Brickley engine

[boonebucker]

Those of you with engine friction experience have any thoughts on the Brickley engine?

 

[GregLocock]

If you want to eliminate skirt friction the easy way is to use a crosshead. This has the advantage compared with the Brickley of simplicity, and disadvantage that you couldn't patent it. I'd like to see one with a ballbearing rather than a slipper bearing as the guide.





Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[EdDanzer]

Using a different method of converting the linear motion to rotary motion will have little effect on the engine efficiency at the end of the day. The cost to tool up to mass produce a different engine with little net efficiency gain through the mechanics is a foolish gesture.

Until the crankshaft is eliminated the actual thermal efficiency over a drive cycle will only improve a small amount.

Ed Danzer

http://www.danzcoinc.com

http://www.dehyds.com

 

[CH5OH]

no friction at all, on a computer model......lol

 

[ornerynorsk]

If I had a dollar for everytime I've heard "well, it works on the computer!"

 

[boonebucker]

I'm wondering if anyone is ever going to address the numbers, graphs, and the tribology that goes with the graphs on the blog. Maybe anything more than simple opinion is too much to expect.

 

[btrueblood]

"The example given on the blog uses a Willans line for a diesel. There are near zero pumping losses for the diesel at 1500 rpm."

Uh, maybe at wide open throttle, but the example he uses is for a part throttle condition (1/6th throttle) - meaning losses at the throttle plate.

Extrapolating a Willans line as a linear fit...doesn't sound right to me.

There are better sources out there for estimating the mechanical friction losses of reciprocating engines. The author should find these and cite them. And not buried in a blog somewhere.

 

[boonebucker]

I think 1/6th throttle means 1/6th load. No throttles for CI. Extrapolating a Willans as a linear fit is correct according to Gupta, Ganesan, etc. as long as the points chosen fit the linear part of the entire rpm map. That appears to be the case here when all the points for 1500 rpm are included from the BSFC map. It's amazing how straight the fuel consumption line actually is.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Most of us here have seen, and perhaps participated in, at least one example of Computer Aided Self- Delusion.

If you want to convince this crowd that your engine has low friction losses, then you need to build one, and race it and make it survive in a motorcycle or a boat, with a vestigial or absent oil cooler.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[ornerynorsk]

Ditto what Mike said. Proof is in the pudding. It doesn't sound like one has actually been built yet. I personally believe that Chrysler was on to something in 1963/1964 when they put out 50 turbine cars as a test bed.

I agree that there is a far better way to convert a fuel into performed work, but the IC reciprocating engine probably ain't it. At the end of the day, you can't cheat physics.

 

[boonebucker]

Maybe it's a delusion, maybe not. Sometimes" That's not going to work" is seeing. Sometimes"That's not going to work" is not seeing. The test is in a working prototype.

 

[patprimmer]

Feel free to use YOUR money to make one. I will not be contributing. I doubt anyone else who understands the laws of inertia and the nature of friction and the influence of the number of parts on costs and weight will either.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm

for site rules

 

[boonebucker]

Being that you understand he "laws of inertia and the nature of friction" could you please address the following with great care: the efficiency with which the bottom end 5+ lbs of inertia is connected, started and stopped each revolution (twice per) in a 2 liter inline 4 cylinder and compare it to a Brickley configuration (connecting rod removed). Assume the Brickley has twice the mass( 8cyl mass equivalent) Address friction using the Stribeck curve "duty parameter" variables of load and distance traveled as the basis of comparison.

 

[MikeHalloran]

Bench racing is free.

How much have you budgeted for formal analysis?






Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[boonebucker]

Bench racing is fun too; at least for a little while. The formal analysis quote I received is no small pittance but methinks there might be another way. There's nothing like real numbers.

 

[franzh]

Not that long ago, one forum member and got into a heated debate with one other member. The poster made a claim that he didnt care about the laws of physics, as "laws were meant to be broken". He went to continue a diatribe about Columbus and the flat world, Copernicus, Newton, Einstein, and others who were proved themselves right, after the "experts of the time" claimed otherwise.

The proof is in peer review and replicating test results. You have had your peer review from some of the industry top engineers.

Dont get me wrong, but we tend to be doubters until we see a working model. Today's Solidworks and CAD works FEA development is VERY accurate and far less expensive than building a nuts and bolts model.

Franz

eng-tips, by professional engineers for professional engineers
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[boonebucker]

I couldn't agree with you more. Peer review and replication are the essence of science. I used Solidworks to build a prototype. It is a very powerful piece of software and can provide a great deal of very valuable information like FEA. I find myself always a novice with Solidworks. While I have found my own ways to model the friction associated with squeeze film lubrication (SAE papers etc.), I have yet to find a Solidworks way to model the friction. Any suggestions?

 

[MikeHalloran]

I don't think Solidworks is the right tool for that.
Even if it could do it, I wouldn't trust the results without a physical correlation model, running and instrumented.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[LionelHutz]

It's hard to see the watts link. Is the floating link the piece tying the large pieces to the H pieces? There just is no pivot shown in the middle of it making it very obscure to tell.

 

[boonebucker]

You are correct. There is no pivot shown at the center of the floating link but that is where the fulcrum is located. Also I might add that while the kinematics of the animation are correct, the actual parts look quite different to address the issues of stress, inertia, balance, etc.

 

[boonebucker]

Might I suggest how the wheel “cheats physics.” Does the wheel’s gain not lie in the comparison of the distance traveled by the circumference of the wheel with the distance traveled at the circumference of the axle? The greater the ratio between the distances traveled the lesser the friction. These distances traveled are the direct result of diameters involved and the number of rotations, or partial rotations. This is how twelve 20 mm wrist pins rotating through 70 degrees of rotation per revolution covers the same distance as only one 48 mm crankpin in one revolution. By sizing the pins to their respective loads great reductions in friction are possible; an amount greater than the contribution of the entire ring pack.
Of primary importance here is the reduction of the distances that the areas of oil being sheared have to travel.