MOVED: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

[ilyan]

Re: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

No problem.

[AirDOGGe]

Re: MOVED: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

Lotta info on these engines at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swashplate_engine and http://www.aqpl43.dsl.pipex.com/MUSE...g/axial-IC.htm

[IcePaq]

Re: MOVED: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

I believe they flew it 7 hours and not 700 hours.

[Monkeyron]

Re: MOVED: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

I have been doing some research on this Motor Design. This is going to be so much fun! Now I can't get into the logistics of this just yet, but will soon if it all works out. It's in the works!

What do you think if we took this basic design, added our Patented Process to it?
What you will have is:
You will have a motor that uses no Air, has no Valves, has no exhaust, has no heating so has no need for a Cooling system. It does not use Hydrocarbon Fuels. It has no combustion. Has ZERO Emissions. It is sealed and will run in Outer Space as well as under water.
I know! It's too good to be true.

Preliminary Dyno test on our Proto-type showed us that a 1-liter motor at 1800 RPM produces 274 Horse Power and 800 lbs of torque!

We are going to go in to production soon. It won't be until September before we will show it Publicly. The CEO is superstitious. He said ( we all have seen this) that is a product is shown before it is available to the Public, is was doomed to succeed.
So we are going in production in 8 countries at the same time to guaranty it's survival.

I will be starting manufacturing here hopefully next month.
Wish me luck!

Have a wonderful day!
M~R

[errolc]

Re: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

Because computer models are cheaper to produce than real machines, they can be made to appear as if they work, and they don't wear out.

BTW - All rights, etc. of Dyna-Cam were sold to Axial Vector Engine Corp in 2006. The AVEC website doesn't give me a warm feeling as a place I would want to invest my money.

Hello everyone...I'm a newbie to the site which I fell into looking to find what happened to DynaCam/Axialvector.

This seems to be one of the treads which is going to take a loooong time to go away.

Skyracer was DEAD right about being wary about investing in...Chuck Jaffe from Investment Weekly warned in 2006...
"If you listen to business talk radio, you might hear executives from Axial Vector Engine Corp. tell a great story about a company that sounds like a strong buy.
It's a tale of developing a new, unique type of internal-combustion engine, one that generates more energy for less effort. It's hard to listen without imagining countless applications for the technology in today's energy-mad global economy.
By the time the corporate brass is done talking, you're ready to go check out the firm's Web site and ask for its investor kit.
But if you go any further than that, you're headed for a Stupid Investment of the Week, because Axial Vector Engine bought the radio time for the interview, and the executives gave a description of the company that, suffice it to say, smoothed out the rough spots...In the case of Axial Vector Engine, the big problem is hype, and how the stock doesn't quite live up to the spin...it has been involved in nearly 20 paid interviews in the last year-plus on three syndicated shows -- two national, one regional to New England -- hosted by Stu Taylor.
"...there is more...http://www.marketwatch.com/news/stor...99AD158408D%7D
but to sum it up...hind sight is a wonderful thing...and history speaks for its self...but thats enough of the Cliché's...gotto
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2012/34-66536.pdf Order Instituting Administrative Proceedings & Notice of Hearing Pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act...Airbee Wireless Ltd, Axial Vestor Engine Corp (n/k/a Avec Corp), and Exploration Drilling International Inc...After investigation the division of enforcement alleges that...ABE is delinquent in its periodic filings with the commissions...since 2008

As a little rundown on what I know of the Dynacam...As an appetiser there is an interesting & easy read written by Craig McLanahan 1998 "Barrel Aircraft Engines: Historical Anomoly or Stymied inovation?"...also go to freepatents search-us1828353 Bleser 1931 is the beginning of the Dynacam Engine...Bleser was an engineer for Studybaker and collegue of Karl Herrmann.

Anyway to cut a long story short(ish)...Blesers design began at a time when most engine development work was sponsored by govt funding and during a rather unsettled time leading up to ww2, there was a LOT of political influence in how & where engine development was directed.

There have been numerous patents filed and prototypes attempted over time to no avail for what ever reasons...some political such as RR's 26ltr 2-stroke V12 Creche and Napiers Deltic British rails mis-management of its service schedules.

As for AxialVector I have to ask why the hell would you take a design which had recieved FAA certification in 1981 (which cost Dynacam $4m us) and replace it with something "better" when all they had to do was put it into production for customer base that was very keen to get it. As I see it the Dynacam Co simply needed funds to get it into gear so to speak.

I give Herrmann & the "Dynacam" developers my applause in achieving a design past prototype and able to return reportable test results with FAA cert, it has a lot of merit...However...there is always a "but"... in reviewing the engine, and which their previous promotions didn't allude to, was the archillies heal of cam engines...the loading on the main bearings bare the forces of combustion with bmep of 11 or so bar, that typically translates to a factor of 10 for peak pressures...and on an 83mm piston/bore which the dynacam run translates to well over 30tons of force...add to that the free nature of the bearing and postive feed oil delivery...the Dynacam engine centrifuged oil misted from the central driveshaft.

But the big problem to resolve which I believe held up its release to the market...the reciprocating assembly is somewhat bulky and heavy. compared to conventional assemblies. Being a 4-stroke, the reciprocating mass g forces at the top of the induction stroke @ 2000rpm & 95mm stroke is 210g's, overrun stresses being continuous, would be significant towards longevity with no combustion forces to counter them...I would say bearing life would be very short indeed for the size of bearings the design used and the Cam profile to fit within the engines case dimensions.

It would seem in their haste to get an investor on board to manufacture the engine the DynaCam peoples lawyer did a really messy job in their contract with the Axial Vector people and unwittingly gave them "exclusive" rights to the whole business...business politics...shame! All they had to do was make it!! The concept has a lot of development potential presently with ceramic bearings, carbon pistons etc, synthetic oils and design CAD technology.

[AirDOGGe]

Re: MOVED: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

Thank you for that very informative post.

There's a reason the good ol' reciprocating internal combustion engine survives today....it WORKS. Many decades of improvements make it a tough horse to beat.

[Willi7777]

Re: MOVED: What ever happened to the Dyna Cam engine?

The "engine", project has been resurrected. It is to be renamed which was one of the things lost in the lawsuit. This engine has had cooling problems in the past, 15 generations ago, but the oil cooler size was increased and it solved the problem. This engine has an FAA certified 2000 hour tbo. If it had problems of cooling and bearing friction it would have never been FAA certified.
The real problem for this project was the engineers who currently have the plans. They are not business men and got into business with a company and partner who specialize in raising funds for a project and then taking the money and running. This wasn't the first project this gentleman has bilked investors on.
This motor has been a product of bad timing and poor business practice. Hopefully with a slow and more prudent complete process this project will finally get off the ground.