It sure is quiet in here!

[RodRico]

Just as well since I've been busy selling one home, buying another, and moving from both a home and an apartment to the new digs in Alabama.

The new house has selected in part based on it having space for a shop. I recently looked back through my work and realized I've forgotten where I was, but I look forward to picking it back up and starting my prototype efforts!

I'll post regular updates and no doubt solicit some feedback and ideas once I'm back at work on my engine.

 

[BrianPetersen]

Let's hear it make some noise

 

[RodRico]

I'm eager to get to that point. I have a lot to learn regarding fabrication, however, so it will be quite some time!

 

[BigDiesel1]

I'm eager to get to that point. I have a lot to learn regarding fabrication, however, so it will be quite some time!

I will do whatever I can to help you. We need to keep this tradition alive.

 

[enginesrus]

Keep wasting time and they will buy from someone else, then your idea will just be a desktop display. Its time to just farm out the machine work and get it going.

 

[RodRico]

BigDiesel, thanks!

Enginesrus, What’s the hurry? Nobody can build the same engine thanks to my pending patent, and I’d rather have some fun than throw a bunch of money at it. I’ll outsource production if/when that time comes.

RodRico

 

[Compositepro]

A patent only last for 17 years and then everyone is free to use it. So it is worse than worthless if you take 15 years to go into production, because you will have given the ideas away, and paid to do it.

 

[BigDiesel1]

Rod, he's right (I'm an attorney). The race is to the swift.

 

[RodRico]

Patents only give one a headstart. I have 16 years to get far ahead in terms of value delivered, thus eliminating incentive to compete head-to-head. It’s called “building a mote.”

 

[enginesrus]

I wasn't saying someone would steal your idea. Someone could just come up with the correct mouse trap for drones and or what ever other uses you had in mind for that engine idea. Keep wasting time and your idea will just be an interesting antique or another "look at this maybe it would have been nice little power plant in those days".

 

[RodRico]

enginesrus,

Granted, someone could capture markets. Liquid Piston, for example is being generously funded by DARPA specifically to address the military drone requirement. There's not much I can do about that, however. I have long experience with DARPA, and they're not going to fund another engine until the Liquid Piston effort fails and passes from recent corporate memory.


Beyond the military market, I don't see a lot of R&D pouring into internal combustion for light civil aviation. Rotax, Contenental, and Lycoming appear content to harvest revenue from their current designs, and most everyone else appears to be chasing electric. My biggest fear is deployment of a safe, high density, rapid charging solid state battery which could doom *all* internal combustion development.


Frankly, I'm not real confident there *is* a market for a new internal combustion engine outside the military market (which needs propulsion in areas lacking reliable electric infrastructure), and interest in that area is temporarily captured by Liquid Piston. For that reason, I'm not terribly interested in jeopardizing retirement by spending a small fortunate paying others to do the work. Once I have a prototype with promising performance, I *may* be able to get investor funding and only then will I start expanding the team.


My efforts will accelerate soon, and I don't think they'll go significantly slower than if I threw money at the prototype build.


Rod

 

[FeX32]

Rod,
What is your idea? I'd be interested in taking a look at your patents.

I agree, in general the enabler for many e-machines long term is only energy density (sounds simple, but isn't however).

 

[enginesrus]

Maybe time to scale it up into the thousands of HP range and keep the weight down, then you could compete with the turbines.

 

[RodRico]

FeX32,

The patent was filed on 4/18/2017 (US 62485227), and I understand applications are published 18 months after filing, so it should appear soon. The patent has 26 claims stated in the highly confusing language of a patent lawyer. In the meantime, you can view a slightly outdated description of the engine with illustrations at

https://contest.techbriefs.com/2017/entries/aerospace-and-defense/8090.

I have made several changes in response to comments by a consultant I hired (who worked on the Ecotech, Skyactiv, and Liquid Piston designs) and to reduce the complexity of the prototype. Included in the changes are a reduction in equivalency from (1.0 to 0.4) with peak temperature to 2150K to prevent NOX formation, direct routing within the cylinder block of intake charge from the air pump piston to the intake chamber to eliminate some rotor side seals, reduction of piston sets (each radial set comprised of 3 piston faces) from 12 to 6, and increase of cycles per revolution from 4 to 6. The last change, increase of cycles per revolution from 4 to 6, is accompanied by a reduction in RPM from 7,800 to 2,626 to allow use of a larger and more efficient propeller turning at a slower speed without requiring a reduction gear.

The numbers are still shifting a bit as I finalize the 50cc prototype design, but they currently indicate approximately 2.8 HP and 5.6 lb-ft torque at 2,626 RPM at better than 50% efficiency sustainable to 20,000 foot altitude in an engine that's 5.4" in diameter and 3" in thickness including all components required for operation other than the fuel and oil tanks. I'm planning to build the engine by 3D printing the components, milling the 3D models for better accuracy and finish using a DSLS 3000 mill (

http://www.microproto.com/MMDSLS.htm),

centrifugal casting the components, then cleaning them up a few thousandths here and there with the same mill. I'm building my own test cell which will include a motoring dyno (constructed using a small electric motor/generator that can either be driven using an off-the-shelf motor controller or loaded using programmable electric load) as well as fuel consumption and emissions sensors. It's going to be a lot of fun!

enginesrus,

I don't think my engine competes with large turbines, and its integral supercharger lends itself best to high altitude applications. My power to weight ratio will be a little worse than a Wankel, but my reliability, efficiency, and emissions should be much better. I think the light aviation market is ideal, and it will likely be the last market to be impacted by electric propulsion due to concerns over weight and range.


Rod