Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Engine Technologies (AENG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: shashyazhi who wrote (1478)	7/18/1998 1:11:00 AM
From: 246810	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3383

Hi shashyazhi, glad you're back. You wrote, Even those who have a fairly intimate acquaintance with the conventional internal combustion engine are led astray by the horsepower output from such an apparently small engine. It is a pretty small engine. I think the OX2 was demonstrated at 170 lb ft torque at 1250 rpm. That is 40 hp and piston speed of ~2500. Yes, the cam profile affects the speed at any point, and we are talking average speed, so can't we shape the cam to increase the early acceleration and reduce the peak speed? (The crankshaft engine piston follows simple harmonic motion with (relatively) slow initial acceleration and fast mid-stroke velocity.) You wrote, Initially the OX2 engine befuddles the mechanically unsophisticated person. I agree. I do not understand the sketch that shows the transfer of the torque from the cam to the cam follower to the cruciform to the guide pins to the rotating container to the output shaft. I think, intuitively, the friction wear on such small bearings and sliding surfaces will be high. I read on the Yahoo board from a UofW student that the demo there was cancelled due to engine troubles regarding lubrication. How do you feel about wear? 246810

To: shashyazhi who wrote (1478)	7/18/1998 10:38:00 AM
From: john griffin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3383

Calculation of G---I don not believe you are correct!! Stick to the actual piston speed NOT the equivalent speed in a crankshaft engine. Also the piston speed and acceleration do not need to be the same because the cam can vary from a crank. No piston slap, therefore short light pistons, small rings? Engine size comparison -- 350 fires every second rev-- divide by 2 = 175 66 fires twice per rev--- mult by 2 = 133 In general we are comparing engines of similar size so out put being similar is not unreasonable?? ----John