RE: 4 Stroke Redesigned
Discussion
Pigeon said:
Dead centres?
Different new sites in animation Solid Works of new differential.http://www.new4stroke.com/differ.wmv
Andrew
Feliks said:
...
Different new sites in animation Solid Works of new differential....
Andrew
New rod differential at animations Solid Works when one axle stop.Different new sites in animation Solid Works of new differential....
Andrew
http://www.new4stroke.com/differ%20stop.wmv
Andrew
I find a beautiful array :
At last something happens .
In my oscillating dynamo I help cellular telephone IC Lm 2621.
May be cellular telephone need advanced mechanic??
If put in cellular telephone mechanic automatic movement,using in mechanic clock, and miniature electric generator drive it, we don't need charge cellular telephone.Phone will be loaded on our result of traffic, obvious as there will be in our pocket
Some parts and principle work of automatic movement:
Perhaps, we must use e.g. 6 such systems, in order to can be charge phone goods .?
Regards Andrew
At last something happens .
In my oscillating dynamo I help cellular telephone IC Lm 2621.
May be cellular telephone need advanced mechanic??
If put in cellular telephone mechanic automatic movement,using in mechanic clock, and miniature electric generator drive it, we don't need charge cellular telephone.Phone will be loaded on our result of traffic, obvious as there will be in our pocket
Some parts and principle work of automatic movement:
Perhaps, we must use e.g. 6 such systems, in order to can be charge phone goods .?
Regards Andrew
Edited by Feliks on Sunday 7th September 22:56
May be Swiss precision it will astonish again .
My propose for yacht: On highest point of mast instead of flag,for example,box belongs to place with such array: 20 pcs X 20 pcs X 60 pcs systems (50 cm x 50cm x 30 cm). All 24000 system's. And I think, so enough for made electric energy for yacht. Without any fuel.
There is possible build closest house fiberglass mast too and we insert dynamo in this highest place. When wind blows this e.g 15 meter mast too have some movement.
Without barrier for birds , and no sound effect. And looks better
Andrew
My propose for yacht: On highest point of mast instead of flag,for example,box belongs to place with such array: 20 pcs X 20 pcs X 60 pcs systems (50 cm x 50cm x 30 cm). All 24000 system's. And I think, so enough for made electric energy for yacht. Without any fuel.
There is possible build closest house fiberglass mast too and we insert dynamo in this highest place. When wind blows this e.g 15 meter mast too have some movement.
Without barrier for birds , and no sound effect. And looks better
Andrew
My propose new
Differential Gear. It's first design.
Without any cogged gear, and if we will employ oiled lubrication solid ball bearing (closed), then work is possible without oil oiling .Polyurethane HD belt.
I am some, that such will work without that noises differential .
Regards Andrew
Differential Gear. It's first design.
Without any cogged gear, and if we will employ oiled lubrication solid ball bearing (closed), then work is possible without oil oiling .Polyurethane HD belt.
I am some, that such will work without that noises differential .
Regards Andrew
Edited by Feliks on Friday 12th September 01:52
Edited by Feliks on Friday 12th September 11:09
Why I don't like spring:
Yes, discus about advantages and disadvantages of spring a re start
Some video, what spring of poped can make :-)
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/high_speed_video/mec...
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/high_speed_video/mec...
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/high_speed_video/mec...
I thik, so pistons valve , and rod eliminate this "play sprig".
Mass too is better solutions.
Regards Andrew
Yes, discus about advantages and disadvantages of spring a re start
Some video, what spring of poped can make :-)
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/high_speed_video/mec...
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/high_speed_video/mec...
http://www.engr.colostate.edu/high_speed_video/mec...
I thik, so pistons valve , and rod eliminate this "play sprig".
Mass too is better solutions.
Regards Andrew
Edited by Feliks on Sunday 21st September 10:05
Edited by Feliks on Monday 22 September 00:27
Farthest development at one pivot stand differential animations, but this time about 180 degrees removed rod. Permutation is possible about 90 degrees definitely too. But which setup will be better, as yet, I do not know. My be It's help if torque will not have a linear relationship To develop simile Torsen torque biasing and traction management too.
Regards Andrew
Regards Andrew
Feliks said:
You see this animations?
Andrew
I'd have thought that you would want to stagger the ignition by 90degrees.Andrew
Just looking at it, the piston valves look broadly balanced, but the power pistons aren't.
I'd guess that if you were to move the ignition around then the piston valves would be moved out of balance by the same amount that the power pistons moved into balance. Clearly the power would then be uneven. Perhaps make it four power cylinders?
You know last time my distaste for transmission cogged ??
Visit Ricardo Company - http://www.ricardo.com/engineeringservices/newEner... I see many problem with it.
My solve: Wind motion my oscillating dynamo packs, without any cogged transmission:
Regards Andrew
Visit Ricardo Company - http://www.ricardo.com/engineeringservices/newEner... I see many problem with it.
My solve: Wind motion my oscillating dynamo packs, without any cogged transmission:
Regards Andrew
Feliks said:
You know last time my distaste for transmission cogged ??
Visit Ricardo Company - http://www.ricardo.com/engineeringservices/newEner... I see many problem with it.
My solve: Wind motion my oscillating dynamo packs, without any cogged transmission:
Regards Andrew
The problem with the oscillating packs is what I would describe in an electrical engineering sense, as an impedance mismatch.Visit Ricardo Company - http://www.ricardo.com/engineeringservices/newEner... I see many problem with it.
My solve: Wind motion my oscillating dynamo packs, without any cogged transmission:
Regards Andrew
In a mechanical sense, the turbine has low speed and high torque. To get the best out of the electrical rotor/stator, you need high speed and low torque. That's what the gearbox does. Whilst your reciprocating scheme would work, it would not be efficient, unless your dynamo was very long. Even then it would use significantly more copper.
[quote]
The problem with the oscillating packs is what I would describe in an electrical engineering sense, as an impedance mismatch.
In a mechanical sense, the turbine has low speed and high torque. To get the best out of the electrical rotor/stator, you need high speed and low torque. That's what the gearbox does. Whilst your reciprocating scheme would work, it would not be efficient, unless your dynamo was very long. Even then it would use significantly more copper.
[/quote]
This motor too work dynamo .I am only rolled it, and give new philosophy - no one big , multi little dynamo. It 's very efficient new dynamo at very low RPM. this same normal stepper motor working dynamo.
http://www.new4stroke.com/stepper.wmv
Regards Andrew
The problem with the oscillating packs is what I would describe in an electrical engineering sense, as an impedance mismatch.
In a mechanical sense, the turbine has low speed and high torque. To get the best out of the electrical rotor/stator, you need high speed and low torque. That's what the gearbox does. Whilst your reciprocating scheme would work, it would not be efficient, unless your dynamo was very long. Even then it would use significantly more copper.
[/quote]
This motor too work dynamo .I am only rolled it, and give new philosophy - no one big , multi little dynamo. It 's very efficient new dynamo at very low RPM. this same normal stepper motor working dynamo.
http://www.new4stroke.com/stepper.wmv
Regards Andrew
Edited by Feliks on Tuesday 28th October 10:50
dilbert said:
Feliks said:
The problem with the oscillating packs is what I would describe in an electrical engineering sense, as an impedance mismatch.
In a mechanical sense, the turbine has low speed and high torque. To get the best out of the electrical rotor/stator, you need high speed and low torque. That's what the gearbox does. Whilst your reciprocating scheme would work, it would not be efficient, unless your dynamo was very long. Even then it would use significantly more copper.
In a mechanical sense, the turbine has low speed and high torque. To get the best out of the electrical rotor/stator, you need high speed and low torque. That's what the gearbox does. Whilst your reciprocating scheme would work, it would not be efficient, unless your dynamo was very long. Even then it would use significantly more copper.
This motor too work dynamo .I am only rolled it, and give new philosophy - no one big , multi little dynamo. It 's very efficient new dynamo at very low RPM. this same normal stepper motor working dynamo.
http://www.new4stroke.com/stepper.wmv
Regards Andrew
Edited by Feliks on Tuesday 28th October 10:50
I will get back to it.
ETA;
Allright. I'm not going to have the time for this in detail, but I'd point out that in the same way that nobody is really using a rotary stepper motor to generate electricity, I doubt anyone is going to use a linear one to generate electricity. I'm not going to say it's beyond the wit of man, but it's not the way to do it.
That is not to say that you cannot make a linear dynamo.
The point I was originally trying to make is that because you only have a single stator, you are only ever going to see RMS power out at 0.707 of peak, it's a sinusoid. Most wind turbines (as far as I am aware) have three phase alternators, which run at something like 1.223 of peak.
You could also have three of your boxes to contain each of the phases, and then of the three boxes, none would ever have a static magnetic field unless the turbine was not rotating.
Even then, I fear that you still would not be hitting the efficiency of a rotating alternator. because the magnetic fields would not be contained in the same space. Somehow you have to get all three of the phases distributed magnetically within one box, for optimum efficiency.
Even then, the loss in the rotating dynamo is still less. Thats because there are no ends ends to the fields in the rotating alternator. They continue around in a donut. The linear approach can, by nature, never replicate that.
The only question in my mind is if the losses of the linear approach are worse or better than the gearbox losses in the rotating approach. I suspect that the gearbox losses are smaller, but the only way to find out for sure is to try.
Edited by dilbert on Saturday 1st November 20:14
[quote]
Allright. I'm not going to have the time for this in detail, but I'd point out that in the same way that nobody is really using a rotary stepper motor to generate electricity, I doubt anyone is going to use a linear one to generate electricity. I'm not going to say it's beyond the wit of man, but it's not the way to do it.
That is not to say that you cannot make a linear dynamo.
The point I was originally trying to make is that because you only have a single stator, you are only ever going to see RMS power out at 0.707 of peak, it's a sinusoid. Most wind turbines (as far as I am aware) have three phase alternators, which run at something like 1.223 of peak.
You could also have three of your boxes to contain each of the phases, and then of the three boxes, none would ever have a static magnetic field unless the turbine was not rotating.
Even then, I fear that you still would not be hitting the efficiency of a rotating alternator. because the magnetic fields would not be contained in the same space. Somehow you have to get all three of the phases distributed magnetically within one box, for optimum efficiency.
Even then, the loss in the rotating dynamo is still less. Thats because there are no ends ends to the fields in the rotating alternator. They continue around in a donut. The linear approach can, by nature, never replicate that.
The only question in my mind is if the losses of the linear approach are worse or better than the gearbox losses in the rotating approach. I suspect that the gearbox losses are smaller, but the only way to find out for sure is to try.
[/quote]
Dear Dilbert,
Alternate current in my oscillatory dynamo for some employment produce today's time straighten DC electrical energy, in order to it further use . So, if dynamo gives constant current(DC), then everything we can further with this . Before make inventer DC - - 3 phase.For example, it is used such that for change of rotary speed of engine of alternate current (AC).
There phase current (AC)is made want from DC current about like frequency AC (frequency inverters)(, we can change speed of rotary engine of electric alternate current by that.
DC current are posible many regulation , when we make it.It is advantages.
http://www.lenze.co.uk/lenze.uk_en_active/020_Prod....
In final effect only, after assembly from all sources and regulation , it belongs to convert in current 3 phase alternate on iventer.
But if you no like oscillating dtnamo , i have my proposes without this:
Name Beam Dynamo.
Such type of pump has been born for too, that produce electric current from marine waves can .
Under-sea fields with energy ? ?
Regards Andrew
Allright. I'm not going to have the time for this in detail, but I'd point out that in the same way that nobody is really using a rotary stepper motor to generate electricity, I doubt anyone is going to use a linear one to generate electricity. I'm not going to say it's beyond the wit of man, but it's not the way to do it.
That is not to say that you cannot make a linear dynamo.
The point I was originally trying to make is that because you only have a single stator, you are only ever going to see RMS power out at 0.707 of peak, it's a sinusoid. Most wind turbines (as far as I am aware) have three phase alternators, which run at something like 1.223 of peak.
You could also have three of your boxes to contain each of the phases, and then of the three boxes, none would ever have a static magnetic field unless the turbine was not rotating.
Even then, I fear that you still would not be hitting the efficiency of a rotating alternator. because the magnetic fields would not be contained in the same space. Somehow you have to get all three of the phases distributed magnetically within one box, for optimum efficiency.
Even then, the loss in the rotating dynamo is still less. Thats because there are no ends ends to the fields in the rotating alternator. They continue around in a donut. The linear approach can, by nature, never replicate that.
The only question in my mind is if the losses of the linear approach are worse or better than the gearbox losses in the rotating approach. I suspect that the gearbox losses are smaller, but the only way to find out for sure is to try.
[/quote]
Dear Dilbert,
Alternate current in my oscillatory dynamo for some employment produce today's time straighten DC electrical energy, in order to it further use . So, if dynamo gives constant current(DC), then everything we can further with this . Before make inventer DC - - 3 phase.For example, it is used such that for change of rotary speed of engine of alternate current (AC).
There phase current (AC)is made want from DC current about like frequency AC (frequency inverters)(, we can change speed of rotary engine of electric alternate current by that.
DC current are posible many regulation , when we make it.It is advantages.
http://www.lenze.co.uk/lenze.uk_en_active/020_Prod....
In final effect only, after assembly from all sources and regulation , it belongs to convert in current 3 phase alternate on iventer.
But if you no like oscillating dtnamo , i have my proposes without this:
Name Beam Dynamo.
Such type of pump has been born for too, that produce electric current from marine waves can .
Under-sea fields with energy ? ?
Regards Andrew
Edited by Feliks on Monday 3rd November 11:44
I think we can agree that a system of pulleys is better in many ways than a gearbox.
In addition there are lots of benefits to using a connecting rod.
The big problem with reciprocation though is that the torque at the output varies throughout the cycle.
With the wave power solution the linear dynamo, is a good idea. The source of energy, the wave, has a variable input magnitude. Using the nodding donkey with it wouldn't be such a good idea, because the wave motion would have to be in synchronisation with the nodding donkey to get maximum energy transfer.
Because of the variability of the mechanical energy source you need to be able to control the resistance against the input forces for optimal energy transfer. With engines, you have a lovely continuous source of energy. With something slippery like a wave, you have to start thinking about coupling, if you want it to work well.
With the wind turbine, I still think the optimum solution is the gearbox.
In addition there are lots of benefits to using a connecting rod.
The big problem with reciprocation though is that the torque at the output varies throughout the cycle.
With the wave power solution the linear dynamo, is a good idea. The source of energy, the wave, has a variable input magnitude. Using the nodding donkey with it wouldn't be such a good idea, because the wave motion would have to be in synchronisation with the nodding donkey to get maximum energy transfer.
Because of the variability of the mechanical energy source you need to be able to control the resistance against the input forces for optimal energy transfer. With engines, you have a lovely continuous source of energy. With something slippery like a wave, you have to start thinking about coupling, if you want it to work well.
With the wind turbine, I still think the optimum solution is the gearbox.
Edited by dilbert on Tuesday 4th November 03:09
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff