Bored with 2-stroke and 4-stroke? Consider 1-stroke or 6-stroke engines....

Came accross these curiosities. The six-stroke has actually been tried in a
bike.

1-stroke
http://bourke-engine.com/ani.htm

6-stroke (in a bike!)
http://www.jack-brabham-engines.com/articles.htm

 

No, that's a 2-stroke.

And that's a 4-stroke

You don't really understand this 'strke' concept, do you?

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2
`\|/`
`

 

How about a two stroke with a hinged piston.

http://www.pivotalengine.com/applications.html

 

The Bourke engine has one con rod (two pistons) and fires on both the "up"
stroke and the "down" stroke so it can be described as a "one stroke". It
all depends on how you wish to define the terms.

God knows about the other thing but it is described as a "six stroke" and it
certainly isn't like any other four-stroke engine.

Tony

 

Just uses a combination of disk, piston and rotary valves instead of the
usual poppet valve setup. One good thing about that setup, is the power
recovery from the piston valve, although I'm sure that things could be
done better with two piston valves instead of one, and no disk or reed.

 

Oh no it can't. The 'stroke' refers to the movement of the piston wrt
the cylinder, so each piston has the normal two strokes, so it's a
2-stroke.

Well of course, if you're going to invent your own language you could
call it whatever you like.

It's just a 4 stroke using some ideas about getting gases in and out
which are more common on 2-strokes, hence the jocular use of
2+4=6-stroke. But again, the piston goes through four 'strokes' of the
piston per firing, so there's no doubt that it's a 4-stroke.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2
`\|/`
`

 

An engine with one piston, but a combustion chamber each side of the
piston would be a one stroke engine?

But a turbine is not pulsed combustion, it's continuous combustion, and
can't really be spoken about in the same way as pulsed combustion
engines surely?

There was a Formula1 turbo engine that used a hybrd system of pulsed and
continuous combustion, but that doesn't really count.

 

No, it's a twin cylinder two-stroke. Otherwise, using your definition,
2-stroke four would be a half-stroke.

No, you get one power stroke per two turns of the (main) crankshaft -
in other words, a four-stroke.

 

I's agree, it's a Brayton cycle engine, not Otto cycle.

 

Says who, where and with what authority? My guess is that it is custom and
practice rather than a precisely defined term. The stroke could be defined
as the movement of the con rod. Alternatively, one could consider the
entire double-ended assembly as the "piston" in which case it clearly is a
"one stroke". Anyhow, it certainly isn't a "two stroke" in any conventional
sense of the term as the piston/con rod unit is powered on every single
movement.

Its all about agreeing the terms used. If you can demonstrate that there is
only one, single universally accepted definition of the "stroke" of an
engine and it corresponds with yours then you would have a point. However,
as the engine in question is described by some as a "one stroke" or "single
stroke" see
http://bourke-engine.com/aboutrus.htm
http://www.teslatech.info/ttstore/books/290003.htm
I think you may be in difficulties.

Tony

 

I like motor cycle engines. ;o))

 

Ding! Or the nearest possible thing to it. In fact, each side of the
piston would be going through the 2T cycle. Problem is, how on earth to
extract useable power from such a device without horrendous sealing
problems.

 

What a load of old cobblers. Bourk himself deserved better, I must say,
but to describe his engine as one-stroke is to do him a dis-service.
It's an opposed-piston two-stroke, with one unique feature; that of the
weird and wonderful crankshaft. The detail of the piston porting and
transfer were probably innovative at the time, but I'd imagine would
have been quite problematical in service.

As for the so-called 6-stroke - it's a 4 stroke engine with a small
opposed piston acting as a piston ported valve, that's all.

There's nothing new under the sun, it's all been done before and in the
field of automotive engines, usually by Ricardo or somebody of that day.
If materials in the 20s were as good as they are now, the engine
development that could have happened 80 years ago would have been
phenomenal.

 

Interesting.... wonder how long it'll last in service.

 

After having had a little think about it, there may be a couple of ways
of building something like it, using inductive coupling.

 

Dunno, there doesn't seem to be much usefull test data there.

 

TOG-pattern BMW engine.

 

That rocks.

 

It also sucks and blows at the same time.

 

Bits of it swivel, too.