Stirlingengineforum.com

Just so I don't waste time , those of you with Manson engine experience, is hot side ventilation better or cold side?

I've been thinking a lot about Manson engines. The Rupp improvement is pretty ingenious.
From what I read, the Manson engine as designed has about 40% less power than the stirling engine. But keep in mind that the Manson engine does not have a displacer. If one would incorporate a displacer, would the Manson engine actually have more power? As stated in a different Forum post, Stirling engines at least the big ones typically have a snifter valve because eventually the quantity of air in the engine gets reduced overtime. Manson design however it would not have that problem, also it jettisons and intakes air at top dead center and bottom dead center just at the right times. So the quantity of air is always kept just right.
Am I incorrect in this assumption? Or is the Manson intake design foolhardy?

Manson engines DO have a displacer.
Where have you read that the Manson engine is 40% less powerful than the Stirling ?
How was the comparison made ?

Oh, you are quite right.
I meant a phased displacer.
I am wondering if the ports make more power by self adjusting pressures

I'm also interested in manson engine stirling, but I do not understand it , So, is there anybody explaining or some preliminary design .. easy to understand !?

Online one can find a photocopy of the original article that was written back in 1950s about this.
Essentially at the top and bottom Strokes theres a vent to clear excess vacuum or excess pressure in order to allow the flywheel to continue the cycle.

Even if you don't understand french, the diagrams are self-explanatory here.
http://www.moteurairchaud.com/manson/principes.php

Thanks Semelis !!