Pattakon engine.....legitimate alternative or just another fly-by-night

[revetec]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

ROFLMAO

Manolis, you should keep track of items under discussion.
it was pointed out to YOU that the extra weight was superfluous.

Please join hightower in the annals of "those to be ignored"

Yes I pointed out that the extra weight was doing nothing about 5 pages back on the 16th of February and we have been arguing about it ever since. It's good you admitted it as I have said before that some things are always overlooked in a large design project and I won't hold it against you. It was good you admitted it rather than holding onto your pride and looking foolish. I just wish it didn't take so much time to listen, wasting other subjects discussion time.

Manolis: Please just keep your posts to a few paragraphs as the responses have to be long also and if you make a post short, clear and concise then people will be more interested. It is easy to put a view or response across in about 1/3 of the size of posting you make. Another note: let's keep this thread on the Pattakon engine and the Revetec engine comments on its own thread.

I hope we all agree on the balancing, and we should all move on to more productive discussions on this thread.

[manolis]

I copy from Revetec’s post on March 1, 2007, answering on the perfect balancing of the Greco-i3:
“Great. I'm glad of your modification and it is now correct in practice, as long as the balance weights are correct in weight. I showed you this in a image of your Greco engine previously. You always take the attack before thinking it through which sometimes baffles me.”

After shrinking angularly the two “halves” (120 degrees each) of the balance web in order to reduce the balance web angular “duration” in less than 180 degrees, the balancing of the Greco-i3 was admitted to be perfect!

The case is shown simplified in the plot
http://www.pattakon.com/tempman/guru2.GIF
All masses are on the same plain.
There is a balance web comprising 4 weights (two “rectangle” and two circular all of the same mass, all at the same eccentricity from the rotation center O.

At left the balance web covers more than 180 degrees around the rotation center O.
At middle, the circular mass m22 cancels the rectangular mass m12 (so these two masses can be omitted if desirable). Nevertheless, the total centrifugal force generated by the four balance masses that constitute the balance web is the same in all five cases shown, no matter if they cover more than 180 degrees around the rotation center.

As long as the counterbalancing action of a mass rotating around a center is nothing but the centrifugal force generated by its motion (except there is something “magical”/beyond nature in the balancing of an engine) things are so simple and straight that is strange how many pages and plots have already been used to explain the case without finding the proper background to flourish/grow.

Is the counterbalancing action of the four masses m11, m12, m21 and m22 identical in all five figures or it is not?
Very simple and straight question.
Remove the masses m12 and m22 (which cancel each other as they are at 180 degrees angular distance and same eccentricity from the rotation center) from the middle figure and answer again the above question.
If the answer is yes, then why one cannot extend the “angular” length of the balance web more than 180 degrees?
If not, can anybody in this forum explain why?


As for the Revetec X4 and its balancing.
It was written in many posts and tones that it will not use sinusoidal piston motion (i.e. its piston travel versus the shaft angle will not be of first order only).
An engine like X4 cannot have second, fourth, sixth etc (i.e. even) order coefficients in its piston motion profile (this makes zero the forces of second order on the engine casing as well as the fourth order inertia torque).
But as the piston motion of the X4 is not pure sinusoidal, it will necessarily comprise a third order coefficient (and a fifth order – if desirable – and so on).
This third order coefficient generates an unbalanced third order inertia force on the engine casing and a sixth order inertia torque on both, the casing and the power shafts (i.e. on the propeller in case of planes). The stronger the third order coefficient of the piston motion profile, the stronger the unbalanced inertia force and inertia torque.
If, for instance, the third order coefficient of piston motion profile is just 10% of the first order coefficient, the resulting third order inertia force is 30% of the first order inertia force while the resulting sixth order inertia torque is 30% of the second order inertia torque.


A couple of months ago, when the discussion was about gearboxes, torque etc, I wrote that Revetec “needs” in Revetec company a guy like Pneumatic’s background.
Getting into Revetec site to download the video with the X4 at idling, I read: “What to do with all that torque?”. The old “joke” is still there: Divide the revs by three, increase the torque by almost three and impress the “not relevant”.
But on the other hand, the construction of the Revetec X4 prototype is impressive, at least from outside (as there are no data for what is inside, like the Bore / Stroke etc).

It is a confusing case: capability to invent, to design and to construct and at the same time obvious lack of basic background and plenty of arrogance. In any case, good luck with X4.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by manolis

I copy from Revetec’s post on March 1, 2007, answering on the perfect balancing of the Greco-i3:
“Great. I'm glad of your modification and it is now correct in practice, as long as the balance weights are correct in weight. I showed you this in a image of your Greco engine previously. You always take the attack before thinking it through which sometimes baffles me.”

After shrinking angularly the two “halves” (120 degrees each) of the balance web in order to reduce the balance web angular “duration” in less than 180 degrees, the balancing of the Greco-i3 was admitted to be perfect!

English is not tour first language so given the benefit of the doubt.

BUT, he did NOT say it was perfectly balanced and you would be advised NEVER to suggest the same or your open to legal action

You were told that your balance weights were incorrectly calculated and had "dead weight" in them. You were shown how to remove it to achieve the same.

Whether or not the whole Greco thing is in balance is STILL up for debate and with zero confidence from readers given the silly errors you contineu to make.

[CHOOK]

Manolis,

I will only add that you have been told many times that you do not know the make-up of the REVETEC engine, so stop assuming because assuming usually makes the assumer look like an ass (as you have repeatedly shown)

Also, I set up this thread for you to talk about your experimental engine. Please do not discuss details of other engines in this thread (as you have also been told) as other threads have been set up for that purpose, as you know.

Finally, take a chill pill dude. You take things as though people are attacking you when they just want a sensible discussion. Your arrogance and ignorance is not helping your cause.

[revetec]

Originally Posted by manolis

Getting into Revetec site to download the video with the X4 at idling, I read: “What to do with all that torque?”. The old “joke” is still there: Divide the revs by three, increase the torque by almost three and impress the “not relevant”.
But on the other hand, the construction of the Revetec X4 prototype is impressive, at least from outside (as there are no data for what is inside, like the Bore / Stroke etc).

It is a confusing case: capability to invent, to design and to construct and at the same time obvious lack of basic background and plenty of arrogance. In any case, good luck with X4.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos

The Video with the comment "What can we do with all that torque" is not geared or divided by three. In one rotation it sweeps each piston once up the stroke and once down the stroke like a conventional engine. The 1.38 litre RLE4 prototype has never been configured that way. I have explained this to you before and I am explaining it to you again. Again you try and attack us for no reason and come out looking foolish. You "obviously lack basic background" and don't pay attention. You also assume way too much.

You may think I am arrogant but I think you misinterpret my goals and constrictions. If I am designing an engine for clients then a lot of the information remains confidential. I'd love to tell you more information, but I just cannot.

I also come under attack from you quite often, and in most posts from you requires me to be slightly aggressive back. If you were actually interested in what we are achieving, rather than being scathing towards me, then you would find that I would be more approachable.

I have spent a bit of time pointing out areas of your engine design that can be modified before you actually build it. In my eyes I think what I have been pointing out as being constructive to you. The alternative is not to say anything and let you plod along and build it with faults that I could have pointed out, and supplied you with some thought or solutions before you spend your money to build it.

I think you take me as a pain in your backside. Well back to you because your responses are long winded and arrogant. Like say for instance on the balancing issue. I hope that you take my advise and use the counterbalances I have suggested. I expect you wont listen. Your designing path to me will see you adding unnecessary weight to your engine which I feel is most arrogant and stubborn. You can post as many posts as you like but I'm only pointing out what is obvious to me and I hope that I help you in some way, if not, you can't say I didn't try to tell you so. It's your call what you do from here.

And finally, I have never said your engine is perfectly balanced as Matra et Alpine has pointed out a couple of posts previous. As he said, I have merely pointed out the "dead weight" issue.

[manolis]

The good thing with the forums is that everything is written (and saved into the forum members’ hard disks).
For instance, here is the “seal” / “stamp” of a pure gentleman: http://www.pattakon.com/tempman/gentleman.GIF posted a week ago and then edited. Congratulations to him.

More interesting is the reaction of the moderator: “no reaction” at all.
Congratulations to the moderator, too.
Congratulations to the moderator and for his feeling about “justice”:
When I use a link or a diagram or a drawing in one of my posts/replies, it is judged as “advertisement for free” and immediately it is deleted or modified by him.
A look at the “the work of a pure “genius” . . . ” thread reveals how the “advertisement for free” rule is applied there.
“Fair play”. . .

As for the strictly technical part of my posts (to the “Technical forums - Ultimatecarpage_com forums”) regarding the balancing, what is written is -by far- more than adequate for those having the basic background and the desire to learn.

Socrates (the greatest ancient Greek, the teacher of Plato, who was the teacher of Aristotle, who was the teacher of Alexander the Great) used to say “only one thing I know, that I know nothing”. This way he remained a “student” during all his life, listening to the others and learning from both, their knowledge and their ignorance.


As for my offer / bet regarding the perfect balancing of the Greco I3, it remains valid (see the relevant posts). Especially for the “genius” who may want to bet a part of his million dollars grant (but it would be like “a robbery of a church”).


According to the UltimateCarPage moderator “rules”, when referring to a specific Pattakon’s project I am forced to write nothing more than “my company’s engine”!
Either referring to the Pattakon VVA projects, or to the Pattakon-PRE engine, or to the Pattakon Greco engine, or to the Pattakon PPE engine, I have to write just “my company’s engine” without any links (because they are deleted) or photos or plots or videos.
A discussion, any discussion, cannot go on this way.

It would be better if the moderator could examine the validity of the technical analysis, writing his objections and spotting on the mistakes he sees.
What he does until now, is to censor my posts (deleting links, plots, photos, editing phrases etc).
This is supposed to be a Technical Forum for cars and car engines.


Before leaving this forum, I like to thank all the independent “UltimateCarPage forums” members for their interest, their e-mails, and their downloads from the pattakon site.

Thank you
Manolis Pattakos

[CHOOK]

Originally Posted by manolis

Before leaving this forum, I like to thank all the independent “UltimateCarPage forums” members for their interest, their e-mails, and their downloads from the pattakon site.

Before you leave, how about answering all those questions that you left unanswered from nearly 3 months ago. I suppose we can only to come to our own conclusions that you can't or that your answers will prove the flaws your family's experimental engine has.

I am sure you will pop up in some other forum. History seems to repeat itself.

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by manolis

The good thing with the forums is that everything is written (and saved into the forum members’ hard disks).
For instance, here is the “seal” / “stamp” of a pure gentleman: http://www.pattakon.com/tempman/gentleman.GIF posted a week ago and then edited. Congratulations to him.

ROFLMAO !

Shame you didn't have the fortitude to read and understand what that avatar was about Also, it's a sad reflection that you kept it
It was ANOTHER UCPers car which HE had made his avatar about as it had demised. A few of us shared his avatar as a "support" for his upset and frustration.

Man, you gotta feel silly about now

immediately it is deleted or modified by him.

Please don't lie.
As you already noted the internet has memory. The PMs and posts sent to you ASKING you not to constantly promote and reference the site were given to you.

A look at the “the work of a pure “genius” . . . ” thread reveals how the “advertisement for free” rule is applied there.
“Fair play”. . .

Missing the point of SUPPLIED VALUE.
You don't mind the adverst interrupting your favourite TV series because of the enjoyment in the show. Your posts were shallow, vacuous and repetitive(sic)

As for the strictly technical part of my posts (to the “Technical forums - Ultimatecarpage_com forums”) regarding the balancing, what is written is -by far- more than adequate for those having the basic background and the desire to learn.

Are you inclduign yourself or acting as you have in other forusm about the errors in your thoughts. See the web balance nonsense you defended ... oh and the contuous erroneous statement that Wankels are perfectly balanced.
I have come to the conclusion you do not understand and perhaps have not bothered to study the differences in the early Wankel engines

Socrates (the greatest ancient Greek, the teacher of Plato, who was the teacher of Aristotle, who was the teacher of Alexander the Great) used to say “only one thing I know, that I know nothing”. This way he remained a “student” during all his life, listening to the others and learning from both, their knowledge and their ignorance.

Glad you have studied philosophy in the recent days.
So hopefully either here or elsewhere you will act with that wisdom in mind.
Sadly you have not demonstrated it here

As for my offer / bet regarding the perfect balancing of the Greco I3, it remains valid (see the relevant posts). Especially for the “genius” who may want to bet a part of his million dollars grant (but it would be like “a robbery of a church”).

I'm hoping at the end of your post I'm goign to find you will leave UCP as you have done EVERY other forum you've posted the BS in.
As others have said, go build the Greco as currently designed and come back when it demonstrates perfect balance -- if ever.

According to the UltimateCarPage moderator “rules”, when referring to a specific Pattakon’s project I am forced to write nothing more than “my company’s engine”!

No ... when you CONTINUOUSLY refer to the same web site, same animations, same inaccurate conclusions you are "forced" to behave as an adult.
In reality you were asked, cajoled, reminded

Either referring to the Pattakon VVA projects, or to the Pattakon-PRE engine, or to the Pattakon Greco engine, or to the Pattakon PPE engine, I have to write just “my company’s engine” without any links (because they are deleted) or photos or plots or videos.
A discussion, any discussion, cannot go on this way.

You were told which way the discussion needed to go many months ago.
You ignored it.
You can't now bleat about treatment !!!

It would be better if the moderator could examine the validity of the technical analysis, writing his objections and spotting on the mistakes he sees.

Been done by MANY UCPers.
Also been pointed out that trying to get FREE engeering analysis and using the expensive education and esperience I and others have for FREE is immoral. And yet you carried on. Astoundingly, despite this already having been said you STILL think you do no wrong
[quote]What he does until now, is to censor my posts (deleting links, plots, photos, editing phrases etc).
This is supposed to be a Technical Forum for cars and car engines.
[quote]
Correct.
Not a sandpit for kiddies to play engineer in and ask others to correct all thier errors so that they can benefit. Somethign that has been seen in your entrance/exit to other forums !!!

Before leaving this forum, I like to thank all the independent “UltimateCarPage forums” members for their interest, their e-mails, and their downloads from the pattakon site.

OH THANK GOD. You are leaving.

Interested "downloads from the site" ? hmmm, your not using these hits to promote your "Products" in the same way you've tried to suggest that memebers here were "saying" that the Greco was balanced ?????

Thank you
Manolis Pattakos

Doubly thank you for leaving.
PS: Please tell us which forum is next in your list to repeat what you have done here and many other forums. I'd rather avoid it in future

[floundericious]

Thank you all for this thread.

Manolis comes by about once a year to the temple of vtec (The Temple of VTEC - Honda and Acura Enthusiasts Online) and tries to stir up our members with claims of massive efficiency gains and huge power improvements and "my engine's bigger than yours and runs all night long for her pleasure, too"

Revetec, you've fisked him far better than any of us have and kept your temper in check better than many of us did. I see you all noticed the very real LACK of solid information that Manolis brings to the table. I didn't read the whole 11 pages yet...did he offer to let you drive it if you flew to Greece on your nickel? LOL!

Again, well said all around! The next time he pokes his nose in, I'll close his thread and redirect people here and to our older threads in case they want to see what he's on about.

[Matra et Alpine]

NOT FAIR, floundericious

How about we close THIS thread and direct everyone to you.
Why should we be the only ones to suffer ?????

Only joking.
He's welcome to come back here any time to demonstrate real success.

[floundericious]

LOL

He presented at some world engine expo in 2008. So, good for him! I stand by the statements you guys have made and that we all made: "show me real, comparative usage data on fuel consumption, horsepower, oil consumption, and reliability...without linking back to more of your own pretty pictures." As I'm sure you've seen, that never happens...