Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 76

Thread: PatEF; the "Ef" for efficiency

  1. #46
    apriliaforum expert photoRotor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    SE corner of the NW
    Posts
    9,785
    Can you, please, provide the number of your rotary valve US patent?


    I don't want to infringe your patent

    Name:  Fish_Hooked_08-FishHookInMansMouth-300x165.jpg
Views: 63
Size:  10.5 KB
    Last edited by photoRotor; 11-24-2017 at 03:29 PM.
    JD

    '01 Futura

  2. #47
    apriliaforum expert FTM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Portsmouth Uk
    Posts
    9,268
    A member on here has a patent for a product he sells and makes his living solely from that product. His patent has been infringed many times but if he was to fight every infringement he'd be bankrupt by now.
    Good luck with your product/patent.
    FUCK THE MAGS


    Never live the same day twice. (My wife nearly pissed her self laughing when she read my signature line, because she reckons she has never met anyone in the whole of her life who hates change more than me) She does have a point .

  3. #48
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Clearwater, Fl
    Posts
    7,202
    Manolis - As I said stop filing dead patents and make something real otherwise its just clutter and trolling for someone to pay you off. You talk a lot but appear to do nothing but file patents in the hope of what? A pay off from a major manufacturer or to have someone else roll up their sleeves, work out the bugs and build a practical working model for you saving you the expense and bother of doing it yourself or paying a machine shop to do so?

    You talk about savings and improvements as if they are definite, carved in stone realities without actually making a alpha or beta model so any benefit you speak of is untested and just theory or vapor.

    Even if you are not a patent troll just looking to hit on an idea close enough to what someone else has already spent millions of dollars developing so you can claim royalties on their final product, you have been asking folks to collaborate on engineering these things without offering compensation for the aid in developing your products which many do find objectionable. Collaborators should be included in your patent filings and are due some form of compensation. I wonder if those who have given you input could legally claim percentage rights to your patents and demand compensation if you do eventually sell one of them after implementing one of the improvements they offered.

  4. #49
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Hello Yzr750
    Can you, please, provide the number of your rotary valve US patent?
    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos
    My patent was unrelated to my rotary valve design, I built the rotary valve head because I could.
    Your rotary valve design looks like a simple adaptation of the age old two stroke style rotary valve, what's it's point of difference?
    I will probably re-visit my design in a couple of years time just for kicks, money spent on long term ICE engine development is probably dead money due to the electric revolution anyway........
    Btw my design had independently variable inlet and exhaust timing, and variable duration. It had problems which would be a relatively easy fix with modern materials/coatings/lubricant combinations.
    At the time the donor motor(honda cb125) gave 9hp at the gearbox sprocket on my dyno, with my head it gave 27hp but blew the bottom end on regular occasions. With ECU control over valve timing, ignition timing and fuel injection I reckon it could match the specific output of a two stroke whilst giving better fuel consumption and driveability.
    seesecurity.com.au

  5. #50
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    151
    Hello Yzr750

    You wrote:
    “I built a rotary valve head for a 125 honda single 30yrs ago, ran it on my dyno with some good results as well, spent 80,000 quid on a patent back in 1985 and couldn't afford to fight infringements.”


    The average reader has the impression that the patent is for the rotary valve. Because you talk for a rotary valve (and the dates mentioned fit).

    So,

    what was so special about the “non patented” rotary valve you made and tested?
    Was it a Cross design? An Aspin design?
    I suppose it was a naturally aspirated engine. Right?
    At what rpm it was delivering the 27bhp?
    If it is not a secret, please do provide some drawings to get an idea for what we are talking.

    At http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatRoVa.htm you can see hundreds of drawings and photos, and many – many explanations for the PatRoVa rotary valve.
    If you take a look, you will understand (as the patent examiners already did) how fundamentally different the PatRoVa rotary valve is from all other previous designs of rotary valves.
    Then come to talk technically.


    By the way, what the 80,000 quid (1985) means in today US dollars?

    What I know from long experience (as well as from recent experience) if you do everything by your own (i.e. without patent lawyer / patent agents), for the first ten years a US patent (the USA market is the biggest market in the world) costs totally US3,200$ (small entity).

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  6. #51
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    151
    Hello FTM

    You write:
    “A member on here has a patent for a product he sells and makes his living solely from that product. His patent has been infringed many times but if he was to fight every infringement he'd be bankrupt by now.
    Good luck with your product/patent.”

    There are patents easy to infringe, and other patents so different that the prior art that the infringement is quite difficult.

    For instance, the PatBox CVT



    (stereoscopic drawing; forinstructions on how to look at it http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonStereoscopy.htm )

    for which the US patent is to be officially granted on 12/12/2017,
    has a fundamental difference from all the prior art: an auxiliary belt runs on the V-belt, a lever controls the auxiliary belt that, in turn, controls the working diameter the V-belt runs on the one conical pulley, and so the transmission ratio, (the PatBox is also allowing the full automatic operation when desired).

    This opens a new class of CVT’s, and makes difficult the infringement.



    Similarly for the PatRoVa rotary valve.

    It has a unique characteristic not met in the other rotary valves:





    it cancels out the forces it receives due to the extreme pressure inside the combustion chamber, leaving its bearings unloaded.

    (more at http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatRoVa.htm )

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  7. #52
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    151
    Hello all.



    HCCI controllable combustion


    For 2-stroke and 4-stroke engines.


    Prior Art:








    Prior art (Nautilus Engineering):










    A look at the above plot / example is indicative for the problems of the prior art and for the solutions of the PatBam.


    Starting the compression stroke with 1 bar pressure, at 33 degrees before the TDC / 12 bar in the united combustion chamber, the auxiliary combustion chamber is sealed and its pressure rises at 33 bar (wherein the threshold for auto-ignition is) some 14 degrees before the TDC (corresponding to about 2% of the piston stroke).


    Then the air-fuel mixture inside the auxiliary combustion chamber auto-ignites and its pressure at the TDC is way higher than the 48 bar of the case without ignition.


    The pressure of the air-fuel mixture in the main combustion chamber never exceeds the 29 bar, i.e. it is below the threshold for auto-ignition.


    So, after the TDC the air-fuel mixture in the main combustion chamber expands not-yet-burnt until 33 degrees after the TDC, when the two combustion chambers unite into one, with the burnt gas from the auxiliary combustion chamber igniting the not-yet burnt mixture.




    With the PatBam things are similar until the auto-ignition of the air-fuel mixture inside the auxiliary combustion chamber.


    Then, a little after the auto-ignition in the auxiliary combustion chamber, the auxiliary piston passes over the passageways formed on the inner side of the auxiliary cylinder, allowing the hot (and at high pressure and full of active radicals) burnt gas to enter into the main combustion chamber and ignite it, exploiting all the 11:1 expansion ratio and achieving a high thermal efficiency.




































    More at from http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatBam.htm


    Thoughts?


    Objections?


    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  8. #53
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Hello Yzr750

    You wrote:
    “I built a rotary valve head for a 125 honda single 30yrs ago, ran it on my dyno with some good results as well, spent 80,000 quid on a patent back in 1985 and couldn't afford to fight infringements.”
    Sorry. I can see where the confusion came from.

    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    what was so special about the “non patented” rotary valve you made and tested?
    Was it a Cross design? An Aspin design?
    I suppose it was a naturally aspirated engine. Right?
    At what rpm it was delivering the 27bhp?
    If it is not a secret, please do provide some drawings to get an idea for what we are talking.

    At http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatRoVa.htm you can see hundreds of drawings and photos, and many – many explanations for the PatRoVa rotary valve.
    If you take a look, you will understand (as the patent examiners already did) how fundamentally different the PatRoVa rotary valve is from all other previous designs of rotary valves.
    Then come to talk technically.


    By the way, what the 80,000 quid (1985) means in today US dollars?

    What I know from long experience (as well as from recent experience) if you do everything by your own (i.e. without patent lawyer / patent agents), for the first ten years a US patent (the USA market is the biggest market in the world) costs totally US3,200$ (small entity).

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos
    No drawings, at the time the drawings were done 'on the board' all paper, no digital, yes it was N/A. If memory serves I was getting 27hp@14,500rpm, the real problem at those rpm being the points ignition.....
    I used a law firm to do my patent, which was worldwide, probably got ripped off but I didn't have the time or the knowledge to do it myself, remember there was no google back then, it was weeks spent in libraries and research centers to find what you needed to differentiate your work from prior art.
    I had a quick look at your models, all very pretty but as I said it's just a variation on the standard two stroke disc valve. The one thing that struck me immediately was that there didn't seem to be any method of sealing from combustion pressures, the two stroke version only has crankcase pressure to control, not combustion pressure?
    seesecurity.com.au

  9. #54
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    151
    Hello Yzr750

    You write:
    “I had a quick look at your models, all very pretty but as I said it's just a variation on the standard two stroke disc valve. The one thing that struck me immediately was that there didn't seem to be any method of sealing from combustion pressures, the two stroke version only has crankcase pressure to control, not combustion pressure?”


    Sealing:

    Wankel Rotary, Mazda RX-8 "compression test" specifications:



    According the above, if the compression of a Mazda RX8 rotary engine at 200rpm cranking is at or above 6 bar, the engine is regarded as OK (i.e. into manufacture’s specifications).

    The sealing has to do with the total leakage area.
    If you can keep the “total leakage area” adequately small, you need no conventional seals.

    What is the “total leaking area”?

    Quote from:
    http://gasturbinespower.asmedigitalc...icleid=2467298

    “Abstract:
    The Wankel rotary engine offers a greater power density than piston engines, but higher fuel consumption and hydrocarbon emissions, in large part due to poor gas sealing. This paper presents a model for the deformable dynamics of the side seal, which completes a set of modeling tools for the comprehensive assessment of the gas leakage mechanisms in the rotary engine. It is shown that the main leakage mechanisms for the side seals are: (1) opening of the inner flank due to the contact with the trailing corner seal, (2) flow through the gap with the leading corner seal, (3) simultaneous opening of both inner and outer flanks due to body force at high speed, and (4) running face leakage due to nonconformability at high speed. The leakage mechanisms are qualitatively validated at low speed with observed oil patterns on the rotor from laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) experiments. Finally, the predicted total leakage area for all the gas seals ranges from 1.5 mm2/chamber at low speeds to 2 mm2/chamber at high speeds, which is in agreement with the previous experimental studies, and the three gas seal types (side seals, apex seals, and corner seals) each accounts for about 1/3 of the total leakage, with minor variation as a function of speed.”




    End of Quote


    According the above abstract and plot, the leakage is a major problem / issue of the Wankel rotary engines.
    Each cylinder of the Panigale 1299 has a capacity of 650cc, i.e. as much as each chamber of the Wankel RX-8.
    Take a drill and make one hole of 1.5mm diameter (1.77mm2 area) on each piston crown of the Ducati Panigale, to allow each combustion chamber to communicate, through the hole, with the crankcase.
    No doubt, the Panigale can still work, however a significant amount of high pressure gas will escape reducing the efficiency (a lot of energy is consumed to compress the gas that leaks without giving back any energy) and worsening the emissions.

    This is the way the conventional Wankel works. The gaps around each combustion chamber have an equivalent “total leakage area” of 1.5mm2 at low revs, to 2mm2 at high revs.



    Having said the previous, and having understood that if you can keep the “total leakage area” adequately small you can achieve excellent sealing without conventional seals, take a look at the following photo wherein with manual (literally speaking: by hand not by foot) cranking, and dry cylinder head the PatRoVa achieves 12.5bar compression (compare it to the 6bar of the Mazda RX8 specifications):







    Achieving such sealing at such low revs (~200rpm), the sealing at medium and high and extremely high revs is guarandeed.


    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  10. #55
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    1,404
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Achieving such sealing at such low revs (~200rpm), the sealing at medium and high and extremely high revs is guarandeed.
    Sealing at medium, high, or extremely high revs are NOT guaranteed. You're not giving yourself any margin of error for alloy expansion due to heat. With such tight tolerances, what you are GUARANTEED is catastrophic failure beyond a few short minutes if you rely solely on computer models. As rocky stated, build the damn thing before you make claims based on theory that you reserved in your name. A patent doesn't prove that it works or that your claims are true.

    I'm inclined to suspect you are a patent troll taking advantage of other people's intelligence for your own selfish gain. There is a pattern here:

    http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread...290378&page=14

  11. #56
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Hello Yzr750
    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos
    You certainly seem to have a huge amount of ideas/patents. Do you have any that are in production/actually working, or are they all theoretical and pretty pictures?
    seesecurity.com.au

  12. #57
    apriliaforum expert millietant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Used to be sunny Durham, now dull and rainy Midlands, England
    Posts
    1,728
    Given that no advice or comment is taken "constructively", I'm just wondering "WHY"

    There are lots of similar Pat posts on other forums........similar threads, sadly.
    Cheers,

    "I am a selfish, self-righteous tosser", a "fucking loser" and now an "absolute fucking idiot"

    Me - '03 RSV Mille, '89 FJ 1200 x 2, & '75 TL 125 & Schweizer S300 CBi Helicopter
    Wife - '01 FZ1 (Fazer 1000), '86 VF 750 Interceptor and '07 CRF 230F
    Kids - '03 Fazer 600, GY 125 and CRF 100 off roaders, '10 Reiju RS2 50 Matrix Pro

  13. #58
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by millietant View Post
    Given that no advice or comment is taken "constructively", I'm just wondering "WHY"

    There are lots of similar Pat posts on other forums........similar threads, sadly.
    Because forums such as these usually have a few smart cookies, Micah on here for example. For a little effort and virtually no money you can crowd source you research, every potential problem exposed, every solution offered by well meaning forumites means less dollars he has to spend and potentially more patents he can file from other peoples ideas...........
    seesecurity.com.au

  14. #59
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    151
    Hello all.


    Pvster wrote:

    “I'm inclined to suspect you are a patent troll taking advantage of other people's intelligence for your own selfish gain. There is a pattern here:
    http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread...290378&page=14


    Those guys (EcoMotors / OPOC) after spending some100million dollars (the 23 invested and lost by THE Bill Gates of Microsoft, another 25 from the US ARMY), and after publishing thousands of articles in the WEB for their technology, now they seem as they have abandoned their invention.

    Nobody of them paid the US100$ or so (dollars, not millions of dollars) required to keep their web site alive.

    So, what is the accusation for pattakon?
    What is it supposed pattakon took from EcoMotor’s OPOC technology?


    The pattakon PatOP engine:



    is a by far better engine than the OPOC.

    See the video.
    It runs on Diesel Fuel. It stands free on a desk.
    Simpler, smoother, greener, cheaper, more compact, more vibration free.
    And is patented.

    (more at http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatOP.htm )

    So, what are you talking about?




    Pvster also wrote:

    “Sealing at medium, high, or extremely high revs are NOT guaranteed. You're not giving yourself any margin of error for alloy expansion due to heat. With such tight tolerances, what you are GUARANTEED is catastrophic failure beyond a few short minutes if you rely solely on computer models. As rocky stated, build the damn thing before you make claims based on theory that you reserved in your name. A patent doesn't prove that it works or that your claims are true.”


    When cruising at ~100km/h (~60mph) with 5th in the gearbox, and put, by mistake, the 1st instead of the 3rd in the gearbox (to brake with the engine before an approaching turn), you will see what a “GUARANTEED catastrophic failure” is, with some poppet valves exiting from the exhaust pipe and some other stack on the pistons crowns.




    The PatRoVa, even if the timing belt is broken, cannot harm the rest engine.
    At most, an engine stall will happen.


    Regarding the “tight tolerances” you mention.

    In the PatRoVa only one dimension is important: that along the rotation axis of the rotary valve.


    The distance between the inner flat surfaces of the two disks (at the ends of the stiff / robust / massive hub) equals to the width of the combustion chamber (measured on the lips of the two chamber ports) plus 2 times the “clearance”.

    Keeping the width of the combustion chamber small (say, 25 to 30mm for a 90mm bore cylinder), proportionally small is the thermal expansion and its affect on the clearance.

    A DLC coating on the working surfaces (i.e. on the two inner flat surfaces of the two disks and on the lips of the ports of the combustion chamber) would protect the parts in the long term.

    It is not necessary, however there is always the option the rotary valve and the cylinder head to be made of INVAR (or similar) material.


    The hub (the shaft between the two disks) is so strong that for a normal size cylinder and, say, 100 bar maximum pressure in the combustion chamber, the working clearance changes for less than five microns (0.005mm) in case the cylinder head and rotary valve are made of steel of spheroid graphite iron.





    At the high pressure portion of the cycle, the (trapezoidal) periphery of the chamber port turns red.
    In order to maximize the ratio of the chamber port area to the chamber port periphery (note: the chamber port periphery is wherein the leakage occurs), the chamber port covers some 40-45 degrees around the valve).

    The combustion chamber of the PatRoVa (cylinder head) and the rotary valve (excluding the area around the exhaust ports, wherein the clearance can be larger without problem because this area operates when the pressure is way lower than the combustion pressure) are at not substantially different temperatures.



    The short axial distance between the two flat surfaces of the PatRoVa makes proportionally small the change of the clearance due to thermal expansion.

    Add the clearances (due to mechanical distortion and due to thermal expansion) and you get the clearance the PatRoVa can work safely.

    If the thermal expansion of the steel or of the spheroid graphite iron is considered high, there is the option of using INVAR .




    Yzr750 wrote:

    “Because forums such as these usually have a few smart cookies, Micah on here for example. For a little effort and virtually no money you can crowd source you research, every potential problem exposed, every solution offered by well meaning forumites means less dollars he has to spend and potentially more patents he can file from other peoples ideas...........”


    Can you, please, be more specific regarding your “from other peoples ideas”?

    Your ideas?

    EcoMotor’s ideas?

    Mahle’s ideas?


    Thank you.
    Manolis Pattakos
    Last edited by manolis8; 11-27-2017 at 04:20 AM.

  15. #60
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    1,404
    More theological dribble and computer models without real world testing. Build and test the damn thing. Otherwise stfu with your supposed claims.

    Thank you for proving you are a patent troll.

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Stick with the RS or go for a restricted 400!??
    By technoandy in forum RS125 Euro-archive
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-23-2003, 09:12 AM
  2. Giving up on the RS, traded it for a CBR250RR
    By Tokyo Rider in forum RS125 Euro-archive
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-21-2003, 02:29 AM
  3. The coolest Sprockets in the World...and now for Aprilia
    By micah apriliaforum com in forum SL1000 Falco Forum (all years)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-29-2002, 08:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •