electromagnetic radial engine

Anyone intrested in putting my theoretical electromagnetic radial engine to an educated stop ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

hmm

Are you suggesting that you invented that?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

too mechanic.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

whats the electromagnetic part? what makes it diffrent from a normal radial engine? explain how it works?

 

radial config.may not be the answer

The piston/cylinder is almost exactly like a speaker drive system. The contacts at the top and bottom of the cylinder would have +/- leads which would complete the current for a strong, split secound burst of energy. This would be like conecting a speakers + to your spark plug wire and - to ground.
Obviously using a small coil from a speaker would give you a one time blast and a blown speaker. But using a larger winding capably of handling such a large burst of energy coupled to a much stronger fixed magnet should in theory create some controlable power.

The fact that this engine relies on spark plug type bursts
of energy instead of continous draw is what makes this theory intresting. When your charging system dies in your car your engine runs longer then even your dome light.
To me meaning burst type electrical power is more efficient than constant draw.

I am starting to think maybe a cylinder much like a hydraulic ram design with two drive windings on either side with some kind of rack and pinion gear drive to turn side to side movement into rotation. Two free spin gears with the two pistons connected.
This type of design shouldn't be as rev limited as the crank system correct ?
When the pistons moved left, a rack gear would drive one free spin gear and then when the pistons moved to the right they would drive another. Thus creating rotation.
But how would you fit such a gear drive into an 8" cylinder?
The caps on either end of the cylinder could take care of the flux and give the piston a slide guide.
The fact that a audio speaker drive system can move at lightning speed leads me to believe that this configuration should be comparable with it taking into consideration there would be more friction and weight to drive.

 

So basically you integrate the alternator into the piston heads to that as the pistons move they produce electricity? Thus removing then need for a alternator and making electrical generation more efficient? Why can't this system be used in in-line configurations?

 

Not exactly. The idea is to create an engine based on a permanent magnet housing an electromagnet. The permanent magnet has a fixed polarity. The electromagnets polarity can be switched from + pole to negative pole, and quite quickly I mite add.
An electric motor uses a constant current with no stored energy or potential energy. Which in theory would make this concept more efficient as long as you can turn the back and forth movement into rotation efficiently.

 

If i understand this, you are trying to replace the electric motor, not the engine. Correct?

-AntonK

 

I'm trying to design an engine that will run using less energy than it produces (physical or electrical). By effectively using the constant stored energy, fixed magnets have.

 

ok...now I've lost interest. Just so you know. Thats impossible. Energy has to come from SOMEWHERE. Your guesses that using electricity that has been capacitated then released very rapidly could indeed work. I'm not sure. I'd have to do the math on it. But there is no possible way without pulling energy from some UNKNOWN place to get more energy out of your machine than you put in. Stop trying.

-AntonK

 

Wait a minute don't all engines use less energy then they produce? I mean if the engine uses more energy to move and crank then it can burn the engine would not run! I think he means he wants to make the engine more efficient... not trying to make a perpetual motion machine, right?

 

Perpetual motion machine, that would be the best case scenario.
The power needed to energize the electromagnetic windings in this drive system would be similar to an ignition system in your car.
12v 110 amp is plenty of power to run any electromagnet. Now if you put that electromagnet inside a fixed magnetic field and charged the electromagnet each time it hit the end of the pistons travel point in opposing polarities your electromagnet/piston should travel back and forth.
Now using a rack and pinion system with two free spin pinions and two seperate racks you would get rotation.
Now if that rotation was powerful and could drive an altinator that kept your 12v battery charged would you have perpetual motion ?

 

Don't tell me your stupid enough to think you can accually do that?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Stupid yes my Grade 9 education does limit me to the real world. What in my simple little world works now?
Loudspeakers work, the electromagnet on my 100 metric ton charge crane works with 200 amps, high rmp rack and pinion systems work in military safety doors.

 

Well you did come up with a good idea, lets hope its not patented so that I can patent it.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Here's a simple diagram for you.

 

If you are thinking of running your engine without an expanding
fuel mixture, what is pushing the piston thru the complete stroke?
If it is an electromagnetic engine, you would need a series of magnets
around each cylinder, energized in sequence to pull the piston down,
something like how a particle accelerator works. I can't see how that would be efficient, though. Maybe I don't understand, just my immediate thoughts.

 

Of course you could make an electrical motor in a radial piston configuration, although I would suggest you put the permanent magnets in the pistons and let the coils be stationary (saves you the trouble of routing current to the moving parts). And of course you might make it run on high-energy pulses instead of constant current.

But what makes you think it would be more effective? A watt-second is a watt-second. You can draw a thousand watts for a millisecond, one watt for a second, or a milliwatt for a thousand seconds; in all cases you will have used a watt-second.

There are some functions that are more effective in the pulsed mode, but it is not an inherent property of pulse mode, and electromagnets are not among them, quite the opposite, as you will have a lot of induction problems to deal with.

This seems obvious to a technician, but it may not be to others: You cannot have an electric motor run a generator to replenish its own power-source. The reason is that no motor and no generator is 100% effective; there will always be losses. So even without an external load, energy will bleed away from the system, eventually halting it. If you try to extract power, it will, of course, stop even quicker.

Hans

 

oh I don't believe in the perpetual motion thing but this design does eliminate the need for a starter motor and alternator.

 

Basically you've built a less efficient electric motor. Are you aware that electric motors also use permanent magnets and have the advantage of not losing so much energy in friction like your motor.