Massive Yet Tiny Engine

  • Thread starter Vonie
  • 20 comments
  • 3,824 views
3,879
thevonsteinery
Massive Yet Tiny Engine
New Internal Combustion Engine


Angel Labs has developed a new type of internal combustion engine known as the “Massive Yet Tiny” engine. It “has the potential to replace all the existing internal combustion engines and jet engines,” according to the inventor. It reportedly has a power to weight ratio 40 times higher than a regular internal combustion engine. A 14-inch, 150-pound MYT would reportedly have the same power as a 32 cylinder diesel engine — putting out 858 horsepower.

apr24-myt_1.jpg


Much More Info.

 
The problem with the efficient burn--as this cycle uses to attain the amazing statistics--is that you get high CO (carbon monoxide) and HC (hydrocarbon) emissions.

Lean burn results in lower CO and HC but higher NOx.

So the question is which can we deal with easier--I would guess NOx since lean burn engines (of the conventional kind) are preferred.

I think the sticking point for any of these new ideas is maintaining compliance with emissions laws, which are pretty much tailored for 4-cycle engines.
 
Wow think of that engine being in Supercars, but with more BHP. I just wonder if current Turbo and Superchargers will be able to work with it.

Also I hope it can produce more MPG.
 
Well, given that efficiency, maybe you could still get 400 hp out of it after restriction losses due to emissions equipment in the exhaust.

Very neat concept... really dig the way the pistons bounce off each other... :lol: ... designing the timing and movement must have been very arduous... I can just imagine how each ignition powers the stroke for the next compression cycle... what I don't understand is how the crankshaft articulates with both sets of pistons (the animation was very limited).

I could see this as being two or three times as efficient as the best piston engines purely from the absence of parasitic loss from the valvetrain.
 
Whoa.. That's kinda cool.


How the hell would one change out pistons for use with a high boost turbo?:eek:

I wonder what a set of headers would look like for one of those.:dopey:

If it has no valvetrain, then it has no cam, so no belts, so no way to attach a supercharger. Would one of these be carbureted or fuel injected?

It can be controlled by a throttle, right?
 
That's insane, but I wonder if they can fix the emissions problems that skip0110 mentioned.

...or, if they make the engine small enough to provide the same amount of power that we already get in passenger cars, I wonder if its emissions will even be a problem... :lol:
 
Its a very interesting design, I would like to see more detail (diagrams) and a running model before I make judgment.


High-Test
If it has no valvetrain, then it has no cam, so no belts, so no way to attach a supercharger. Would one of these be carbureted or fuel injected?

A rotary engine has no cams but still has belts off the crankshaft for alternator, air con etc, which is where the supercharger would run from, the crankshaft. This engine should be no different.

High-Test
Would one of these be carbureted or fuel injected?

I would imagine if the engine is compression ignited like a diesel it would have to be direct injected.
 
I don't see anything on their website that says the engine has even run yet. They seem to be making some pretty big claims about an engine that appears to be almost completely untested.

They've got some test putting 150psi compressed air into the engine and getting 800ftlbs out... I'm a little confused about the meaning of that, seeing as you can go buy an air impact wrench that will do exactly the same thing.
 
Seeing the pictures and the animations, its a fascinating idea.

There have been people trying to work out some sort of rotating engine (besides the wankel) for years and years and years now.

Again I'd have to see it run, and I can only imagine the racket it would make.

Edit: I just listened to the Air Compression video test, I notice this thing sounding something like a Jet Engine at full throttle.

Neat, no doubt, but man it will require some hella mufflers to get that down to a reasonable level.

Still, it might catch on, especially with Bio-Diesel looking like a good way to lower America's Foreign Oil Dependence.
 
How does this work? Judging from the picture, when the fuel mixture is ignited, the gas will push on two pistons at once, in opposite directions.

I'm skeptical until I see this thing actually run. Those numbers seem a bit dubious as well.
 
skip0110
The problem with the efficient burn--as this cycle uses to attain the amazing statistics--is that you get high CO (carbon monoxide) and HC (hydrocarbon) emissions.

Lean burn results in lower CO and HC but higher NOx.

So the question is which can we deal with easier--I would guess NOx since lean burn engines (of the conventional kind) are preferred.

I think the sticking point for any of these new ideas is maintaining compliance with emissions laws, which are pretty much tailored for 4-cycle engines.

I would suggest that you ask that question on their forums, they seem to be quite willing and prompt to give answers.

According to their claims, they could build a 25 lbs, 2.4L engine smaller than your car's alternator... which could pump up to 500hp?

Please make it so... :dopey:
 
Wolfe2x7
I wonder if they can fix the emissions problems that skip0110 mentioned.

Who cares - after all, it churns out more power than an F1 car, and can (probably) fit in a supermarket bag :lol:

Great find Vonie. 👍
 
Carl.
According to their clains, they could build a 25 lbs, 2.4L engine smaller than your car's alternator... which could pump up to 500hp?

Please make it so... :dopey:

Imagine that in a motorcycle.... :drool:
 
The action is actually quite simple. There are two rings of pistons sitting in the same groove... you have ring A and ring B, and the pistons are set to alternate so that piston count goes A-B-A-B-A-B-A-B.

The exhaust and intake ports are position in the housing at set intervals. As ring A moves and ring B stays stationary, the space between all A pistons and B pistons grows. This sucks in air through the intake ports. In the meantime, space between the backs of the B pistons and the front edge of the A piston shrinks... compression... combustion... A stops dead, B starts moving, powered by exhaust expansion... exhaust goes out exhaust port, and further motion pulls in intake gases for the next cycle. As this is happening, the front of the B pistons nears the back of the A pistons, creating compression... combustion... etcetera.

Actually, you don't even need to specify back end and front end. The pistons would actually have heads on both sides.

Apparently, the rings will be geared like bicycle gears... they'll only move in one direction. There'll be enormous stress on this mechanism, but maybe not as great as on a reciprocating assembly.

With fixed exhaust ports, maybe they'll have the combustion portion happen before full compression, so that the compression will push all waste gases out before taking in air for the next cycle... just like in a regular piston engine. What I can't figure out is how they would adjust the timing so that this happens optimally at different engine speeds.
 
niky
What I can't figure out is how they would adjust the timing so that this happens optimally at different engine speeds.

Maybe the housing that has the intake and exhaust ports maybe able to rotate a few degrees back and forth, or they could figure away to do this.
 
niky
Actually, you don't even need to specify back end and front end. The pistons would actually have heads on both sides.

Apparently, the rings will be geared like bicycle gears... they'll only move in one direction. There'll be enormous stress on this mechanism, but maybe not as great as on a reciprocating assembly.

Have i got this right?

The ring arrangement of cyls has torsional inertia plus the bidirectional motion of the dualheaded pistons is motion in two planes that operate w/ less stress than a 4-stroke due to lack of valve mechanism scavenging (it's timing regulation).

P.S get a mockup feel from the Youtube link of Vonie's, gotta grab more pics.
 
What I meant is that there'll probably be quite a bit of stress on the gear mechanism that keeps one set of pistons from moving backwards while the other set moves forward after detonation... Plus, that gear has to keep the compression stroke from pushing that stationary ring forward while the other ring is moving... otherwise the pressure will push the stationary ring forward, and you'll have no compression... would be a problem at low rpms.

Less to go wrong than in a conventional piston set-up,maybe... but there will be about a zillion pounds of pressure on that one mechanism.
 
niky
What I meant is that there'll probably be quite a bit of stress on the gear mechanism that keeps one set of pistons from moving backwards while the other set moves forward after detonation... Plus, that gear has to keep the compression stroke from pushing that stationary ring forward while the other ring is moving... otherwise the pressure will push the stationary ring forward, and you'll have no compression... would be a problem at low rpms.

Less to go wrong than in a conventional piston set-up,maybe... but there will be about a zillion pounds of pressure on that one mechanism.

I agree, I thought exactly the same thing when I first saw it, thats why I said I wanted to see more detail/diagrams before making judgement. I do see many potential serious flaws that I would like to see how they work around them.
 
👍 Same here... this bears watching.

Can't stand disappointment, though... there haven't been any paradigm shifts in engine design for quite a long time... remember the "Coates" engine? Long time no see... :indiff:
 
Back