I think you are just confused by the animation. And what you see as the change of compression from 1 side of the vane to the other can be explained because BOTH sides of the vane are under compression (and ready to for combustion). However, the animation only shows the spark for the trailing section of the compressed chamber, giving you the impression that the compressed charge has transferred to the leading edge of the vane. The entire chamber between the vanes is compressed as it varies its shape. So, the ignition could happen anywhere within the charged chamber. Moving it to yhe trailing edge, should in theory, give the best torque advantages during rotation. As a side note, rotory vanes have been used as air compressors for decades. But will probably have sealing issues if used as a combustion engine.
Thank you so much. So first, let's establish that whether this design can be used as air compressor is not relevant to this discussion (that was in fact my first thought). I still don't get it though, the vanes are at 90 degree angle so when one chamber is compressed, the one behind it just started the compression cycle. How would it be at full compression state? I just can't visualize it.
@blackhorserepairs Look at the animation again. The compression cycle starts as soon as the trailing vane sweeps past the intake port. After that, the entire chamber begins to compress due to the changes of the outer wall geometry and the forward movement of the chamber. In theory, the compression in one chamber does not effect the next chamber. Just like the ignition of one chamber does not effect the next chamber. However, in practice, I believe sealing issues would be a problem between the vanes.
0:56 This point has also caught my attention 🙂 And after thinking a while, and a rough geometric simulation in AD Fusion 360. I came to conclusion that such an engine is a kind of mixture of a gas turbine and a 4-stroke engine with very low compression ratio (5.9 is the maximum I got during simulations), and for this reason with quite low efficiency. In addition, at the very beginning of the combustion cycle, the vane has a very small working section exposed. And the expanding combustion gases at this point will try to mechanically damage the engine to a greater extent than to produce useful work. And given the other theoretical and practical technical challenges of the engine design concept, I am not at all surprised that none of the engineers, hobbyists or professionals, have yet made a relatively functional prototype of it. PS: Yes, the Wankel engine has long been known and is even used on an industrial scale, but it is not so efficient and not environmentally friendly. And in this regard, the "LiquidPiston" rotary engine seems to me to be better candidate for further development...
Thank you so much for sharing your results. This also confirms the suggestion that there are too many forces working against the sides of the engine. This was suggested a few times. Can you share the animation of the simulation and perhaps some numbers? Thank you so much!
I’m unsure how accurate is rhe animation, however my understanding of vane motors is that it rotates in the direction of the vane with more surface area because pressure generates more force on that vane compared to the other with less area.
@@blackhorserepairs You are right. I've revisited the animation and it explains nothing. Anyway, I still don't see why it can't work as expansion will give you more energy than the compression and exhaust will consume, at least in theory. I see other problems with this gimmick like: sealing vs. thermal expansion vs. fricion, cooling of the rotor, lubrication of the inner part of the vane in the slot (compressed air vane motors run air/oil mist through inner portion of the vane instead of using springs), shape of the chamber for fuel injection (is that slanted pipe representing a fuel injector, or he has carburetor on the intake?), etc.
@@jimmius2 you need to do better than that brother, it still doesn't make sense. if 0:30 is not the compression chamber, what is? The fuel line? It is clearly separated from the area where we see combustion (on the animation). The compression MUST happen in the combustion chamber right? Or is the compressed mixture transferred somewhere?
Yes this is compressed mixture transfer to combastion chamber as compressed air transfer for (carburetor effect) air ->fuel mixture creation for incnision . This engine to work needs more air . extra managment piston only for second intake air. somehow :).
I don't see very much compression occurring, though that might not be an issue if the intake air has already been sufficiently compressed before reaching the engine. The real issue I see here is poor air fuel mixture. The combustion begins when only small a fraction of the air is in the combustion portion of the chamber. The rest of the air is pumped in over the remaining duration of the combustion (about 60° of rotation). I think the thermal expansion might be enough to make it work if there is sufficient air fuel mixture to sustain the combustion over the duration of the stroke.
After thinking about it a bit more, maybe the fuel is not injected in bursts. Perhaps the fuel is being pumped in a constant stream and actively being mixed with the fresh air that is constantly being added to the existing combustion event.
@blackhorserepairs It seems that I have managed to find how to solve the problem of insufficient compression of the "basic engine design" (see a couple of pictures on my YT channel) And, in principle, I have the parts 3D models ready on 80%, for the first prototype. I think to order them in 3D printing (SLA) at first , to check the dimensions tolerance. And, perhaps, I could be even able, somehow, to check its "pump" functionality with them...
It's a little bit of a confusing concept, but I can explain it very simply. If it only exists as an animation or 3D model or something, the answer is no. That's how it works, it doesn't. In the absence of evidence, we do not need to accept that an animation that someone on the Internet made will actually work. Once they build it and prove it works, then we can talk about _how_ it works. And no, an engine is not like a theory of physics, it's a machine, a system. For example, I'm sure there have been a lot of rockets designed to go to space, but when you look at how many rockets there have been that have successfully gone to space, there's actually not that many, and each one certainly didn't go from the first draft design to space. In any case, designing an engine like this today is kind-of like coming up with a revolutionary new idea to replace the blu-ray disc.As if that's something that the market actually wants.
Hi black horse repairs, I've posted a video on my channel with a very crude animation which shows in more depth how this is intended to work. (it seems to have uploaded as a short idk how to make it a regular video)
you think it's the main issue? I also heard that side forces would would make it inefficient, combined with poor exhaust it would make a very inefficient engine :)
I was thinking that you should have 3 vanes and use them like the wankel .....Instead of three apex you have 3 vanes...Just to start from a concept that already works....I'm thinking you could use an existing rotary housing and replace internals....
@@blackhorserepairs I don't know. I think if the end was a roller it could seal it with less friction and may not need oiling on the surface area. Trying to avoid oil/gas mix. So large roller on end of vane and a high tension spring between vane and center mass slot (crank). I think people trying to convert a vane air pump (pneumatic tool) and that won't work ... The center mass should have recess pocket like a rotor for the gas and air to go to as the air and gas gets compressed. 1. Intake Air and Fuel happen in first void, 2. Second void is Compression (Air Fuel are compressed into recess pocket 3. Ignition in 3rd void 4. Exhaust I think that is these models it's hard to see how this compression works...It's in the pocket... At least that's the way I see it. 😆
I guess you could have 6 vanes and two more plugs for a total of 4 plugs (180 out) in an imaginary vane engine...I think the 6 vanes might help the efficiency of this engine.
The animation is not done well. You can think about the space between each 2 neighboring vanes as a separate cylinder in a 4-cylinder engine, with the shorter vane acting as the head and the longer one acting as the piston.
Respectfully, i think you need to stay in your lane a bit. The concepts clearly escape you. There are no problems with the concept of this engine, only with its execution. Sealing and sealing materials are difficult, just like in the wankel engine. In the combustion cycle, the chamber is expanding again due to the shape of the outer wall. Even if the spark occurs during end of the compression cycle, just like it does in every spark ignition engine, momentum will still allow the compression cycle to finish and allow peak combustion pressures to occur in the expansion side of things. I suggest reading some books on engine theory, there's nothing inherently wrong with this. Another way to look at it, the pressure will act greatest on the vane that is furthest extended. Flame fronts have a propagation speed, it is not an explosion.
It escapes me indeed, thank you. Your analysis contradicts the other ones so not sure which one is correct 🤔 But I have devised a simplified analogy which I will share soon, that might settle this debate
Integraz already did a video on it but basically the solution is to make it have two vanes And then pin them together instead of using springs
I think you are just confused by the animation. And what you see as the change of compression from 1 side of the vane to the other can be explained because BOTH sides of the vane are under compression (and ready to for combustion). However, the animation only shows the spark for the trailing section of the compressed chamber, giving you the impression that the compressed charge has transferred to the leading edge of the vane.
The entire chamber between the vanes is compressed as it varies its shape. So, the ignition could happen anywhere within the charged chamber. Moving it to yhe trailing edge, should in theory, give the best torque advantages during rotation.
As a side note, rotory vanes have been used as air compressors for decades. But will probably have sealing issues if used as a combustion engine.
Thank you so much.
So first, let's establish that whether this design can be used as air compressor is not relevant to this discussion (that was in fact my first thought).
I still don't get it though, the vanes are at 90 degree angle so when one chamber is compressed, the one behind it just started the compression cycle. How would it be at full compression state? I just can't visualize it.
@blackhorserepairs
Look at the animation again.
The compression cycle starts as soon as the trailing vane sweeps past the intake port. After that, the entire chamber begins to compress due to the changes of the outer wall geometry and the forward movement of the chamber.
In theory, the compression in one chamber does not effect the next chamber. Just like the ignition of one chamber does not effect the next chamber.
However, in practice, I believe sealing issues would be a problem between the vanes.
0:56 This point has also caught my attention 🙂
And after thinking a while, and a rough geometric simulation in AD Fusion 360. I came to conclusion that such an engine is a kind of mixture of a gas turbine and a 4-stroke engine with very low compression ratio (5.9 is the maximum I got during simulations), and for this reason with quite low efficiency.
In addition, at the very beginning of the combustion cycle, the vane has a very small working section exposed.
And the expanding combustion gases at this point will try to mechanically damage the engine to a greater extent than to produce useful work.
And given the other theoretical and practical technical challenges of the engine design concept, I am not at all surprised that none of the engineers, hobbyists or professionals, have yet made a relatively functional prototype of it.
PS:
Yes, the Wankel engine has long been known and is even used on an industrial scale, but it is not so efficient and not environmentally friendly. And in this regard, the "LiquidPiston" rotary engine seems to me to be better candidate for further development...
Thank you so much for sharing your results. This also confirms the suggestion that there are too many forces working against the sides of the engine. This was suggested a few times.
Can you share the animation of the simulation and perhaps some numbers?
Thank you so much!
nice and informative video!! keep it up dude
Thank you so much!
Really nice video!
Great episode!
Thank you Doug, haven't seen you here in awhile :)
@ I’m always here👍
The compressed air ignition is from the next stroke to the one you are thinking about when following the compression
I’m unsure how accurate is rhe animation, however my understanding of vane motors is that it rotates in the direction of the vane with more surface area because pressure generates more force on that vane compared to the other with less area.
Thank you so much, that explains nothing :) Do you know where I can find more accurate animation?
@@blackhorserepairs You are right. I've revisited the animation and it explains nothing. Anyway, I still don't see why it can't work as expansion will give you more energy than the compression and exhaust will consume, at least in theory. I see other problems with this gimmick like: sealing vs. thermal expansion vs. fricion, cooling of the rotor, lubrication of the inner part of the vane in the slot (compressed air vane motors run air/oil mist through inner portion of the vane instead of using springs), shape of the chamber for fuel injection (is that slanted pipe representing a fuel injector, or he has carburetor on the intake?), etc.
Antimatter is the only answer
I agree with you!
Hi, in the way i see it , this (compressed vane) is not compressed air on closed chamber , but is forced air to a channel.
I don't get it. Could you elaborate?
@@blackhorserepairs 0:30 this is not copmression chamber. The air forced to move to combustion 0:40 through mix fuel - spark channel.
@@jimmius2 you need to do better than that brother, it still doesn't make sense. if 0:30 is not the compression chamber, what is? The fuel line? It is clearly separated from the area where we see combustion (on the animation). The compression MUST happen in the combustion chamber right? Or is the compressed mixture transferred somewhere?
Yes this is compressed mixture transfer to combastion chamber as compressed air transfer for (carburetor effect) air ->fuel mixture creation for incnision . This engine to work needs more air . extra managment piston only for second intake air. somehow :).
I don't see very much compression occurring, though that might not be an issue if the intake air has already been sufficiently compressed before reaching the engine. The real issue I see here is poor air fuel mixture. The combustion begins when only small a fraction of the air is in the combustion portion of the chamber. The rest of the air is pumped in over the remaining duration of the combustion (about 60° of rotation). I think the thermal expansion might be enough to make it work if there is sufficient air fuel mixture to sustain the combustion over the duration of the stroke.
After thinking about it a bit more, maybe the fuel is not injected in bursts. Perhaps the fuel is being pumped in a constant stream and actively being mixed with the fresh air that is constantly being added to the existing combustion event.
Yes, that's what I have an issue with.
Just like rotary engine it does have a chamber on the rotator
Combustion chamber (dish) in the rotor between vanes.
@blackhorserepairs
It seems that I have managed to find how to solve the problem of insufficient compression of the "basic engine design" (see a couple of pictures on my YT channel)
And, in principle, I have the parts 3D models ready on 80%, for the first prototype.
I think to order them in 3D printing (SLA) at first , to check the dimensions tolerance.
And, perhaps, I could be even able, somehow, to check its "pump" functionality with them...
amazing!
It's a little bit of a confusing concept, but I can explain it very simply. If it only exists as an animation or 3D model or something, the answer is no. That's how it works, it doesn't. In the absence of evidence, we do not need to accept that an animation that someone on the Internet made will actually work. Once they build it and prove it works, then we can talk about _how_ it works.
And no, an engine is not like a theory of physics, it's a machine, a system. For example, I'm sure there have been a lot of rockets designed to go to space, but when you look at how many rockets there have been that have successfully gone to space, there's actually not that many, and each one certainly didn't go from the first draft design to space.
In any case, designing an engine like this today is kind-of like coming up with a revolutionary new idea to replace the blu-ray disc.As if that's something that the market actually wants.
Yup
It's because rotor has hollow chambers inside
Hi black horse repairs, I've posted a video on my channel with a very crude animation which shows in more depth how this is intended to work. (it seems to have uploaded as a short idk how to make it a regular video)
Thank you so much 💓
The exhaust is the real problem
you think it's the main issue? I also heard that side forces would would make it inefficient, combined with poor exhaust it would make a very inefficient engine :)
The biggest problem with a rotary vane engine is that the vanes are mechanically weak. This is why the wankel is superior.
yes, wankel design makes more sense to me and we can actually see it working :)
I was thinking that you should have 3 vanes and use them like the wankel .....Instead of three apex you have 3 vanes...Just to start from a concept that already works....I'm thinking you could use an existing rotary housing and replace internals....
of course I'm a little crazy...
interesting. does that address the sealing problem at all?
@@blackhorserepairs I don't know. I think if the end was a roller it could seal it with less friction and may not need oiling on the surface area. Trying to avoid oil/gas mix.
So large roller on end of vane and a high tension spring between vane and center mass slot (crank).
I think people trying to convert a vane air pump (pneumatic tool) and that won't work ...
The center mass should have recess pocket like a rotor for the gas and air to go to as the air and gas gets compressed.
1. Intake Air and Fuel happen in first void, 2. Second void is Compression (Air Fuel are compressed into recess pocket
3. Ignition in 3rd void
4. Exhaust
I think that is these models it's hard to see how this compression works...It's in the pocket...
At least that's the way I see it. 😆
I guess you could have 6 vanes and two more plugs for a total of 4 plugs (180 out) in an imaginary vane engine...I think the 6 vanes might help the efficiency of this engine.
Maybe the roller thing is just a bad idea..I guess I have something against apex seals...Wait everyone has something against apex seals!
The animation is not done well. You can think about the space between each 2 neighboring vanes as a separate cylinder in a 4-cylinder engine, with the shorter vane acting as the head and the longer one acting as the piston.
Yes, I get that. I still am not sure it would work
im sorry but you may have Dame bramage
LOL, that's clever (took me a second to get it)
That's an inaccurate animation. The fuel should be sucked in during the lower expansion phase.
That makes more sense but still hard for me to understand how that would work
Respectfully, i think you need to stay in your lane a bit. The concepts clearly escape you.
There are no problems with the concept of this engine, only with its execution. Sealing and sealing materials are difficult, just like in the wankel engine.
In the combustion cycle, the chamber is expanding again due to the shape of the outer wall. Even if the spark occurs during end of the compression cycle, just like it does in every spark ignition engine, momentum will still allow the compression cycle to finish and allow peak combustion pressures to occur in the expansion side of things. I suggest reading some books on engine theory, there's nothing inherently wrong with this.
Another way to look at it, the pressure will act greatest on the vane that is furthest extended. Flame fronts have a propagation speed, it is not an explosion.
It escapes me indeed, thank you.
Your analysis contradicts the other ones so not sure which one is correct 🤔
But I have devised a simplified analogy which I will share soon, that might settle this debate