Clever Engine Design.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzBgoDeY3Ws&NR=1

no cam and no valves.

Lots of pressure on one (or two opposed) sliding/rolling elements. It might fare better in translation, though. The video is more clever than the design, I suspect.

but ,,if,, enuff lubrication then it should not be that much of an problem. And if maybe he integrate a ball in the sliding part then he can reduce some of the friction.

I am working on similar concept for many years. These sighted problems and experienced problems are being worked out. For an individual, it is rough road into a tunnel with no light across.

Built a rotary engine/pump many years ago, where the action was different from the youtube one, but the action on the pistion rings was the same, the piston rings due to friction where forced to rotated in the groove, the result was that they eventual broke.

Regards JD.

And here is a another design who are very interesting.

http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonFly.htm

The animation has the left rotor passing alternately over/under the right rotor. This is not credible. Cartoon goofs like this do not speak well for the ideas supposedly being shown.

One is very, very unlikely to find a viable motor design on Youtube...

but it is fun to discuss difference in different motor design, what will work and what will not. Sometime one can deliver the piece in the puzzle another was missing.

and i like to listen on what the engineerings are thinking so i can learn. Don''t We All.

The stationary pin in the slot and the the pin/slot "crosshead" do not suggest an ability to form hydrodynamic or squeeze type fluid films approaching the load carrying capability found in most common piston engine mechanisms. This suggests that power output per unit weight of the mechanism will remain uncompetitive until improved bearing and material technologies are discovered.

An engine design waiting for basic materials research in order to be successful does not look very promising. But I hasten to add that my comments are based on current engine technology in the range of 5 to 5000 kw. There may be some promise for this design in smaller engines used for small remote control vehicle applications as well as lightweight portable power sources where the realtionship of mass to surface area has a different effect.

Ed Weldon

It appears to be a two stroke engine made more complicated with more wear points.

Same here.... basically a piston port 2 stroke, that doesn't use a crankshaft. I would have to wonder about the wear on the piston/pin slot.

I think that vibration may be a problem and somehow the designer must stop the "join" of the rings ever going over the inlet or outlet ports......

The peg in the side of the piston must be fitteded with a roller bearing.

Also not much room for axial thrust bearings for the shaft and as the whole ai´rcraft(?) will be pulled along by this shaft........

I am sceptical.