Upload
Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
asd
#74 - peggscott
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
Smart, But the combustion at the bottom pistons would not not be converted into the same amount of power because they also have the weight of the piston itself to push up...
#93 to #74 - tomob
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
the force produced by the combustion is far greater than the weight of the piston so much so that the weight of the piston is insignificant
User avatar #113 to #93 - peggscott
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
Again, I work on ships.... I think the way of a ships engine, and the pistons on them are MUCH bigger... the weight of the piston would not be insignificant on them....
#120 to #113 - tomob
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
ship engines very big pistons yes pistons weigh a lot yes but it will also use more fuel in each stroke meaning more pressure meaning a larger force acting on a larger piston. its less about the size of the piston more about the ratio of the weight of the piston against the force acting upon the piston due to the increase in pressure
User avatar #143 to #120 - peggscott
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
HFO is used, for the soul reason that it is cheap... Its not the best and the least amount possible is used, and the force needed to lift a piston of that size would more than likely blow a hole in the side after a few months... if not weeks... I would show you the size of one of the fuel injectors compared to me, but my router is ***** at the moment and I cant be ****** uploading it...
#238 to #143 - tomob
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/30/2013) [-]
alright tell me a few things and ill work it out im probably wrong in the case of large engines but i would like to work out the math to see if i am. could you tell me-

-the surface area of the piston/radius of piston im not fussy

-the amount of fuel injected into the engine each stroke

-the radius and length of the cylinder

-the mass/weight of the piston again not fussy
#239 to #238 - tomob
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/30/2013) [-]
oh and also how many pistons and how are they arranged what angle are they at relative to the deck of the ship?
User avatar #102 to #93 - snaresinger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
-Combustion doesn't cause force, expansion does.
-A large force acting against a small force doesn't somehow make the small force smaller. It just overcomes it.

But your idea is correct.
#107 to #102 - tomob
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
expansion is a consequence of combustion. expansion causes pressure increase which in turn causes force on the piston therefore the force is caused ultimately by combustion.

and i never said it made the small force of the weight smaller i said it was insignificant compared to the force exerted on the piston from the rapidly expanding gas
User avatar #92 to #74 - Awesomenessniss
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
User avatar #85 to #74 - cumsinbucket
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
I'm not a science smart person, but the people below me make an awful lot of sense
User avatar #82 to #74 - snaresinger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
>implying this is just a theoretical idea OP is proposing
This is a real thing, smart guy. Radial engines are things which have already been created and used.
User avatar #87 to #82 - peggscott
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
Fair enough, When ever I think of engines I automatically think of a ships engine... where it is much more easy and piratical to just keep a a camshaft
User avatar #231 to #87 - snaresinger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/30/2013) [-]
True, I suppose. That's why modern engines basically all use camshafts.
User avatar #81 to #74 - arziben
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
those were used on WW1 planes, they ARE obsolete
#75 to #74 - anon id: 6d579756
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/29/2013) [-]
Have the engine horizontal.