STRANGE New Rotary Engine BREAKS Records
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 апр 2023
- Liquid Piston inside-out rotary has 5x greater power density and
specific power vs. piston diesel engine while running on multiple fuels!
Sources & Credits:
Original Rotary
• Umlaufmotor. Aufbau un...
Kurt Roberson
• Kurt Robertson explain...
Felix Wankel
www.britannica.com/biography/...
Other Rotaries
• Wankel animation
• Suzuki Re5
www.mazda.ca/en/vehicles/mx-3...
Liquid Piston
www.liquidpiston.com/
news.mit.edu/2014/liquidpisto... 
Наука
40 years ago I read a book on Wankel engines from the college library. There were all sorts of alternative lobe and rotor designs including this one. So the concept isn’t new but the execution and development is. This video also conflated radial engines with rotary engines but there is some common nomenclature overlap historically. The first real use of a wankel rotary was as a supercharger on a motorcycle. The first operational Wankel engine had spark plugs in the rotor itself. Silly things I remember from a book I read in 1983. Wankel had designs that could create a theoretical 144:1 compression ratio if a functional seal could be developed.
Do you know the name of one of the books?
The aircraft engine shown was considered a rotary engine because the crankshaft was fixed and the entire cylinder block rotated around it, whereas a conventional radial engine has a fixed cylinder block with rotating crankshaft.
The Musée de l'Air et de l'Espace in Paris has on display a special, "sectioned" working model of an engine with seven radially disposed cylinders. It alternates between rotary and radial modes to demonstrate the difference between the internal motions of the two types of engine
I remember an item from Popular Mechanic about 1980? It was a great idea then and my college buddies were awed by it.. 😮😮
@@mirandahotspring4019 Either way, both aircraft engines are piston engines. Secondly, the Wankel rotary doesn't have a fixed crankshaft. There were some weird considerations is the past...
@@stuartedge5906 The original Wankel design DID have a fixed shaft; the rest of the engine spun.
If the fuel efficiency is a bit better than the Wankel, this new rotary engine could be a great option for general aviation with its lightweight for the power produced and the inherent reliability of a low-part-count engine with no valve train.
If this is a worthwhile engine for AC design, coupling it with the upcoming new prop designs could be of real interest and efficiency.....
Meh, no way an oscillating clunker will _ever_ outperform a _true_ rotary, the jet turbine and the new jet turbine/high output electrics are filling the hybrid gap.These work like railroad diesel/electrics, except the generator is coupled to the jet turbine.
@@larryhyak2529 - I saw a weird quiet prop used on a drone that's used to deliver blood and other medical supplies to villages in Africa. The prop has two oddly shaped props perhaps 45 degrees from each other and what looks like an aerodynamic counterweight opposed to the two props. Presumably it's efficient or it wouldn't be used for a long distance drone, and it was very quiet.
@@Liberty4Ever
The other option thats even safer and quieter is the toroidal prop... In air or water....see sharrow props.
The spark ignition form of this engine is reckoned to be 50% more efficient than a conventional reciprocating engine and the diesel 30% plus its way smaller lighter and smoother and simpler.
@@aardque Consider the potential lower footprint, total cost, part counts, and service costs. It may not be as peak efficient as a turbojet/fan/shaft, but it could be much easier to maintain, which will have a much more significant impact to the operating costs, especially for short hop applications that don't benefit from that cruising efficiency. It could also make a difference for time sensitive applications. Turbine engines often have complex startup requirements, requiring long warmup times and external assistance. There's also the fact that piston engines have much better throttle response, meaning a pilot needs less training and experience to reach an operational proficiency. Those are all huge deals for making the power of aviation more accessible to areas without the economic ability to sustain a more complicated air fleet.
As a young and dumb "early adopter" I had a rotary powered RX2. It was a great car, I had 2 problems with it, it ran so smoothly I was constantly engaging the starter when it was already running and being Y&D I didn't replace the Antifreeze often enough resulting in failed "O" rings and a rebuild of the engine. Watching the mechanic strip off the accessories, unbolt the motor mounts and pick the motor up, by himself and carry it to the work bench like it was a lunch box floored me. The RX2 looked like all the other Japanese 4 cylinder cars of the time and would eat them for lunch in the Red Light Derby. It didn't get great gas mileage but at $0.35 a gallon that wasn't a deal breaker. There has only been 1 car that I enjoyed more, an RX7 I kept for 18 years. Now if Mazda would put a rotary in a Miata....
Here is an interesting video on how to make wankel engines more reliable.
ruclips.net/video/BwM6JJYPzkM/видео.html
Where it always belonged!🤨🤔
I had a 79 RX-7 that i absolutely loved driving, while the car had its issues (teenage me didnt help either) I was sold on the power and acceleration. The only thing that got me away from it was the introduction of the Miata which I owned for 18+ years which was the perfect sportcar other than the limited power. The 1st generation Miata in good shape is worth almost what I paid for it back in 89, and nothing has come close to be as fun to drive as that Miata.
My brother had a car that was sort of a forerunner of the RX cars that Mazda called the Cosmo. It had a very similar Wankel engine to the early RX cars and exhibited the same operational and performance issues.😢
It's a girls car, just is.
I’m a motorcycle builder, started at 18 fabricating the frame and rear end. I have a frame sitting 10 years and haven’t built anything because I’m not decided on a engine yet. This caught my attention since rotary has had improvements.
Is your bike a trike ? Since you said it has a rear end! After 10 years what’s the holdup?
I am an Iranian and I live in Iran and unfortunately it is closed and I can only see these clips and I have plans that I cannot implement due to the conditions of the country. The new Tawankal with newer capabilities should work / it's a pity that it can't and we are stuck in a bad place///😢😢😢
@@mehdisoleimanian6394 😢
The exhaust port was the only one that was moved the intake was always on the plates and this wasn't done for airflow since it is much worse in the renesis, it was done for emissions because while the exhaust going straight out the housing is great for making power it also causes a lot of over lap
TBF, the Renesis’ airflow wasn’t as bad as often thought (no doubt the 90° turn didn’t help things though). The main problem had to do with Mazda combining ports into a half size “Siamese” port, which restricted airflow. The side port design has a lot to give, but so far nobody has given it another chance besides Mazda themselves. The side port was liked by a lot of drivers due to it’s smoother torque curve and idle.
@@BrapBrapDorito the problem with the side port is down to the design of the engine itself, it creates a serious hot spot on the plate, which causes even more uneven heating across the plates. Bad for many reasons including detonation. And the port cannot be enlarged by much because there is a water jacket around it.
as a side effect the engine is virtually imposible to tune. Unless running strictly on e85. You can add a turbo for modest gains, but the engine itself is the limiting factor.
They also have soft rotors compared to the older 13b.
@@BrapBrapDorito that said though, it depends on your perspective. Its a weird engine, no doubt, with some impressive engineering and performance characteristics, as well as unique issues.
@@Nbomber While it is true that it creates a hot spot, predetonation isn’t a really large problem as the combustion happens in a separate sealed section of the engine. Maybe Im not immersed enough in the RX8 tuning scene but I have never heard of the rotors being weaker (though I will concede the seals were far too thin.) Honestly, all of these problems can be fixed if the engine was given another chance, but there isn’t too much likelihood of that happening for a while.
Scalability of multiple units will be vital. The advantage of the Wenkel is you can almost slap together as many as you want in a row, such as the V12 you can find on RUclips that i don’t think made it into the boat it was intended for
It’s a piece of art
V12? lol.
"V", he says
Maybe the R12, or the wankel12 😂
Vee? Wankel? This is incongruent you need to post a link…
@@soljump it is three 4 rotors linked together in a v shape.
Rotaries are also an excellent choice for small aircraft. Small, light, and fantastic power-to-weight. Once assembled and running, they have few problems, especially for the operating regimes experienced by aircraft powerplants.
No thanks. I ain't hanging my ass on the reliability of apex seals.
In-Air replacement of seals is important... Pilot needs to be a mechanic and a fast one at that......
@@ME-pb2gfapex seals don't fail catastrophically... little by little over very many hours you would see oil consumption increasing... But there wouldn't be any sudden engine damaging failure...
Theoretically they are, also considering the low frontal area... but the odd thing is, there's never been a certified aircraft rotary (as far as I know), and kit-built are pretty rare... I think the issue is that the high RPM's require a reduction drive (belt or gearbox), which sort of throws a wrench amongst the plusses, at least for a homebuilder... unlike a piston engine, I don't think a rotary can be built for low RPM torque, which would allow direct drive... NASA was conducting rotary light aircraft engine research in the last decade, but I don't know what the final conclusions were...
Insane EGT’s
I was one of those who purchased a rotary engine wankel in 1973. I loved it, even allowing for the occasional explosion under the gar when unburned gas ignited. It didn't hurt anything; it was just loud. That car didn't get excellent gas mileage, but nothing else did at the time. But it sure was peppy. It responded yesterday when you stepped on the gas. I only had it for a year, and had to sell it for financial reasons. I certainly did love that car.
Very fascinating new engine. Nice job with the graphics. Short and concise. Good presentation, too.
Yes, and a carefully balanced ratio of great graphics and lies. Really good job.
@@satunnainenkatselija4478 You are right. But this is not the only problem.
I loved my late 1980s Mazda RX7. The turbine like whir ! Petrol stations and regular oil top ups were somewhat "painful", but still happy days ! (plus I was young !)
I hope Liquid Piston make their rotary work.
Just keep them coming Sir.
Nice approach to an Idea. Thanks for your Report.😊
as a rotary engine fan I am very excited about the liquid piston technology as it is the next step in the evolution of rotaries
I bought two (2) Wankle rotary cars in the 1970s: Mazda RX-2 & 3. They had smooth rides, but the cars themselves were pretty flimsy. Still, I admired the compactness and handling.
So I decided to invest in Liquid Piston. I see a promising future in using LP's engine within hybrid vehicles to extend the EV range without the massive weight of the ICE and/or the need for heavy batteries.
Simplicity does have its merit.
It looks promising to me.
Now that I know anything about engines but this looks like a good way to augment EV or for small vehicles in developing countries which are the majority.
How did you invest in the company?
Are they on the stock market?
I think they were flimsy because they were made light weight to get reasonable fuel economy, just a thought.
@@anthonyxuereb792 They we’re also flimsy because it was the 1970’s and engineering and materials costs weren’t what they are now.
@@mikalrage7316 Thanks for that
Very interesting video, and well-made too. Subscribed.
The liquid piston engine sounds great but the road to production is littered with great ideas. Would love to see this someday.
I'm glad it's finally getting attention
A motor like this could revolutionize the ultralight industry. I'm definitely going to keep an eye on this one!
Agreed! 42 pounds for 25 hp is a way better weight/power ratio than my rotax 447.
The other big plus is the APU generator/hybrid area. Two guys can carry a multi fuel Diesel gen set that would conventionally be the size and wt requiring wheels and towing vehicle or crane...
Plus its got so few parts in a boat or a yatch you could take the engine out and rebuild it on the cockpit floor in a couple of hours.
@@clivestainlesssteelwomble7665 that would be a sight to see 😁👍
@Richard Cranium how does that even make sense? You can't use electricity for an ultra-light right now. That's a novelty that does not work. If you figured that s*** out you be a billionaire
You've probably never even flown an aircraft yourself
Being a huge rotary fan I have high hopes for Liquid Piston's future. Such innovation and development is exciting. ICE's will be the dominant means of power for my lifetime so how can one not take an interest. That said, I'd love to own a cheaper electric vehicle someday (not holding my breath) if/when the battery technology advances a few clicks.
Please. Just reinventing the wheel
Inefficient
If they could run it on hydrogen, then why bother with a battery? John Deere is doing some fantastic stuff with hydrogen and they are predicting 1 dollar a kilogram in the USA in the future. I really believe hydrogen is the answer, not lithium.
@@michaelburke5750 Hydrogen's viability is unproven in terms of mass distribution networks and use. It is dangerously touchy stuff compared to, say, methane (natural gas); like comparing gasoline to cooking oil. LP's inverted-Wankel's best potential now is in the hybrid and small-engine routes. But when the H2-driven economy gets going, LP's X-Engines will be ready.
@evans haller pardon me I made a mistake, it's not John Deere, it's JCB. They do have a viable hydrogen supply already in Europe. JCB green hydrogen is the video on RUclips. Very informative. I am completely sold on hydrogen. Lithium is a waste of money for the USA. Let China run battery powered cars. Why would you want to be dependent on China for more items and fuel sources? We don't need China for hydrogen production.ruclips.net/video/H6_qAta3Gk8/видео.html
Hate to tell you due to classified research all countries regardless of their wealth will be forced to stop using fossil fuels. The increased efficiency of solar panels, storage cells, production of hydrogen, and taking carbon from the air and converting it into fuel like gasoline for a carbon balance. These are already being implemented in areas around the globe. The glaciers have turned black from exhausts from coal burning, inefficient diesel engines, and off gassing of crude oil wells. They also noticed the particles created by tires as they break down from friction on the two poles of the earth. Tires are changing design now to prevent these particles from building up on the ice sheets.
awesome video and hope the new engine is commercialised. It sounds really good
Great vid!
Interesting Video, Back in 1981, I had a 1973 Mazda RX-2, It was a twin rotor 74 cubic inch, with two dual electrode spark plugs per rotor, a four barrel carburetor and two distributors, one with two sets of points and the other with one set, It had a four speed manual gearbox, And It was very fast for such a small motor, but it guzzled fuel, I paid $140.00 for it and after about 11 months, a forty cent seal went south, which was the same as a blown head gasket on a piston engine, water in the combustion chamber, so I sold the wheels and tires for $100.00, and the car for $140.00, It was fun while it lasted, I was 23 years old at that time, THX for posting, subbed. 👊 😎
Thanks, great back story, interesting to hear! That would still be fun to drive probably light! Mazda always makes interesting cars, my first was a 97 Millenia with a miller cycle engine, it was a very weird 5 stroke, almost made me go broke in college with all the repairs so can relate to your story heh
@@Tech_Planet A 5 stroke? That's a new one on me, I'll have to check that out. THX, 👍
Wankels have high flame quench, poor mechanical advantage for the expanding gases and the exhaust opens too soon. Result high wear rates poor efficiency.
Just see a lot of combustion area that needs to be sealed compared to a piston engine, like the rotary. But compression ratio seems impressive, guess we'll see if it does what it promises. Old engineers I used to work always said "if it ain't round, it ain't sound", so it's got that stigma going against it too.
Love new rotary. Seals is what makes the piston engine work longer with good efficiency. The new shape helps much of the sealing problem. I hope this engine does well.
Always great stuff!!!!!!!!!!!
Liquid Pistons should explore applying their technology in outboard motors, before trying to break into the car market. Wankel did actually make it into outboards in the late 60s or early 70s, but they never really caught on at that time. In marine applications vibration and noise are major factors, as is weight to power ratios. Other than going electric, this solves it. They are also far less complex and smaller than current outboard 4-cycle engines. I hope that they reach out to some of the majors (Mercury, Honda, Yamaha) and see if they are willing to work with them. They might be surprised
I think planes are an even better angle as weight matters greatly for them, an alternative would be motorbikes.
Very interesting. Thanks
Gute Idee Test test test !
I knew about Liquid Piston's earlier version (~75cc) and what was happening with it. 210cc is a big jump in power. For an ICE engine it has the potential to be way out in front.
Like to se it in snowmobiles
I drove a Mazda rotary a few times in the early 1980s. It was so smooth. I really wanted it to succeed. If they have solved the seal issues and high fuel consumption, it sounds like the perfect engine - especially if they can run it as a diesel.
Who knows? Maybe they'll even be able to run a gasoline engine with compression ignition?
Compression ignition, that would be great.
Don't you need like 25:1 - 30:1 to get gasoline to auto-ignite? Attainable but lofty. I'd like to see someone try.
Achates power did that with their 2 stroke OP.
Nice Video. I owned several RX7 and repaired them. Improvements of the Efficiency is always important ... Multifold-exaust ( Multiplied Decompression Factor ) by series of Exaustpathes using additionally Rotors only as a decompression path and thermodynamic multi-step recuperation (Water- steam-Wankel-Engines, or even better : Silicon Oil based evaporation steam engine using "Wankel-Decompression" ) could improve the overall Efficiency a lot too.
Very smooth delivery, sir! No pissing around on a 2-minute intro followed by "and so without further ado..." (oh I hate that!). The graphics ditto.. Very hi-res/smooth/informative.
As to the subject matter, it's not my specialty. However - if tiny, lightweight motors can be introduced into hybrids - wow! Game changer! A lighter car, more compact, more room for humans and/batterys. That's def a win for us all.
I've been interested in what Liquid Piston has been doing every since I read about them years ago in (I think) a Popular Mechanics magazine. I read about a company that was founded and run by a bunch of veteran auto engineers and thought, "this could be interesting". I am very hopeful that they will be able to succeed at scale.
Same I was kinda hoping Mazda picked them up for this range extender when I first heard it'd be a rotary
Seems their main client is the US military. Not surprising with the rise of UAVs. Using such a light package as a range extender makes a lot of sense since a UAVs main usefulness in a military context is loitering time in places where it would be too dangerous to send say, an A-10 or similar jet.
They are father and son MIT PhD’s.
Swapping the rotor and stator ships solves a great many problems it would also allow tip seals to be replaced without opening the motor - if the manufacturer builds in access points.
Four cylinder radial two strokes also need a small blower but with direct injection are extremely clean and efficient. More complex (pistons rods crank) but are well understood.
The access to the "apex" seals is a great point! I hadn't even thought of that. It would be really easy to make them removable or even allow adjustment of spring pressure to dial in seal seat pressure.
_"tip seals to be replaced without opening the motor"_ well, the truth is, the access to the seals is the only difference. The seals would still suffer from sudden failures, causing damages to the housing and the rotor, that can happen even on first miles. The whole engine will have to be reworked. There are anecdotal stories about Mazdas blowing engine on the way from the dealer...
The swapping rotor and stator also moves the problem of uneven thermal expansion from the stator (fixable with an adequate cooling) to the rotor (not fixable).
Two strokes work well without turbo, and they will never be clean, unless they are marine diesels... The problem is with seals needing lubrication when moving over the ports. The significant portion of the lubricant will always get into the combustion chamber.
@@alterbart7916 I'm still trying to figure out why you keep arguing emissions when absolutely no one is arguing that this engine will be a clean engine. You are arguing points that are farther down the line. The use cases for this motor rarely care much about emissions. UAV, diesel dirt bikes, chainsaws, generators, sea faring drones. None of them have astringent emissions standards so I'm not sure why you argue it so hard.
@@jameshathaway5117 Jim, I was answering David. He called two stroke turbo extremely clean.
If you got upset by me not commenting your reply, here it goes - seals fail unpredictably and blown seal most likely damages the motor. There are youtube videos showing the inner surface of wankel after broken seal. So there is a very little advantage of being able to access the seals. First of all, seals will get carbon deposits and will not be easy to remove. Second of all, have you ever replaced an apex seal? There is no way you do it from the side. You have to have face access.
Finally a good explanation of the LP rotary engine. Thanks. This engine is hyped in the wrong way for sure.
Moving the seals to the block was a stroke of brilliance.
Liquid Piston has the same basic problems of Wankel's - seals and emission, plus, it has problems of roots and twin screw compressors - a requirement for a very precise shape of both hull and rotor. Having stationary seals does not really solve the problem - same three apex seals have to swipe the same surface.
The rotor overheating problem is probably one of the newly added obstacles.
The rotor is the intake and is in constant contact with fresh air from one direction (the reason its finned) and cold air/fuel from inside the shaft and rotor. The main reason the apex seals are a problem in a Wankel is because at high rpm they are being pushed into the housing at extreme g force... that doesn't happen with stationary seals. I'm not sure you are taking the physics of the problem into consideration. Even if the apex seals are physically identical between the two designs they will last exponentially longer in the liquid piston engine.
@@jameshathaway5117 _"The rotor is the intake and is in constant contact with fresh air from one direction (the reason its finned) and cold air/fuel from inside the shaft and rotor."_
Few fins will not transfer tens of kilowatts of heat. The fresh air that goes through intake does not remove the heat. Anyway, aircooling is not enough for high power.
In Wankel, at least, the hull can be liquid cooled. I do not see how you can liquid cool a liquid piston.
_"The main reason the apex seals are a problem in a Wankel is because at high rpm they are being pushed into the housing at extreme g force..."_
That's a garage talk. G force is not a problem. It just requires a reliable lubrication. The top three problems of the apex seals are vibrations, gas leakage and wear. The gas pressure is 70% of all acting forces and it acts orthogonal to the g force. In fact, in some variants of seals, geometry is optimized to use g force to stabilize the seal.
_"that doesn't happen with stationary seals."_
Like I said, g force is a non-existing problem, "invented" by the inventors of the LP for sole marketing purposes. In the same way they "invented" HEHC, which is nothing but... Atkinson cycle.
Stationary seals have the same triad - vibrations, gas leakage and wear. Gas leakage is even worse because of ... the lack of g force. The springs now have to work against gas pressure and overcome wall friction of the seal. Being stationary does not give a big advantage. The only small advantage is - there is no complex joints of apex and face seals.
_"I'm not sure you are taking the physics of the problem into consideration."_ Which physics? How about a little understanding of engineering?
_"Even if the apex seals are physically identical between the two designs they will last exponentially longer in the liquid piston engine."_
any reason why it will be so? And "exponentially"? Exponentially to what?
Hint: most of the seal wear happens due nibbling over the ports, due to over pressure shocks and due to lack of lubrication. Neither design is free from the three problems.
Please understand, liquid piston does not have a revolutionary advantages over Wankel. In one respect - rotor thermal mode - it is much worse, and this will be a big problem for scaling up or increasing the power density. The uneven thermal expansion of the rotor and overheating - these are serious problems, but the garage pundits do not realize those even exist.
Seals will require constant lubrication in both. Same as two stroke piston engines. In a way, two stroke single cylinder engine is as simple as a wankel or an LP and can be tuned to really high rpms and achieve a high specific power. It will be more reliable that either WE or LP. You can achieve a better compression, hence - higher efficiency. What prevents them from becoming the main stream? Lubrication. Which makes the exhaust dirty.
Another thing that you are definitely reluctant to consider is this. WE has had half century to mature. All its quirks and warts are well understood and there are a lot of know-how for WE. LP just does not have that luxury. ICE are becoming obsolete - for political reasons, not because of technological advancement. Nobody will consider investing in LP in the same way they did it for WE. Too late. LP might find its niche - UAVs, RC models. However, it will never mature enough.
@@alterbart7916 NASA might disagree with you... the Wankel apex seals eat about 250 watts due to friction at 1k rpm. At 7800 rpm the apex seals eat 2250 watts each. The chamber pressures from combustion are the same in both examples yet the drag increases by 9x. That my friend is a exponential increase in friction a stationary seal will not experience. The seals also only experience pressure from a power stroke on one side temporarily while the seals see high pressure from rpm as long as the revs are high. If you want to know what kills a sliding seal follow the friction. It's all in the NASA study and the pdf is free. The math is a little hard-core but the charts are a decent help.
@@jameshathaway5117
_"the Wankel apex seals eat about 250 watts due to friction at 1k rpm. At 7800 rpm the apex seals eat 2250 watts each. The chamber pressures from combustion are the same in both examples yet the drag increases by 9x. "_
First of all, the rpm increased 7.8 times and friction - 9 times. It is hardly exponential. And
Even if the apex seals are physically identical between the two designs they will last exponentially longer in the liquid piston engine."
Second of all, if you noticed, the fig. 17 shows that the acceleration friction losses at 7800 rpm are about 400 W. The major contribution is the *cavity pressure* . I am talking about the same NASA/TM-2010-216353.
Third, MAZDA tests show that even with springs there are seals disconnect, which means, LP will have to use stronger springs and instead of acceleration losses it will have to introduce spring losses.
_"That my friend is a exponential increase in friction a stationary seal will not experience. "_
Shifting goal posts, my friend? This is what you said earlier: Even if the apex seals are physically identical between the two designs they will last exponentially longer in the liquid piston engine.
How increase of *total* friction power 9x with 7.8 increase of rpm mean "exponential longer seal life in LP?
_"The seals also only experience pressure from a power stroke on one side temporarily"_ that is the pressure friction I was talking about. It is the same on both. _"while the seals see high pressure from rpm as long as the revs are high."_
this is acceleration friction, and it is as small as the spring friction, three times smaller that the pressure friction.
_"If you want to know what kills a sliding seal follow the friction."_
First of all, NASA/TM-2010-216353 is math modelling, it does not count the losses on passing the ports. Read MAZDA documents from 90's - you see, what really eats the seals.
Apparently you are under impression that liquid piston is free from friction. This is not true. Actually... There is a patent on liquid piston engine where the friction losses are really negligible. Only there the liquid piston is really piston and ... liquid. Not rotary at all. The rotary has the same friction components except for the acceleration one. But the spring friction will be at least twice as high. And the vibration and disconnect problems will remain.
You move goalposts like a woman arguing.
I would love to put one of these in a motocross bike! Imagine a turbocharger on such a small engine running on diesel! That's absolute perfection 👌
In such a tiny package and so fuel efficient it would be perfectly suited to a motocross configuration running via the same motocross bike gearbox 👍
I've seen people mate different engines to a motorbike engine with the block cut off and connected via a chain drive and very surprisingly many work perfectly; if you use the same sized sprockets it matches 1:1. Then if necessary you can change the main gear ratio according to power compared to the original motor? I seen a dude running a friggin chainsaw or wiper sniper motor on one in India and it was revving it's tits off but surprisingly the dude got up and going without any problem and then started shifting up through the gears and picking up speed 😲
I was like "oh c'mon what's this home made bullsh...... Holy fk! Oh damn WTF? This Indian guy just broke my mind lol"
Yes he needs to be very prepared approaching hills but he uses momentum. It didn't go up steep hills but he explained if we waited 5min he will change the gearing again, add links to the chain..... And then he can ride up the hill no problems bahahaha he kept spare sprockets and chain links in his backpack 🤣🤣
He explained that it gets very good fuel mileage.....I stopped laughing when I heard that 😐
The dude is a genius
don't think diesel would run as well as gas in a rotary.
It would definitely run on diesel, but it would almost certainly run better on gas.
Also, why run diesel in a bike when you could run a high octane racing fuel like methanol?
@@jakehildebrand1824 I've got a student plan. Diesel is very good for fuel mileage. Those converted Kawasaki KLR650s that ran on diesel and jet fuel, they got between 450 and 600miles per tank? So this would make for a very decent "off road" enduro bike? In Australia we don't have a lot of fuel stations in the outback country side, so it could potentially allow for a bike that covers very long distances?
I think perhaps the idea of a paramotor setup running on gasoline may be a more appropriate use for the motor upon reflection? 🤔
By the way I do have a turbo rotary RX7 so I do know plenty about rotary engines 😎
I love the sound of this thing because it's single rotar but sounds much like a 20B triple rotar? I think a 20B sound is the most perfect Rotary sound 👌 it would sound so much nicer than the typical paramotor setup? That's just my opinion but I'm biased 🤭
It's just very cool to be able to have flexibility of fuel options too?
@@jameshatton4405 best sounding rotary engine would have to be the engine used in the Mazda 787B racecar.
@@jakehildebrand1824 I disagree. I love the 20B sound better
Just came across this content maker, my apologies if this has been asked before. What is your thought on the
Duke/swash plate motor?
Turbo charged and use as an auxiliary engine like in military tanks where small size is needed appears to be a good fit for this motor. Since it appears it can do compression ignition multiple types of fuels appear to be able to be used. Like this appears to be a diesel engine that has the ability to have a high power to weight ratio. This might be a good motor for a drone. I think cars are going to be electric but this motor should have some niche uses.
Rotary engine and wankel rotary engine are vary different engine ,back in 70s my father Datsun 120 couple have one.👍👍. not many people knew about it..they only knew Mazda RX 4, RX 7.
my grandfather used to race a datsun 120y, eventually put a 12a and called it the Rosun. dominated the track for years
I've been following Liquid Piston for years. It's really disappointing how long it takes new technology to make it to market. It seems like there always has to be a military phase, so I'm glad they've been working for the DoD for a few years. Now they're touting it as able to run on hydrogen too. I think it would make a great range extender for an EV, with so much power per pound. But I've never seen anything more than 40 hp. They say it's scalable, I'm sure it is, but I wish they would just do it. Make one with 100 hp to compete with the Rotax 912 as an airplane engine. The 912 weighs 124 lbs, Let's see if Liquid Piston can produce 100 hp in an 80-85 lbs package. That would allow for 7 more gallons of fuel in a typical light aircraft, enough to fly an extra 60 to 90 minutes.
Yea more people should touch up on the hydrogen capability, as hydrogen will be experiencing a boom and is the first truly valid combustion based competition to fossil fuels - and with higher energy density at that. For all the downsides of electric solutions, hydrogen offers a healthy competing alternative depending on the application, and the more combustion-style engines we can engineer to use hydrogen, the better. We have near 100 years worth of global r&d invested into combustion already and lots of industry talent at hand. No reason not to make use of them alongside the other alternatives in development.
Having the apex seal servicable without disassembly would be amazing. A set screw could seat it into the block, remove the screw, remove the reseal, insert new seal, new screw… boom engine overhaul conplete.
yes i like that make sure use a good 2 stroke oil in this liquid piston 2 stroker. Amsoil interceptor is use in my rotary 2 stroke.
The small size and multi fuel could be a huge benefit for standby generators or APUs.
It taps aetheric ZPE and needs no chemical fuels at all. Like a pulsed plasma ball lightning powered 2 stroke.
Two of my favorite things in one concept. I absolutely had a love/hate relationship with my RX-2. The performance of the car was magnificent. It could dust off any Mustang 289 at the time and most other cars. The 25 to 75 MPH movement was like a rocket. On the downside, the seals...the seals...the seals and the cooling system, which, if it fails just a little bit, starts warping the aluminum components in the stack. It cost me many thousands of bucks (some of which found its way back to me via extensive class action law suits). Love/Hate.
The second concept is a PROPER gas/EV Hybrid where the cost, range anxiety and the charging time anxiety simply VANISH with a credible little gas engine used as a continual charging mechanism without any propulsive duties. Size and weight to power cannot be be beaten.
If they do this new vehicle correctly, which they have been fairly competent at for many decades, this concept can bust open the EV market. The biggest costs for all these high priced cars are the huge, heavy and expensive battery packs. If you can reduce the overall weight and cost in favor of smaller battery farms, the EV market can and should take off in the lower end and in construction equipment and many stationary applications.
The only thing which will make this even better in the future is the removal of the gasoline and replacing the ICE extender engine and gas tank with a MAGNETIC ENGINE to keep the batteries charged.
Look at one of the faces of a rotor and you'll see a rectangular piston. This is the reason rotary engines never worked.
Also, thanks for reminding me that range anxiety doesn't exist; only charging time anxiety does, due to the simple but unsolvable fact that batteries store no electricity.
Electric primary traction has been ready since the late 1800's, and since then, every industry has been dominated by electric motors. However, using batteries to power EV's turned them into a niche product, just like electric forklifts, for example.
EVs will never catch on.
@@LaZarusXtnct As long as they use batteries, they will never catch on.
Using a gasoline generator to recharge an electric vehicle while driving it is just driving an internal combustion vehicle with extra points of failure and worse fuel economy.
@@adrianhenle It improves fuel economy. Electric powertrains are over 95% efficient, and since the engine doesn't have to care about the immediate road demands it can always run at the most efficient RPM the engine was designed for. There's a reason this setup has been common in trains for a long time. Large diesel engine powering a generator, which drives electric motors on the wheels.
So, in Australia, one guy or group came up with a solution to the wankel problems. They involve making the spark plug hole 2mm slits, 3mm appex seals, a redesign in the rotar cavity, and using a synthetic 2cycle oil pre-mixed in the gasoline.
And it never really worked...
@Trevor Sachko never saw any follow up on the modification. If you have links to the after modification data, I would love to see it
This is truly an awesome powerplant. And its not going away anytime soon and infact it is gaining respect for motor enthusiasts .
yeah and its an oil injected 2 stroke not a fat ugly 4 joke stroke like in outboards and cars today. No oil changes needed
What is the efficiency percentage for each fuel. I'd love to have a hybrid diesel.
Can they insert the generator inside the cylinder?
I heard a 46hp quote, but what can it do?
Thank you.
Yeah, the Wankel never got the efficiency or torque it promised. I've seen a few really interesting design changes made by an individual here on YT, where he'd moved the central dish in the rotor face to the leading half, keeping more of the intake charge on the leading side of the rotor face, which allowed the expanding gas a better lever arm on the rotor, producing higher torque. He also reduced the spark plug ports to small slits slightly less than 2mm, so that the apex seal never loses seal on the intake charge, and won't blow part of the power stroke gases into the intake charge the next face over. There's no good way to reduce oil consumption, however he was able to get power and torque numbers that matched current production piston engines. I was hoping someone would pick up the torch there. Maybe Rob Dahm?
The combustion chambers look like they have a very high surface to volume ratio just like a wankel, and as a consequence there will be a high percentage of unburnt hydrocarbons in the exhaust because of the boundary layer of fuel vapour on that surface that doesn't ignite. This is a problem with all engines. The more surface area exposed to flame the bigger the problem, as well as greater fuel consumption than would be otherwise.
Yes, but given that the combustion chamber volume and intake charge are static during the combustion process, prior to the power stroke even really starting, there should be enough dwell time for the mix to burn far more completely. I'd be fascinated in their research on the topic.
Direct fuel injection with modern high-speed electronics, solves much of the wasted fuel in the gaps issue. Because the fuel isn't in the gaps - it's injected into the combustion chamber just before ignition, and maybe some a little after ignition.
Maybe they could pass the exhaust gasses from one chamber to another with a modified air/fuel charge reclaiming some of the unburnt fuels power and increasing efficiency. A downstream combustion chamber could be smaller thus having less surface area reducing the boundary layer effect described while still contributing to power development. In essence a second combustion cycle slave to the primary one. Another option could send the fuel laden exhaust through a smaller piston engine that more efficiently combusts to drive a power generating source for battery charging. It wouldn’t be 100 percent efficient, no fuel burning engine ever will be due to heat being a byproduct; however, it may make it efficient enough to beat the legacy design.
@@travelinkevin5130 Oh yeah, I forgot about DFI being able to position the fuel droplets so that the combustion stops short of the metal surfaces. Good point. 👍
the apex seals have always been the service problem in this engine, what is needed is some sort of opening that the user can open and change them, pull them out with some sort of tool and push new ones in, in the past they were attached to the moving rotor and it was full strip down after removing the engine from the car/bike/etc and the labour costs and downtime were crazy, so if the it can be made so you can swap them over in half an hour they will more user friendly,
The liquid piston idea is fantastic. I think they need to offer up the parts to RX7/8 fans as an alternative to the Mazda version. I know I would love to build a multi rotor version for them and play with one. I think the possibilities far exceed what we have had up until now. As far as emissions go I would suspect a LNG version would solve those issues.
We all know the electric car is the future and may even get better over time with more efficient battery technologies
🤮🤮🤮
@@mikekraut7643 I know I puked as soon as I seen your face as well
What gave you that impression?
WTF is the obsession with batteries, just have a motor generator of a tiny but powerful floyd sweet device tapping ZPE. Watch the lost century and how to reclaim it with Steven Greer. i hate these 4 stroke in cars and everything else. With a liquid Piston we will not be 2 strokeless! i hate these cars today!
any info on relative noise vs diesel? sounds like a great engine though
i remember hand propping stearmen bi wings (crop dusters) here in the early to late 70's. amazin' stuff!
I love how absolutely simple, jet genius this solution is!
Not really. It is different kind of Wankel engine (i call both "epitrochoidal engines"). One advantage (long time of combustion) with plethora of disadvantages. I know very innovative 2 stroke design that is really better.
Great to see that this technology isn't dead and buried. We tried it at Ingersoll Rand with medical air compressors but once again the seals were a problem.
This has a real future in long range drones. This weight to power ration will make them ideal where batteries just poop out.
I would love to see the additional development of ICE in hybrid operations such as the Mazda Project - or - Liquid Piston's radical re-interpretation of the Rotary! Hope it makes to a commercial scale application; exciting! jc
Brian Crighton who developed the Rotery Norton motorcycle got 10th in the British grand prix as a wildcard entry and it won british superbike and isle of man senior TT. It was very very fast
Also a snap in for small generators.
No need to convert linear movement to rotational.
Yeah , imagine how small you could make some diesel generators !
Other version of liquid piston ro have ultra compression (67:1) and over expansion. Exhaust is near atmospheric pressure. Result is 57% thermal efficiency at full load and 50% at partial load. This efficiency means it doesn't need a liquid cooling system, it skips a fuel injection to cool the engine if needed.
Fascinating. I am so glad to see all of this new technology development coming down the pike. It will be really interesting to see if a genuine replacement for the gasoline and diesel engines that have been so beneficial can be replaced. We're overdue for this kind of advancement and I am happy to be alive in this season of advancement. 😊
The inverted Wankel concept is so cool.
How would the engine casing handle this power output over time?
When I was a kid, there was a man at the end of our street who was the head of NSU Prinz for North America... The actual headquarters was in an old Tastee Freeze ice cream stand... Didn't last long... Cream wrote a song about them called NSU...
I'd be interested to learn more about the real world performance of this engine. Astron Aerospace's Omega 1 has morphed into the "H2 Starfire" to try to hitch the concept to that of hydrogen as a fuel -- I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting to know whether it can be used to power vehicles using more conventional fuels instead.
I really love the design of stealth rear doors
Sat there at the lights in your EV and the range extender kicks in like "wah bah bah bah bah bah" 🤣
I hope the Mazda range extender idea pans out. I believe that would be a promising option for those of us who like to keep a variety of vehicles with different drivetrains.
It definitely has a place in the aircraft industry. The power to weight figures are well suited for light and ultralight aircraft. The efficiency will remain to be seen. The weight savings allows for more fuel storage and greater distances. With an efficient airframe design i dont see a problem with fuel consumption.
Interesting -- there was a Brayton-cycle curve @4:12. Although I always interpreted it as a pressure/velocity rather than pressure/volume.
New, clean rotary technology that is this compact, and doubles its compression is very exciting. Battery technology will not solve our long distance movement problems yet, and we need all the help we can get.
Love to see that non piston engine are still in development! Video is understandable, factual and quick though I have a small critic : any engine can output same power as a bigger engine.
Exemple: a 125cc 1cylinder 4stroke can deliver has much as a 1000cc 4cylinder 4stroke, If my 125cc revs around peak power (6000rpm) and the 1000cc at low peaks (1000 rpm) and even if we compare at max rmp power for each of them there is still fuel consumption that can give a nice input/output power ratio which i don't have high expectations toward the rotary engine.
(Again very nice video just to tickle and bring critisisme in number, and graphs reading)
I've known about the Wankel for decades and am fascinated with the technology, and it would be great to optimize its characteristics. I currently drive a hybrid that gets close to 50 mpg on average, and would be happy to consider one with a Wankel engine;
Back in the 1970 i owned a Mada pick up truck with the rotary engine and is ran great.
I have high hopes that they will produce a marketable engine soon.
I have been following liquid piston for years. A++
How do you get a comparison between a radial engine and a rotary?
Because of the limited compression rate of the Wankel, I thougt the rotary concept would die out.
Now there is new hope in the Galaxie. This new concept is interesting....
What about the materials expanding at different rates on the comb side and intake side? They are in one plain. One piece of material, but diff temp on either side. I heard this was a big flaw in the mazda rotary engines.
I very much like the concept of this engine as a range extender, it makes a lot of sense in countries without infrastructure for EVs
The liquid piston rotary has solved many of the problems of the winkle motor.
So it's only a matter of time before it comes out as a serious combatant.
It's kind of like the idea of a turbine car. It has some advantages over the piston car, such as burning any kind of fuel. But had to many drawbacks to replace the piston engine.
Great presentation. Hopefully they will find a need to feel.. Wonder if it will support a hydrogen fuel? That could be a game changer,
remembers when the RX-7s took over the IMSA GT/U series, previously dominated by Porsche.
I have often though that the hybrid range extender generator applications were the best option for a rotary
I've been following them for a long time and all they ever do is beg for more investors.
I think they should put that go-cart motor they demoed into production and go from there.
It's easier to get investors to expand a company rather than constantly seeking investment dollars for more rework and design. People get tired of companies that never produce anything.
I agree, go small and at least try to commercialize the 210
The main use case for these engines is military. It started as a DARPA project and it will probably stay military for some time. Maybe specialized mining equipment ect. The engines main claim to fame is size and weight per hp. You will probably see portable diesel generators before any go carts.
@@jameshathaway5117 A diesel anything is a hard sell with the strict EPA regulations.
That engine featured in the go-cart could be used in dozens of applications. I'd like to see it marketed as an industrial engine.
@@tenlittleindians The military is largely exempt from the EPA regulations. This has a place.
@@rustylugnut755 I worked at John Deere in the 70's. The road graders and bulldozers we built for the military had straight pipes on them and no smog boxes. It really made no sense to skip the mufflers but that's how they wanted them.
Great video, XTS is VERY exciting!
What is compression ratio, and why is it important?
I'd like to see the Liquid Piston rotary engine in light aircraft, since with its high compression ratio it could be built to run as a Diesel using Jet-A fuel. It might need gear reduction to drive a propeller, but overall would be lighter than most piston engines now in use. A time-before-overhaul (TBO) exceeding 2000 hours would be a big bonus.
If you replace using weight as your guide then the lighter engine can be much bigger internally. (Cubic inches. More can be better. C.I. equals more power.) Cooling issues may be problematic until someone figures it out. Driving huge variable pitch propellers for the aircraft size. STOL dream machine.
If i get an XTS-210 im running amsoil interceptor 2 stroke oil in it.
I’ve been reading stuff off and on about liquid piston for years. I hope they develop and market engines of various sizes for the general public but I doubt it will happen. I love the simplicity and light weight of rotary engines. I have a couple of them that came on snowmobiles from thev1970’s that I want to do something with.
The XTS-210 sounds great as a power source for portable gensets.
Interested to see your summary of the rotary wankel engine, however you omitted to mention the original NSU development and the exhaustive development (to address overheating of rotors) conducted by Norton Motorcycles, where they ended up using the intake tracts to cool the rotor. For a relatively brief period Norton used this engine in racing, but classification, ie swept volume, dictated that they could be excluded from pre-existing competition classes and controversy ensued.
Mazda’s idea of extending the mileage on e v’s is good what would be absolutely brilliant would be if somebody designed a way of making the rotary engine so easy to replace with a new one, almost a plug and play .
Finally a new type of engine that doesn't have any obvious fatal flaws.
Ridiculously small, light and powerful, sounds like a great motorcycle engine to me!
Its also 2 stroke oil injected and no fat ugly wet sump mess like on 4 jokes.
Fascinating! If the emission and fuel consumption issues can be overcome and running on hydrogen, it’s a no brainer!
So when can I put one into a go cart
The liquid piston was tested in a go kart on RUclips and it sucks they aren’t any better than the 13b and they’re already running into problems
As a hybrid range extender, I think a jet turbine is an equal competitor with plenty of small displacement, variations available. Power generation requires steady efficiency… Who wins?
Jet engines start at $100k
@@josephschaefer9163 Turbine and microturbine generators are much cheaper than that
Love to hear that going down the road
Fuck this hybrid shit, i gotta have a 2 stroke!