markmurfie
Well-Known Member
It is definitely superior to cams. Cost and longevity I fear will never allow this to become production ready for economy cars.
All you have to do is read some valve less, not cam less, patents and you will question why engines still have valves, cams, or even butterfly valve throttle bodies.
Some ideas are so simple yet seem to have so much potential. Maybe I'm just ignorant to facts that would cause the ideas to not work or be less efficient than valves and cams. Just like valves and cams got improved I'm sure some clever ideas could improve the simple ideas these patents have.
One patent as an example was two hollow tubes one inside the other with port window holes cut out of both. The outer tube all Windows were cut in a single line leading into the cylinder. The inner tube had holes in sorta a diagonal line and as it rotated the Windows would open and close as they lined up just like valves except with no valve in the middle of the hole so a very high amount of air is allowed in. With the hole being equivalent to the intake port size there would be no restriction in air flow into cylinder. To control throttle all you would need to do is slide the outer tube to offset the Windows and closing the intake port size. No valve float means the engines could go up to higher rpms and only be limited by connecting rod strength. The tubes would replace the intake manifold completel. Heads would have a radically different design and be repurpose to transport air from tube manifold to cylinder which is what they do now but have the valve train to feel with as well. To improve it compression fan blades like how a jet engine/turbo/ supercharger works could be used to compress air into tubes manifold. Strategic baffles placed between Windows in the inner tube could also replicate modern intake manifold tuning and improve air flow into heads drastically. A vct equivalent would be a third hollow tube that rotated with the inner tube and was phased to change duration while the first inner tube would phase to change where in the stroke the duration occurred. You could apply the same concept to and exhaust manifold setup like this and eliminate valves, improve upon valves, but retain all the benifits of vct.
I might have that backwards the outter tubes rotating and the inner stationary that would position it move like classic valves. Its been awhile since I read the patent and I cant even find it anymore.
Sponsored
Last edited:
