I don't know if you guys have ever seriously encountered the realities of
mass production and the mind-set that it *imposes*. For years I was involved
in mechanization-robotics projects at RCA, principally with the manufacture
of TV picture tubes. This a complex chemical/mechanical process that at
first appearance is nearly impossible, but they are made by the million. The
guys that manage the factory are not stupid and are in daily hand-to-hand
combat with Mother Nature. If the yield at final inspection falls below 95%,
the entire enterprise is just an elaborate way to lose money.
I visited two plants in different parts of the country. A particular
processing step was done differently in each plant, and the management,
while aware of the alternative, swore that their way was best. Any novelty
may reduce yield in unforeseen ways.
The Wankle engine has many appealing virtues, but I understand the seals are
a potential problem, requiring engine teardowns at 50,000 miles. Mazda used
it in a sports car, and Yamaha in some motorcycles. People have been
inventing clever IC engine configurations for many years and complaining
about stupid management all the time. The ability to manufacture
economically in quantity is a formidable requirement.
There are others -- microelectronics, LCD/plasma displays, VCR recorders --
which required years to evolved the manufacturing techniques to become
reliable and economical.
It is all too easy for clueless theoreticians and developers to dismiss the
skills of manufacturing engineering. I have lived in both worlds and
acquired deep respect for the latter.
Mike Carrell
----- Original Message -----
From: "R C Macaulay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Tooo" obvious for Detroit?
Interesting thinking Jones. A proposed valveless, pistonless engine/motor
concept is being studied whereas the "engine" is ring shaped and drives a
cluster of embedded cavity discs positioned with the ring. The design
approach is to build a "planetary transmission with an engine inside" .
The transmission functions both for mechanical drive output assisted by
the huge torque output with the large diameter ring primary mover and
also output electric power from the electric generating features.
Designers have been stuck in the 18th century steam engine rut too long.
Their approach has been to build an engine and connect it to a
transmission. Radical new thinking suggests that we should be building a
transmission and fit an engine/electric generator inside. This thinking
would allow for the engine exhaust to serve a secondary turbine scavenging
purpose. The unit assembly shape could be an inclined pancake shaped
configuration and ... not use "gears" but slip discs within the planetary
reduction system.
These radical new engine/motor concepts "fit" the theme of your post. New
engines must be designed for new fuels and not attempt to "make" new fuels
fit present engine technology.
Richard
Jones wrote,
The following suggestion, or a version of it, will be
implemented by some perceptive auto manufacturer in
the coming years.
________________________________________________________________________
This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T.
Department.
