Pretty cool. I think it would be cool if someone developed a system to use exhaust gas to actuate valves, much like exhaust gases are used to operate some semi-automatic rifles (like the AR-15 or AK-47).
Doesnt Fiat do that in their "twin air" engine?why not just use a solenoid and run it all electronically? why complicate it with the hydraulic system? just seems like 1 more thing that can go wrong. i couldn't imagine a hydraulic actuator being able to cycle faster than an electromagnetic actuator
damn you Wankel! well played sirCam less engine? Are you talking about a rotary engine?
:bowlol:
Pretty cool. I think it would be cool if someone developed a system to use exhaust gas to actuate valves, much like exhaust gases are used to operate some semi-automatic rifles (like the AR-15 or AK-47).
Those F1 engines still use camshafts to LIFT (open) the valves while they use pneumatics to CLOSE the valves.They use camless pneumatic valves to play music
why not just use a solenoid and run it all electronically? why complicate it with the hydraulic system? just seems like 1 more thing that can go wrong. i couldn't imagine a hydraulic actuator being able to cycle faster than an electromagnetic actuator
18K RPM seems to be talking about Formula One engines. But where does the six valves come from?... electrical solenoid actuating at a frequency of 150+ Hz (150 actuations per second when engine is at 18,000 rpms). Now imagine you have this on each valve at 6 valves per cylinder;
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. However, I'm not an engineer, so I'm not going to get into a debate about it. It just seemed to me that if exhaust gasses could be used to spin a turbine, they could just as easily be used with a regulator to actuate valves. Again, I'm in no way qualified to argue that it could be done. It was just a thought.Wouldn't that cause the engine to lose power? You couldn't use just exhaust gasses, you'd have to use combustion gasses to open the other set of valves and that would lessen the amount of energy the engine uses for power. That's why a bolt-action rifle or a revolver has (on average) a higher muzzle velocity than a gas blow-back auto or semi-auto.
orly?There are HUGE differences between [gas operated] rifles and IC engines.
Like I said, if it were feasible, it would have be be regulated somehow. I'm not talking about free flowing exhaust gasses being channeled into a plenum to move valves. Again, just a thought. I wouldn't be surprised if someone hasn't tried it before, or at the very least, done some extensive research on it.Most every shot in a rifle has the same chamber pressures - within a few percent - and the timing between when the chamber is first pressurized and when the gas pressure is released into the gas pressure cycling system is very consistent.
IC engines, otoh, are significantly different. First off, even at high chamber pressures, the timing varies significantly due to changing engine speeds.
Anf to add to the issue of lowered chamber pressures due to part-throttle and closed-throttle conditions makes using internal pressures a very difficult thing.
Remember that the ROM range of most street engines is 10:1 while the chamber pressure differences over the whole operating range is much higher. Not to mention how long those "peak" pressures exist for.
The idea might work for a stationary, steady load, steady RPM engine. But good luck getting it started.