Did I see this vortex intak somewhere?

[Mike Everman]

More from planes, trains and autos. I have this nagging feeling I saw this idea somewhere and forgot... Original or not, looks fun to try. ;-P

[resosys]

More from planes, trains and autos. I have this nagging feeling I saw this idea somewhere and forgot... Original or not, looks fun to try. ;-P

Looks neat.

Over the past few weeks I've been thinking a lot about engine configurations, vortex generation, and how it all fits together. Somewhere in the mess of thoughts, I centered on the wankel rotary designs and how the vortex could be used to create a "valve like" reaction at the intake. Theres something there, but it hasn't quite hit me yet.

Walking through Sears and seeing all the "vortex powered" vacuum cleaners really didn't help me much. The physics section at the local Barnes and Noble just wasn't up to the task. I may have to hit up the physics professors here at UC Davis for some free classes or some help with the theory end.

I'm sick. Really sick. Thanks Mike. Now I'm never going to get to sleep :-).

[Mike Everman]

I aim to please, zzzzzzzzzzz.

[Viv]

Cool, I posted a valved version that was nearly identical on the old forum when i first came on to the forum.

I had an annular flame trap at the front though to improve the timing.

Viv

[Mike Everman]

Why does it need timing improvement?

[nmasters]

Don't overlook the fact that gasses experience centrifugal force the same as solids except that compression and expansion move heat around. You've got the outer track labeled "low pressure" and the exhaust "high pressure". That's just not the way vortices work. The centrifugal force compresses the outer perimeter of the vortex and the relatively low pressure at the core draws material inward. To bad there's not enough area at the center to draw fresh air in through a central snorkel and exhaust it through an annular slot because heat is concentrated at the perimeter and it's easier to work with nature than against her.

[Viv]

Why does it need timing improvement?

I was trying to get it to run with a shorter tailpipe!

Viv

[Mike Everman]

True, I was just considering pressure due to velocity; silly mistake. I need to know the inlet velocity before I can determine whether this is worth anything, and then it may still not be!
I wonder if there's any reference material that would shed some light on a trapped vortex like this, as in pressure distribution that considers both centrifugal and velocity pressures.

[Mark]

More from planes, trains and autos. I have this nagging feeling I saw this idea somewhere and forgot... Original or not, looks fun to try. ;-P

I like anything with a vortex, the design reminds me of a Hero's Steam Engine of some sort, only with an in and out effect instead of constant exhaust.
Mark

[mk]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't it be that vortex-engines need a constant airflow, without any kind of pulsation? I think that pulsation in the cc always destroys the vortex by interrupting the inflow through the valves getting closed. After that the vortex has to be rebuild (what needs energy) by a suction at the exhaust intake at cc. And there is another problem: how do you manage the flame in the exhaust getting back into the cc, against the direction of airflow that creats the suction? When suction is once created, it would keep the valves open until energy is lost through friction. Then preasure in cc is "normal" and the flame wouldn't move back, though the fuel/air mixture has to be ignited again.

Would a constant burning not be more optimal for these engines?

[Mike Everman]

Well, pulsating combustion is known to be more efficient than constant burn, when done right; though for making thrust per pound of fuel per hour, it's still not there.
I think the key with these vortex engines is to keep encouraging the pulsation, but improve mixing and increase the pressure swings without mechanisms.
While my interest lies mostly with the valveless version, the valve type seems like it will work without difficulty, but they all work phenominally on paper. ;-P

[mk]

Mike, have you already build a valvless vortex engine? If you have, does it work?
Vortex engines are very interesting and I would like trying to get such an engine working. It could be my next projekt.
The thing with an improved pulsation makes sense. Maybe some a kind of 2-stroke engine exhaust shape of the tailpipe might help. The problem of stopping and opposing suction is nearly similar.

It would be great if somebody could say whether a valveless or a valved vortex engine runs better/ delivers more thrust.

[Mike Everman]

Bruno or Graham would know better than I, but the only running vortex burner is the Reynst pot, which is not a thrust engine but a burner. It does pulsate, though. We're getting ready to do some testing soon, but it is so far all a pipe dream. Or a dream in pipes.
Scan this area for some good discussion on 2-cycle tuned pipes and their applicability to pulse jets, I don't remember where it was...

[mk]

I'll soon do a drawing of a tuned exhaust pipe for a vortex engine. Till now I don't have any experience in vortex engines, but it may be useful/inspirative for somebody.

Let me know if you're (not) succeding in testing vortex engines.

[Bruno Ogorelec]

Mike Everman was on the right track. SNECMA patented a vortex-intake pulsejet not terribly different from his, but it breathed from the inside of an annular drum. The pulsejet was tangential to the drum. It all looked like figure 9, but teh tail was much longer and straighter than in the 9. I'll try to fish the picture out and post it here.