Turbicône

[turbi]

Hello everybody

I would like to present here a new concept of rotary machine: the Turbicone.

The principle is very simple: roll one over the other between two concentric spheres, trunks of elliptical cones whose apex is located in the center of these spheres. This is to exploit in different rotary machines the volumetric variations of the spaces generated by these parts.

The following video gives an idea of ​​what the turbicone is:

https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... IqpwXL.wmv

The cones shown in this video also have certain additional features that prefigure the concept's operating mechanisms.

I hope to raise the interest of many with this new topic

Yves

[Pascal HA PHAM]

come on Turbi,
I post a first question:

what can be the ratios of volumetric variation in each element composed of a chamber and a rotating cone?

ratio between Vmin and Vmax?

well to you and hats off for this phenomenal cogitation work.
A+

Pascal

[turbi]

Thank you Pascal for this question,

After a good geometric analysis of the subject, the volumetric ratios are calculated using the formula. Curiously, the reports are only a function of the flattening of the cones, not of the rays of the spheres: yes, only one parameter.

the flattening is normally the ratio between the small angle 2b and the wide angle 2a. The analysis however seems easier if we define it as the angle p such that:

tg p = tg b / tg a (p between 0 and 45 °)

We obtain a range of interesting volumetric ratios (1/10, 1/20) with flattening p varying between 30 ° and 35 °.

Too much flattening creates more torque, but does not leave enough room for the mechanical parts required for proper operation.

A weak flattening, brings the cones closer to the cones of revolution (p = 45 °) where there is no torque.

[Capt_Maloche]

Beautiful design, surely delicate to implement, but extremely compact

it reminds me a bit of the MYT engine (flat version): http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=zqSIq39TM ... re=related

ou http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 7018998659

See the animated detailed sheet! under excel (impressive) https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... D3bmK8.xls

[Remundo]

Hello Yves and Pascal,

A truly stimulating concept based on geometric properties of the sphere that, to my knowledge, no one has ever used.

Maybe other applications with Pascal ...

I invite everyone to take a look at the beautiful animations of Yves.

A nice synthetic video that I uploaded hard on econology:
https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... dFs03m.wmv

@+

[turbi]

Thank you for your remark Capt Maloche,

It allows me to expose my way of seeing the sphere and what sets turbicone machines apart from other engines, in particular the MYT engine (based on a torus).

I think a quick way to get an idea is to study the chambers of the turbicon systems to those of the MYT engine or any other engine.

A chamber of a turbine engine is delimited by a part of the outer sphere, a part of the inner sphere, and a part of each of the four adjacent cones. When the chamber is under pressure, the forces exerted on the spherical parts are countered by reaction forces of the structure and are therefore lost. On the other hand the forces exerted on the conical parts are all active and have no component which acts on the spheres since these surfaces are perpendicular. An interesting measure is therefore the active surface (conical parts) for a given volume V.

A MYT engine chamber is delimited by a torus part and by two discs. When the chamber is under pressure, the forces exerted on the toric parts are countered by the reaction of the structure and are therefore lost. Only discs have active surfaces. If we consider the same measurement as for the turbicone, that is to say the surface of the disks for volume V. We see that it is smaller.

At equal volume and equal pressure, the chambers of the turbicon systems exhibit more active surface than those of the MYT engine and therefore make better use of the incoming energy.

Of course it will be necessary to confirm all this by a solid demonstration taking into account the interactions of the other rooms ... It will be discussed later.

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

To complete all of this, I firmly believe that the spherical mechanics has a huge future:

- To treat the high pressures associated with many forms of energy, what could be better than a spherical form;

- To minimize the forces of actions and reactions that are lost in structures, the sphere is still the best approach;

- To increase interactions, what could be better than conical surfaces: it is perhaps less obvious, being perpendicular to the spheres, the forces which are exerted on them always go in the direction of movement. This allows in addition to benefit from astonishing synergies;

- To benefit from the concentric couplings of systems which further increase the already extraordinary potential of the spheres (one turbicon system inside another);

- To better withstand the expansions and retractions due to temperature changes: proportional variations have little effect on the structure of the whole;

- To obtain compact machines requiring little material to manufacture them;

- To regularize movements (no downtime, less noise, less wear ....)

- Etc. ..

As it is easier and easier to mold or machine such parts ... Why wait to go to spherical mechanics.

Several machines already use more or less a spherical approach:

http://kugelmotor.peraves.ch/

http://www.youtube.com/user/fuhandaigou

See you soon

Yves [/ u]

[turbi]

Here are some conventions that will help me present several aspects of the geometry of the turbicone:

The conical surfaces of the turbicones are of the second degree. They are generated from an ellipse located in the plane z = 1.

The red angle 2a is the wide angle of the cone. It is located in the plane passing through the major axis of the ellipse (xOz).
The green angle 2b is the small angle of the cone. It is located in the plane passing through the minor axis of the ellipse (yOz)




The ellipse has a semi-major axis tan (a) and a semi-minor axis tan (b)
The angle p controls the flattening of the turbicone
we have tan (p) = tan (b) / tan (a)

[Christophe]

Uh, is that the new Rubik's Cube?

[Capt_Maloche]

Sure that playing on 4 sides allows brief and torquey efforts, in addition to the considerable reduction in volume

The effort on a lateral cone quarter will be equal to the equivalent flat surface on its edge, with less volume

By cons I do not know how you plan to achieve the seal between volumes: metal / metal?

[turbi]

I would now like to give a first definition of the turbicone.

All the cones of the second degree, rolling on each other do not have the particularity of defining closed spaces. Here is a first approach to define those who have this ability:

The following video illustrates this definition:

https://www.econologie.info/share/partag ... L4YqsL.wmv

1) It should be noted that the center of a circle of radius R which rests on the three planes of a right-angled trihedron remains at a constant distance D from the origin of this trihedron.

D = R root (2)

(The demonstration is easy because by performing a projection of this circle on one of the planes of the trihedron we recognize the figure explaining Monge's circle. We can therefore use the formulas associated with it)

We can easily verify this point by placing a bicycle wheel in the corner of a room, with a CD and a shoe box ...

The beginning of the video shows a circle in different positions.

2) The video shows in gray a little transparent, the sphere of radius D on which the center of the circle evolves.

It would also have been possible to look at things in another way: by fixing the circle and by moving the trihedron so that its three planes are constantly supported on its circumference. It is the origin which would then have described a sphere of radius D, having the same center as that of the circle.

3) It is then necessary to freeze the angle under which we see the circle from the origin. This is shown on the video by the appearance of a triangle having its vertex at the origin and retaining a fixed position relative to the circle, (in a plane perpendicular to that of the circle).

We note that despite this constraint, the circle still has many possible positions for which it remains in contact with the three planes. In fact, it now describes a curve on the gray spherical surface. (this curve is not shown on the video)

4) Since the origin is now at a fixed position with respect to the circle, it can be used as the vertex of a non-deformable cone having the circle as a directing curve.

The video shows this cone in green. It also shows that a second circle identical to the first could have given the same cone.

It is very important to note that the contact points of the circle on the planes have given rise to contact lines of the cone on the plans. And so that the space of the trihedron outside the cone is separated into three parts delimited by these contact lines.

5) This step consists in truncating the cone obtained by two concentric spheres to finally define the solid part "Turbicone".

The video shows only the outer spherical part which evolves in the trihedron.

6) Now having our initial turbicone, we must use all the symmetries of the trihedron to obtain the other seven that will compose the volumetric system.

The video also presents certain elements on the spherical parts whose use will be defined later.

7) Finally, you must completely remove the trihedron to finally see the system of the eight turbicones in action.

The planes having disappeared, the turbicones remain in contact and define spaces whose volumetric variations are particularly interesting.

In fact, the triad is not completely gone. It just went virtual. We can regenerate it at any time because it is formed by the planes tangent to the turbicones according to their contact lines.