One Stroke Engines - 200% More Efficient??

two

stroke

gasoline, that's crazy and has to be the reason why an engine wanted to distance itself from two

stroke

, but why call it a one-shot? Why not just call it something else like I don't know? Enter marketing buzzword here. It turns out that if you watch this animation, you will notice that each pair of pistons performs two complete cycles per revolution, which is the same number of power strokes per revolution that a single-stroke engine would have, so, two-stroke, it would be like I say. which yes, this is only two strokes because I have to readjust my arm to swim again, but if I have two arms then I'm a one stroke because I'm producing power in each stroke, that's true, but if you break it down. by piston, true, it still would be.

It would have two two-stroke pistons, so to speak, anyway, a bit pedantic, but that's its logic and the engine. If I could have the opportunity to go to your facility, I would love to check out this engine. I think we should just call it what it is but it's interesting and I'd love to see the long term reliability of something like this, okay it's not a single stroke but are there any real single stroke motors? Around there and as I started researching, rotary

engines

kept showing up for some reason and a cool inverted rotary engine called liquid piston

engines

also appeared, but after seeing how the cycles worked, it turned out that they were both not one-stroke engines. off.

In the comments below, if you want me to go deeper into liquid pistons or rotary engines or anything else you know, I'm good at it. Of all the designs I looked at, only one engine seemed to be suitable for the Motor at one time, the Amper amp SS prototype. Let's first see how it works. You'll notice that this engine has only two cylinders in a boxer configuration connected to a central crankshaft. The levers on the crankshaft are also quite unique and are designed to minimize vibration, but what makes this a single-stroke engine is the piston and cylinder assembly.

Interestingly, this design is the opposite of opposed piston design engines, instead of having two pistons compressing each other and moving in opposite directions. Amper opted to flip both pistons and join them together. back to back when moving them together inside a dual chamber cylinder, I noticed two spark plugs and two sets of fuel lines in each cylinder, that's because both sides of the cylinders act as combustion chambers, the power stroke of a side of the piston compresses the air in the fuel. mixture on the other side of the same piston, so you get a power stroke and a compression stroke at the same time, then the second side begins its power stroke helping to compress the fuel on the first side, the net effect is that you get a stroke of power on each stroke of the piston, one pushing towards the crankshaft like when you put your weight on the pedal of a bicycle to push down and another pulling on the crankshaft like when you pull up on the pedal while riding a bicycle when you look at Each side of the cylinder separately you see a normal two-stroke cycle, but when you look at the piston as a whole with both sides working, it really appears to be a single-stroke engine.

Regardless of this, there is a clear difference between the Amp Engine and the E Rex we talked about. About before The E Rex's compact size, high nominal weight ratio and inaudible hum make it an ideal candidate for an application that could change the electric vehicle industry. Going back to the E Rex, let's talk about some of the disadvantages. All engineering is a matter of balance. of the right trade-offs, try to get

more

of what you want and minimize what you don't want. The first is that the opposed piston design concentrates heat in the center of the engine, requiring a very complex cooling and lubrication system, and then there is a problem with performance even though you get

more

power and much smoother running. smoother the design of the wash kit has a major defect it has a lower Tor than other engines because it lacks a crankshaft that acts as a lever multiplying the force of the pistons, they claim that it is a torque of 180 ft-lb or 244 newon M but they don't mention at what RPM.

I'd be willing to bet the low RPM torque is pretty low since they mounted an e   rex in a Mazda Miata and showed it running, but I never showed it off the ground and if the flagged videos don't show something it may be because it's not particularly fast. One thing that also bothered me is the claim that the engine will run on ambient air when the pictures of the Miata clearly show it. a supercharger installed on the engine, so I guess the intake is getting a little more help, but this brings me to my bigger point: why bother with an internal combustion engine?

Why invest money in R&D for something that we know is going to disappear? The world is going electric so why bother developing a newer and better internal combustion engine? It's like someone tried to design a better, smoother horse-drawn carriage in the early 1920s when it was clear that automobiles were going to take over and this explains why it's called the E Rex (you're probably familiar with e for electronics). or electric and Rex for range extender. Their plan is to build this as a range extender option for EVS. Their premise is that it would be better to build three cars instead of one with these range extenders.

They are smooth, small and quiet and with 5 or 10 gallons of gas you could get that extra range when you need it most of the time. You would never do it. You wouldn't have to use it very often, but when you did, you would have it. It's interesting. and it's something that I go back and forth on seeing the Tesla Cybertruck with the range extension battery pack, which is not gasoline, it's just another battery, and it made me think that yes, it makes sense, for example, a gallon of gasoline It has over 30 KW hours of Onboard Energy Storage in one gallon, meaning a 10 gallon gas tank weighing 60 pounds has 300 KW hours of energy.

Now obviously the internal combustion engine is only a third as

efficient

, but it's still 100 KW hour, the same as the Cyber ​​truck. something that weighs 1,000 lb for the battery pack and only 60 lb of fuel, is unfortunately really good for high-density, long-range storage, so it makes sense. What do you think the comments below rule out if they think a range extender plus an EV is best? the right way to do this, one thing I will say is that I will never buy a car again that has a gasoline engine, the wheels, gasoline engines are too slow, very low torque at low RPM, you really know, they are bad for take off and I need transmissions that are constantly searching for gears, not good after driving an electric car.

I want a purely electric drivetrain, but would I be on board a range extender option that just found its perfect RPM for the highest power output on the torque curve and just hits it? producing electricity as a generator to charge the backup battery, giving you that quick recharge time if you need it, all the range you want while still having all the benefits of electric motors for that super high speed, high performance, durable components out from the comments below   I'm really curious to know what you guys think, so that's a quick look at the one-stroke engine.

Now watch this video below and see you next week. I'm R Vinci, thank you very much for watching.