[Jcam]

I'm not an engineer, but I've been following this post (and will continue to). My only words to readers of this thread: "Never tell he who is doing it that it can't be done."
Good luck on your endeveour Try, innovation (for the most part) is a good thing.

[TSI AV]

Hi,

TRY, You heel my wounds ...

Year 2002. That time I was at sea. I sailed on a commercial ship and found one dutch magazine, (probably "Panorama") and there was an article abt compressed-air-driven-car, developed in France.

With one air charge that car could make 500-600 km.

Is it, what You meant / developed ?

I was so sticked with that idea, that started to draw / build my own "air-engine".

I used 1 empty vessel (30 bars allowed), 1 very old 2 cyl. gas engine, 1 air reducer...

Well, that thing worked. Of course, not efficently as I wanted, but it worked.

I'm not sure, how You transfer air pressure into rotating movement (I think - reciprocationaly), but :

1. with a good timing of inlet / outlet valves (probably - electronic timing could be considered),
2. with a very good lubrication of parts,
3. may be double expansion should be considered ?
4. and may be some parts need to be warmed up ?

this engine will have efficiency.

But, "efficient" means what it means.

Compressed air has to be produced.
By compressors.
And here is the point ! ...
If we going to use ENVIROMENTALY FRIENDLY ELECTRICITY (to drive compressors), then, congradulations, we will have a clean engine ...

So, I doubt in very high efficiency, but, because of enviroment, this concept is great.
It is more safe, more simple than hydro-engines.

I'm not sure, who will strive to buy patents...
Oh, yes, still same names (as usual) ...: B*, SHE**, TEXA**, AGI*, TOTA*, STATO**, ...
There is a problem, not engines.

TRY, I will support this concept as much as I can.
Will be happy to help / support / develop / calculate / mount / pack / weld / cut / carry / check / etc.
Please, contact me, if necessary.

Kind regards and respects,

Andrei

[TRY]

First of all to K1W1:
Be it positive or dubitative, your interest is a moral support!
As a shareholder and pro-active in marketing this exciting technology, I feel I can say "we" when discussing the progress of "our" development.

Then to Jcam:
You are oh so right! Never tell the guy who's doing it, that it can't be done! He will only double his efforts, which we are doing constantly.
we're almost there, 5%-ish to accomplish some fine-tuning and we'll go global.

Finally (I've taken my replies in chronological order) to TSI AV:
Good! You've seen the information, you've tried it yourself, you know it works!
We've improved the efficiency very much with some very clever mechanical solutions (piston stops at top end, dual pistons on the same rod, etc).
Since we're a fully privately owned company, nobody can buy our patents, since they're not for sale.
We simply propose options-to-licence, of which some 46 are signed till now, worldwide.

As always, further questions will be answered.
Thanks again!

[TSI AV]

TRY,

Interesting, how all this can be patented ?

Generally, this is 2 (may be 3) stage compressor, working opposite way...

Ok, ok, ok, + electronic timing of valves, TDC "delay", damping / increasing of air pulsations, electronic air distributor(s), probably even pistons of a dual action of different diameters...

The world is familiar with these things already.
Very interesting, WHAT was patented ?

P.S. Have You ever heard abt Mr. S. Balandin ?
That guy invented reciprocating engine without connecting rod...

Well, THAT thing is patented... http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6631671.html
Friction forces are very low compare to standard conrod solution.

Have You tried to use his kinematic schema within Your application?

P.P.S. Please, double Your efforts, oil-madness has to be stopped some day...

Rgds,

Andrei

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by TSI AV

P.S. Have You ever heard abt Mr. S. Balandin ?
That guy invented reciprocating engine without connecting rod...

Well, THAT thing is patented... http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6631671.html
Friction forces are very low compare to standard conrod solution.

Have You tried to use his kinematic schema within Your application?

Here's another very interesting engine without connecting rods. And this one is far beyond the patent stage.

Revetec Engine
http://home.iprimus.com.au/stevewest/feature/Piston%20Broker.html

http://www.revetec.com/

[TRY]

To all the followers of this thread I wish a very Merry Christmas and a Happy - Prosperous and Healthy 2007!
During the festive period I will prepare some photographs to underline the progress of this exciting project.
In a not too far future we'll undertake to cross the Atlantic on air, pure air!

[TRY]

As promised before the "quiet period" I post some (very bad quality) photos of the air-genset we use for further development and demos.
It develops approx 6kva for 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.4 meters and some 60 kgs.

More detailed specs will be posted later today (or tomorrow).

[TRY]

The specs relate to the genset configuration as shown with photographs yesterday.

The engine part is a flat twin of 600cm3.
2 or 3 engines can be connected mechanically to increase volume and power output.
Therefore the flat-four version can be extended to flat-8 or flat-12.

Materials up to now are alloy, but lots of plastic parts will be used in series-production.

The electric part (inhouse developed) delivers 6kva, 220VAV.

Dimensions and weight were specified yesterday (without the noise-reducing casing).

Use in a martime environment does NOT require any specific modification (since no ancillary equipment is needed to make the engine run).
What you see on the photos is all it takes, no extra bits and pieces.

Oil can be any (rather fluid) oil since no heating occurs, rather the opposite, hence the need for a fluid oil.
These can be vegetal, animal, fossile oils, whatever.
Due to absence of heating (never more than 40°C was measured) lifetime of oil is much longer than in any conventional engine.

Power (compressed air) is stored in tanks at 300 bars, engine runs on 30 bars.

Applications for the genset can be emergency, power generation(and zero-pollution storage), power supply, etc.
Weight and zero-pollution are major advantages here (you can literally install this thing in a surgical theatre, or on top of an elevator).

Applications for the engine are same as for any other engine, less weight (so less costly to produce), zero-pollution, free AC (from the O°C exhaust), etc.

If you want to know more: get a message to me, take a flight to this area and I'll show you!
We're now signing licences to manufacture and market for specific geographic areas.

END OF STORY!

[K1W1]

Hi,

Thank you for your appraisal of my comments earlier in the thread.

From your post above:

"Power (compressed air) is stored in tanks at 300 bars"

How is this "Power" initially produced and how is it subsequently rejuvenated especially whilst this proposed vessel is underway?

[TRY]

Power comes from the mains, any 16A socket will do.
Any "engine" driven apparatus needs filling up, otherwise it is called a perpetuum mobile.
Normally you fill up at the pump, not when underway.

However, as outlined in one of my earlier replies the range or endurance of the fuel-quantity can be seriously extended by using an external air-heater.

Does that answer your question?

[K1W1]

Hi,

Yes it does answer part of it, thanks.

How hot will you have to heat the air to seriously extend the endurance?

[TRY]

We heat the air as much as possible, just below the temps where chemical reactions create toxic or polluting gases; in a real-time operational circumstances I would reckon this temperature to be around 800°C.

[K1W1]

Hi,

If you are heating the Air to around 800 Deg C how hot do you think it will be by the time if gets into the engine?

[TRY]

Given the short distance between heater and expansion chamber, and the improving qualities of insulating materials, the loss should not be all that important.
But I agree that we will have a loss in temperature, therefore in air volume, therefore in effiency and range.
With the low cost of the air-fuel however this loss should not be dramatized
With average cost of KW in Europe we reckon to fill a 100L @ 300 bars tank for less than 2 USD, ergo 6-7 times cheaper than diesel-fuel (approx).

[K1W1]

Hi,

Thanks for the reply.

Where will the remaining heat of this 800 Deg Air be dissappated once it has been used to produce the " power"?