Control emissions at the cylinder level, with Zero CO, Zero HC and near zero NO
Check out this great video
Unlike two pistons sharing a cylinder, and expanding in opposite directions, our same direction acceleration Design and Method does not cause ourFloating piston to share or deduct its kinetic energy from our crankshaft piston power, but instead it will create a higher field of pressure by competing for space.
This video is a working visualization, to solve for the design-to-function relational goals.
It is intended to describe the position of a floating piston positioned above a crank-shaft piston.
Fluid motion is also simplified to describe desired benefits. From engine design prospective, we would describe different motion of fluid flow and different positions and shapes of moving parts.
A relative motion engine design is different mainly in having an extended block to house the additional floating piston. Floating piston can share fluid motion controls with camshaft controls, which will simplify fluid motion rather than what seems more complicated. Fuel-Air mix shall not suffer a loss like we see in two stroke engines.
We understand the limitations on claiming high work output, when text books draw the limits around the chemical thermodynamics availability when converted to work output, where we see a discrepancy between the tight limits of expected theoretical cylinder work output enhancements and between some reports stating that only 20% of fuel burned in a vehicle is actually effective in moving the vehicle from point A to point B.
To avoid conflicts or a prejudgment, we prefer initially to concentrate on differences that can be claimed by design. If a 50mg of combustion fuel was expected to generate 150 Joules of work output, then we have to expect that 30 Joules will be spent in the next cycle on compression, and about 20 Joules spent on two cycles frictions to complete four strokes, ending with net 100 joules useful. When we complete four strokes in one cycle, by having four strokes performed in two compartments/one cycle, first saving is 10 Joules of friction, as well as compression energy recovered at about 70%, by increasing pressure in the combustion side, that is 20 Joules recovered, and the net useful work output is about 130 Joules. These calculation is to escape the pre-judgment of having 5% being the allowed limit of possible enhancement.
The OTTO's principles, treating the physics of a working piston like a bullet is dropped for the purpose of using better equilibrium of transferring combustion forces to a piston doing work
Functions and physics need to be reviewed by using new principles that we introduced at our American Physical Society presentation, for fellows to accept that we are not trying to break valid rules while we link our functions to the new design.
ANSYS simulation tests, were repeated by SOLIDWORKS and some key graphs were posted hereunder for those capable of repeating such tests, to enable them to verify our findings.
We did many simulation tests before we make any confirming step. Some fellows with business background, were able to communicate feedbacks, that helped us to better choose our presentation words as credible statements, and avoid, advertisement phrases.
Performance equation, was imbedded in our design video presentation, for those who prefer to build on theoretical base, before advancing a verification plan. While simulation tests show about 200% work/time enhancement, the 400% figure of claimed performance, was based on known engineering equation that can be verified in textbooks. We based our calculations on a well-known reference " Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals - Second Edition -Chapter 2, Engine Design and Operation Parameters" for John B. Heywood.
On the theoretical level we remined our readers, of the following:
While DeRochas-Otto principles recommend highest initial piston speed, John B. Heywood, reminds us that speed is what limits the engine breathing, and decides energy spent on acceleration. This issue is solved in our Relative Motion Design, where a relative motion is established by a lesser acceleration control method.
Torque is what measures engine ability to do work, and Power measures the rate of work done per second. On both measures, our Relative-Motion Cylinder doubled the performance, where every stroke is a power stroke and with our force graph doubling the distance before it goes negative.
Our floating piston, does not apply any negative power consumption to the crankshaft drive, being mechanically separate from the crankshaft, and floating inside the cylinder, with all of its valves closed, while it is also competing with the combustion fluid for space, creating a space-void of a negative combustion Pascal mass, and decreasing volume of displacement created by the crank shaft piston motion, which is the only Output Surface.
Copyright © 2019 Relative-Motion- 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. 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.