![]() 09/25/2013 at 11:09 • Filed to: None | ![]() | ![]() |
SLEEP. SLEEP. SLEEP.
![]() 09/25/2013 at 11:11 |
|
My mind is full of fuck trying to figure this out
![]() 09/25/2013 at 11:12 |
|
That's the worst torque converter I've ever seen
![]() 09/25/2013 at 11:19 |
|
Woah! that's kinda brilliant. but me thinks it needs less spark plug.
![]() 09/25/2013 at 11:43 |
|
If it were a two-stroke, it would have two plugs and two exhaust ports, rather than just one each. Also, it could use four fixed spark plugs instead of one moving one, if it wanted to, but this setup is way easier with a magneto.
A source of potential leaks is the interface linkage between the toroidal pistons and the inner reciprocating drive rings. To reduce risk, the two drive rings can themselves be chamber sealed from one another, but that means a small margin of exhaust pressure could, in the case of a leak, impede inlet air flow and lead to power loss. Due to the position of the rings, however, that would only occur with severe blowby at the "top" and "bottom" of stroke, and that can be alleviated by making sure the through-link is always in the ring-sealed cylinder cavity with bigger pistons and a shorter stroke. That reduces displacement, however.
As I understand it.
![]() 09/25/2013 at 13:18 |
|
Pffftt...that'd never work. The spark plug wire would get tangled.
![]() 09/25/2013 at 13:47 |
|
Magneto: needs only a fixed point vs. rotating point and high enough speed. The whole spark system on the spin section, but with a contact ring for ground-out killing it. With the comparatively few revs per sparks needed, it might do best having twin magnets run backward at engine speed vs. the pickup.
(Yes, I know the comment wasn't serious)
![]() 09/25/2013 at 13:54 |
|
Thank you for the explanation. I knew it had to involve super powers. But no serious, I do appreciate the explanation.