speed (20,000 rpm-30, 000rpm) and give a great power.
We can put a lower rotary piston or a lower pressure

Believe me,the other uses off rotary piston are equally spectacular.
The following article has many mistakes, but mostly true.

http://technicalstudies.youngester.com/2009/03/rotary-piston-invention-that-could.html

Using rotary piston in building cars is spectacular but not the most important.
My view, the most important use of the rotary piston is in power.
I am convinced, that we can produce at least 50% more electricity, regardless of power, hydro, thermal or nuclear power.
The idea is replacing turbines with rotary pistons.
In my opinion rotary piston would take energy more efficient than turbines.
If I did wrong, please tell.
I can not do anything until I am convinced I'm right.Others do much more for our planet.
If I'm not right, and you convince me also is well,I can relax.

I heard that GM killed the Wankel engine for whatever is the reason.
Crappy apex seals killed the Wankel. Particularly with the raised combustion chamber pressures of turbocharging, which was all but necessary to generate sufficient torque to move a car.

The Wankel was never "dead" by any means. It just wasn't accepted by the mainstream due to reliability issues inherent in the design.

Well seals can be improved and because power to volume/weight ration is very good in a Wankel, small power tools like portable power generators, Lawn Tractors would be an ideal application.

The Renesis engine in the RX-8 supposedly isn't too bad, but I don't know how much of that is due to improved seals and how much is due to it being naturally aspirated.

I know a few people who've turbocharged their RX-8s without any issue, but they're all running low-ish levels of boost (0.5 bar or less).

Tightness is one of the advantages of rotary piston.
All contacts are on the surface.Not a line,a generator as the Wankel.
Rotary blade has radius equal to radius cylindrical housing.
Contact between rotary blade and cylindrical housing are on surface.
Cylindrical piston is not tangential to the cylindrical housing,they are secant.
Contact between cylindrical piston and cylindrical housing also are on surface.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrbDU_n1jqM&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXZuRB4P-x8&feature=related

How would you balance something like that? The moment of the piston changes through the rotation. Would you use a balance shaft like a piston engine?

It does seem like a neat idea. If they can get a Wankel engine to work, this thing should be a lot easier.

What you've presented is operating principle.
Rotary piston has features depending where it is used( pump, compressor, pneumatic motor, hydraulic motor or internal combustion engine)
It is nonlinear and is not balanced.
To linearized or balance:
is mounted on the same shaft, one after another, two (or more) identical rotary pistons, but the blades are 180 degrees from one another.
When one is up other is the minimum.When one increases the other decreases.
Narrowing in valves area is a problem.
For liquids valves will be placed elsewhere.

The Wankel engines Mazda uses have two rotors opposed to each other. I don't think they use a balance shaft or harmonic balancer.

How efficient is an engine like this? Brake-specific fuel consumption (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_specific_fuel_consumption)?

I had a rotary piston compressor for airbrushing plastic models when I was a kid, which I took apart once, so I am familiar with how the parts work.

Only this rotary piston has vane fixed to the shaft.
Not a four-stroke engine,Otto or Diesel.
Is a new engine.
I try to recover losses by: cooling and flue gas discharge.

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2547626&postcount=17

The most beautiful piston machine.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Walschaerts_motion.gif


I could watch those motions for hours...

Yes, indeed it is a pleasure to watch.
But also I'm like piston rotary.It is very simple and elegant.
I started working for about nine years to rotary piston.
I worked five years at the rotary piston.I have made many variations.Among the first was one like Minh Nguyen's.I was not happy either.
I can now say that a technology has muse as artists.
After five years working in a few hours I managed to make the rotary piston.
I was lucky? It was a muse?
Look, once again at the simplicity and the efficiency of the rotary piston.:)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrbDU_n1jqM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXZuRB4P-x8&NR=1

Emil, as I understand you, your "blade" serves two functions:
(1) It moves in and out thru the seal of the eccentric rotating piston, which is a circular cylinder, to seal the high pressure side from the low pressure side as the eccentric piston rotates.
&
(2) It transfers the rotational torque to the shaft.

Even though in one 360 turn it travels much less than the Wankel's seal going around the full circumference, I think all this seal wear can be eliminated by separating these two functions. I will let your creative mind work on how to couple the rotation of eccentric piston to the shaft (It is my bed time in Brazil now.) Probably an eccentric gear on the shaft will do - just don't have time now to think more on this.

The rotation is always in one direction. Thus for the high/low sides pressure seal function, why not have a small region of negative curvature on the outer circumference of the eccentric piston - I.e. a cavity into which the FLEXING seal (no seal friction sliding in and out) can recess entirely when the blade would normally be fully inside the eccentric piston. 180 degrees of rotation later, this flexing seal would be fully extended out of the rotating cavity of the eccentric piston.

Of course the tip of your blade will wear as it "scrapes" around the ID of the stator cylinder so it needs to be spring loaded. Likewise the seal of that folds out of the cavity to touch the ID will wear and the folding out can also be spring action (not just flex) But make it a few mm thick so still makes a good seal with the ID even when a mm thinner.

Hope this is clear and not too silly just because I am sleepy now. I will check back tomorrow if you have questions. If you take up my modification, you can cut me in on a tiny fraction of your profits - I think your idea has a lot of potential.

Emil, your YouTube demo with link in post 16 is excellent. However, I will give few words, for English readers which probably are in your patent to call attention to one easily over looked, but essential, aspect of your rotating piston machine.

The exterior of the rotating piston is one solid piece but two circular cylinders of different radii. I.e. a single circular cylinder has had one end machined down to a smaller diameter. This smaller diameter section slips inside a cylinderical cavity that has been machined in the stator block, however, the axis of this cavity in the stator block is NOT concentric with the main larger cavity cylinder of the stator block (or the drive shaft axis). The radius of smaller end section of the rotating piston is very slightly smaller than the radius of the small cavity eccentrically located in the stator block, but the size of these two nearly equal radii is not critical. (could be larger or smaller).

To be specific I will create some symbols:
The main large block's cavity has radius R.
The OD radius of the larger section of the eccentric rotating piston is r. (r < R)
The separation or displacement of the axis of the small cavity machined in the stator block from the axis of the main shaft (and from the axis of the stator block's main cylinder with radius R) is d.

The relationship between these three is: d+r is almost R. Thus as the piston rotates, d+r is always in contact with the ID of the larger stator block cylinder, except for thin oil film between whose thickness is f.

I.e. the exact relationship between these four is:

r+d+f = R.

PS for Emil: In the unlikely case that you do not know, OD and ID are standard abbreviations in English for Outer Diameter and Inner Diameter.

Thanks for your attention.
I ask you to write short sentences and no abbreviations.My English is pretty bad.
My experience over the net with rotary piston is daunting.
From Automotive Forum, after two posts, I was kicked out, with the following explanation:Spam endorsing concept engine.
On eng-tips and engineeredge forums,I was kicked out after two posts, without saying why.
I do not understand why.
I post on rotaryforum ,energeticforum and physicsforum but I have not found anyone to inquire about the rotary piston.
I'm not sure I understand what you wrote.

Please look at a practical implementation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXZuRB4P-x8&feature=related



I worked hard to make some files.Some essential things for rotary piston:

Rotor "eccentric" is placed eccentric but his movement is not eccentric.
The center of rotation of the vane is centered in the housing…..and not centered in the rotor . Also the vane dosen't need to rub on the housing walls as it rotates and so in this area is not rpm limited.
The vane is fixed to the shaft,no need for spring or centrifugal force so in this area is not pressure limited.
For the rotary piston ,contact between the vane and cylindrical hausing is a surface and not a line(generator).Very easy to sealed.


What you've presented is operating principle.

Rotary piston has features depending where it is used( pump, compressor, pneumatic motor, hydraulic motor or internal combustion engine)
It is nonlinear and is not balanced.
To linearized or balance:
is mounted on the same shaft, one after another, two (or more) identical rotary pistons, but the blades are 180 degrees from one another.
When one is up other is the minimum.When one increases the other decreases.
Narrowing in valves area is a problem.
For liquids valves will be placed elsewhere.

If performed four basic functions of rotary piston: pump, compressor, pneumatic motor, hydraulic motor,we can talk about applications.
I think that now I have given enough details and I expect your observation.

I am sorry you have been "kicked out" at some other forums.
I think your idea is very interesting.
I will only discuss one misunderstanding we have here:

I understand that the vane (or blade) does not really "scrape" the inner circumference of the stator cavity.

There is a film of oil, which prevents the high pressure from leaking past the tip of the vane into the lower pressure region (the region with decreasing volume if your machine is serving as a motor).

Normally for reasons of manufacturing economy (greater tolerances) there is some need to have the space between the tip of the moving vane and the stator cylinder too large for only an oil film to seal.

For example in the standard linear piston engine the space between the moving piston and the static cylinder wall is filled with several thin rings. These rings do essentially scrape the wall of the static cylinder except for a very thin film of oil. We call these rings "piston rings."

In principle one could avoid the use of these rings. Just make this space between moving piston and static cylinder wall very small (high tolerance - exact control of the piston size and cylinder size - their diameters) but that is too costly for mass production, so "piston rings" are used.

What I was suggesting with your vane is that it be spring loaded to keep the tip of the vane very close to the cylinder wall to reduce the cost of very high tolerance manufacturing.

I assume you know about standard linear motion piston rings, but will mention that they too are springs. I.e. They are not continuous rings, but have a small gap open in their circumference. This gap needs to be reduced, compressed, when they are inserted into the cylinder so they naturally expand to essentially scrape the cylinder wall.

SUMMARY: I was suggesting the exact length of your vane is not constant. That it has an internal spring trying to make it longer than the radius of the static cylinder so that it always (even after wear) is essentially in contact with the cylinder wall - only a very thin film of oil away. This is very much like the use of piston rings in a linear motion piston. It is done to reduce the cost of manufacture. I.e. the bore and piston diameters do not need to be made with very high precision as the piston rings fill the "tolerance gap"

Your vane could have very slight ability to lengthen or contract so your manufacturing costs could be lower too.

I.e. the vane would be hollow with a spring loaded inner blade inside that expands to almost make contact with the cylinder wall even if there is slight manufacturing variation in the exact diameter of the cylinder wall.

I plan to also trying to describe a more important improvement to your machine later. It is a conceptual change, not just a cost reduction suggestion. First I need to know if I can write English you can understand.

Let me know if you could understand this cost reduction point about the vane in English.

If you take up my modification, you can cut me in on a tiny fraction of your profits - I think your idea has a lot of potential.
Of course.

When I started writing post 31, yet you have not posted number 30. (OD, ID). Now I understand.
I do not have the opportunity to start a production or even to complete a fully functional prototype.(zero series)
Therefore, I am open to any collaboration.


There is a film of oil, which prevents the high pressure from leaking past the tip of the vane into the lower pressure region (the region with decreasing volume if your machine is serving as a motor).

A former colleague, mechanical engineer, made the drawing of execution in 20 hours,for the prototype what you saw on YouTube.
For him was a routine work.But he said I should talk to an engineer with specialty pumps who knows the materials used in pumps.He specializes in sewing machines.

I'm not a mechanical engineer Iam industrial automation engineer.So here I have opinions, but I'm not sure.
It takes oil if it works with gas.But it might, because of modern materials, not need oil.All movements and forces are taken bearings.Friction is only between vane and two sealing elements.


Normally for reasons of manufacturing economy (greater tolerances) there is some need to have the space between the tip of the moving vane and the stator cylinder too large for only an oil film to seal.
For example in the standard linear piston engine the space between the moving piston and the static cylinder wall is filled with several thin rings. These rings do essentially scrape the wall of the static cylinder except for a very thin film of oil. We call these rings "piston rings."
In principle one could avoid the use of these rings. Just make this space between moving piston and static cylinder wall very small (high tolerance - exact control of the piston size and cylinder size - their diameters) but that is too costly for mass production, so "piston rings" are used.
What I was suggesting with your vane is that it be spring loaded to keep the tip of the vane very close to the cylinder wall to reduce the cost of very high tolerance manufacturing.
I assume you know about standard linear motion piston rings, but will mention that they too are springs. I.e. They are not continuous rings, but have a small gap open in their circumference. This gap needs to be reduced, compressed, when they are inserted into the cylinder so they naturally expand to essentially scrape the cylinder wall.
SUMMARY: I was suggesting the exact length of your vane is not constant. That it has an internal spring trying to make it longer than the radius of the static cylinder so that it always (even after wear) is essentially in contact with the cylinder wall - only a very thin film of oil away. This is very much like the use of piston rings in a linear motion piston. It is done to reduce the cost of manufacture. I.e. the bore and piston diameters do not need to be made with very high precision as the piston rings fill the "tolerance gap"
Your vane could have very slight ability to lengthen or contract so your manufacturing costs could be lower too.


Yes, applies to internal combustion engines.Size variations should be compensated due to temperature variations.Guidance is between piston and cylinder walls.The wear that is oval and not circular.(and because Crank system)
Guidance is on bearings,for rotary piston
The engine, designed by me, has little operating temperature.It is not an Internal Combustion Engine.But I propose talking about the engine later.

Are applications even more important than the engine.


Let me know if you could understand this cost reduction point about the vane in English.
Yes, I understand.

In my opinion,the easiest would be the water pump.Current pumps, high flow, have low efficiency.Consume much of energy to supply a city with drinking water.

Emil,
Over time you are unfortunately going to have to learn English if you want to interact with the international community, it's one of the main languages used to communicate internationally now. So practive makes perfect.

Why you might of been classed as spam, is you might have been misunderstood. If you get stuck trying to write something in English, write it in your native tongue and let us work out what you mean through translators.

What you will require doing is getting some prototypes up and getting third-parties to apply them to their own applications. The condition you should have for these third-parties is that they collect data and write a summary report on their findings "as an independent" on your products capacity.

Without third-party evaluation people might assume you are a "snake oil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_oil)" salesman, so let the results speak for themselves.

Few concrete results.
Two gold medals.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs176.snc4/38128_128364173873405_107968045913018_130086_23773 06_n.jpg

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs040.ash2/35355_128364327206723_107968045913018_130089_18299 64_n.jpg

And another two medals.


http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs080.snc4/35374_128364247206731_107968045913018_130087_30343 25_n.jpg


http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs112.ash2/38923_128364383873384_107968045913018_130090_12490 45_n.jpg

Place two holes in the cylindrical housing at 45º angles to the rotary blade and extend the rotary blade across the whole diameter. Now cover up the left hole leading outward in you animated diagram. As pressure builds in the middle it would have only one escape and would also be pushing the rotary blade from both sides.

Emil, I've taken a look at the videos, but how does it work?

Place two holes in the cylindrical housing at 45º angles to the rotary blade and extend the rotary blade across the whole diameter. Now cover up the left hole leading outward in you animated diagram. As pressure builds in the middle it would have only one escape and would also be pushing the rotary blade from both sides.


No, unfortunately is not possible.
The "rotor" is driven by the blade and it has variable rotational speed,
when the palette has a constant rotational speed.
If the blade is equal to the diameter of the "stator",
so there are two blades arranged at 180 degrees,
the system would lock up.

Emil, I've taken a look at the videos, but how does it work?


The space between "stator" and "rotor" is crescent-shaped,is the useful chamber.
At first is placed the admission valve and at the end is placed the discharge valve.
This chamber is divided in two by the blade,the intake chamber and the compression chamber.
The intake chamber and the compression chamber have variable volume when
the blade rotates.

Oh. Your right. I see why. Now I just feel silly. I told you I couldn't get my head around your great design.:D

This is indeed fascinating. And you can use it for pressure-based energy storage, or plain combustion, etc.?

Yes,
can be a pump, compressor, pneumatic motor, hydraulic motor or internal combustion engine.
Many potential uses I have already written but I also give another example:
Propulsion used by the ski jet is the most efficient, but is doable.
In order to obtain higher performance jet of water we do not have such performance pumps.
With rotary piston you can get a jet of water with high efficiency and even to use for ocean vessels.
You can imagine what handling can be achieved by placing the exhaust nozzle of the jet of water in different places on the ship?

I see, this design has the key advantage of having the working fluid mechanically confined, as opposed to non-confined designs like centrifugal pumps or turbines.

Some impressive results can be obtained with electric fields acting on saltwater, however, there is thermal dissipation and the sub-breakdown voltage capacitance properties of seawater.

I see, this design has the key advantage of having the working fluid mechanically confined, as opposed to non-confined designs like centrifugal pumps or turbines.


Indeed.
The rotary piston hydraulic efficiency is 100%.
It would get spectacular results replacing turbines with the rotary piston.
Not only has much higher efficiency but is able to take the potential energy instead of kinetic energy.
If turbines from thermal,hydroelectric or nuclear power plants are replaced with rotary piston,we can obtain more electricity.

Also, if we replace the turbines from the jet engine, we get a new type of engine.

... (1)The rotary piston hydraulic efficiency is 100%.
(2) It would get spectacular results replacing turbines with the rotary piston.
(3)Not only has much higher efficiency but is able to take the potential energy instead of kinetic energy.
(4)If turbines from thermal,hydroelectric or nuclear power plants are replaced with rotary piston,we can obtain more electricity. ...While I think the idea has potential* these four statement are not correct:

(1) There is turbulence in the working fluid and it rapidly increases with the rotational speed of the engine.

(2) Turbines can achieve high rotational speed, with relatively little turbulance because their blades and the working fluid both rotate together - there is relative low velocity difference. In your engine /pump, there is a static wall for the fluid to rub against. Also your entrance and exit opening (ports) are small so there is high turbulence losses at them at high rotational speeds.

(3) That is only partially true. For example the turbines at the base of a hydro-electric dam are generating energy from the potential energy of the higher elevation water. It is true that in most this potential energy is first converted into a high speed jet of water via a nozzle but little energy is lost if it is of large diameter and smooth taper down to smaller diameter.
"... Efficiency: Large modern water turbines operate at mechanical efficiencies greater than 90% ...
Reaction turbines:
Francis Kaplan, Propeller, Bulb, Tube, Straflo Tyson, Gorlov (Freeflow types)
Impulse turbine; Pelton, Turgo, Michell-Banki ..."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_turbine

These last three (or at least the Pelton) gain their high efficiency as the jet of water has its velocity reversed (maximum change in momentum) in interaction with spoon-like blades. When these turbine blades have the same tangential velocity as the water jet, then relative to the ground the water jet leaving the spoon-like blade has zero velocity - all the kinetic energy of the jet was captured.

(4)No, you would get less energy as electric generators need high rotational speeds. If you tried to get high rotational speed directly from your engine, the internal turbulence would "eat you alive." If you used step-up gears to get the high RPM, then several percent of you energy would be lost in the gears.

Dam turbines are 90% efficient - it will be very hard, probably impossible, for you to get 91% efficiency. IN ALL practical turbines the exit path for the working fluid has very large cross section Your design has a very small exit path and great losses as the water tries to squeeze thru the tiny exit.

*For example, compared to the complex shape of turbine blades, your flat or circular surfaces are easy to machine.

(1) There is turbulence in the working fluid and it rapidly increases with the rotational speed of the engine.

Yes, it is true at high speeds.But losses are caused only due to turbulence, which also occur in a simple pipeline.



(2) Turbines can achieve high rotational speed, with relatively little turbulance because their blades and the working fluid both rotate together - there is relative low velocity difference.


No,turbines induce significant turbulence.Turbines require culvert pipes that have turbulence itroduse besides the turbines.
If there is relative low velocity difference means as the ceded power is small.



In your engine /pump, there is a static wall for the fluid to rub against. Also your entrance and exit opening (ports) are small so there is high turbulence losses at them at high rotational speeds.
What you see is the working principle.I have and the practical for different applications





(3) That is only partially true. For example the turbines at the base of a hydro-electric dam are generating energy from the potential energy of the higher elevation water. It is true that in most this potential energy is first converted into a high speed jet of water via a nozzle but little energy is lost if it is of large diameter and smooth taper down to smaller diameter.
"... Efficiency: Large modern water turbines operate at mechanical efficiencies greater than 90% ...
Reaction turbines:
Francis Kaplan, Propeller, Bulb, Tube, Straflo Tyson, Gorlov (Freeflow types)
Impulse turbine; Pelton, Turgo, Michell-Banki ..."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_turbine

These last three (or at least the Pelton) gain their high efficiency as the jet of water has its velocity reversed (maximum change in momentum) in interaction with spoon-like blades. When these turbine blades have the same tangential velocity as the water jet, then relative to the ground the water jet leaving the spoon-like blade has zero velocity - all the kinetic energy of the jet was captured.

A turbine can not directly take the potential energy.
Yes, mechanical efficiency is 90%.

Efficiency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_turbine#Efficiency)
Large modern water turbines operate at mechanical efficiencies greater than 90% (not to be confused with thermodynamic efficiency).

But how is energy efficiency?
Potential energy of the water is converted into kinetic energy and part of the energy is taken from the turbine.
Energy balance is:kinetic energy of water from exit the turbine is subtracted from the initial potential energy.With approximately we can say that:kinetic energy of the water from the turbine entry minus kinetic energy of the water from the exit is equal to the energy ceded.
So to increase the system efficiency should be reduced water velocity at the exit.
This is not possible to the systems which have turbines.






(4)No, you would get less energy as electric generators need high rotational speeds. If you tried to get high rotational speed directly from your engine, the internal turbulence would "eat you alive." If you used step-up gears to get the high RPM, then several percent of you energy would be lost in the gears.

Dam turbines are 90% efficient - it will be very hard, probably impossible, for you to get 91% efficiency. IN ALL practical turbines the exit path for the working fluid has very large cross section Your design has a very small exit path and great losses as the water tries to squeeze thru the tiny exit.

*For example, compared to the complex shape of turbine blades, your flat or circular surfaces are easy to machine.
You confused the mechanical efficiency with the hydraulic efficiency.
These two and another one (I can not remember now )give totatlitate efficiency.
Rotary piston mechanical efficiency due to friction and losses can not say exactly (but greater than 90%).

But it is important hydraulic efficiency and overall efficiency.
As I've said is just the principle of operation,many shortcomings are reduced to a practical realization.

Edit:
To understand what I want,for a water height of the dam,the water velocity from the exit of the energy receiving system(rotary piston), at constant flow, to be as small as possible.
That means a high capacity rotary piston and low speed.

... Yes, it is true at high speeds.But losses are caused only due to turbulence, which also occur in a simple pipeline. In a pipeline the velocity profile across the diameter is approximately parabolic. I.e. at the walls of the pipe the velocity (and hence the wall friction) goes to zero. In your design the velocity at the circular wall is maximum - a lot more wall friction.

... Energy balance is:kinetic energy of water from exit the turbine is subtracted from the initial potential energy. With approximately we can say that:kinetic energy of the water from the turbine entry minus kinetic energy of the water from the exit is equal to the energy ceded.
So to increase the system efficiency should be reduced water velocity at the exit. This is not possible to the systems which have turbines. No, having the turbine exit KE be essentially zero is possible and is done, at least in the Pelton type turbines.* The KE of the water leaving a Pelton turbine is essentially zero. I.e. it just falls down as the spoon-like cups it collided with move away at the tangential speed of the turbine.

Relative to the ground the water enters the cups at velocity V and they reduce the water velocity to zero, relative to the ground. Stopping the momentum of the entering water requires a force which is supplied by the cups. The third law "reaction force" acts on the cups making the torque that the common shaft applies to the generator, and this shaft is turning at high speed, as the electrical generator requires to be efficient.


... To understand what I want, for a water height of the dam,the water velocity from the exit of the energy receiving system(rotary piston), at constant flow, to be as small as possible.
That means a high capacity rotary piston and low speed.Yes that low rotational speed will reduce your turbulence losses BUT now you can not directly drive the spinning electrical generator with the same shaft. The electrical generator needs to be turning at high speed to be efficient. You will need some "step up the RPM" gears between your engine and the generator.

If your application did not require high RPM shaft, then your system may have an advantage. For example, it could slowly turn a large grind stone to convert wheat into flour, as water power did 100+ years ago. Back then they needed gears to slow the shaft RPM down. I.e. in this application, yours could be the cheaper system, IF the large volume of its circular chamber did not cost too much to make.

Effectively, in the electric generation application, you reduce the turbulence losses but will introduce new gear losses. I may be wrong, but I suspect that the new gear losses will be greater than the reduction in turbulence losses; but I am certain high speed step up gears, rated for the full peak power, cost a lot of money, which the direct drive water turbines now in use do not need pay.

*As water is essentially incompressible, the product of the flow velocity and the cross section of the tube it is passing thru is a constant. If you look at the typical turbine cross section, you will note that it is small at the entrance and large at the exit. For example if this cross section ratio is 1 to 5 then the exit velocity is 0.2 of the entrance velocity, but the KE is goes as the square of the velocity thus (0.2)^2 = 0.04 or 4% of the entering KE was not captured. That is how large turbines get greater than 90% of the energy captured. Thus, even in non-impulse type turbines, very little KE is left in the exit water, (not captured).

The Pelton and and other type impulse turbine can in principle leave zero KE in the exit water but they do have more friction losses as the water must slide around the cup surface with high speed relative to the cup wall surface as its velocity is reduced to zero, with respect to the earth. In these turbines, the water does not "leave the turbine blades" - Instead the turbine blades leaves the zero velocity water, which just falls down to get out of the way of the next blade rotating into the entering water jet. (That is slightly false as the cups are slightly tilted downward to help the water quickly leave, get out of the way, by more than gravity alone can do.)

One might also note that your design has a relatively small exit opening so the velocity thru it must be very high. I.e. you will leave a lot of KE in the exiting fluid. That is why your design may work well as a jet-ski pump.


Again, let me state I am impressed by your new engine/pump design. Especially the simple machining requirements and few moving parts. I just cannot let you make false claims for it, especially about its efficiency, which will be low compared to other designs for reasons I have discussed.

Billy T,
I admit that I am not objective because I am emotionally involved.
But any objective opinion is welcome,even if it is not consistent with my opinion.

I have searched much, so I can compare the hydraulic turbine and rotary piston.
The difference is not as spectacular as I hoped.
The efficiency of a power generator with hydraulic turbine is 60% of which 10% is electrical efficiency so remains 70% for the turbine. Calculation of Hydro Power (http://www.reuk.co.uk/Calculation-of-Hydro-Power.htm)
I believe that the rotary piston is more efficient but not spectacular.

I think it would be more beneficial to micro and small plants.(Run-off river plants and Low-Head ,less than 30 meters, Hydro electric plants)
These hydro electric plants,I think, it would be more advantageous than wind power plant.
Due to low production costs and ease of location.

Building shape would look like this:
Intake and exhaust vents are moving to reach 180 degrees.
Intake and exhaust will not be perpandiculare on the stator but will be tangential to semicircle between intake and exhaust openings.
Rotary piston will only work 180% degrees.
Outer form will be a semicircle combined with a rectangular.
Rotary piston will work on the semicircular portion and the inlet and outlet will be placed on the opposite side on the same side of the rectangle.

To linearized and balance the system two identical rotary pistons are mounted in series, one after another on the same axle.
They running alternatively each of them 180 degrees,in the semicircular portion.
From the hydraulic point of view, will be coupled in series.

I think, when using steam will be more efficient than the turbine.

Billy T,
I admit that I am not objective because I am emotionally involved.
But any objective opinion is welcome, even if it is not consistent with my opinion. ...Good. That is the correct attitude. Again for what must be the fourth time, I am impressed with your engine/pump design and sure it does have applications. Just you can not claim it is better than all others in all applications. I am essentially sure it will never economically drive electric generators, which require high RPM shaft rotations to be efficient. I suspect it will be mainly in the field of high pressure pumps, including those that are followed by a nozzle that converts the pressure efficiently into a jet for fighting fires or moving a jets ski will be attractive. I also like your suggestion that these pumps may be able to replace tug boats to steer an ocean liner into a slip at the port.

I suspect it will be mainly in the field of high pressure pumps, including those that are followed by a nozzle that converts the pressure efficiently into a jet for fighting fires or moving a jets ski will be attractive. I also like your suggestion that these pumps may be able to replace tug boats to steer an ocean liner into a slip at the port.


How about if we manage to recover water (or other liquid) so that we can reuse?
I have some ideas how to do and where we can use.

Billy T, you mentioned the problem of turbulence, and it seems to be a well-made point that I overlooked. You also mentioned that friction losses from gears amount to several percent. I'd say that's still pretty good.

Say you can transform a 300 rpm (5 rot/sec) into a 3000 rpm generator using a few gears. Or maybe none, if you have a huge output diameter for generating power. In this case the loss will be material hysteresis and aerodynamic, probably still less than 10%.

This novel 'rotary piston' may be well-suited for fluids with low viscosity, such as gases in a combustion engine. It all comes down to the Reynold's number. A microscopic engine would be well-suited for water instead of a large one.

I shall have to look this up when I get home and can run video. Thanks for the post.

It took some time, but now I get it.
The blame for such a difficult development, are the muons.

Yesterday I received.
Seoul International Invention Fair 2011, December 1-4, KOREA.

http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4458&d=1323780549



http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=4459&d=1323780561

Congratulations, Emil.

I hope that you are able to advance your design to the marketplace and be amply rewarded for your efforts and diligence. It can be very difficult to break that barrier, especially where the big players may have vested interests.

Designing technology for a more energy efficient future, I wish you the very best of luck with your rotary piston device. :)

Have you ever seen a Rotary Snow Plow in action? Pretty cool.

http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/9/0/7/1907.1305256045.jpg

Congratulations, Emil.

I hope that you are able to advance your design to the marketplace and be amply rewarded for your efforts and diligence. It can be very difficult to break that barrier, especially where the big players may have vested interests.

Designing technology for a more energy efficient future, I wish you the very best of luck with your rotary piston device. :)


Thank you much. Sometimes I need this encouragements.
I have bitten the medal, when I received , to test if it is really gold, that I can sell it. http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/17/article-0-0250E69200000578-493_306x423.jpg
(I have financial problems)

I do not think it is really gold since I was close to break my teeth. :o


Have you ever seen a Rotary Snow Plow in action? Pretty cool.

No, I have not yet seen.

Yesterday I received.
Seoul International Invention Fair 2011, December 1-4, KOREA.


Congratulations! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NjssV8UuVA&feature=related)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrbDU_n1jqM



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXZuRB4P-x8


Whoops .... it works ! :D

That is the problem.
Everyone understands: rotary piston =engine.
Rotary piston is not a engine..
Ex:With rotary piston you can have a hydraulic transmission off torque.(really so important)
You can have high yield pump,etc.
I know perfectly Wankel engine.
If I wrong somewhere, please delete it and warned me where I was wrong.
The second time I do not.


(I'm writing short sentences that should work in google translate) (what is your native language?)

I understand the principle in your video. It can work as a pump. Similar constructions already exist.

It could also be a motor, such motors are used in pneumatic tools.

It is not a new invention.

Now about Wankel engines. As somebody allready mentioned, Masda have been using it, Reneault too, so obviously it was not killed by GM. Instead, it became opsolete. You see, it is not possible ot get a very high compression ratio with an Wankel (or any other rotary type engine, for that matter), and this means that you cannot get a really good fuel economy.

Forget about whatever company (GM, Exxon, you have it) suppressing ingenious motor designs for fun and profit: The profit potential in fuel economy is huge, and if there was anything better than the conventional piston, manufacturers would be scrambling to market it first.

Hans

Whoops .... it works ! :D

I'm sure it works. It is a very nicely made prototype. However, it has a lot of moving interfaces, of several different shapes. To keep it tight, you need extremely precise engineering, and even then you will get a lot of friction.

Hans

(I'm writing short sentences that should work in google translate) (what is your native language?)
Romanian.



I understand the principle in your video. It can work as a pump. Similar constructions already exist.

It could also be a motor, such motors are used in pneumatic tools.

It is not a new invention.
The summary of the patent (http://www.breveteonline.ro/brevet/200600812-masina-rotativa-cu-piston-excentric-19196157.html):

The invention relates to a rotary machine with eccentric piston, that can be a pump, compressor, pneumatic motor, hydraulic motor or internal combustion engine. According to the invention, the rotary machine has a cylindrical piston (1) mounted in a cylindrical housing (2) tangent to the inner cylindrical wall of the cylindrical housing (2), the cylindrical piston (1) being provided with a sealing piece (3), wherein a rotary blade (4) can glide, said blade being integral with a driving shaft (5) whose rotation axis concides with the axis of the cylindrical housing (2), the rotary blade (4) being in permanent contact with the inner cylindrical wall of the cylindrical housing (2); between the rotation axis of the cylindrical piston (1) and the axis of the cylindrical housing (2) there is provided an eccentricity (e).


The patent (http://www.breveteonline.ro/brevet/pdf/200600812-masina-rotativa-cu-piston-excentric-19196157.pdf)




Now about Wankel engines. As somebody allready mentioned, Masda have been using it, Reneault too, so obviously it was not killed by GM. Instead, it became opsolete. You see, it is not possible ot get a very high compression ratio with an Wankel (or any other rotary type engine, for that matter), and this means that you cannot get a really good fuel economy.

The engine, which can be achieved with rotary piston is not a four-stroke engine (Otto or Diesel).
But leave the engine and to insist as a pump or hydraulic motor.


I'm sure it works. It is a very nicely made prototype. However, it has a lot of moving interfaces, of several different shapes. To keep it tight, you need extremely precise engineering
As seen in the second video, there are only six parts.
Is much easier to execute than a Wankel engine.

...and even then you will get a lot of friction.
Hans
I do not have the same opinion.
In your opinion, where the friction occurs? (Let's call stator (cylindrical housing), rotor (cylindrical piston), axis (driving shaft ), blade (rotary blade) and pass element (sealing piece).)

Emil: Sometime, elsewhere (PM?), I'd like to chat with you re: my linear engine . . . never got it beyond the design-drawing stage . . . but it is 'scalable; from the size of a fountain pen to heavy-duty applications . . . wlminex

RThe engine, which can be achieved with rotary piston is not a four-stroke engine (Otto or Diesel).
But leave the engine and to insist as a pump or hydraulic motor.

I think it will be essentially four stroke, but ... nevermind.


As seen in the second video, there are only six parts.
Is much easier to execute than a Wankel engine.

A Wankel engine, in principle, has only three moving parts.


I do not have the same opinion.
In your opinion, where the friction occurs? (Let's call stator (cylindrical housing), rotor (cylindrical piston), axis (driving shaft ), blade (rotary blade) and pass element (sealing piece).)

You have friction between:

- stator and blade (both cylinder wall and endpieces)
- blade and sealing piece
- sealing piece and rotor
- sealing piece and stator (endpieces)
- rotor and stator (endpieces)

And exactly all these interfaces have to be air tight.

Another problem is that you have an uneven load on the axis (because there is only one blade).

Remember that you will need to keep those interfaces airtight over a considerable temperature range (even if you don't use it as an engine).

I am not saying that your device cannot work. I am saying that it has no advantage over existing systems.

I think it will be essentially four stroke, but ... nevermind.

There is a continuous burning and not one sequential.


A Wankel engine, in principle, has only three moving parts.

Compare Wankel with Rotary Piston.


http://www.prelovac.com/vladimir/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/wankel_cycle_anim_en.gif
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrbDU_n1jqM

At Wankel, contact between rotor and stator is a line (the generator).
At rotary piston, contact between rotor and stator is on a surface and no need to rub. Similarly, between blade and stator, contact is on a surface and no need to rub.

If you should make a hydraulic transmission of torque, what do you do?




You have friction between:

- stator and blade (both cylinder wall and endpieces)
- blade and sealing piece
- sealing piece and rotor
- sealing piece and stator (endpieces)
- rotor and stator (endpieces)


-no, forces are taken by the bearing and no need to rub
-yes, but forces are insignificant
-yes, but forces are insignificant
-I do not understand, they are not into contact.
-no, forces are taken by the bearing and no need to rub

And exactly all these interfaces have to be air tight.
Yes, if used as a compressor or pneumatic motor.

Another problem is that you have an uneven load on the axis (because there is only one blade).
Yes, must be balanced and linearized using different methods. (This is just the principle and require engineering.)

Remember that you will need to keep those interfaces airtight over a considerable temperature range (even if you don't use it as an engine).
Yes indeed, but as there isn't a four-stroke engine and it has separat combustion chamber, temperature differences are small.

I am not saying that your device cannot work. I am saying that it has no advantage over existing systems.
It was awarded with gold medals since it was considered better than existing ones so far.

That's a really nice design Emil.
If you consider the cost of making a simple water pump, what lift (height of water) do you think you could obtain with a rotary pump based on your design at the same cost?
You can calculate this on air pressure, a cheap pump will create a 2 atmosphere vacuum to draw the water.

Have you ever looked at designing a 5 piston wankel engine?
(instead of triangle piston it is pentagon, and instead of 2 chambers there are 4)
I reckon you could even run a 5 piston wankel as a 3 stroke by changing the ignition sequence.

That's a really nice design Emil.
Thank you.

If you consider the cost of making a simple water pump, what lift (height of water) do you think you could obtain with a rotary pump based on your design at the same cost?
From the hydraulic point of view is unlimited. Is limited only constructively as a classic piston.

You can calculate this on air pressure, a cheap pump will create a 2 atmosphere vacuum to draw the water.
I do not understand, how can you create "2 atmosphere vacuum" ?

Have you ever looked at designing a 5 piston wankel engine?
(instead of triangle piston it is pentagon, and instead of 2 chambers there are 4)
Yes, and I think you wanted to write instead of 3 chambers there are 5.

I reckon you could even run a 5 piston wankel as a 3 stroke by changing the ignition sequence.
I do not know how 3 stroke engine work. I've never heard of 3 stroke engine.

To suck water up a pipe you need a vacuum, atmosphere is 14.7 psi pushing down on water, so 1 atmosphere vacuum is 0 psi and 2 atmosphere vacuum is -14.7 psi.
I think that's right, so you would just need to test amount of air pressure at psi your pump can produce, as it will probably create that in vacuum psi.
A 1 atmosphere pump can lift about ~3.5 meters of water, 2 atmospheres can lift ~7 meters of water.

Yeah technically it is 5 chamber, I meant the shape of the outside part, wankel is 2 round bits, I meant 4 round bits.
Made you a piccy anyway to show you.
http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff428/codex34/w2.jpg

Got another that uses a square piston with 3 round bits to the outside part.

3 stroke just means it runs as 2 stroke but misses sequence sometimes to save fuel.
It might be 5 stroke if it runs as 4 stroke and misses sequence sometimes.
Like the Cadillac Sixteen that turns off up to 12 cylinders to save fuel.

kaduseus,
LOL...1 Atm(1kgf/cm²)=0 psi(0 pounds-force per square inch)...LOL

I have not seen so many in so few words.
Your ingenuity knows no boundaries. I give up. :truce:

LOL - just hook your device to a tyre pressure guage :)
Hand digging a 20ft well for my father so became a 15 minute wiki expert in pumps.
I've seen alot of pump designs, not seen yours anywhere.
I really like that design you have, simple but effective, a bit like the semi-rotary hand pump but better because you could hook it up to a bicycle, or a windmill, and looks like it would produce alot more pressure than the standard rotary hand pumps.

Ingenuity? I thought everyone knew the principles of the wankel engine?
It's all in the gear ratios.

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff428/codex34/w3.jpg
The 4 face wankel

http://i1235.photobucket.com/albums/ff428/codex34/w2b.gif
The 5 face animated.
(you know you want to build one :D)

Hello Emil,

A genuine good luck with your work. Going from post concept to final model is never an easy task.

I do not wish to take from your post. You being a mechanical engineer may see the benefits of different form of rotory piston.
Your engineering skills I trust would have little difficulty in assembling.
All assistance provided. I now too old and too tired for continuation.

http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee397/DaSEnergy/Untitled-1.png

Cheers Peter