MYT Engine

[gfunkusarelius]

i did a search of the forums and saw no mention of this, but it is an engine making some huge claims-

http://www.angellabsllc.com/mytengine.html

first of all they say this:

he MYT™ (Massive Yet Tiny) Engine, is a breakthrough of immense proportions that will spawn the next industrial revolution and will rocket the internalcombustion engine into the next millennium

and they follow it up with:

The MYT™ Engine has the potential to replace all the existing internal combustion engines and jet engines. With 40 times higher power to weight ratio, low parts count, low maintenance, high mechanical efficienty, and low pollution, the MYT™ Engine will benefit airplane, big ship, 18 wheeler, SUV, passenger car, even down to carry on power generator applications. The MYT™ Engine as a pump/compressor also exceeds exisiting pumps/compressors in providing massive pressure, volume, and flow, all in one unit

i havent done anything except watch one of their trade show vidios, but their claims definitely flagged my "too good to be true" meter.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Yet another rotary engine contender. That is all good and well, but then it becomes crazy. Whether it works or not, the comparisons and claims they make seem totally absurd.

Since it is still (although they deny this) in principle a piston engine (stopping and starting is no less wasteful than reprociating), it will have approximately the same yield per "cylinder" all else alike. However, cooling will be an issue in the compact design, so you can't just equate it with an standard engine.

They claim it is a 32 cylinder equivalent, but as far as I can deduce, it has only 8 working strokes per revolution, equating a 16 cylinder standard engine.

They claim to be able to obtain absurdly high compression ratios, but that is actually unlikely because of the linear openings needed in the "cylinder" (really a doughnut) wall, and anyway I wonder which fuel they suggest to use with 1:70 compression.

Apart from cooling, the Achilles heel of it seems to be the linear drive mechanism of the pistons. They will have to have two rings running in the inner wall of the doughnut, and keeping those lubricated and tight is going to be a major issue. This is the problem of all rotary engine types, and probably the main reason the reciprocating piston engine still holds the field: The closed ended cylinder is really by far the best way to rein in compression and explosions.

I think their engine is workable, but I don't believe it will have any useful advantages in practice (and I would have been far more impressed to see a video of one actually running).

Hans

 

[gfunkusarelius]

you dont think the reciprocating piston engine holds the field over the rotary because of some sort of industry conspiracy? come on, the automakers would have to change so much tooling and the cars would use so much less fuel...

seriously, thanks for the thoughts, that was my first impression too, but i dont have as good of an understanding of engines as you seem to have. the lack of a working model while making such wild claims is a huge red flag.

 

[Bikewer]

I seem to recall Mazda replacing a lot of those early Wankel engines with reciprocating types after the seals started to fail...

Though I understand the new ones are fairly well sorted out.

 

[The Don]

Rotary engines are not light on fuel. At least Mazda ones aren't

 

[Genesius]

AFAIK, the Mazda RX-8 is the only rotary-engine car currently being sold in the US.

From this site:

The engine delivers 197hp at 7,200rpm with a torque of 164lb/ft at 5,000rpm for the 1.3-litre, four-speed automatic, and 238hp at 8,500rpm with a torque of 159lb/ft at 5,500rpm for the 1.3-litre, six-speed manual. Fuel economy is expected to average 18mpg (city) to 24mpg (motorway) for the six-speed manual and 18mpg (city) to 25mpg (motorway) for the four-speed automatic version.

Not incredible mileage, but I'd like to see a comparison with a piston engine of the same horsepower.

 

[gfunkusarelius]

my 99 mustang gt has a 4.6 liter v8 that gets 260 hp and 300 lb/ft torque and its rated 17/24 mpg, so yeah, not at all impressed with the rx8 stats. to be fair, the OP wasnt about the existing mazda engine, they arent making the 40X efficiency claims.

 

[Genesius]

Understood, the subject came up & I was curious.

Incidentally, the new Mustang V6 makes 210hp @ 5250 rpm and gets 19/28 MPG manual & 19/25 auto. Not too far off the Mazda.

 

[MRC_Hans]

I seem to recall Mazda replacing a lot of those early Wankel engines with reciprocating types after the seals started to fail...

Though I understand the new ones are fairly well sorted out.

A wealness that will also affect the MYT engine. The donut, or ring chamber will have to be assembled, so there's another seam. The chamber has four seams, three of which are in movement. Add to this the fact that temperature varies considerably over the circumference of the chamber, and the piston-carrying rings rotate through hot and cold sections. I think there will be major tightness and lubrication issues. Also, with no oil reservoir under the pistons, the engine is, lubrication-wise, equal to a two-stroke engine, and will probably need oil-mixed fuel. However, with the high compression ratios they envisage, any lubricant will combust.

Rotary engines are not light on fuel. At least Mazda ones aren't

The Wankel engine has fairly low compression. The MYT can, at least in theory, have high compression ratios.

However, the conceptual problems, combined with the low credibility presentation leads me to believe the MYT is a genuine project that has run into unsurmountable problems, and they (or others who have taken over the scraps) are now trying to milk some scam money from it.

Hans

 

[gfunkusarelius]

"low credibility presesntation" yeah i had to laugh at the pictues from the la auto show where their prototype had a handwritten sign saying "breakthru engine" that looked almost like my friends sign "free car wash for just 2 dollers" when we were about7...

one annoying thing-the place where i saw this posted originally was entertainment based and a lot of commentary was rather unskeptical, so i can already see peolple discussing fuel prices a few years from now and someone saying "i saw this rotary engine that got 40X the power and economy of standard engines a few years ago but i bet the oil companies shut that down" haha, sigh

 

[Lynx2174]

wankel Rotary engines eat fuel fairly fast, because they get lousy compression ratios. (they can, unmodified, burn straight hydrogen gas though, because of this.) What they do get is high power-weight. they're real hard to seal though, and they are hard to pass emmissions because of oil from the seals getting burned in the engine.

This engine would probably have a hard time passing emmissions because of the same problem. I must say though, it's really quite clever. I'd like to see how he proposes to cool the danged thing. and also how the inventor plans to seal it. those nice piston rings we use in regular cars only work when you can have oil behind them, and if you're running combustion on both sides of the piston, it's not going to be pretty.

New rotary engines pretty much always come with ludicrous claims. This is one of the more spectacularly exaggerated ones, but I still think it's pretty clever in principle. I still like those other ones that use a sort of screw for a non-reciprocating internal combustion engine that isn't a jet perse.

heh. breakthru. that's classy.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Cooling is a major issue for the MYTh () engine. Pistons working from both sides with no oil to cool them from "below". The same parts of the chamber always having thrust strokes, without a cooling intake stroke in between. And overal, even granted the exorbitant claims for efficiency, getting the excess heat from a 2000hp output away from a hat-box sized engine is going to call for some major creativity. Certainly, the puny cooling-ribs on the model will barely suffice to cool it while idling.

I think that on a practical model, when they have finshed derating it to deal with for all these problems, they'd end up with a fairly average yielding machine, with an appalling consumption of lubrication oil.

Hans

 

[kleinjahr]

But it's so, preeetty.