1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to sleeve valve systems for aspirating internal combustion engines, and to internal combustion engines with tubular sliding valves for enhanced aspiration. More particularly, the present invention relates to reciprocating sleeve valve systems for engines equipped therewith of the general type classified in United States Patent Class 123, Subclasses 84, 188.4, and 188.5.
2. Description of the Related Art
A variety of aspiration schemes are recognized in the internal combustion motor arts. In a typical four-cycle firing sequence, gases are first inputted and then withdrawn from the combustion chamber of each cylinder interior during reciprocating piston movements caused by the crankshaft. Gas pathways must be opened and closed during a typical cycle. During the intake stroke, for example, an air/fuel mixture is suctioned through an open intake passageway into the combustion chamber as the piston is drawn downwardly within the cylinder. The intake passageway is typically opened and closed by some form of reciprocating valve mechanism that is ultimately driven by mechanical interconnection to the crankshaft. The combustion chamber must be sealed during the following compression and power strokes, and the valve mechanisms must be closed to block the ports. During the following exhaust stroke, exhaust ports must be opened to discharge spent gases from the combustion chamber.
Spring-biased poppet valves are the most common form of internal combustion engine valve. Typically, poppet valves associated with the intake and exhaust passageways are seated within the cylinder head above the combustion chamber proximate the cylinder and piston. Typical reciprocating poppet valves are spring biased, assuming a normally closed position when not deflected. In a typical arrangement, the bias spring coaxially surrounds the valve stem to maintain the integral valve within the matingly-configured valve seat. Poppet valves are typically opened by mechanical deflection from valve train apparatus driven by camshafts. Typical overhead-valve motor designs include rocker arms comprising reciprocating levers driven by push rods in contact with camshaft lobes. When the camshaft lobe deflects a pushrod to raise one end of the rocker arm, the opposite arm end pivots downwardly and opens the valve. When the camshaft rotates further, the rocker arm relaxes and spring pressure closes the valve. With overhead-cam designs camshafts are disposed over the valves above the head, and valve deflection is accomplished without push rods or rocker arms. Overhead camshafts push directly on the valve stem through cam followers or tappets. Some V-configured engines use twin overhead camshafts, one for each head. Some enhanced DOHC designs use two camshafts in each head, one for the intake valves and one for the exhaust valves. The camshafts are driven by the crankshaft through gears, chains, or belts.
Despite the overwhelming commercial success of poppet-valve designs, there are numerous deficiencies and disadvantages associated with poppet valves. Although poppet valve designs provide manufacturing advantages and cost savings, substantial spring pressure must be repeatedly overcome to properly open the valves. Spring pressure results in considerable drag and friction which increases fuel consumption and limits engine RPM. Poppet valve heads are left within the fluid flow passageway, despite camshaft deflection, and the resulting obstruction in the gas flow pathway promotes inefficiency. For example, back pressure is increased by the valve mass obstructing fluid flow, which contributes to turbulence. Poppet valves are exposed to high combustion chamber temperatures, particularly during the exhaust stroke, that can promote deformation and wear. Thermal expansion of exhaust valves, for example, can interfere with proper valve seating and subsequent sealing, which can decrease combustion performance.
Many of these disadvantages are amplified in high-horsepower or “high R.P.M.” applications. Valve deflection in high power applications is often extreme, increasing the amplitude of valve deflection or travel. Damaging valve-to-piston contact can result. As a means of attenuating the latter factor, some pistons are designed with valve clearance regions, but these piston surface irregularities can deleteriously affect the combustion charge and fluid flow through the combustion chamber. Another problem is that the applied drive forces experienced by the valves are asymmetric. The extreme forcing pressure applied by the camshaft to open the valves, for example, is not as uniform as the spring closing pressure. Disharmony between the opening and closing forces contributes to valve lash and concomitant timing problems that interfere with power generation and limit engine R.P.M. Of course, in high power systems involving four or more valves per cylinder, the problems and disadvantages with poppet valve engines are increased proportionally.
So-called “rotary valves” have been proposed for replacing reciprocal poppet valves. Typical rotary valve designs include an elongated tube or cylinder machined with a plurality of gas flow passageways that admit or pass gases. The rotary valves are not reciprocated; they are rotated about their axis to expose passages defined in them in directions normal to their longitudinal axis. Rotary valves must be timed properly to dynamically align their internal passageways with the fluid flow paths of the engine during operation. When rotated to a closing position, the rotary valve passageways are radially displaced, obstructing the normal flow pathways and sealing the engine for firing or compression strokes.
One advantage espoused by rotary valve proponents is the relative simplicity of the design. Further, rotary valves do not penetrate or extend into the cylinder, avoiding potential mechanical contact with the piston, and minimizing fluid flow obstructions. However, the biggest problem with rotary valves relates to ineffective sealing. Although much activity and research has been directed to rotary valve sealing designs, commercially feasible systems have not been perfected. Rotary systems provide inefficient cylinder sealing, lessening firing efficiency, and reducing compression pressure because of leakage. Further, rapid wear of such systems increases the aforementioned problems.
Sliding valves of many configurations are also known in the art. Typical slide valves may be hollow and tubular, or planar, or cylindrical. They are reciprocated within a tubular valve seat region proximate the combustion chamber to alternately open and then close the intake and exhaust passageways. Like rotary valves, sliding valve designs have hitherto been difficult to seal effectively, with predictable negative results.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,080,126 issued May 11, 1937 to Gibson shows a sliding valve arrangement involving a tubular valve driven by a secondary crankshaft. Its reciprocating axis is parallel to the axis of piston deflection. Ports arranged at the side of the piston are alternately opened and closed by piston movements, and gases are conducted through and around portions of the piston exterior.
A similar arrangement is seen in U.S. Pat. No. 1,995,307 issued Mar. 26, 1935, and U.S. Pat. No. 2,201,292, issued May 21, 1940, both to Hickey. The latter patents show designs that aspirate a single working cylinder with a pair of tubular, reciprocating valves that are mounted on either side of the piston and driven by secondary crankshafts. The aspirating valves are forcibly reciprocated between port blocking and port aligning positions. The valves are aligned at an angle slightly off of parallel with the axis of the cylinder.
Other examples of engines with tubular, reciprocating slide valves that move in a direction generally parallel with the drive piston axis are provided by U.S. Pat. Nos. 1,069,794; 1,142,949; 1,777,792; 1,794,256; 1,855,634; 1,856,348; 1,890,976; 1,905,140; 1,942,648; 2,160,000; and 2,164,522 that are largely cumulative.
Hickey U.S. Pat. No. 2,302,442 issued Nov. 17, 1942 shows a tubular, reciprocating sliding valve disposed atop a piston head. The valve slides in an axis generally perpendicular to the axis of the lower drive piston.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,694,890 issued to Yazdi on Dec. 9, 1997 and entitled “Internal Combustion Engine With Sliding Valves” discloses an internal combustion engine aspirated by slidable valves. Tapered, horizontally disposed valve seats are defined near inlet and exhaust ports at the top of the combustion chambers. The slidable valves are tapered to conform to the valve seats. Valve movement is caused by a crankshaft driving a rocker arm that is oriented substantially orthogonal to the rod, whereby crankshaft rotation is translated into horizontal, sliding movements of the planar valves, which reciprocate in a direction normal or transverse to the axis of the piston.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,263,963 issued to Price on Sep. 4, 2007 and entitled “Valve Apparatus For An Internal Combustion Engine” discloses a cylinder head with a cam-driven valve slidably disposed within a valve pocket. The valve, which is displaceable along its longitudinal axis has a tapered portion defining multiple fluid flow passageways. The valve is displaced by cam rotation between a configurations passing gases through the passageways and a configuration wherein the valve flow passageways are closed.
This invention provides an improved sliding valve system for aspirating internal combustion engines, and engines equipped therewith. The system employs tubular, reciprocating sliding valves disposed within sleeves defined within the head secured above the motor's reciprocating pistons. The valves are driven by an independent crankshaft that is exteriorly driven through a pulley.
The sliding valves are positioned within suitable exhaust and intake tunnels in the head. Preferably, sleeves are concentrically disposed around the valves and concentrically fitted within the tunnels. Fluid flow through the valves results through ports defined in the body of the tubular slide valves that are aligned with similar ports in their sleeve, that are in turn aligned with ports dynamically positioned above the compression or combustion region of the cylinder located below the head. Gas pressure develops shearing forces on valve sides. Gases are routed through the tubular interior of the sliding intake valve or valves during intake strokes, and exhaust gases are likewise forced out of the combustion cylinder through the interior of the exhaust valve or valves during exhaust strokes. Pressured gases traveling longitudinally through the valve interior passageways are inputted or outputted through lateral valve ports in fluid flow communication with the internal valve passageways. High pressure gas is confined between axially spaced apart sealing rings that prevent gases from flowing axially about the valve exterior.
All intake and exhaust gas flow is thus confined within the tubular interior of the sliding valves. As a result, gas pressure does not develop a substantial resistive force upon leading surfaces of the valve in a direction coincident with the direction of valve travel. Instead gas pressure that might otherwise resist valve travel, and add to friction, is applied as a shear force, and pressure is evenly distributed in the relief annulus. Gas flow is distributed through the valve interior rather than around it, and friction is substantially reduced.
Importantly, the port sizes are maximized for efficient breathing. However, in the past, large sliding valve ports have contributed to inefficiency, reduced sealing, and premature valve failure. In the present design, the slide-valve sleeves are provided with a unique connecting bridge that traverses the port area, aligned with the direction of sliding valve travel. When the valves slidably reciprocate through this region, their sealing rings are supported tangentially by the bridges, to maintain ring integrity. Importantly, the present design includes an oiling section on the sliding valves with an additional sealing ring.
Thus a basic object of my invention is to provide a highly efficient, sliding valve aspiration system for internal combustion engines, particularly four-cycle designs.
A related object is to provide an improved sliding valve that is ideally employed with four cycle, internal combustion engine.
A related object is to improve combustion efficiency within an internal combustion engine. It is a feature of our invention that its advantageous overhead valve geometry and the reduction of valve-train parts needed for the invention increase overall efficiency.
Another important object is to preserve the sealing integrity of sliding valves. One important feature of the invention in this regard is that the head ports are provided with bridges that support the valve sealing rings during motion. Another important feature is the addition of a fourth sealing ring proximate a separate oiling section.
Another basic object is to provide a valve system for internal combustion engines that provides an enhanced power stroke. In other words, it is a feature of this invention that a higher proportion of the total 720 degrees of crankshaft rotation during typical four cycle operation occurs during the power stroke.
Another important object is to provide a sliding valve system of the character described that does not affect combustion chamber volume during operation. Important features of my invention are the fact that chamber expansion during valve displacement is avoided, and that the porting path does not consume the operational compression volume.
A related object is to provide a valve system of the character described wherein the valve structure does not enter the combustion chambers.
Another object is to provide a valve deflection system that applies force symmetrically, to minimize valve lash and allow higher engine speeds.
Yet another basic object is to minimize friction. It is a feature of my invention that spring-biased poppet valves and the typical frictional cam shafts and associate linkages such as rocker arms used to reciprocate poppet valves are avoided.
A still further object is to provide a valve system of the character described that is driven externally by a belt, so that efficiency is increased and complexity is reduced.
Another important object is to avoid so-called “split-lift” applications used in the prior art for aspirating motors.
These and other objects and advantages of the present invention, along with features of novelty appurtenant thereto, will appear or become apparent in the course of the following descriptive sections.
In the following drawings, which form a part of the specification and which are to be construed in conjunction therewith, and in which like reference numerals have been employed throughout wherever possible to indicate like parts in the various views:
For purposes of providing an enabling disclosure, prior U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/443,077, Filed Apr. 10, 2012, entitled Sliding Valve Aspiration, by inventor Gary W. Cotton, and U.S. Pat. No. 8,210,147 issued Jul. 3, 2012, Entitled “Sliding Valve Aspiration System,” by inventor Gary W. Cotton, are herby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
With initial reference directed to
The standard combustion power piston 14 reciprocates within a cylinder 18 (
With additional reference directed primarily now to
A drive pulley 26 (
The crankshaft bearing assemblies 46 are bolted within crankshaft region 34 to mount the slide valve crankshaft 32 over the saddles 45 are secured with a plurality of bolts 48. As best seen in FIGS. 4,5 and 7, head 22 includes a plurality of spaced apart mounting orifices 50 through which head bolts 52 (
The intake sliding valve 25 (i.e.,
As best viewed in
This invention requires maximal air flow quickly. In other words, it is preferred that the carburetor 29 have a relatively large throat with a relatively short venturi. In the model depicted in the drawings, which has been thoroughly tested, a Honda 350 cc. “dirt bike” motorcycle carburetor is preferred.
Exhaust valve 24 is slidably constrained within its sleeve 27 in tubular tunnel 54 (
As best seen in
As seen in
As best seen in
Importantly, rigid, transverse bridges 69A are integrally formed in the sleeve port regions and bisect these regions into twin, side by side orifices 68A (
With joint reference directed now primarily to
With emphasis directed to
In the best mode each valve has four pairs of external ring grooves to seat suitable sealing rings. For example, a pair of concentric and parallel ring grooves 91 separate valve rod section 80 from the adjacent port section 94 (
A comparison of
Each sealing ring 100A, 100B, 100C, and 100D is preferably made of heat treated and heat resistant nickel alloy steel. As best seen in
Importantly, the valve port section 94 (
Importantly, as slide valves 24, 25 reciprocate, their multiple sealing rings 100 are prevented from deformation while traversing sleeve ports 68A by the bridges 69A (i.e.,
Referencing
In
The exhaust valve 24 is seen in
At the beginning of the intake stroke in
In
In
Low Load Fuel Usage: 10% less than Factory Engine (12.07−10.86=1.21/12.07)
High Load Fuel Usage: 34.4% less than Factory Engine 13.19−8.65=4.54/13.19)
NOX: 23.4% less than Factory Engine HC: 90.3% less than Factory Engine
CO: 24.1% less than Factory Engine CO2: 37.9% less than Factory Engine
Two GX 390 Honda 13 hp engines were used for testing and comparisons (i.e., a “stock” engine versus one modified in accordance with the instant invention). Both engine specifications were as follows:
The muffler was removed on both engines to confine exhaust emissions for analysis purposes. The engine with the stock head is named the “Factory” engine on the above chart. The engine with our proprietary head is named the “G1” on the above chart.
All tests were conducted on the same day in a controlled and isolated environment. Fuel and emission measurements were made using the following equipment:
The primary objective of house testing was to determine the fuel usage of the modified engine. We kept run time, load and rpm constant. To compare and measure the efficiency, input was divided by output. In our particular case, fuel usage was our input variable and our output variable was the pound-foot of torque produced. Fuel usage and all emissions results of both engines were calculated based on a unit of brake horsepower (torque×rpm/5252).
The low load fuel usage per unit of brake horsepower for the G1 engine was 10% less than the Factory engine. The high load fuel usage per unit of brake horsepower for the G1 engine above. It was determined that fuel consumption of the modified engine G1 was 34.4% less than the Factory engine. The high load emissions per unit of brake horsepower for the G1 engine resulted in 23.4% less nitrogen oxide (NOX), 24.1% less carbon monoxide (CO), 90.3% less hydrocarbons (HC) and 37.9% less carbon dioxide (CO2) compared to the Factory engine.
From the foregoing, it will be seen that this invention is one well adapted to obtain all the ends and objects herein set forth, together with other advantages which are inherent to the structure.
It will be understood that certain features and subcombinations are of utility and may be employed without reference to other features and subcombinations.
As many possible embodiments may be made of the invention without departing from the scope thereof, it is to be understood that all matter herein set forth or shown in the accompanying drawings is to be interpreted as illustrative and not in a limiting sense.
This utility patent application is a Continuation in Part of Ser. No. 13/443077, Filed Apr. 10, 2012, entitled “Sliding Valve Aspiration,” by inventor Gary W. Cotton, which was a divisional application based upon prior U.S. Utility patent application Ser. No. 12/387,184, filed Apr. 29, 2009, Entitled “Sliding Valve Aspiration System,” by inventor Gary W. Cotton, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,210,147 issued Jul. 3, 2012, which was based upon a prior U.S. Provisional application entitled “Sliding Valve Aspiration Engine,” Ser. No. 61/135,267, filed Jul. 18, 2008, by inventor Gary W. Cotton.
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61135267 | Jul 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12387184 | Apr 2009 | US |
Child | 13443077 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13443077 | Apr 2012 | US |
Child | 13863710 | US |