Three apexes like a rotor, but it uses pistons.
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 15,725
Likes: 91
From: Near Seattle
Three apexes like a rotor, but it uses pistons.
After reading the 0 vibration rotary thread, and seeing a link in a VW forum about this new flat four engine that uses piston movement similar to the really old Bourke engine, I decided to post the link in this forum.
http://www.revetec.com/
Latest news: http://www.revetec.com/website/index2.html
As for coming out with new internal combustion engine stuff like what Manntis mentioned, I think this engine may be able to do it.
However, it works very much like the old Bourke engine, except for the counter rotating 'rotors' of the new REVETEC. Anyway, here's a link to the Bourke engine so you can compare: http://www.bourke-engine.com/b/index.html
http://www.revetec.com/
Latest news: http://www.revetec.com/website/index2.html
As for coming out with new internal combustion engine stuff like what Manntis mentioned, I think this engine may be able to do it.
However, it works very much like the old Bourke engine, except for the counter rotating 'rotors' of the new REVETEC. Anyway, here's a link to the Bourke engine so you can compare: http://www.bourke-engine.com/b/index.html
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 735
Likes: 0
From: Wayward Hayward
looks interesting... I'd like to see some dyno results from this thing as well as the ox2 engine. New concept engines may be more powerful, more efficient, ect, but they also tend to be more expensive... 
I did just recently hear that the car companies are just about finished with Hydrogen Fuel cell cars. By november or Dec honda and toyota said they would have their first production line models through factory... Interesting stuff...
I did just recently hear that the car companies are just about finished with Hydrogen Fuel cell cars. By november or Dec honda and toyota said they would have their first production line models through factory... Interesting stuff...
Punk Ass Bitch
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
From: Welland, Ontario
LOL!!!!
Still, the rotary is WAY simpler, the engine basically has a glorified crankshaft. IT doesnt really eliminate any aspects of a piston powered motor!
Still, the rotary is WAY simpler, the engine basically has a glorified crankshaft. IT doesnt really eliminate any aspects of a piston powered motor!
Last edited by Defprun; Sep 27, 2002 at 03:00 PM.
add to cart
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,181
Likes: 0
From: Saskatoon, SK & Montreal, PQ
The problem with this engine is the 2 lobes 'pinch' the rollers when pushing up in compression stroke, sending torque forces in one direction through the rod connecting the two pistons, then the force of expansion pressing the piston down on power stroke immediately thereafter sends torque forces in the opposite direction through the rod.
This constant torque clockwise then torque counterclockwise three times per revolution of the lobe would lead to early fatigue of the rod resulting in stress cracks and potential catastrophic failure.
Additionally, instead of a simple lubricated bearing allowing a con rod to hydroplane over a crankshaft, this design relies on small rollers.
Extrapolate this: if the roller turns 10 times to go around the outer edge of the lobe once, it is spinning at ten times the RPM of the engine. So at 6,000 RPM that roller, under a lot of pressure during power stroke and piston return to top dead center, is being asked to spin at 60,000 RPM! If a roller bearing inside the roller spins five times for every trip around the race connecting the roller & piston 'axle', that roller bearing is being asked to spin at 300,000 RPM - flyapart speeds.
No wonder they ran the engine at 'medium RPM' during their annual meeting.
This constant torque clockwise then torque counterclockwise three times per revolution of the lobe would lead to early fatigue of the rod resulting in stress cracks and potential catastrophic failure.
Additionally, instead of a simple lubricated bearing allowing a con rod to hydroplane over a crankshaft, this design relies on small rollers.
Extrapolate this: if the roller turns 10 times to go around the outer edge of the lobe once, it is spinning at ten times the RPM of the engine. So at 6,000 RPM that roller, under a lot of pressure during power stroke and piston return to top dead center, is being asked to spin at 60,000 RPM! If a roller bearing inside the roller spins five times for every trip around the race connecting the roller & piston 'axle', that roller bearing is being asked to spin at 300,000 RPM - flyapart speeds.
No wonder they ran the engine at 'medium RPM' during their annual meeting.
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 15,725
Likes: 91
From: Near Seattle
Lol! I guess it could be installed in a bug or Subaru. But why bother when it's so easy to put a rotary in a baja? It's #2 on my to-do list.
Did you get a chance to check out the Bourke engine at all? Its design is a couple decades older than the KKM.
Did you get a chance to check out the Bourke engine at all? Its design is a couple decades older than the KKM.
