Boeing Pulse Jets

Moderator: Mike Everman

Post Reply
nitro
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:49 am
Antipspambot question: 125

Boeing Pulse Jets

Post by nitro » Fri Mar 21, 2014 1:21 am

I noticed Boeing have put in some Patent rights to a new Pulse Jet that uses a pneumatic throat to do away with reed valves for good.They claim to be more powerful that any other reed less Pulse Jet.Perhaps more power than any reed valve set up.Perhaps Perfect for RC.Look up Pulse jet Ejector Thrust Augmentor. :wink:

metiz
Posts: 1517
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2006 6:34 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Netherlands

Re: Boeing Pulse Jets

Post by metiz » Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:03 am

Source?
Quantify the world.

nitro
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:49 am
Antipspambot question: 125

Re: Boeing Pulse Jets

Post by nitro » Mon Mar 24, 2014 12:31 am

Try these two in Freepatentonline.com I wonder if any have proven to work yet.

https://www.google.com/patents/US7581383
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6883304.pdf

Mark
Posts: 10727
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:14 pm

Re: Boeing Pulse Jets

Post by Mark » Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:20 pm

There's this, seems I've seen the video before. Maybe they could frighten the enemy with the sound it's going to make.
www dumpert nl Boeing Pulse Jet Concept Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chmmUF9fPSE
Presentation is Everything

Mike Everman
Posts: 4906
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:25 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: santa barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Boeing Pulse Jets

Post by Mike Everman » Fri Apr 04, 2014 5:08 pm

Yeah, so patented in 2005, but not how they show it in the video, and the guy confuses detonation with deflagration. You can't find anything on it that is real, because they clearly don't get it, and it doesn't work for s**t this way. The ejector stuff is OK, but certainly unproven here as well.
If you look at this design in detail, which I have, it's a thermojet with annular intake.
Here's why this has no legs:
Extremely tight tolerances in the annular area for the intake, that change unacceptably during warm-up,
Very high skin friction in the intake. The smallest intake round tube is best. I've made annulars, as has Bill, and some others, and they suck,
The sneaky one that any turbine guy would catch is your intake has a red-hot wall on it, which unacceptably dumps heat into the incoming air. that is the last place you want to dump heat. you want intake air cooooold, so it is as dense as it can be.

Boeing did a rash of these types of patents trying to sow up IP in this space, and as far as I know, none of it proven to work, just speculative. I have an impressive collection of pulsejet patents that if you've had any experience or study at all, would obviously not work.
They also have clearly not put a pulsejet inside an ejector structure like that. Try it, it's the quickest way to shut off a pulsejet!
Mike
__________________________
Follow my technical science blog at: http://mikeeverman.com/
Get alerts for the above on twitter at: http://twitter.com/mikeeverman

nitro
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 3:49 am
Antipspambot question: 125

Re: Boeing Pulse Jets

Post by nitro » Sat May 17, 2014 1:09 pm

Bugger.I hoped they had solved the reed valve problems for good & still have a Very powerful design. :cry:

Post Reply