Quote:
| Originally Posted by Codger I have not looked at the "Air -Electric Drive" thread for a while. Seemed to be a lack of consensus as to the utility/reality of that system. |
I still have great reservations about that myself...just seems to go against all physics we learned.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Brian I wonder which arrangement might last longer, the sinusoidal cam/crankshaft of the Dyna-Cam verses the “trilobate” (three lobed) cams of the Revetec?? |
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Codger I've thought about this as well in regards to the Dynacam. In conventional diesel engines the maximum stress/wear points in the system have long ago been identified and dealt with, more or less, by materials/lubricant developments. I don't know if there are higher forces present between any of the faces in the Dynacam or the Revetec than have already been dealt with in conventional diesels or even if the materials/lubricants are really issues. |
I've followed this Revtec development for awhile, but not as throughly as I would have liked to (I still have a bunch of related forum discussions from some knowledgeable engine folks on my computer that I've not had time to read yet). One thing I've noticed over the period of time is their addition attention to the rollers/trilobate cam interfaces. so there must be extra wear problems they are finding and addressing. I don't believe this has been fully addressed on the dynacam engine. what bothers me is "trunion rollers are housed in the middle of each piston that ride along the cams". Their claims of '2 million miles' seem unfounded to me.
Remember in both of these cases the cam following bearings and cam faces are having to absorb the power of the iginition explosion rather than just being conventional valve activation units as in conventional engines.