Subject:
|
Re: System to allow pressure and vacuum for piston at the same time
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.technic
|
Date:
|
Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:44:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
8833 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.technic, Kevin L. Clague wrote:
> In lugnet.technic, Chio Siong Soh wrote:
> > But why hypothetical? Would have loved to see the running engine and how it
> > compares with the traditional ones using just compressed air, which was the
> > original question.
> >
> > Pity the poor student :-)
>
> Well we must agree that the switch solution is a bit gangly. I'd like to work
> on a more compact solution before I bother with the engine.
>
> When simply run on compressed air, the sequencer cycled faster than I would have
> thought.
>
> Engines are not really my thing anyway. I've made a few. I thought Andrew
> might want to take a whack at it.
I think I may, if I have enough switches. I only have the contents of one of the
new studless backhoes, minus one piston because I broke off the bottom port and
can't figure out a way to repair it. Oh, and I also have the pneumatics from the
Ultimate Builders Set. So, 11 switches, 10 (working) pistons, and a bunch of
tubing. And two small pistons from the Pitsco pneumatics bulk pack. And an air
muscle that I built a while ago, which doesn't work very well. So, I have to use
four switches per piston in the engine (8), and it seems like another four on my
compressor, because I have no oneway valves. I may start with a very tricky one
cyl engine, though I have never had much success in building a traditional one.
But, I'll see. Just like Columbus and the egg, it is always easier to do
something if there is a precedent. Thank you all for providing the precedent.
Andrew Meyer
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
9 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
