Rand Cam / RadMax rotary engine up for licensing
The REGI U.S. company has been working on a rotary engine they've named Rand Cam/RadMax. This engine uses 12 vanes and a rotor and REGI U.S. says there is one horsepower for each pound in the engine, which means a lot of oomph for the weight. The Rand Cam/RadMax is very fuel-felxible, and can accept diesel, natural gas, propane, hydrogen or gasoline. Those are the facts. The news is that REGI U.S. is preparing to license this technology, and claims to have heard nibbles from "several major defense contractors from both the US and Europe."Is this a good thing for green cars? Aside from the flexible fuel inputs, not really. It's not really a green engine even though the company calls it efficient. If it were, it could make a big impact. REGI U.S. says the RadMax engine is scalable for use in everything from weedtrimmers to military jet engines. The engine is also 50 percent lighter than a comparable stratified Wankel engine while producing twice or three times as much power (Mazda fans will remember the work the company did on getting the inefficient and fairly dirty Wankel engines to something resembling environmental friendliness). You can see an animated schematic of the RadMax engine in action here.
[Source: REGI U.S., Inc.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Tim 12:58PM (12/06/2006)
"...one horsepower for each pound in the engine..." High power to weight ratio and flexible fuel may make this an excellent choice for an Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) in a series PHEV where size and weight considerations are paramount.
Reply
George Krpan 7:55PM (12/06/2006)
So a 100lb engine could make 100hp. The whole car could be made lighter and that would have a significant effect on it's efficiency. How about a 25 lb/hp version in a sub 500lb car?
Reply
Damion 7:34AM (12/07/2006)
I do not believe that it is a correct statement to say this is not a green motor. Yes, it is a rotary motor however it is vastly different in design then any current rotary motor, which are mostly of wankel design or a direct derivative of it. We can really only wait to see its impact on the world, the company is still in relatively early stages of development. You also have to remember that a 4 stroke as a power pulse every 2 rotations of the crankshaft (720 degrees). A 2 stroke has a power stroke every rotation (360 degrees). It marine out board motors the 2 strokes will always out accelerate there equivalent horsepower 4 stroke. So you can really only imagine the way this motor will accelerate things. It will be faster then a 2 stroke, and most likely have less emissions, and is most likely more efficient. It has to be much more efficient to get a 1lb to 1 hp ratio.
Reply
Trev 5:14PM (12/07/2006)
they state that the 42 hp diesel engine is only 6 inches long! that is tiny. One could save a lot of space and weight. If it is a dependable long lasting engine they may be on to something.
Reply
CM 3:57AM (12/08/2006)
Interesting. I wonder if they could make this an Atkinson cycle by changing the cam profiles, thus achieving higher efficiency. The Atkinson cycle improves efficiency by making the power expansion stroke longer than the compression stroke.
One potential problem with this design is the complex seals. Not unsolvable, but difficult.
Reply
Tim 9:15AM (12/08/2006)
CM- The seal problem is also the Achilles heal of the Wankel engine design. Rand Cam It's a very interesting design and I think it holds great promise. Only time and money will tell. It just doesn’t make sense to have so much mass changing direction so rapidly as in the piston engine design. Every time mass changes direction you loose inertial energy and sacrifice efficiency.
Reply
Chuck 3:58PM (12/18/2006)
Well there is the fact that its currently being litigated by Tony Cuthbert who invented it, don't know who you would license it from. Although as the replacement for the Boeing Tomahawk's cruise engine its a good deal (no need for the seals to last all that long, a few hours at most) Less weight means more "bang" for the buck.
For the military/reliability market I can see it, but no mention of its thermal efficiency. With the exception of the "special tooling" needed to hold the vanes during assembly it could be a good ultralight engine.
Reply
moderncorporation 7:59AM (11/02/2007)
I would welcome additional info. from Chuck who on Dec. 18th 2006 commented on who was the real inventor of Radmax engine a Tony Cuthbert who presumable is litigating for his rights.
Where is the litigation taking place or where is Tony Cuthberg from ?. Regards, Fernán.
Reply
smile17 10:22AM (11/05/2007)
Hi
yes the new improvement is done by using new design of the disk-vanes and the change of circular groove form (is a toroidal-sinusoid groove )more difficult to produce but more efficient with a better burning full due to the conical form making the moving chambers volumes see here under
from PARIS FRANCE Friendly
Inventor(s)
Georgy Leonidovich Kozlov
Petr Anarolievich Regel
Assignee
Arktur-Trading GmbH
Application
No. 857894 filed on 2001-06-11
Current US Class
123/243 , Vane 123/245 , Alternately approaching and receding elements 123/247 , Only combustion and expansion of charge in engine 418/219 Vane
Field of Search
123/243 , Vane 123/245 , Alternately approaching and receding elements 123/247 , Only combustion and expansion of charge in engine 418/219 Vane
Examiners
Primary: Thomas Denion
Assistant: Thai-Ba Trieu
Attorney, Agent or Firm
McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.
US Patent References
5429084
Axial vane rotary device and sealing system therefor
Issued on: July 4, 1995
Inventor: Cherry, et al.
Foreign Patent References
WO 97/43518 WO Nov., 1997
2 301 666 DE Jan., 1973
3218 601 DE May., 1982
2183732 GB Jun., 1987
2018695 RU Mar., 1991
1188336 SU Jan., 1983
Reply