Comments on: Revetec Engine Developments http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/07/31/revetec-engine-developments/ Motorcycle News for Positive People Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:51:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Spartandude http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/07/31/revetec-engine-developments/#comment-135224 Spartandude Wed, 06 Aug 2008 16:12:01 +0000 http://thekneeslider.com/?p=1921#comment-135224 It actually was patented (look up tri-lobe engine on freepatents.com). A company called tritech also had some patents on the arrangement of the pistons, but they seem to be in a financial pickle. Couldn't find the balance issue in the patents though. I took another look at the x engine and saw that the pistons are in sync vertically. This would eliminate the x direction viabration and the rotating shafts on top could balance the y axis vibration while also offsetting each others rotational moment. One could also have only one top shaft (also used for the alternator) and have the drive shaft rotate at the same frequency as the pistons and these would cancel each others rotational moment. I want one...anyone see a price tag on these yet?-peace. It actually was patented (look up tri-lobe engine on freepatents.com). A company called tritech also had some patents on the arrangement of the pistons, but they seem to be in a financial pickle. Couldn’t find the balance issue in the patents though.
I took another look at the x engine and saw that the pistons are in sync vertically. This would eliminate the x direction viabration and the rotating shafts on top could balance the y axis vibration while also offsetting each others rotational moment. One could also have only one top shaft (also used for the alternator) and have the drive shaft rotate at the same frequency as the pistons and these would cancel each others rotational moment.
I want one…anyone see a price tag on these yet?-peace.

]]> By: todd http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/07/31/revetec-engine-developments/#comment-134761 todd Mon, 04 Aug 2008 23:17:19 +0000 http://thekneeslider.com/?p=1921#comment-134761 Right, forgot the whole 3-lobe crank ("trilobate") thing. I guess the "low RPM" still stands then. This might be patentable but... One could always have a simple crankshaft (driving nothing) in the center of the trilobates that would allow the pistons to oscillate in opposition. They would then balance each other out. You would only add the small amount of friction in the rods and a small rocking couple in the off-set of the pistons. -todd Right, forgot the whole 3-lobe crank (“trilobate”) thing. I guess the “low RPM” still stands then.

This might be patentable but… One could always have a simple crankshaft (driving nothing) in the center of the trilobates that would allow the pistons to oscillate in opposition. They would then balance each other out. You would only add the small amount of friction in the rods and a small rocking couple in the off-set of the pistons.

-todd

]]> By: Spartandude http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/07/31/revetec-engine-developments/#comment-134736 Spartandude Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:57:13 +0000 http://thekneeslider.com/?p=1921#comment-134736 Okay, I solved the balance equations with two pairs of dynamic balancing rods. These rods could neutralize their off axis vibration with one pair cancelling out the X and vice versa for the Y forcing function of the pistons. I haven't figured out the equations for a single pair of balancing rods, but hopefully this will let me stop obsessing over this. - peace Okay, I solved the balance equations with two pairs of dynamic balancing rods. These rods could neutralize their off axis vibration with one pair cancelling out the X and vice versa for the Y forcing function of the pistons. I haven’t figured out the equations for a single pair of balancing rods, but hopefully this will let me stop obsessing over this. – peace

]]> By: Spartandude http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/07/31/revetec-engine-developments/#comment-134728 Spartandude Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:13:16 +0000 http://thekneeslider.com/?p=1921#comment-134728 @ todd, Thanks for the reply, but the cranks can't be weighted as there are three piston cycles per one crank revolution. This would mean that a weight offsetting the piston on one cycle would be neutralized by the other three lobe's weight (thats what I meant by rotationally symetrical). Possible on the low RPM though. @ todd,
Thanks for the reply, but the cranks can’t be weighted as there are three piston cycles per one crank revolution. This would mean that a weight offsetting the piston on one cycle would be neutralized by the other three lobe’s weight (thats what I meant by rotationally symetrical).
Possible on the low RPM though.

]]> By: todd http://thekneeslider.com/archives/2008/07/31/revetec-engine-developments/#comment-134600 todd Sun, 03 Aug 2008 17:19:30 +0000 http://thekneeslider.com/?p=1921#comment-134600 Balancing? This is where the "low RPM" comes in handy. Since each geared flywheel/crank web is counter rotating they can have weights to counter the pistons. At 90 degrees the counter rotating would allow them to cancel each other as well. There would still be a rocking couple at the center of the two flywheels. -todd Balancing? This is where the “low RPM” comes in handy.

Since each geared flywheel/crank web is counter rotating they can have weights to counter the pistons. At 90 degrees the counter rotating would allow them to cancel each other as well. There would still be a rocking couple at the center of the two flywheels.

-todd

]]>