Feliks Crosshead

[Feliks]

Well, this is my new idea ... I decided to get rid of force, guide the piston ...
*This gives an average of about 10% higher efficiency of the engine, because we do not waste energy on friction .. In marine, eolnobrotowych, so far used to be used crosshed.
Instead, I used such a machanism, based on oil like a pump, with a rope as a working element .. Because the rope can not be "pushed", I put the other such arm in motion to the other side .. And from this simple connecting rod driving the crankshaft. Thanks to this, there is no side force anywhere in the whole mechanism .. It is in a traditional design, very large force, reaching up to 1/6 of the total force in the connecting rod driving the crankshaft .. Here its size is calculated .. I think that the average 10% of the engine's reliability will be obtained. The engine has very small orots, 100 rows per minute, and I think that this will work ... In the steam locomotive, we will get rid of the slider, and its efficiency will increase significantly ..
Certainly the demand for oil, which suppressed this large friction, will be much smaller ..
Maybe someday it will go to F1

http://www.marinediesels.info/Theory/Thrust_on_Crosshead_Guides.htm

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoCEcjJxPZs[/ame]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOtN7yFXP8Y[/ame]

Regards Andrew

 

[Charles Lamont]

You can do what you want with a single rocker. If you extend the piston rod past the far side of the rocker you can have two cords or chains. One from the bottom of the rocker head as you have at present. The other goes from the top of the rocker to the extended bottom end of the piston rod. A screw adjuster somewhere allows the two chains to be tensioned one against the other.

A fun idea, but you wildly overestimate the friction losses in the normal arrangement.

 

[Feliks]

Ok, thank you guys ... http://www.railroadhandcar.com/projects/video-files/keystone-family.mp4

The film shows that with 3 movements of the arm, the vehicle travels about 10 meters .. with a piston stroke of 50 cm, having 300 cubic centimeters of air, a liter will travel 30 meters .. from 100 liters 3 km, and from a pressure of 200 atmospheres 60 km. .. 10 such tanks, and we have a range of 600 km .. 100-liter tank is a pipe with a diameter of 24 cm and a length of 2 meters in a square meter will fit 16 such tanks .. ie in the tank 1 m x 1 m x 2 m, 200 atm, it we have a range of 1000km ... I am wrong somewhere, because through my miastenia , I have a double vision .. Such an idea for a Polish family-owned electromobile car .. And it is with us (Poland) REAL, most importantly ..
No Tesla ..


with a simple and light, cheap engine, pneumatic cylinder .. Just 3 cm in diameter, if the pressure is 10 atmospheres ..

Adrew:thumbup:

 

[Feliks]

Well, there is one big advantage of such a crosshead. We can freely change the stroke, piston in relation to the crankshaft stroke .. For example, the stroke of the piston is the same, and the crankshaft stroke even twice as long .. Everything will depend on the demand, and what is most important in a given engine application ..
Of course, the rope has to go exactly in the axis of the piston ..

So that his way of placing the crankshaft, as you can see in the figure, from the side, will make the engine will be much lower ..
Of course, only for marine engines 102 rpm

 

[Feliks]

What if you made Teflon so much ?
And maybe in diesel it would be enough to lubricate them with fuel ?

And the rolling bearings on the crank with the grease in the middle ?

This ... the engine could have been WITHOUT lubricating oil.

Just what would Castrol say ?

:smoking: :smoking:

Or maybe a carbon fiber line ?

Andrew

 

[Feliks]

we lost forge Nm

Okay, yes, do we continue to develop ideas ...
here one of the advantages: the possibility of completely separating the piston chamber, from the crankshaft chamber and main connecting rod .. This causes that the oil used for lubricating the shaft will not be contaminated with combustion products. He is in a clean state ... As someone will want to lubricate the piston with oil, it can use a different oil for this purpose.
However, I think that Teflon will fulfill its role ......

Andrew

 

[Feliks]

Here all the forces in the crank mechanism ... Reduction in the stroke of the shaft twice reducing, with the same stroke of the piston causes a large increase in efficiency, by reducing the forces of inertia. Also the force Nm sometimes reaches up to 30% of gas force , which can be seen in the charts.

http://www.new4stroke.com/sily w cylindrze.pdf

When it does not exist at all, the average efficiency of these 10 to 15% of the engine will be higher. only because of its lack ..

Adding a fall in the shaft stroke by 50% from the inertia forces, even the next 10% increase in efficiency will be able to achieve ... in total, some 25% efficiency will be better ...


Andrew :thumbup:

 

[Feliks]

Here is a textbook of a young handyman..

http://www.cimac.com/cms/upload/history/Dragsted_History_Booklet_2013.pdf

Now he will describe how we can change the crankshaft pitch in relation to the piston stroke and what it can give us in Feliks Crosshead .

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel_and_axle

Andrew :thumbup:

 

[Feliks]

Here is a textbook of a young handyman..

http://www.cimac.com/cms/upload/history/Dragsted_History_Booklet_2013.pdf

Or so very quiet?

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYI5ORbX8g8[/ame]

Or some game ...

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heMCodsfl9w[/ame]

Or maybe such a rope made of such a chain or a timing belts ?
Half milion ibs ...

https://www.usarollerchain.com/240-4-Quad-Strand-Roller-Chain-p/premium-240-4-10ft.htm

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myXCwpYyywg[/ame]

Andrew

 

[Feliks]

A traditional crosshead, usually unbalanced, to save a little on the construction .. But for this, when the command "whole back" is taken for the ship's engine, only 60% of the power can actually be used, because of this unsymmetrical crosshead, which can not withstand greater load, in the reverse than usual turnover.
In my solution, it does not matter which engine the engine is on, so "the whole back" can actually be "all", i.e. 100% ..

But in my solution, it may be asymmetrically, for the same reason as in the traditional one, it means that the piston is pressed down all the time, if not by the work stroke, then by the compression stroke ... (of course, it is 2 stroke ) .. Therefore, the second lower frame, can be "symbolic" and the thin line, just to keep the kinematic bond in some abnormal situations.
Of course, all this new mechanism can be in a separate housing, separating the oiled space, from the space under the piston, which can be cooled water ..
Developing further ideas for smaller engines, instead of a rope, we can use a toothed belt, whose durability is known from the mechanisms of timing .. But the revolutions can be a little bigger ..

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/821500.pdf Here is a handbook, but it is very long uploading, because 35 MB .. On the 74 page, such a two-stroke engine, whose piston pin, is a ball, which moves only pressure from above in a pristine way ..

Andrew:thumbup:

 

[Feliks]

and in Locomotive it would be so ...

https://web.facebook.com/photo.php?...&set=p.10215648436468350&type=3&theater&ifg=1

Andrew

 

[Cogsy]

And the rolling bearings on the crank with the grease in the middle ?

This ... the engine could have been WITHOUT lubricating oil.

Just what would Castrol say ?

Are you aware of what grease is? It's lubricating oil held in a soap, and Castrol manufactures thousands of tonnes (at least) of the stuff every year. But a big drawback of using grease over oil is the friction it creates, both from pumping and drag. You wildly overestimate the friction reduction using your design, now talk about replacing one source of friction (oil) with a much higher source of friction (grease)??