[Gasification] Fwd: Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 25

[Kevin Chisholm]

Dear Kenn

Can you, or anyone, see anything specific about this engine that would 
suggest that there is a rational basis for improved fuel efficiency?

If not, then this would have to be classed as an "unsubstantiated claim, 
with no reason to believe it is true."

Best wishes,

Kevin

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "kenn johnsen" <kennj at webspeed.dk>
To: <gasification at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 11:19 AM
Subject: [Gasification] Fwd: Gasification Digest, Vol 2, Issue 25


>    It is claimed to use 1/4 of a pound off fuel, per horse, and that is
> with a carburetor, what would happen if the Aussie Orbitel got there
> hands on it.
>
> Kenn
>>
>> Hi Drew,
>>
>> I mentioned the Bourke because I personally DON'T KNOW.  Except that
>> Bourke
>> produced and sold 30cc models of it in the 1950s and others now make
>> certain
>> performance claims for it.  Plus one of the websites shows a 30cc
>> Bourke now
>> being tested periodically against a 24 KW generator.   A 24kw generator
>> would normally need 48 shp so that picqued my interest.  Whether he's
>> able
>> to run it full load with his Bourke engine, again I don't know.
>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourke_Engine<<
>>
>> The problem with Wikipedia is articles may well be written by
>> competitors.
>> In the case of the Bourke Engine, they might be disinformation written
>> by GM
>> or Exxon public relations flacks.
>>
>> The most I can say is developments in the tiny Bourke engine field seem
>> worth watching given the claims made for the engine's performance.
>> Conventional theoretical wisdom is often overturned by actual
>> experimental
>> results.  It might develop into a good gasification engine someday.
>> Or it
>> may always be a spurious crackpot 'invention' always needing more
>> development funding but never delivering any useful results.  Similar
>> to
>> hydrogen fusion and enyzmatic conversion of cellulose to ethanol.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 09:13:07 -0700
>>> From: drew <drew at artforging.com>
>>> Subject: [Gasification] Bourke Engine and Steves Gassifier
>>> To: Gasification at listserv.repp.org
>>> Message-ID: <44E1F293.80907 at artforging.com>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>>
>>> The 1936 patent drawings of the bourke engine are here
>>>
>>> http://patimg2.uspto.gov/
>>> .piw?docid=US002122676&PageNum=2&IDKey=B2AB2A5BECE0&HomeUrl=http://
>>> patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
>>> Parser?Sect2=PTO1%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%2525%
>>> 25252FPTO%2525%25252Fsearch-
>>> bool.html%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526d=PALL%2526S1=2122676.PN.%2526O
>>> S=PN/2122676%2526RS=PN/2122676
>>> <http://patimg2.uspto.gov/
>>> .piw?docid=US002122676&PageNum=2&IDKey=B2AB2A5BECE0&HomeUrl=http://
>>> patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
>>> Parser?Sect2=PTO1%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526p=1%2526u=%25252Fnetahtml%2525%
>>> 25252FPTO%2525%25252Fsearch-
>>> bool.html%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526d=PALL%2526S1=2122676.PN.%2526O
>>> S=PN/2122676%2526RS=PN/2122676>
>>>
>>> A 1994 patent for a similar engine but fancier scotch yoke
>>>
>>> http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
>>> Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-
>>> bool.html&r=41&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=bourke&s2=engine&OS=bourke+A
>>> ND+engine&RS=bourke+AND+engine
>>> <http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-
>>> Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-
>>> bool.html&r=41&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PTXT&s1=bourke&s2=engine&OS=bourke+A
>>> ND+engine&RS=bourke+AND+engine>
>>>
>>>
>>> The engine looks interesting, the pause at TDC and BDC are supposed to
>>> make the engine run better?   I don't know?   The true linear travel
>>> pistons look interesting.   I am not qualified to judge, and especialy
>>> not from the meager info on thier site, or in the patent.  I do notice
>>> that on the website they are selling an "revolutionary electronic fuel
>>> cracker" which gives 15% better fuel rating.   This sort of add does
>>> little for thier credibility from my point of view.
>>>
>>> The 1994 patent is licenced to Collins motor company in Austrailia,
>>> they
>>> have an artical on thier engine "soon to be released, after a bit of
>>> testing"
>>> http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3165/is_n4_v27/ai_10615466
>>>
>>> The wikipedia page
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourke_Engine
>>>
>>> Says poor NO emissions are what killed it, same as the wankel I
>>> suppose,
>>> as higher combustion efficency is obtained, the seemingly inevitable
>>> higher NO.    The scotch yoke mechanism seems like it could be (and
>>> has
>>> been) quite problematic too,  if it was huge and heavy like the old
>>> steam gear, maybe, but in a "high output" low weight engine?
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gasification mailing list
>> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
>> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/
>> gasification_listserv.repp.org
>> http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gasification mailing list
> Gasification at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/gasification_listserv.repp.org
> http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/gasification