Duke Engines? Axial piston recip engine..

[TerryW]

This is a Fascinating new engine concept.  I love new radical designs, they may change everything as we know it.

 

Interesting application of axial piston pumping technology applied to reciprocating engine development.

 

  

JUST WHEN WE THINK WE CANNOT DO MORE WITH THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE,

 

SOMETHING NEW TURNS UP!!

 

 

HERE

[peejman]

Interesting.  I wonder how the lubrication and cooling systems work. 

[tercel89]

Interesting.  I wonder how the lubrication and cooling systems work. 

Exactly ! I was wondering how the lubrication system would get up in through the tight areas of that engine. It is interesting ! 

[tercel89]

If I remember correctly , the Wankel had a problem early on and it's early engines would burn oil right off the bat on new engines. Plus it's dirty little secret was low torque. 

[Joseg]

smaller engine with turbos, FTW!! Or VW TDI engines.. Though definitely an interesting concept, would like to know more about maintenance and what not.. 

[Caster]

That's awesome. I'm all for innovation.....but....I don't see this unseating a well built small block for 'snatchin a knot in yo azz' oomph!

[TerryW]

Give it time. When something like this gets to about a hundred horses/liter you may change your mind.

 

 

I wonder just what torque will feel like in this new design?  I love the V designed motor torque that we have come to know over the years.  Loads of torque and it feels like it's going to roll when you stomp on it..  lol

[peejman]

If I remember correctly , the Wankel had a problem early on and it's early engines would burn oil right off the bat on new engines. Plus it's dirty little secret was low torque. 

 

 

Even the newer Wankels (RX8) would burn an astonishing amount of oil when new.  Some never stopped consuming it.  Sealing the rotor isn't easy. 

 

As for increasing efficiency, adding a turbo is a quick way to do that.  Looks like that would be a plumbing nightmare with this design since it has 3 separate throttle bodies.

 

The basic shape of it and reported weight savings makes me think light aircraft would be a good application. 

 

 

 

I wonder just what torque will feel like in this new design?  I love the V designed motor torque that we have come to know over the years.  Loads of torque and it feels like it's going to roll when you stomp on it..  lol

 

 

Torque will feel like torque. Its still a moment applied around the crankshaft axis, that part is the same regardless of configuration. 

Edited March 19, 2014 by peejman

[Guest Lester Weevils]

If I remember correctly , the Wankel had a problem early on and it's early engines would burn oil right off the bat on new engines. Plus it's dirty little secret was low torque. 

 

I had a wankel mazda. It was designed to rev pretty fast in normal operation. The torque was low at low rpm and high at high rpm, so pedal to the metal didn't snatch yer head back. It was like a slingshot, slow at the beginning of each gear, and fast at the top of each gear. But purt fast and it handled good at least compared to the competition at the time. Very smooth power.

 

It burned oil by design, had an injector that would add oil to the gas, so you expected to routinely add oil. Oil had to get to the friction surfaces somehow. They had trouble getting good enough materials for the seals on the tips of the rotors, so it was also expected to replace those periodically.

 

I suspect the coffin nail was fuel efficiency. If tuned for high gas mileage and high power it had horrible pollution, so it was intentionally run too rich, 18 mpg or less when equivalent little piston cars got much better mileage. The unburned gas in the exhaust was necessary to run a very hot catalytic converter to deal with the pollution and satisfy the epa.

 

Was interesting looking under the hood because the tiny powerful engine was about the size of a gallon milk jug, but had normal sized battery, radiator, carb, air cleaner, and full sized transmission. Almost looked like the engine was missing, had to hunt under the other fullsize stuff in there to find the little engine down in the shadows.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Lester Weevils

[TerryW]

 

 

Wrong post

 

Edited March 19, 2014 by TerryW

[No_0ne]

Interesting concept, but there are probably a lot of issues left to work out.  As mentioned earlier, the Wankel engines had inherent problems sealing a single rotor, and normal engine wear exacerbated this accordingly, You have to wonder how the designers will handle what appears to be a more complex sealing problem in this engine.  With many newer designs, longevity becomes problematic as testing continues, I doubt if these are far enough along in the testing phase to answer that issue yet.  If it pans out, good for them, innovation and creativity are great things in engineering, but the conventional V-type piston engine has well over 100 years of real-world testing and development behind it and won't be unseated easily by newer designs.

 

As for light aircraft, it's unlikely this engine will ever see use in that industry.  Any certificated aircraft must undergo rigorous, lengthy and very expensive testing before the FAA will approve any new designs being installed in factory built aircraft, and the market is too small to justify the (literally) millions of dollars necessary to bring something like this to fruition.  Small piston-engined GA aircraft are still running 1940's era boxer engines, with magnetos and mechanical fuel injection for this very reason.  If it proves successful, you might see someone giving it a try in the experimental category.

[Guest Brutnus]

Pretty neat, but it needs to be very efficient to ever be introduced into the market due to the swing in hybrids and electric cars. 

[peejman]

Interesting concept, but there are probably a lot of issues left to work out.  As mentioned earlier, the Wankel engines had inherent problems sealing a single rotor, and normal engine wear exacerbated this accordingly, You have to wonder how the designers will handle what appears to be a more complex sealing problem in this engine.  With many newer designs, longevity becomes problematic as testing continues, I doubt if these are far enough along in the testing phase to answer that issue yet.  If it pans out, good for them, innovation and creativity are great things in engineering, but the conventional V-type piston engine has well over 100 years of real-world testing and development behind it and won't be unseated easily by newer designs.

 

As for light aircraft, it's unlikely this engine will ever see use in that industry.  Any certificated aircraft must undergo rigorous, lengthy and very expensive testing before the FAA will approve any new designs being installed in factory built aircraft, and the market is too small to justify the (literally) millions of dollars necessary to bring something like this to fruition.  Small piston-engined GA aircraft are still running 1940's era boxer engines, with magnetos and mechanical fuel injection for this very reason.  If it proves successful, you might see someone giving it a try in the experimental category.

 

 

Agreed on the FAA stuff, experimental would be the only way.  I find it absurd that you can pay $350k+ or more for a brand new airplane, glass cockpit, GPS satnav, etc. ... with an engine designed 70+ years ago. 

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Hmmm, well if there were a better engine, guess it might fit in a hybrid as good as pistons? Even wankels if they could solve the pollution and rotor tip issues with modern materials, could run constant throttle at the operational sweet spot of the engine. Maybe have an even smaller engine than what was used in the mazdas.

 

It was against the law and impossible in regions with annual pollution inspections, but some folk would remove the catalytic converter and lean out the carb on mazdas, and get lots more power and outstanding gas mileage. Not that the little mazdas felt especially underpowered. My little rx3 station wagon, unmodified, ran like a scalded dog, especially at highway speeds. When speed limits were 70 and you didn't get in real bad trouble going faster, once at highway speeds, no cruise control, once at 60, had to keep an eye on the speedometer because it just naturally wanted to creep up on 80+.

Edited March 20, 2014 by Lester Weevils