Intake Valve and Feliks' ideas

[J.A.W.]

Andrew, here's an engine animation you might like.. ( & its still a cool design, even after ~80 years)

http://www.hawkertempest.se/index.php/c ... o-pasquale

[gruntguru]

Outstanding animations! Always been a Sabre fan.

[Feliks]

Here a link for professionals, which, in one place trying to give some knowledge about my engine. Thinking in terms of only heat the internal combustion engine and associated only with the efficiency of the internal combustion engine is a serious limitation of understanding of the internal combustion engine .. As described, the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, Primarily a depends on the efficiency to overcome the forces of inertia. Generally, twice heavier engine of the same displacement, will be much less efficient, its lighter version and the consequent efficiencies, have nothing to do with the heat .. Because overcome the forces of inertia does not cause any increase or loss heat .. So thinking only categories that everything can be reduced to the category of heat is a big mistake, because overcoming inertia can not "force" reduced to the category of heat.

http://forum.engine-research.com/index. ... &board=4.0

Andrew

[gruntguru]

Efficiency has nothing to do with inertia. Any energy used to accelerate heavy moving parts is not lost - simply converted to kinetic energy which is easily recovered when the component is slowed again. Some components are deliberately massive for this very purpose - eg flywheels.

The energy input is heat. The energy output is mechanical work. Divide the two to get the efficiency.

[Feliks]

Efficiency has nothing to do with inertia. Any energy used to accelerate heavy moving parts is not lost - simply converted to kinetic energy which is easily recovered when the component is slowed again. Some components are deliberately massive for this very purpose - eg flywheels.

The energy input is heat. The energy output is mechanical work. Divide the two to get the efficiency.

Of course, oversimplifying the whole science of crank .. The forces of inertia is not the flywheel, and the reaction friction cylinder and bearings. The resulting energy must overcome the forces of friction .. The larger they are, does not have the example depending on the weight of the piston, the friction is larger and less energy. Because of course, and the forces of inertia are dependent on the square of speed. These are reciprocating mass and not mass flywheel



Andrew

[gruntguru]

Ahh friction - now that is different. Friction definitely wastes energy - it converts work back into heat.

Inertia does not waste energy. It converts work and/or potential energy into kinetic energy and vice versa.

[Feliks]

Ahh friction - now that is different. Friction definitely wastes energy - it converts work back into heat.

Inertia does not waste energy. It converts work and/or potential energy into kinetic energy and vice versa.

Really?

[gruntguru]

Ahh friction - now that is different. Friction definitely wastes energy - it converts work back into heat.
Inertia does not waste energy. It converts work and/or potential energy into kinetic energy and vice versa.

Really?

So you knew that already? Surprising, considering you previously posted this . . . . .

Thinking in terms of only heat the internal combustion engine and associated only with the efficiency of the internal combustion engine is a serious limitation of understanding of the internal combustion engine .. As described, the efficiency of the internal combustion engine, Primarily a depends on the efficiency to overcome the forces of inertia.

[PhillipM]

I think you're wasting your time on these threads GG, he posts them everywhere on the 'net but doesn't quite seem to understand why his ideas aren't used anywhere - which is because they don't work. Trying to argue it is like talking to a spoon, as can been seen earlier in this thread.

[gruntguru]

HA HA thanks. Don't worry, I just copy/paste my reply across to other threads too!

[J.A.W.]

I think you're wasting your time on these threads GG, he posts them everywhere on the 'net but doesn't quite seem to understand why his ideas aren't used anywhere - which is because they don't work. Trying to argue it is like talking to a spoon, as can been seen earlier in this thread.

Evidently P.M., you are unaware.. that gg is a (Hons) graduate of the Uri Geller Institute of Advanded Spoon Bending..

[Feliks]

HA HA thanks. Don't worry, I just copy/paste my reply across to other threads too!

Well it's good that everyone saw what true joy makes you .. I'm glad you could induce a sincere smile on your face

Andrew

[PhillipM]

HA HA thanks. Don't worry, I just copy/paste my reply across to other threads too!

I have a belief that one day he'll grow older and gain enough knowledge to realise that these pages and pages of stuff scattered across dozens of forums doesn't work, and just how many people he's given at good laugh at his expense.

Hopefully on that day he comes out with something useful - at least he'll have plenty of drawing experience by then.

[Feliks]

Here the wing crank, because the wind can produce ourselves, when we want and where we want .. remember the carousel, like hair blowing in the wind, when it was going on?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey9W39N ... e=youtu.be



Andrew

[Feliks]

so, so many years of transition period..

http://sinusvalves.com/

Andrew