https://patents.google.com/patent/US201 ... S+10982543
here's some pat. figs.
- M-cycle ambient eng_1.png (285.02 KiB) Viewed 971 times
- M-cycle ambient eng_2.png (151.3 KiB) Viewed 971 times
M-cycle ambient engine
-
matt brown
- Posts: 752
- Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2022 11:25 pm
M-cycle ambient engine
By chance, I rediscovered this ambient engine scheme and thought a new thread was appropriate with a distinct title. Check out this patent:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US201 ... S+10982543
here's some pat. figs.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US201 ... S+10982543
here's some pat. figs.
-
matt brown
- Posts: 752
- Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2022 11:25 pm
Re: M-cycle ambient engine
Back in my creative steam days (40+ yrs ago) this type of stuff consumed endless hours of scheming. For those who don't instantly grasp the basic scheme, permit me to fill in the gaps. This scheme is nothing more than a 'vacuum' engine where the magic is a constant volume transfer after expansion to 'compression' chamber via simple valving. Ideally, this requires minimal work assuming equal pressure on both piston sides during this transfer. This sets up a relative vacuum on backside of piston when expansion valve opens, whereupon this pressure differential drives the piston from TDC to BDC. Depending upon this relative vacuum, the 'compression' valve will open when ambient pressure is reached and the cycle repeats.
A flame licker creates an ambient isobaric expansion by using input heat to raise the temperature above ambient, but this 'isobaric work' usually supplies less output to the piston then return vacuum stroke.
My problem with this M-cycle scheme reduces to first principles: (1) if isobaric expansion then gas temperature must rise above ambient (2) if isothermal expansion then gas pressure must sink below ambient (3) if neither then no heat input and no engine. I haven't read the patent description, but if this really worked, we'd probably already know about it.
The trick here is adding heat to the gas prior expansion, whereupon most of this same heat is rejected (regenerated) after expansion (during previously mentioned constant volume transfer). In a way, this is similar the cold hole fantasy where a cold hole is only required for startup. The main takeaway here is that heat transfers must adhere to some PVT basics and that cheating is bogus. Nevertheless, I still like the Cv transfer after expansion creating vacuum.
A flame licker creates an ambient isobaric expansion by using input heat to raise the temperature above ambient, but this 'isobaric work' usually supplies less output to the piston then return vacuum stroke.
My problem with this M-cycle scheme reduces to first principles: (1) if isobaric expansion then gas temperature must rise above ambient (2) if isothermal expansion then gas pressure must sink below ambient (3) if neither then no heat input and no engine. I haven't read the patent description, but if this really worked, we'd probably already know about it.
The trick here is adding heat to the gas prior expansion, whereupon most of this same heat is rejected (regenerated) after expansion (during previously mentioned constant volume transfer). In a way, this is similar the cold hole fantasy where a cold hole is only required for startup. The main takeaway here is that heat transfers must adhere to some PVT basics and that cheating is bogus. Nevertheless, I still like the Cv transfer after expansion creating vacuum.
Re: M-cycle ambient engine
So does that mean the "M" is for Mythical. LOL Don't forget my Unicorn.
It doesn't look like it's supposed to run on ambient energy, as it shows an outside heat source just before that heat exchanger, rendering the heat exchanger useless. Qin #2.
It doesn't look like it's supposed to run on ambient energy, as it shows an outside heat source just before that heat exchanger, rendering the heat exchanger useless. Qin #2.