Explains a few things, doesn't it ?

http://www.patentsearcher.com/ceb.pdf

 

Still reading.. thanks for posting!

 

good read.

 

Read 'Internal Combustion Engine Fundimentals' by Heywood It is the answer book to all those questions how does it work and what really matters..LOL.. I doubt if you will dream up anything that is not covered in it..

 

Well shucks and gee whiz, that's not a new thought at all. In 1898 the Commissioner of the U.S. Patent Office wanted to close down the Patent Office because he declared everything that could be invented had already been invented. Imagine if others had been foolish enough to believe that.

With your Heywood reference, if you would be so kind as to point out the section / page, etc. where Charge Energy Boost Duration is discussed, I'd be very grateful to read more about it, and learn.

I may be different, but my mindset is that this is a learning process. I don't proclaim to know it all, or anything for that matter, was just sharing an article I wrote. If you've written anything, please feel free to share it also !!

"It is not the critic who counts, nor the man who points how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly...who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at best, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat." - Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

I heartily look forward to hearing from you re the part of Heywood in which Charge Energy Boost Duration is mentioned. Thanks in advance.

 

I am not flaming you just suggest you read the book from beginning to end it ties many things together all in one place by someone really qualified for the task.. If you are interested in combustion effeciency and how to model it it is a valuable source of information...

 

 

theres nothing more disarming than to have someone act in a contrary manner after you try to compliment them on something they did well.and worse yet for them to do it in the face of theyre peers.

 

Cut the jibberish and show me the alleged "compliment". DDahl wrote he doubts I'd ever come up with anything that isn't already known. Vell dahlink, I've got 9 issued patents to my name, and few more pending. Coming up with new things is a way of life with me, instead of stagnating in a cesspool of what is already known. I get a new idea about every 15 minutes.

I'm looking for constructive discourse, based on the subject matter, and not opinions regarding my personality and whether I'll ever think of anything that isn't known.

That said, if any of you rock throwers ever come up with anything of merit, lets have at it, instead of telling me to go read a book. I'm here to learn, not read off-base philosophical nonsense. Again, if any of yooz have seen CEB lift duration discussed anywhere, either put it up, or take a hike.

 

cool, congrats on another patent.

NO OFFENSE, but What do you get out of these patents??
are you actually running or advertising that web site?
I just never noticed you advertising that before.

 

A bunch of headaches. Seriously though, I like doing things that are new and useful, contributing to our body of knowledge. Get in the habit of doing new things and keep going at it until it becomes habit and eventually you might come up with something really good. Also, once in a while one can make some money from a patent, but people at companies don't want to buy your stuff - they resent you, envy, jealousy, whatever - "not invented here" syndrome.

Perhaps the best part is that one can also find lots of good tech info in the patent literature, to cite but one example - Jim Feuling's cylinder heads designs and also his work on valve seats. That guy was amazing - his BBC heads alone added 100HP to an old buddy of mine, JimD's rig.

 

I still work a little to keep busy - much of it is in meeting with people and explaining why their proposed ideas aren't commercially viable. Most new ideas don't make money, so I save these people from investing a bunch of time and money in something that won't give a return. But I caution them that people also thought Alexander Bell's telephone invention was a toy and that no one man's opinion should be a sole criteria. Still, most new ideas / products don't make it to the market successfully.

What I'd like to do regarding that article I posted is gather data from other heads, like LSx heads on engines that put out 500 ft lbs of Tq.
I'd like to know the port inner smallest area, seat inner diameter, and duration on the cam at the CEB lift. I'd bet gold coin that there's a sweet spot in regards to that CEB lift duration and that it could be used to advantage when porting heads and selecting a cam. Chances are, over all the years people have been building engines, that the sweet spot has been hit lots of times, but my suggestion in the article might enable one to identify where the sweet spot is on LT-1 heads so it can be targeted. I wonder how the guys at Comp would react to the question of "What is the duration of that cam at 0.383" ?" They'd probably think you flipped your wig for asking such a question. Still, its also possible that this whole CEB Lift Duration concept could be the basis for new grind profiles. Once I learn more about other heads' dimensions, I think I can formulate what a cam should look like. That's a bold statement given so many professionals have been making cams for decades but maybe not so bold - cams today are a bit different than even a few years ago so its not out of the question. Right now I'm thinking the more CEB lift duration, the better. Get to that lift fast, then go more slowly up to maxlift and back down to CEB lift. Once we get more data about other heads, like LSx and the cam they put in that, then some useful info may be extracted from what is known and applied to other heads. The restriction in the manifold gives it an area of about 1.8 in.^2 and that can also be factored in. I'm concluding that its not all about flow, but rather changes in flow and where they occur along the paths in that cavern for a given intake cycle.