Quasiturbine, his qualities are they a myth?

Tips, advice and tips to lower your consumption, processes or inventions as unconventional engines: the Stirling engine, for example. Patents improving combustion: water injection plasma treatment, ionization of the fuel or oxidizer.
User avatar
Matthedesigner
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 13
Registration: 05/04/08, 13:11
Location: France

Quasiturbine, his qualities are they a myth?




by Matthedesigner » 03/05/08, 18:45

Hello everyone. I did this year, a project of study on the Quasiturbine, Rotating Motor with degradable Rhombus, MRLD of the St-Hilaire family. Because of my research, I came across this forum, and asked several questions to Pascal Ha Pham (Trilobic Annular Rotary Piston Engine) who developed a part about the real story of the Quasiturbine concept.

On this subject, I propose you to share several informations, which I gathered during my project, on this technology which seems so revolutionary but which shows so few results for several years.
0 x
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6

Re: Quasiturbine, are his qualities a myth?




by Cuicui » 03/05/08, 18:53

Matthedesigner wrote:On this subject, I propose you to share several informations, which I gathered during my project, on this technology which seems so revolutionary but which shows so few results for several years.

Nice idea, Matthedesigner!
0 x
User avatar
Matthedesigner
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 13
Registration: 05/04/08, 13:11
Location: France




by Matthedesigner » 03/05/08, 19:16

Our study was based on a pneumatic Quasiturbine,
http://quasiturbine.promci.qc.ca/FFProd ... ademic.htm

We had to do a test bench to determine the performance, but it did not work from the beginning, so we spent a lot of time (the majority of the project) to characterize the problems to find solutions. It was necessary to rectify parts, and make a state of manipulation for it to finally work. With a pressure of 7 bars on admission, it was almost possible to stop it by hand (after a few hours of break-in) ... it warmed up a lot, and asked a lot of oil contrary to what St-Hilaire said.
We did not have any luck for the prototype and so it was absolutely not possible to demonstrate the viability of the concept based on a concrete example. So we searched, contacted different people, to treat the problem theoretically it is always difficult to say if the concept is good, since there are only very few results (kart air compressor compressed air - which has an autonomy of a few hundred meters).
I still do not say that the concept is wrong, but wonder why he still has not shown his evidence.
Many believe that it is because it has nothing revolutionary about it, that it is based on errors. It is true that the arguments that St-Hilaire gives are really debatable.
I'll come back to it later, I do not have time now. Sorry...

Perhaps others will succeed in demonstrating the positive of the concept, the academic kit has decreased in price (divided by three, without taking into account the current price of the USD), I imagine that Saint-Hilaire wants to be able to show how convincing that the concept is good (it's normal, it's his invention, we would do the same). I also have some arguments on this subject, which I will give later.
Good night!
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 03/05/08, 22:30

Well you put your mouth water, dear Mathedesigner 8)
0 x
Image
marcel
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 153
Registration: 22/12/04, 15:49
Location: 84




by marcel » 04/05/08, 18:56

One element seems to me embarrassing, I had spoken to those interested ... who refuse to consider my remarks.
The rotor oscillates between a square position and a diamond position (it is for simplicity, the deformation being continuous).
As long as we run empty, the friction seems very weak and it's misleading.
In fact, when a compressive stress is exerted, for example, the rotor tends to be held in the diamond position while the outer wall forces it to go to the square. Result: a significant friction at the acute angles of the diamond.
That said, there is also a quasiturbine roller that should better cash ...? For me the rotor is insufficiently guided in the state.

If you used the kit, it is possible that its machining was too rough. But the beast must be irreproachable on that side. The kit is more for kinetic demo than for measurement and performance. No?
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 04/05/08, 20:05

Marcel wrote:If you used the kit, it is possible that its machining was too rough. But the beast must be irreproachable on that side. The kit is more for kinetic demo than for measurement and performance. No?


Absolutely Marcel!

For friction, roller guidance can solve some of the difficulties.

For my part, I really like the theory and thinking developed by Saint Hilaire on quasitubin. The concept is very elegant.

However, I see a major flaw in this cinematic. Neglecting friction, the forces applied to the rotor all point towards an area too close to the center of the rotor (both the normal housing-> articulation reactions and the resulting pressure-> blades). Under these conditions, how to generate a strong torque on the rotor : Idea: :?:

While this is one of the "club" arguments developed by Saint Hilaire to defend his invention ... :?

Go Math Designer ... We look forward to your opinion 8)
0 x
Image
User avatar
Matthedesigner
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 13
Registration: 05/04/08, 13:11
Location: France




by Matthedesigner » 11/05/08, 16:36

Hi everybody!

Marcel wrote:One element seems to me embarrassing, I had spoken to those interested ... who refuse to consider my remarks. The rotor oscillates between a square position and a diamond position. As it turns empty, the friction seems very low and it is misleading.

To answer that already, trying to empty, in our case, the rotation was simply impossible, from the start. And always from the start, we contacted "info@quasiturbine.com" aka Gilles Saint-Hilaire, he directly said that when sending the machine had no problems, that "we were in contact with a new one. technology, and that our approach was too conventional ".
There followed a series of correspondences, we added clarifications, asked questions ... All the elements that we brought, he reused them in his sauce to want to convince us, and our teachers who received our mails in CC, that we had not followed the protocols, and we had broken the machine!
Of course the arguments he had for defending his thesis were very pointless. He hid his poor argument by taking us from the top up ... In short, the solution to our problems would not even come from the designer - be said inventor - of the Quasiturbine.

Marcel wrote: when a compressive stress is exerted, for example, the rotor tends to be held in the diamond position while the outer wall forces it to go to the square. Result: a significant friction at the acute angles of the diamond.
For me the rotor is insufficiently guided in the state.


When the rotor of our QT was spinning, it had a lot of hard spots ... every time the rotor changed from its square to diamond position and from its extreme diamond position (when the vertices of the diamond are in contact with the smaller diameter). and the largest) at an intermediate position to this one and to the square ... So it is an important source of problems, I imagine that on a better finished model, the set of other frictions being less important, that would go better. I also think that the rotor should have another shape, not in the shape of "skating rink" ("skating rink of Saint-Hilaire"), but in the shape of a double ellipse as we see it. here on the end of page images ...
As for the roller model I feel that there is more development in this way. If so, would it be interesting to know why? Too weak? Bad solution?
Or maybe its development is secret and that one day, by surprise, they will release a Quasiturbine roller with internal combustion, as they indicate on the website? "... these engines may just come one day as surprises!"

Marcel wrote:If you used the kit, it is possible that its machining was too rough. But the beast must be irreproachable on that side. The kit is more for kinetic demo than for measurement and performance. No?

Yeah, the machining was really not adequate to what we wanted to do, and it was well indicated that the kit did not pretend to demonstrate great performance ... The administration of the IUT preferred to buy a academic kit that a model above, cost issues ... It's another story. They had to say that it was enough for what we wanted to do and also to develop TPs, they planted machine ... The subject of realization test bench became too pretentious when we received the QT, as it did not work and saw how it was built.
Last edited by Matthedesigner the 11 / 05 / 08, 17: 50, 3 edited once.
0 x
Matthew
User avatar
Matthedesigner
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 13
Registration: 05/04/08, 13:11
Location: France




by Matthedesigner » 11/05/08, 17:34

Remundo wrote:For my part, I really like the theory and thinking developed by Saint Hilaire on quasitubin. The concept is very elegant.

Same, I like it too, the arguments it brings are very interesting. But some are very questionable, there is a topic on a forum Quebec who is talking about that (QQOD is me)

Remundo wrote:However, I see a major flaw in this cinematic. Neglecting friction, the forces applied to the rotor all point towards an area too close to the center of the rotor (both the normal housing-> articulation reactions and the resulting pressure-> blades). Under these conditions, how to generate a strong torque on the rotor

the Saint-Hilaires indicate in their book "Quasiturbine, the best of the piston and the turbine" that the thrust is tangential to the stator and in the direction of movement, that it is normal to the surface defined by the joint of contours to the 'front of the piston (or the blade), and to support this, they use the principle of hydrostatic.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but for me, we should also take into account the kinetic energy of the fluid, the principle of hydrostatic applying to immobile fluids.
Considering how the QT is made, and following the principle of hydrostatics, for me, there is also a force in the opposite direction of the movement, on the "follower" contour joints which makes that the resultant of these forces , the thrust is not normal to the contour seal at the front of the blade, does not start from it, and therefore not tangential to the movement ...

In the extreme diamond position, the mediators of two opposite blades do not pass through the center of the rotor.
And each of the chambers is not quite (but almost) symmetrical by the piston mediator, but larger in the front part (front in the direction of the movement), so the thrust does not go through the center and the rotor so is not immobile. (I hope you follow, I have a hard time following myself: cheesy :)

But this chamber being still almost symmetrical in this extreme diamond position, the thrust is directed much more from the center of the rotor than in the direction of the tangent to the rotor of a point of the contour joint. and it's very difficult to imagine having a strong couple

A little later during rotation this room is less symmetrical, the direction of the thrust away from the center, so or could have more torque ...

Remundo wrote:While this is one of the "club" arguments developed by Saint Hilaire to defend his invention ...

It would be nice if he gives us his opinion, and his explanation of the thing, but I think it's going to be hard to get to that, considering how he could have taken us down to deflect the problem.

At the beginning, when receiving the Quasiturbine, the usage protocols were almost non-existent, and little by little, by reporting to Saint-Hilaire our questions, our remarks, its "user guide" of the academic kit deepened. . So it's quite inappropriate for him to tell us that we did not follow the usage protocols, and to tell us that our approach to technology was inadequate ... : Shock:
0 x
Matthew
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 11/05/08, 20:08

Hi Matt,

Glad to read you 8)

Matthedesigner wrote:[the Saint-Hilaires indicate in their book "Quasiturbine, the best of the piston and the turbine" that the thrust is tangential to the stator and in the direction of movement, that it is normal to the surface defined by the joint of contours to the front of the piston (or the blade), and to support this, they use the principle of hydrostatic.

Well, in so-called positive displacement motors, it is "pressure energy" that is used, the kinetic effects are ultra negligible. for example, in a piston engine, it is not the shock of the fluid that pushes the piston, it is his pressure... So Saint Hilaire is right to rely on hydrostatic.

Conversely, in a turbine, the pressure has a negligible effect and the speed has a preponderant effect by impacting the blades.

Now the deductions he makes for me seem curious to say the least. It is well known that pressure forces apply orthogonally on the surface.
___
For the anecdote, I find the name almostturbines inappropriate. Volumetric machine with rotating deformable rhombus (MVLRD), that's a scientifically flawless definition. : Idea:
___
So if you take the QT in its square position, there is perfect balance and no tangential force to the blades.

In its somewhat crushed diamond shape, the balance is broken, but the pressure has no tangential force on the blades ... at the most it induces efforts on the joints that support the housing. and as I pointed out, a metal / metal contact neglecting friction induces a force orthogonal to the plane of tangent contact ... And in the QT, these forces point to little towards the center ... so very few couples !
If there is friction, it is worse because the tangential force brakes the blades.
It would be nice if he gives us his opinion, and his explanation of the thing, but I think it's going to be hard to get to that, considering how he could have taken us down to deflect the problem.

You are not the first to tell me this tendency of superiority in the personality of Saint Hilaire. I personally find that he has not sought to improve his concept in relation to the technical difficulties it generates, while the engine problem that he has developed is very good overall.

Well, I'll go to Quebec on your trip forum :D

@+
0 x
Image
User avatar
Matthedesigner
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 13
Registration: 05/04/08, 13:11
Location: France




by Matthedesigner » 18/05/08, 18:16

Hello
Remundo wrote:Now the deductions he makes for me seem curious to say the least. It is well known that pressure forces apply orthogonally to the surface.


For a piston, I mean the pressure applies orthogonally to the surface, for the piston of a cylinder, it is in the direction of displacement, because the base of the cylinder is perpendicular to the cylinder.

But for the quasiturbine, which surface should be taken into account? I see some main 3:

- the surface of the blade, ie that which is almost in contact with the stator 2 times per turn,
- the surfaces of the front contour seal
- the surface of the follower contour seal

It's a little harder than it seems to determine the direction of the thrust. But you pushed me to think a little more and I deduce that:

I would say that in the motor phases (for a pneumatic quasiturbine with 4 light - 2 intake, 2 exhaust), if the vectors representing the thrusts on the two contour joints are symmetrical by an orthogonal line passing through the middle of the piston (ie halfway between the two blades), we can assimilate them to a vector whose direction is orthogonal to the blade.

When the rotor is in cette position the thrust on the blade is orthogonal to itself, but it does not go through the center, so it turns, but it's clear that there's not a lot of torque like that. a little later in the rotation, the chamber formed between the stator and one of the driving blades, is not quite symmetrical but almost, and therefore this thrust is not orthogonal to the piston (but almost) and the result of thrust is even more orthogonal than that of the piston, so always little torque ...

I come back to post a little later ... If it's not tonight, I wish you all a good evening!
0 x
Matthew

Back to "Special motors, patents, fuel consumption reduction"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 188 guests