www.pulse-jets.com

Hi all,

Check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv0VAlXpJ9U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYx8n4dDTKg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt7Fzva7NAk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z85yJZ8U7b0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXqwWcenalk

wow!

Fedde

Some more about PDE, but the first one looks like PJ to me?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSiER26ZHBg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vutYvUunR64

I hope he decides to change his fuel injector setup, cant seem to comment on any of his videos *shrug*

Lockwood simuylations

I can't see much pulsing, and the time scale goes up to 10 seconds or so.

"me no unnerstand"

Don

But you have to admit that they are nice as simulations, even if they were simulations of my bowels!
Although its looks like my bowels are pulsating a bit more

I've sent the guy a comment on youtube, hope he reacts

Fedde

Some of the prettiest bowel simulations I've seen.

I do not know what this guy is trying to achieve with these simulations!???

Although, thought i better "pull my finger out" before i critisised others work.
So, here is what i expect to see in a Locky. (note: I am NOT endorsing Lockwoods!)

This particular engine (download/file.php?id=11410) is the one Lockwood that i built to test.
I never got it to run before modifying it to something else which started easier and didnt take so much freekin fuel (thanx to Eric).

There is several issues with the engine such as way to small an intake flare to name just one, and this is a very simple CFD setup, far from optimal, only a single cycle, so compleately unbalanced (good enough for this engine tho )

I may upload some higher res vids of this or other engines if there is interest.

Hello to all my old mates on here btw, i do drop by now and then, although havnt built anything or thought of anything interesting to say for a while.

Rossco

Hi Rossco, beautiful. That's the way! I too have little to say or time to say it, but that should clear up a bit soon.

Hi Rossco,

Real lockwood simulatiuns, wow!

Rossco wrote: I may upload some higher res vids of this or other engines if there is interest.
Rossco

There is!!

Fedde

Hi Rossco , Good to see you back here too ,

Very nice work , I saw them simulations on you tube a while back and they didnt make much sense to me ,
what you done there is terrific ,

How about a chineeze ??

Take care

Joe

Rossco posted?! What happened?

GRIM wrote:How about a chineeze ??

How about a really Big chinese?

Cheers!
M.

What's the software used?

I used to be known as the guy that posted simulations of his bowels But now...

milisavljevic wrote:Rossco posted?! What happened?

..now I'm known as the guy thats gets Rossco to post!
Rossco, please post the other video's as well!

The maker of the first reacted through youtube to me:

quote, on youtube wrote: benjaminIschumann Re:pulse jet simulations
thanks for inviting me but this was only a uni-project so my pulsejet career is more or less over now
feel free to link to these videos in the forum.
all the best

Fedde

Did some tweeking after discusions today. Locky is looking a lot better *, just correcting dims. (funny that) *the plans have issues
I will improve my inputs next, although this is a good example of the big difference "small" changes can make.

M. may elaborate here. If you use the Lockwood plans i mentioned above (download/file.php?id=11410) use there "proven" 6" section, NOT the 11" as spec.
I built this engine, and this may have contributed to the very hard starting (for me possibly non running at the time) engine.

Rossco

Mediafire folder of higher res vids. http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=e253 ... b9a8902bda
Grim, this has a preview of a chineeze!
Will do something "closer to home" soon.

Rossco is back!

Rossco wrote:The plans have issues. M. may elaborate here.

To be brief, when the plans were changed, and the 6.00 in. constant diameter section preceeding
the u-bend was replaced with an 11.00 in. section, the design was compromised wrt. its acoustics.

The original layout (6.00 in. tail couple) runs at ca. 93 Hz (15 C) with open and closed pipe modes
synchronised to the upper and lower Helmholtz modes (ie., optimum acoustics). The change from
the shorter to the longer tail couple (11.00 in.) for the sake of aesthetics was a mistake from my
point of view as it left the closed pipe mode "hanging out there". Some builders will find this may
cause start-up problems when (other) "build errors" are considered (eg., an over-large inlet flare).

If you build this Lockwood, do take Rossco's advice and build to the original spec (6.00 in. couple).

Btw., take advantage of Rossco's download link to the most excellent simulations he has created.

Cheers,
M.