Rotary spherical valvetrain!

This thread went dormant a few weeks ago, but for those who have been as engrossed as I have in Manolis Pattakon's VVA invention, consider the possibility of a Coates rotary valve running inside a controllable sleeve which would vary the opening and duration of the intake/exhaust events. Lots of issues to deal with (lubrication control, thermal distortion), but an interesting notion, maybe.
 
Seattle Smitty,

Regarding the rotary valves:

The controlled timing of the rotary valves is simple, it takes only a phaser between the crankshaft and the rotary valves “shaftâ€￾.
The control of the duration is another story. The insertion of a sleeve between the rotary valve and the cylinder opening adds another passage for the gas to escape. If the sealing quality is already critical, the additional sleeve cannot work. Coates knows the rotary valves and their problems, so he could say.


You are thinking about the Variable Valve Actuation system. The Pattakon VVA is on the roads for a long time now. The prototype cars are used as ordinary cars every day.

So instead of thinking about the Pattakon VVA, make me a favor and think about the Pattakon PRE engine.

Look the animations at www.pattakon.com/pre/index.html . Take a careful look at the plots: the PRE engine offers some 30 to 40% more time near TDC for efficient combustion.

pre_TDC.GIF


Spot on the Junkers-PRE version at www.pattakon.com/pre/PRE14.exe , used as the prime mover for an electric power plant at www.pattakon.com/pre/PRE16.exe and on a portable flying machine at www.pattakon.com/fly/Flyer1.exe

When you get the chance, take a look at the Pattakon’s US patent 6,062,187 (regarding the PPE or Pulling Piston Engine which is the father of Pattakon PRE or Pulling Rod Engine) and then at the four year later HONDA’s endeavour on the same exactly problem with the US patents 6,763,796 and 6,786,189 (at http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html ). Spot on the complication of each solution.
Honda’s patents start with “In order to increase thermal efficiency by increasing the constant volume portion of combustion, it is proposed . . . “


A single cylinder Junkers-PRE Diesel engine with a pair of counter rotating electric generators is the ideal power plant for Hybrid cars because:

pre_junkers.JPG


It is absolutely vibration free (there are neither inertia nor combustion vibrations from the engine to the vehicle), it is autarkic having built-in scavenging pumps, it has top thermal efficiency (due to the slow motion of pistons near TDC), top power concentration (as a Diesel it can rev efficiently at 6000 rpm), it has four stroke like lubrication, it is simple, it uses only conventional materials etc.

img15.gif


Do you know a Diesel revving efficiently at 6000 rpm?

Compare the PRE engine to anything you know. For instance, to the OPOC FEV engine. And let me know.

The blueprints for a PRE prototype are ready.
A PRE prototype is necessary in order to check the theory in practice (exactly as happens in the case of the Pattakon VVA).
In the meantime do make your objections and comments.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos
 
Dang!! I guess I'm going to have to get a computer. I am now very time-limited, by using the library computers and a few others. This seemed to me to be a good thing, so I wouldn't waste too much time. But when it comes to websites like yours, Manolis, I want to spend hours studying and thinking about it. You are going to cost me some money!!!
 
Seattle Smitty,

Take the engine of Bourke (many articles have been written for it).
The weak point was (and still is) the Scotch Yoke mechanism.
The strong point was, and still is, the pure sinusoidal motion of the pistons, offering slower piston motion near TDC.

Compare Bourke engine to Pattakon PRE:
If Bourke engine increases the time the piston is near TDC by x% compared to the conventional engine, the PRE engine compared to Bourke engine increases the time the piston stays close to TDC by x%, i.e. the PRE increases the time the piston stay close to TDC by 2*x% compared to the conventional engine.
PRE is not using Scotch Yoke mechanism, but the typical crank / connecting-rod / piston.

Compare the Junkers-PRE engine to the OPOC FEV. To achieve the same quality of inertia balance they need more than eight pistons. In case of Hybrid cars, the single crankshaft FEV OPOC guarantees the presence of combustion pulses to the vehicle. The Junkers PRE with two counter-rotating electric generators on its cranks is absolutely free from inertia and combustion vibrations.

Think that with two short stroke pistons you form a long stroke "through" scavenging engine, think also that the con-rods are heavily stressed only in tension.

PS. Having a PC today is a need, not a luxury.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos
 
Seattle Smitty,

If finding a PC is that difficult, I will sent you a couple of CDs with the material into Pattakon web site.
Just let me know.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos
 
Thanks much, Manolis. A friend of mine has some old equipment he doesn't use, so I'll go look at it in a week or so.

(Funny, I don't have a CD player either. And all my cars are old, too!)
 
Back
Top