Our Relative Motion Engine, is our lab tested technology for new combustion engines with inner designs and methods, of our “Floating Piston” in each elongated Cylinder to literally
Double its torque-horse power output potential,
Insure a much cleaner exhaust with internal cylinder control,
Minimize engine noise and vibrations,
And enhance the mileage from an 18 miles per gallon example to potentially 70 miles per gallon,
Our Relative Motion cylinder hybrid design
decreases the engine speed in half for a given performance
increases the power gained from lowering the “ Acceleration Time of motion”
decreases costs of future life time maintenance, by operating at the lower engine speed
Applicable to both diesel and gasoline options.
Patent pending U.S App 16235272.
Today, the capabilities of our existing engines’ designs have:
A wide Range of variable compression ratios,
Bigger available air to fuel ratios, and
With more efficient turbocharge recovery methods
Is breaking the limits of what we can expect from
existing combustion engine designs and methods.
Traditional Air Emission control is either a pre-engine management solution of removing sulfur or lead from the fuel, or an after-engine filter treatment. while
Our Relative Motion Engine, is the only potential design and method that can provide a radical and effective Air Emission control at the cylinder design level, by increasing the mean effective pressure, ridding of the fluid freeze zone associated with higher piston speeds of conventional cylinders and providing better air to fuel ratios.
To establish better scientific sense of what Relative Motion Mechanics could bring to the table,
We would like to present to you a simple engineering problem, to put our reader on the same page with our web described mathematics and with our company’s mission.
Our Simulation tests of Relative Motion Operation were conducted using a typical combustion cylinder size, similar fluid compression ratio, and similar piston stroke distance, against similar load of resisting force.
First, using indirect fuel injection, where Initial pressure reached a peak of
three folds compared with the peak pressure of a direct injection, and
engine Piston moved at average speed of two folds the speed
after direct injection combustion, yet The direct injection method, is known to be more efficient.
(that is less initial pressure & less kinetic energy, then with the more effective direct injection).
More detail of this discrepancy is explained further in a latter part of our “Cylinder” and "Physics"Sections.
De Rochas - Otto's “Internal Combustion Principles” tie better engine performance to better initial pressure and better piston speed.
While “direct injection” in a counter intuitive sense, has raised the present modern engines torque and horse power.
(Four De Rochas Principles compared to our Relative Motion Engine, re shown in first part of our “Cylinder” Section).
Our Relative Motion Cylinder design and method of our “patent pending” “floating piston” in each cylinder, takes the lead from what makes sense, and from speculations,
to provide a mathematical system equilibrium control
of the calculated work-potential input,
and mechanical kinetic output,
where the source of gain is rooted at
increasing “mean effective pressure”, and
in relative gains of motion energy as a function of “time”.
Both gain factors cause a better equilibrium,
of transferring potential fluid forces to piston forces.
Details and Mathematics, are presented in our partial “feasibility study” of “Time” as a form of Energy in our “Physics” Section,
and to its capabilities presented in the latter half in our “Cylinder” Section.
As for the gain from Relative Motion "Time", using a Newtonian-relativity /Galilean transformation method in a “patent pending” statement, that was mathematically proved and evidenced by lab simulation testing,
Our cylinder system motion provided an exchange of value,
between the time-independent energy of “work potential”, and between work time index (time lapse of acceleration) of the system motion on a “time” coordinate.
Details and Mathematics are presented sequentially in our “Physics” Section.
We look forward to meet interested business partners;
On a worldwide basis
to use our Patent Pending fossil fuel Relative Motion Technology for many productive years;
to cooperate with battery operated vehicle technology; because we can provide a more consistent and cost effective electric supply, and
to cover the commercial vehicle sector with hybrid at the cylinder level solutions ;
Provide low CO and NOx air emission,
All with lower industrial power-to-engine volume cost, lower operating cost, & greater thermal safety.
Our Patent Pending Invention led us to the mathematics of a better system engineering of energy management
where “time” becomes a source of energy, That must have been the way this universe managed to use for its own accelerated expansion.
Mr X (Manufacture ) asked: We see fuel saving with the Relative Motion Method, but why do you think we need to use it?
Mr X: Relative Motion is the future of engine mechanics
for the following reasons:
· Enhanced performance on the full range of engine revolving speed.
· Enhanced possible profit margin, by the tremendous cut on fuel consumption.
· Refined and lower engine noise, and
· Lower air pollutant emissions.
· Decreased engine volume and cost, per unit of torque output.
· Enhanced durability and maintenance requirements due to lower thermal output, and lower operating RPM requirements for a given level of performance,
· By adding only one major unique working hybrid part a “floating piston” in each of our elongated engine cylinders.
· Lower Operational Cost and Maintenance Cost, with lowering engine speed for its greater output.
Fuel vehicles cost about $12,000 less in average than comparable battery operated (electric) vehicles, and we believe that economy will in the end drive the political will, not the other way around.
· Mr Environment an (Auto expert) said: Due to environmental regulations, I expect Electric car will replace the combustion engine completely by 2040.
The answer simply is, battery operated vehicles that cost more than $12,000 more in average, may replace passenger vehicles in certain advanced parts of the world only, while many other developing parts of the world, will need urgent enhancements on combustion methods; and while commercial vehicles will continue to completely depend on the internal combustion .
The future of energy trend, is to diversify and have balanced sourcing approach, where the fossil fuel source will suppot a main market share.
We can see that Electric cars will have important market presence, but while it could take a big share from the passenger car market, we do not see that happening with commercial cars where more torque and weight need continue with the combustion engine solution.
· To generate electricity, even with fossil fuels, and to transfer it to the vehicles for multiple battery re-charges at many future homes and road locations, a need exists to generate additional electricity to compensate for the electric wire travel losses, to reach the electric car users.
· A need and cost of POWER Reserves, to operate and generate electricity when Solar Power has no Sun for a few days, and/or in conjunction with any Wind power losses that may occur, The storage need then relies mainly with fossil fuels Power units, which, after using the Relative Motion method, can advance its share of the power production market.
· Let us not forget the additional pollution created by battery production factories and their added battery production waste disposal, that alone will in the future, requires balancing the pollution potential, where in the end, the Relative-Motion concepts will have to apply, not only to internal combustion methods, but to electric generators, where we can move again from the battery model to the generator model, which is out of the scope of this page at this moment.
It is possible that our World is moving to more centralized business models, with less retail overhead, yet
with the potential mileage gains furnished by the Relative Motion Means, the electrical cost from fossil fuels when used in a Relative Motion method, in a vehicle or in a power plant, shall be much lower per mile compared with any electrical cost of other sources.
· The enhancement of providing lower air emissions to atmosphere from the Relative Motion Engine shall also provide the fossil fuels industries with a grander future, for a much longer period of time, because
the cost comparisons made today of the future electricity sources, have not used yet our new and unique low cost means, of our Relative Motion Engine design and method.
· We do believe that future market demand, will continue to share different kinds of energies, with a great share of the better internal combustion engines that are yet to be produced,
Further discussion is in our “Cylinder” Section
Copyright © 2019 Relative Motion Mechanics - All Rights Reserved.
All material on this website including but not limited to text, images, videos, graphics, animation, physics methods and equations and other materials (herein "content") are subject to the copyright and other intellectual property rights of RELATIVE MOTION MECHANICS. Content of this website is for personal use only and may not be reproduced, communicated or published, in whole or in part, for any purpose without the express written consent of this website ownership.
Limitations of liabilities
Any and all information on this website is provided "as is" with no warranties as to the accuracy, adequacy, completeness, or appropriateness for any particular use. This website disclaims liability for any errors or damages whatsoever that may arise out of or in connection with the use of this website, even after any advice of the possibility of such damages. This statement applies however only to the extent permitted by applicable laws.