1 Steam Cars : Phorum
General Steam Car topics
Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: June 30, 2002 05:40AM
<HTML>Here is an interesting toroidal rotary engine, very similar to a concept I sketched up in the early 1980s:
[www.roundengine.com]
Peter</HTML>
[www.roundengine.com]
Peter</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: tom ward (IP Logged)
Date: June 30, 2002 06:04PM
<HTML>One thing their website never describes is lubrication.</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 01, 2002 02:32PM
<HTML>Peter,
The same old questions about any of these types of expanders. And, this one has two rotary seal disks, if I see the pictures correctly.
How do they propose to seal the disks from the hub, especially with that big gap for the vanes to pass through on each revolution?
How are the vanes sealed while passing through the gaps in the diaks?
Sorry, the Wankel is still the best bet. It works and is sealed very well now.
Jim</HTML>
The same old questions about any of these types of expanders. And, this one has two rotary seal disks, if I see the pictures correctly.
How do they propose to seal the disks from the hub, especially with that big gap for the vanes to pass through on each revolution?
How are the vanes sealed while passing through the gaps in the diaks?
Sorry, the Wankel is still the best bet. It works and is sealed very well now.
Jim</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: July 02, 2002 05:20AM
<HTML>Hi Tom and Jim,
Yep, the usual questions are left unanswered -- seals and oiling. With some of these ideas, I wonder if the developers have even thought about these problems before publicizing the engine?
The killer (?) problem with sealing this one is where the sealing disk edge meets the main rotor. I can visualize various strips & rings to seal everything else, but that is the toughie.
Definitely not up to Wankel standards!
Mainly I present these oddball engines as ideas for fun projects and/or thought-provokers which might lead to new and different ideas. Some might be useful as pumps, hydraulic or exhaust motors, etc, where leakage is not a problem. Anybody remember those little vacuum windshield wiper motors? The oscillating-vane principle made for a lousy IC or steam engine, but made a nice small vacuum motor for a peculiar niche application. Except during hard pulling in heavy rain!
Peter</HTML>
Yep, the usual questions are left unanswered -- seals and oiling. With some of these ideas, I wonder if the developers have even thought about these problems before publicizing the engine?
The killer (?) problem with sealing this one is where the sealing disk edge meets the main rotor. I can visualize various strips & rings to seal everything else, but that is the toughie.
Definitely not up to Wankel standards!
Mainly I present these oddball engines as ideas for fun projects and/or thought-provokers which might lead to new and different ideas. Some might be useful as pumps, hydraulic or exhaust motors, etc, where leakage is not a problem. Anybody remember those little vacuum windshield wiper motors? The oscillating-vane principle made for a lousy IC or steam engine, but made a nice small vacuum motor for a peculiar niche application. Except during hard pulling in heavy rain!
Peter</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: ajantha (IP Logged)
Date: July 02, 2002 06:29AM
<HTML>please send to me you have oll detals abouvet torodal rotary engine</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 02, 2002 01:14PM
<HTML>Peter,
You wonder where and how such contraptions are thought up, and then seriously presented to the engineering community?
These are academic twits that couldn't use a hand or machine tool to save their lives. Pure theory and not one whit of practical experience.
I used to put up with this at NASA all the time. Like the biologist who thought he was a brilliant engineer too, insisted that I give him 40 amp hours out of a 12 amp hour battery. He was serious too!!
As always, let me see it run for 100 hours at full load on a dyno, then talk to me. Interesting though, and great fun to read.
Jim</HTML>
You wonder where and how such contraptions are thought up, and then seriously presented to the engineering community?
These are academic twits that couldn't use a hand or machine tool to save their lives. Pure theory and not one whit of practical experience.
I used to put up with this at NASA all the time. Like the biologist who thought he was a brilliant engineer too, insisted that I give him 40 amp hours out of a 12 amp hour battery. He was serious too!!
As always, let me see it run for 100 hours at full load on a dyno, then talk to me. Interesting though, and great fun to read.
Jim</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: July 02, 2002 05:47PM
<HTML> Just had a most interesting long conversation from Professor Rudi Pekau
(Southern Alberta Institute of technology) and was quite informative on the development of this engine. The initial test engine was 600cc and run on a dynanomotor on 100psi air pressure with success, the Institute has two boilers available and the engine was run briefly on steam but requires larger clearance dimensions. He calls it a low speed high torque engine, somewhere around 2000-2400 RPM. The first test was on 28 Feb 2002 and they are making modifications to the ports and seals---the admission/displacement/expansion ratio is variable when the engine is running. I was most impressed with the technicals of the conversation, the engine will be double ported on the exhaust side as on steam it had too much back pressure. I wish them well, any of us that has worked in the acedemia environment knows how long it takes to do these things as a side project. The Professor appeared to be a most sincere and talented individual, always a pleasure to talk numbers and parameters with such a person!! They also plan to use it as an air compressor, it will have to beat the efficiency of the Lysholm screw compressor. Steam is not their primary focus but I will not pass judgement until further testing is accomplished. He has given approval to put two pictures on this wonderful site of this small engine on the dyno, will forward to John. I hope this is not one more attempt to find the Holy Grail of rotary engines.
Best, George</HTML>
(Southern Alberta Institute of technology) and was quite informative on the development of this engine. The initial test engine was 600cc and run on a dynanomotor on 100psi air pressure with success, the Institute has two boilers available and the engine was run briefly on steam but requires larger clearance dimensions. He calls it a low speed high torque engine, somewhere around 2000-2400 RPM. The first test was on 28 Feb 2002 and they are making modifications to the ports and seals---the admission/displacement/expansion ratio is variable when the engine is running. I was most impressed with the technicals of the conversation, the engine will be double ported on the exhaust side as on steam it had too much back pressure. I wish them well, any of us that has worked in the acedemia environment knows how long it takes to do these things as a side project. The Professor appeared to be a most sincere and talented individual, always a pleasure to talk numbers and parameters with such a person!! They also plan to use it as an air compressor, it will have to beat the efficiency of the Lysholm screw compressor. Steam is not their primary focus but I will not pass judgement until further testing is accomplished. He has given approval to put two pictures on this wonderful site of this small engine on the dyno, will forward to John. I hope this is not one more attempt to find the Holy Grail of rotary engines.
Best, George</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: July 03, 2002 06:48AM
<HTML>Hi Jim,
I usually try to steer clear of controversy (once bitten twice shy, and I've been "bitten" a lot more than once in other steam forums), but my 3 primary "warning signs" for identifying the theoretical twits as you call them, are the presence of:
1.) securities sales in the absence of marketable product,
2.) government R&D contracts, and
3.) advertizing of R&D (especially in early stages) into an idea as a "green-credentials-building" or similar public relations effort by major corporations with a vested interest in the continued dominance of competing conventional technology. I am always wary of "institutional advertising" (ads selling a company's expertise, track record, size, longevity, good intentions, groovy vibes, etc. instead of its actual products). Enron and a few similar outfits were/are noted for this (don't get me started on _that_ issue!). Anybody can screw up, so them ads is strictly for suckers.
In the absence of these factors, I'll give a developer the (provisional) benefit of a doubt. Meaning, the developers are putting their own time and money into building running examples eventually aimed at the market.
Like you, however, I await extensive testing of any idea before giving it much credence. 100 hours at full load is a good start. For car engines, though, I'd actually be a bit stricter; I want to see good results from extensive _road testing_ under real-world conditions (meaning mostly variable and part-load running for road engines), or at least a close simulation of road conditions. Some machines that do well in full-load conditions run horribly in part-load & variable-load conditions, however durable they may be.
I have read that (barring, say, Rolls-Royce and a rare few other premium examples) most production gas car engines can't survive 100 hours of full-load running without at least major damage (if not pieces flying around the test facility). Most production car engines can't develop more than a fraction of their "rated power" as installed in road vehicles, so obviously they're not designed to actually run at such fanciful power outputs for more than a relatively brief interval during a bench test. Note all those gas cars that brag 250 hp and more. A typical car would have to run at something like 200 mph to actually develop that hp! Gear ratios, etc are rarely set up to achieve such results on the road.
George:
Thanks for following up on this. Further reports would be of interest. I figured they'd have seal problems, always the bugaboo in rotary engines. It took $billions & decades of R&D to work out all the seal problems with the Wankel, for example. Who knows, maybe one or more of the various alternative rotary engines being worked on can achieve acceptable sealing, durability, & overall cost per mile (incl fuel & maintenance). A low-rpm, high-torque engine, properly designed, has an edge here. It is a tall order, though.
Numerous caveats aside, this is definitely interesting stuff!
Peter</HTML>
I usually try to steer clear of controversy (once bitten twice shy, and I've been "bitten" a lot more than once in other steam forums), but my 3 primary "warning signs" for identifying the theoretical twits as you call them, are the presence of:
1.) securities sales in the absence of marketable product,
2.) government R&D contracts, and
3.) advertizing of R&D (especially in early stages) into an idea as a "green-credentials-building" or similar public relations effort by major corporations with a vested interest in the continued dominance of competing conventional technology. I am always wary of "institutional advertising" (ads selling a company's expertise, track record, size, longevity, good intentions, groovy vibes, etc. instead of its actual products). Enron and a few similar outfits were/are noted for this (don't get me started on _that_ issue!). Anybody can screw up, so them ads is strictly for suckers.
In the absence of these factors, I'll give a developer the (provisional) benefit of a doubt. Meaning, the developers are putting their own time and money into building running examples eventually aimed at the market.
Like you, however, I await extensive testing of any idea before giving it much credence. 100 hours at full load is a good start. For car engines, though, I'd actually be a bit stricter; I want to see good results from extensive _road testing_ under real-world conditions (meaning mostly variable and part-load running for road engines), or at least a close simulation of road conditions. Some machines that do well in full-load conditions run horribly in part-load & variable-load conditions, however durable they may be.
I have read that (barring, say, Rolls-Royce and a rare few other premium examples) most production gas car engines can't survive 100 hours of full-load running without at least major damage (if not pieces flying around the test facility). Most production car engines can't develop more than a fraction of their "rated power" as installed in road vehicles, so obviously they're not designed to actually run at such fanciful power outputs for more than a relatively brief interval during a bench test. Note all those gas cars that brag 250 hp and more. A typical car would have to run at something like 200 mph to actually develop that hp! Gear ratios, etc are rarely set up to achieve such results on the road.
George:
Thanks for following up on this. Further reports would be of interest. I figured they'd have seal problems, always the bugaboo in rotary engines. It took $billions & decades of R&D to work out all the seal problems with the Wankel, for example. Who knows, maybe one or more of the various alternative rotary engines being worked on can achieve acceptable sealing, durability, & overall cost per mile (incl fuel & maintenance). A low-rpm, high-torque engine, properly designed, has an edge here. It is a tall order, though.
Numerous caveats aside, this is definitely interesting stuff!
Peter</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: tom ward (IP Logged)
Date: July 03, 2002 10:07AM
<HTML>Amen brothers! A few years back the aviation community was ga-gah over something called the RAND Cam. Still haven't seen it pull anything off the ground. If you search the patent office site you will find hundreds of 'miracle' rotaries. I wish the USPO still required working proof of a claim before granting it legal protection. Patent numbers would once again actually mean something.
caveat emptor
Tom</HTML>
caveat emptor
Tom</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 03, 2002 01:34PM
<HTML>Peter and Tom,
Amen brothers indeed.
I have binders full of such engine designs. And three that I already found that are almost identical to this one, with a rotating member separating the phases from each other.
I applaud loudly, anyone who develops his ideas using his own funds.
I certainly wish them well and will keep a close eye on this one. Who says the Wankel is the only way to go, not I. Just as Wankel did, someone may indeed come up with a better design. Right now the Wankel is a proven product.
As always, I have one set of guidelines: 1) Build a reasonable sized engine and not some fist sized model. The leakage and heat losses kill them. 2) Put it on a dyno and run it for hours at a reasonable load, say 3/4 full power. 3) Let me see the horsepower and torque curves and the WATER RATE at various speeds.
Peter, you hit the nail on the head about production car engines. Even the NASCAR engines, by the time they get through with them, are $40,000 and a life of about 10 hours, so my racer friends tell me. Hardly production by any stretch of the imagination. Even the blocks are semi steel. Let alone the ALM or Formula One engines.
Jim</HTML>
Amen brothers indeed.
I have binders full of such engine designs. And three that I already found that are almost identical to this one, with a rotating member separating the phases from each other.
I applaud loudly, anyone who develops his ideas using his own funds.
I certainly wish them well and will keep a close eye on this one. Who says the Wankel is the only way to go, not I. Just as Wankel did, someone may indeed come up with a better design. Right now the Wankel is a proven product.
As always, I have one set of guidelines: 1) Build a reasonable sized engine and not some fist sized model. The leakage and heat losses kill them. 2) Put it on a dyno and run it for hours at a reasonable load, say 3/4 full power. 3) Let me see the horsepower and torque curves and the WATER RATE at various speeds.
Peter, you hit the nail on the head about production car engines. Even the NASCAR engines, by the time they get through with them, are $40,000 and a life of about 10 hours, so my racer friends tell me. Hardly production by any stretch of the imagination. Even the blocks are semi steel. Let alone the ALM or Formula One engines.
Jim</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Rudy Pekau (IP Logged)
Date: July 04, 2002 07:46PM
<HTML>Thanks for your interesting comments.
As far as some of your questions are concerned sealing and lubrication was on our thoughts years ago.It was one of the first things that keptus thinking!!
Lubrication is scheduled to be done through the centre shaft with centrifugal forces doing the distribution.Oil is recycled from the perimeter of the toroidal shell and moved by pressure differentials
Sealing is a tough engineering challenge,no doubt.A gaploss study has been done three years ago by an independent University simulating pressure differentials at various locations and various gapsizes.A computer program was developed showing gaphically where the losses occur and how much powerloss results at variable rpm as a function of the pressures in the various chambers.This study alone is a 120 page report.Some pressurization of the toroidal shell is actually helpful as the delta p decreases thereby decreasing the losses.There are various sealing concepts some are based on springtension others are based on centrifugal forces and /or a combination of the two.Ceramic composite seals including graphite is being considered.
To clear things up further a combustion modeling study has been undertaken by Dr.Karim ,an independent world expert in combustion,resulting in a detailed analysis including an indicated power graph as a function of rpm,see website research.From there you can find the torque curve and if you translate it to other conventional combustion engines you will find that even with a substantial consideration of frictionpower and seal losses you still get substantially larger torque especially at lower rpms than anything on the market today and the overall efficiency can be as good or better if the engine is optimized.
The main feature of the VGT technology is the variable displacement volume,which is very clumsy for any conventional reciprocating engine very by shutting down half of the cylinders[Cadillac and others].Also other variable parameters which other engines do not have make this technology intriguing.
The 1.prototype airmotor runs very well and has excellent throttle response and we are in the process of optimizing it and adapting it to run on steam.There are also ideas for a compressor and a turbocharger version beside the combustion engine.
Who thought reciprocating engines could run as fast as 25000 rpm[achieved with a 10 cc model aircraft engine ] 125 years ago??Rudolf Diesel did not,nor did Nikolaus Otto in 1876.!
I appreciate any comment.
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
As far as some of your questions are concerned sealing and lubrication was on our thoughts years ago.It was one of the first things that keptus thinking!!
Lubrication is scheduled to be done through the centre shaft with centrifugal forces doing the distribution.Oil is recycled from the perimeter of the toroidal shell and moved by pressure differentials
Sealing is a tough engineering challenge,no doubt.A gaploss study has been done three years ago by an independent University simulating pressure differentials at various locations and various gapsizes.A computer program was developed showing gaphically where the losses occur and how much powerloss results at variable rpm as a function of the pressures in the various chambers.This study alone is a 120 page report.Some pressurization of the toroidal shell is actually helpful as the delta p decreases thereby decreasing the losses.There are various sealing concepts some are based on springtension others are based on centrifugal forces and /or a combination of the two.Ceramic composite seals including graphite is being considered.
To clear things up further a combustion modeling study has been undertaken by Dr.Karim ,an independent world expert in combustion,resulting in a detailed analysis including an indicated power graph as a function of rpm,see website research.From there you can find the torque curve and if you translate it to other conventional combustion engines you will find that even with a substantial consideration of frictionpower and seal losses you still get substantially larger torque especially at lower rpms than anything on the market today and the overall efficiency can be as good or better if the engine is optimized.
The main feature of the VGT technology is the variable displacement volume,which is very clumsy for any conventional reciprocating engine very by shutting down half of the cylinders[Cadillac and others].Also other variable parameters which other engines do not have make this technology intriguing.
The 1.prototype airmotor runs very well and has excellent throttle response and we are in the process of optimizing it and adapting it to run on steam.There are also ideas for a compressor and a turbocharger version beside the combustion engine.
Who thought reciprocating engines could run as fast as 25000 rpm[achieved with a 10 cc model aircraft engine ] 125 years ago??Rudolf Diesel did not,nor did Nikolaus Otto in 1876.!
I appreciate any comment.
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Rudy Pekau (IP Logged)
Date: July 04, 2002 08:02PM
<HTML>Hi George,I posted a message on your board.
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: July 05, 2002 10:16AM
<HTML>Hi Rudy,
Thanks for your report -- sounds like you're on the right track, problem areas identified and solutions in progress. Hope my comments were not too harsh; various flops in my own work & other projects I have studied have made me a hard-bitten skeptic about new ideas, including (especially) my own.
One thing I like about your toroidal engine is the near-absence of reciprocating and eccentric loads. Another is the potential for a relatively low surface to volume ratio, important for a low-rpm steam expander.
Best of luck with your project, and please keep us posted on developments!
Peter</HTML>
Thanks for your report -- sounds like you're on the right track, problem areas identified and solutions in progress. Hope my comments were not too harsh; various flops in my own work & other projects I have studied have made me a hard-bitten skeptic about new ideas, including (especially) my own.
One thing I like about your toroidal engine is the near-absence of reciprocating and eccentric loads. Another is the potential for a relatively low surface to volume ratio, important for a low-rpm steam expander.
Best of luck with your project, and please keep us posted on developments!
Peter</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 10, 2002 01:41PM
<HTML>Peter and Rudy,
I am following this development with intense interest and great hope.
While I have been planning on the three rotor 20-B Mazda engine for the XKE project, if this engine can indeed be sealed for use with high pressure steam, I will most certainly be very inclined to try it in place of the Wankel. This is a much cheaper engine to make than the Wankel, and a lot easier to machine too.
I have found about three or four similar engines in my binders on rotary engines, usually with rotating sleeves parallel to the main rotor's axis. This one seems to pose a real question of what appears to be 90° line contact between the actual power rotor and the phase isolating rotor. Just how this could be sealed for use with 1500 psi steam really interests me.
If enough information is forthcoming soon, I would be very willing to lay out and make one powerful enough for the Jaguar steamer. The slow speed is a great advantage over the Wankel, although nothing says the Wankel has to be run at high speeds. As a gas engine, yes; but not as a steam engine. One still has to design an inlet valve system; but at the slow speed suggested for this rotary engine, it seems to be a solvable problem. It may be adaptable as an occulting engine, have to look into that.
My questions are: sealing, compression ratios and expansion ratios. It also suggests that it has to have a rather thin power rotor for sealing, not a much longer drum type for big "piston" area in one unit.
My plan was to pick up the three rotor Wankel engine on the way up to the Steam Car Tour in Seattle in late September at my favorite Wankel speed shop; but if this one shows real promise, I would be willing to forget the Wankel and try to design one and build it for the car project.
I hope Rudy will be inclined to communicate additional information on the seal design he is planning on using.
Peter, Try "blue flame burner" on the computer. A recirculating hot gas post mix vaporizing burner. Interesting in seeing that they claim patent protection, as Lears made a big one over twenty five years ago for the bus project and it was part of the hardware I bought when I got their remaining hardware to build the race car, and Lear patented loads of their designs..
This one is a really good way to make a clean burner for a steam car. Another one of George's interesting finds.
Rudy, if you want to contact me directly: jdcrank@pacbell.net
Jim</HTML>
I am following this development with intense interest and great hope.
While I have been planning on the three rotor 20-B Mazda engine for the XKE project, if this engine can indeed be sealed for use with high pressure steam, I will most certainly be very inclined to try it in place of the Wankel. This is a much cheaper engine to make than the Wankel, and a lot easier to machine too.
I have found about three or four similar engines in my binders on rotary engines, usually with rotating sleeves parallel to the main rotor's axis. This one seems to pose a real question of what appears to be 90° line contact between the actual power rotor and the phase isolating rotor. Just how this could be sealed for use with 1500 psi steam really interests me.
If enough information is forthcoming soon, I would be very willing to lay out and make one powerful enough for the Jaguar steamer. The slow speed is a great advantage over the Wankel, although nothing says the Wankel has to be run at high speeds. As a gas engine, yes; but not as a steam engine. One still has to design an inlet valve system; but at the slow speed suggested for this rotary engine, it seems to be a solvable problem. It may be adaptable as an occulting engine, have to look into that.
My questions are: sealing, compression ratios and expansion ratios. It also suggests that it has to have a rather thin power rotor for sealing, not a much longer drum type for big "piston" area in one unit.
My plan was to pick up the three rotor Wankel engine on the way up to the Steam Car Tour in Seattle in late September at my favorite Wankel speed shop; but if this one shows real promise, I would be willing to forget the Wankel and try to design one and build it for the car project.
I hope Rudy will be inclined to communicate additional information on the seal design he is planning on using.
Peter, Try "blue flame burner" on the computer. A recirculating hot gas post mix vaporizing burner. Interesting in seeing that they claim patent protection, as Lears made a big one over twenty five years ago for the bus project and it was part of the hardware I bought when I got their remaining hardware to build the race car, and Lear patented loads of their designs..
This one is a really good way to make a clean burner for a steam car. Another one of George's interesting finds.
Rudy, if you want to contact me directly: jdcrank@pacbell.net
Jim</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Peter Brow (IP Logged)
Date: July 11, 2002 09:37AM
<HTML>Hi Jim,
Thanks for the tip on the blue flame burner. I remember seeing one on the net last year, with hot-gas recirculation, not sure if this is the same one.
Call me old fashioned, but I would like to avoid the blower if possible. Durn them movin' parts. Not to mention all the delicate fiddleybits which fan burners need for accurate fuel/air ratio control at varying output (eg, pulse width controls). An on/off or multistage burner doesn't have much trouble, but also doesn't fit my steam control process or light tube stack.
I think I have a way to control the carbon/gunk problems of vaporizing burners, at least something that looks worth a try. It would also indirectly control the fuel/air ratio at varying fire rates. It's not a 1910-era or Ottaway burner, though it takes a few cues from them. Coleman now has vaporizing camp stoves that reportedly run OK on today's gawdawful pump gas, and mine would be somewhat more sophisticated, so I think it is doable. Don't want to spill the beans in public yet, as it may be patentable.
I also recall a propane burner design by John Wetz, which used a tangential-inlet jet/mixtube into a refractory firebox something like a Bundt cake pan, and no blower. The fire tornado seemed to pull in extra air. For liquid fuel & no vaporizer, perhaps a hot gas recirculation loop could be added -- or it might not be needed. Then again, a blower would probably still be needed for startup with liquid fuel, unless one wanted to try something like spraying raw startup fuel thru a radiant electric barrel coil a la Baker patents.
I'll do another search and see what turns up.
Peter</HTML>
Thanks for the tip on the blue flame burner. I remember seeing one on the net last year, with hot-gas recirculation, not sure if this is the same one.
Call me old fashioned, but I would like to avoid the blower if possible. Durn them movin' parts. Not to mention all the delicate fiddleybits which fan burners need for accurate fuel/air ratio control at varying output (eg, pulse width controls). An on/off or multistage burner doesn't have much trouble, but also doesn't fit my steam control process or light tube stack.
I think I have a way to control the carbon/gunk problems of vaporizing burners, at least something that looks worth a try. It would also indirectly control the fuel/air ratio at varying fire rates. It's not a 1910-era or Ottaway burner, though it takes a few cues from them. Coleman now has vaporizing camp stoves that reportedly run OK on today's gawdawful pump gas, and mine would be somewhat more sophisticated, so I think it is doable. Don't want to spill the beans in public yet, as it may be patentable.
I also recall a propane burner design by John Wetz, which used a tangential-inlet jet/mixtube into a refractory firebox something like a Bundt cake pan, and no blower. The fire tornado seemed to pull in extra air. For liquid fuel & no vaporizer, perhaps a hot gas recirculation loop could be added -- or it might not be needed. Then again, a blower would probably still be needed for startup with liquid fuel, unless one wanted to try something like spraying raw startup fuel thru a radiant electric barrel coil a la Baker patents.
I'll do another search and see what turns up.
Peter</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Jim Crank (IP Logged)
Date: July 11, 2002 12:36PM
<HTML>Peter,
Don't confuse the problems of pre mix vaporizing burners with post mix.
There is a world of difference in the two types of burners.
The pre mix like the Stanley, White and Ottoway are a pain in the derrier and I would never even consider one for a new project car. Carbon deposits all the time, slow cutoff and starting problems.
We HAVE to use the fuels we can get on the road, unleaded gasoline, #2 Diesel and often kerosene. Around here in the S.F. area, good clean kerosene is right out of the pump and the Doble just loves it. Jet fuel is out, goes bad in about three months in the tank, although when it is fresh, it burns beautifully. Propane is out for loads of reasons.
This "blue flame" starts out as a low level atomizing, then as it gets hot, about 45 seconds, automatically changes to a vaporizing by recirculating the blazing hot combustion gasses to serve as the vaporizer mechanism. The other good way to go is the "J" tube as in the older gas turbines, they work the same way when starting up. The alternate in my mind, although it takes a longer firebox. There is a way to use them with a cyclone that may be a good compromise. Also, the cyclone can be used with the recirculating concept. That is probably going to be my choice in the end. What one must avoid at all costs, is direct flame impingement on the tubes in the boiler.
For me, and using the criteria I have evolved for the new car project, I have to burn up to 26 gallons per hour when the draft booster is going full tilt.
Although I hate to revert to ancient practice; but working for decades with burners, Doble was really on the right track using a carburetor as the mixing device, constant air/fuel ratio with varying draft, although his will not atomize Diesel well at all. It needs a much stronger air blast than the startup on the electric blower alone will give to atomize Diesel.
One solution is the constant vacuum carburetor like the S.U. that works, I tried it. Holly makes racing carburetors that will certainly handle the air flow requirement, up to 1400 cfm.
Work needs to be done on the exact selection; but the means are there for us to have a really good, powerful; but clean burner.
Jim</HTML>
Don't confuse the problems of pre mix vaporizing burners with post mix.
There is a world of difference in the two types of burners.
The pre mix like the Stanley, White and Ottoway are a pain in the derrier and I would never even consider one for a new project car. Carbon deposits all the time, slow cutoff and starting problems.
We HAVE to use the fuels we can get on the road, unleaded gasoline, #2 Diesel and often kerosene. Around here in the S.F. area, good clean kerosene is right out of the pump and the Doble just loves it. Jet fuel is out, goes bad in about three months in the tank, although when it is fresh, it burns beautifully. Propane is out for loads of reasons.
This "blue flame" starts out as a low level atomizing, then as it gets hot, about 45 seconds, automatically changes to a vaporizing by recirculating the blazing hot combustion gasses to serve as the vaporizer mechanism. The other good way to go is the "J" tube as in the older gas turbines, they work the same way when starting up. The alternate in my mind, although it takes a longer firebox. There is a way to use them with a cyclone that may be a good compromise. Also, the cyclone can be used with the recirculating concept. That is probably going to be my choice in the end. What one must avoid at all costs, is direct flame impingement on the tubes in the boiler.
For me, and using the criteria I have evolved for the new car project, I have to burn up to 26 gallons per hour when the draft booster is going full tilt.
Although I hate to revert to ancient practice; but working for decades with burners, Doble was really on the right track using a carburetor as the mixing device, constant air/fuel ratio with varying draft, although his will not atomize Diesel well at all. It needs a much stronger air blast than the startup on the electric blower alone will give to atomize Diesel.
One solution is the constant vacuum carburetor like the S.U. that works, I tried it. Holly makes racing carburetors that will certainly handle the air flow requirement, up to 1400 cfm.
Work needs to be done on the exact selection; but the means are there for us to have a really good, powerful; but clean burner.
Jim</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Rudy Pekau (IP Logged)
Date: July 12, 2002 06:08PM
<HTML>Thanks ,Peter,for your comment,we will keep you posted.I will try to send a picture of the engine on the dyno to Jim.
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: Rudy Pekau (IP Logged)
Date: July 12, 2002 06:24PM
<HTML>Hi Jim,thanks for your response.We are always interested in finding out what other experts in the field have to say.
Although the steam application is not our primary focus we still believe it could have a certain market niche.And we will adapt our airmotor to run with steam albeit not with 1500 psi but perhaps only to 200 psi.We will keep you posted.
You have made some good points in your response!
I will try to send you a picture of our airmotor on the dyno to your personal email address.
Regards</HTML>
Although the steam application is not our primary focus we still believe it could have a certain market niche.And we will adapt our airmotor to run with steam albeit not with 1500 psi but perhaps only to 200 psi.We will keep you posted.
You have made some good points in your response!
I will try to send you a picture of our airmotor on the dyno to your personal email address.
Regards</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine
Posted by: George Nutz (IP Logged)
Date: July 12, 2002 06:46PM
<HTML>Rudy,
I did send the dyno picture to John Woodson last week and it was going to be attached in some way to this discussion but unfortunately his site suffered from "mad cow disease" and his computer also had problems---I believe he worked all weekend on it to get it back up. We are all thankful for this great website and all John's hard work--where would we go without it??
George</HTML>
I did send the dyno picture to John Woodson last week and it was going to be attached in some way to this discussion but unfortunately his site suffered from "mad cow disease" and his computer also had problems---I believe he worked all weekend on it to get it back up. We are all thankful for this great website and all John's hard work--where would we go without it??
George</HTML>
Re: your response of 7-10
Posted by: Rudy Pekau (IP Logged)
Date: July 12, 2002 07:07PM
<HTML>Jim,
here are more details:
the inletvalve is a rotary nozzle shaped blow through valve driven by the timing disc shaft at a 1:1 gear ratio.In case of the steam or air engine the expansion ratio depends a lot on how you design the valve and where you position the exhaust port.Also it depends on the size of the piston and the diameter of the powerdisc.The nozzle is meant to increase the flowrate and accelerate the fluid into the supersonic region(in case of the combustion engine up to Mach 3), a wellknown principle which we find in rockets and gasturbine technology.This will charge the toroidal chamber very rapidly and building up virtually intantaneous pressure behind the piston.
It is very similar for compression.
Sealing can be done in a number of ways.Knowing the pressure differentials is the first step and where they occur.It is also good to know what effect gaps at various locations have on the performance,that is why we made the computerstudy.It is by no means an easy task but with good engineering a solution can be found.
Stay in touch.
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
here are more details:
the inletvalve is a rotary nozzle shaped blow through valve driven by the timing disc shaft at a 1:1 gear ratio.In case of the steam or air engine the expansion ratio depends a lot on how you design the valve and where you position the exhaust port.Also it depends on the size of the piston and the diameter of the powerdisc.The nozzle is meant to increase the flowrate and accelerate the fluid into the supersonic region(in case of the combustion engine up to Mach 3), a wellknown principle which we find in rockets and gasturbine technology.This will charge the toroidal chamber very rapidly and building up virtually intantaneous pressure behind the piston.
It is very similar for compression.
Sealing can be done in a number of ways.Knowing the pressure differentials is the first step and where they occur.It is also good to know what effect gaps at various locations have on the performance,that is why we made the computerstudy.It is by no means an easy task but with good engineering a solution can be found.
Stay in touch.
Rudy Pekau</HTML>
Re: Toroidal Rotary Engine application
Posted by: sandipan (IP Logged)
Date: September 23, 2003 11:28AM
<HTML>Hi Rudy,
please send me the detailed application of VGT i.e . automotive, marine, aircraft, stationary, power generation etc.
Also I need a brief history of the invention & future scope.
sandipan</HTML>
please send me the detailed application of VGT i.e . automotive, marine, aircraft, stationary, power generation etc.
Also I need a brief history of the invention & future scope.
sandipan</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.