Home » The Most Complicated New Engine Has Three Cylinders, A Rotating Block, A Stationary Head, And Is Shaped Like A Circle

The Most Complicated New Engine Has Three Cylinders, A Rotating Block, A Stationary Head, And Is Shaped Like A Circle

Thrre Cylinder Engine Ts
ADVERTISEMENT

Most of the internal combustion piston engines built for vehicles throughout history have pretty familiar core designs. The majority of fuel-burning vehicles sold today orient their pistons in inline or vee configurations. Boxers and “flat” designs are less common in cars, but remain a mainstay in aviation. There’s also the weird Wankel, which replaces pistons with a spinning Dorito of power. But what if you were to combine some genetics from piston engines and Wankels, then put them into one engine? Meet the Birotary, a crazy new and complicated engine that has three cylinders arranged like a star, a rotating block, a stationary head, and just a dab of Wankel fun.

Some of history’s most complicated engines were built to fulfill specific roles. Perhaps the craziest diesel engine of all time, the three-block, 18-cylinder, and 36-piston Napier Deltic, was designed to give the British Admiralty fast boats to best the Germans in the 1940s. Diesel engines were usually pretty weak back then, so engineers got creative to make power. Then there’s the Commer TS3, the legendary British opposed-piston diesel truck engine that fit into compact spaces and offered a unique sound, good power, and great reliability. Of course, the most common weird engine is probably the Wankel rotary, which was once seen as superior to piston engines for its fewer moving parts and high power-to-weight ratio, among other things.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

Like those engines, the Knob Engines Birotary (that’s pronounced sort of like “kuh-nob” not “knob”) hopes to make an improvement in a specific area of transportation. In this case, Knob says it designed this engine to make the ultimate light aircraft engine, one that’s light, powerful, and transmits low vibrations. The awesome thing about the engine that I’m about to show you is that it’s not a concept or something that exists in only virtual reality. A real, running prototype of this engine has been built and has already taken flight in a light aircraft. But how does this weirdo even work? Let’s take a look!

Screenshot (1025)

Behind The Engine

The Birotary engine is the work of Vaclav Knob and his team of engineers at Knob Engines. The company was founded in Czechia (Czech Republic) in 2010, and Knob Engines says it has been working on its Birotary from its founding. However, Vaclav says he first came up with the idea back in 1988, and he’s been tweaking it ever since. In 2014, the company says, Vaclav Knob and company managing director Jiri Drahovzal earned patents for the Birotary engine’s design and sealing characteristics in 48 countries.

ADVERTISEMENT

Here’s the story that Vaclav tells about himself:

Was born 12th June 1964. He graduated from high industry school with a focus on aircraft technology. He also competed four years of studies at university, specializing in engines. All his professional life is focused on research and development in the automotive area. He is the author of patented technology of motor-generator presented on this site.

[…]

After leaving the Czech Technical University in Prague in 1989, where he was studying Transportation and Manipulation Technology, Vaclav has had a broad and highly successful career in engine design, research and development. Strongly influenced by his University study and his inspirational Professor Jan Macek, Vaclav has focused on combustion engine and gearbox design. Today, racing gearboxes and sequential shifting mechanisms developed by Vaclav are being used by many private racing teams.

His developments can be seen in Porsche 996, 997, GT2, GT3, Turbo, Carrera, Boxster, Cayman, also in Mitsubishi Lancer EVO, Toyota Celica, Honda Prelude, and in the vast majority of VW Group automobiles. The shifting mechanism for Porsche was developed by Vaclav in cooperation with “CARTRONIC” and the development center of “Porsche Engineering Group GmbH”. In addition, Vaclav has worked on multiple engine design and development projects for “AUDI AG” and has completed design projects on Ring-Shaped Valve engine and 2-stroke engine with swinging pistons.

Also, before we get into the engineering of this engine, you should listen to it run:

It sounds like Vaclav has quite the history with designing unique machines. Jiri Drahovzal doesn’t note any engineering in his history. Instead, he brings decades of experience in finance, import, export, and business administration to the Knob Engines team. The guys aren’t working alone, either, and have several engineers working alongside them on the Birotary project.

Vaclav also has another outfit called Knobgear, and that company is working in projects beyond the Birotary, including a range extender for electric aircraft and racing transmissions for Volkswagen Group and Honda cars.

ADVERTISEMENT

Alright, so you know the father of the Birotary. Let’s get into how this thing works.

It’s Not What You Expect

Screenshot (1036)
Credit: Knob Engines

 

At the core of the Birotary is a set of three cylinders and pistons. These are banked 120 degrees apart, forming a sort of star shape. All three pistons share a central crankshaft. Now here’s the fun part: these pistons and cylinders are housed within a round cylinder block. This entire block spins. As the block spins, each piston is completing its four strokes. Yes, that means the pistons are moving, and the block is moving, too.

While this sounds crazy, it isn’t. Vaclav says that a version of this design already exists in what’s called a rotary engine. By “rotary,” he doesn’t mean Wankel rotary. There is a different kind of rotary engine that’s actually a piston engine.

The engine spins with the wheel. Credit: Bonhams

Here’s what this engine would look like when rotating:

ADVERTISEMENT
Rotary Engine
The whole crankcase spins while the pistons fire! Credit: MichaelFrey – CC BY-SA 4.0

Like this engine, a rotary engine has an odd number of pistons arranged in a sort of radial configuration. What makes this kind of rotary unique is that its crankshaft doesn’t move. Instead, the entire crankcase, with the cylinders and all, rotates around the crankshaft. This kind of rotary engine has been around for more than a century and was often used in aircraft, and sometimes on motorcycles.

Screenshot (1033)
The lighter gray is the stationary block, the darker gray is the spinning block. Credit: Knob Engines

Vaclav’s Birotary has a spinning engine block and a spinning crankshaft. That’s different enough, but the weirdness continues as the engine case doesn’t move. To reiterate, the crank spins, as does an inner engine block and the pistons, but the engine case itself is stationary.

Now that you have a picture of the engine, we can see how it moves. If you’re looking at the front of the engine, you’ll note that the crankshaft spins clockwise and the block spins counterclockwise. Thanks to the counterweight at the end of the crank, this opposite rotation helps in canceling out gyroscopic forces and reaction torque.

Screenshot (1029)
The prototype engine in an aircraft. Credit: Knob Engines

This is especially important for the expected aircraft application. Propeller-driven aircraft like the Cessna 172 that I fly are subject to four primary factors that cause a left-turning tendency. These are propeller slipstream, gyroscopic precession, P-Factor (asymmetric loading) of the propeller blades, and torque. While a lot of this is caused by the action of the propeller, the engine internals, notably the crankshaft, also matter as the aircraft will want to yaw to the left.

This was a huge deal when the aforementioned old-school aircraft rotary reached its apex of design. These engines got huge, and they had gigantic masses of spinning crankcases in addition to titanic propellers, and thus, a ton of left-turning tendency. Here’s a video of the internal workings of the Birotary:

ADVERTISEMENT

These left-turning tendencies are counteracted with right rudder input. But of course, a goal of many working in this space. is to reduce these tendencies, either through clever angling of the engine or, in this case, making a unique engine. Since the birotary has two large masses spinning in opposite directions, the gyroscopic motion can cancel each other out.

This is also where the Birotary gets its name from, because there are two major rotating masses in the engine. Look, I didn’t create the name. At any rate, Knob Engines thinks this alone will be a pretty huge deal for light aircraft and make them easier and more pleasurable to fly.

It Gets Weirder

Screenshot (1040)
The prototype engine. Credit: Knob Engines

Knob Engines also notes that, by going with this design, the engine technically has fewer parts than a typical piston engine. There’s no valvetrain and its associated components. I’ll let Knob Engines explain:

The case is also the cylinder head and has two combustion portions. Each combustion portion is equipped with its own intake and exhaust port, and set of spark plugs. The rotating cylinder block also fulfils the function of slide valvetrain and provides the charge exchange in the cylinders. The cylinder block rotates in opposite direction to the crankshaft. The crankshaft and cylinder block are connected by means of planetary gear set with gear ratio of three (i.e., the crankshaft revolves three times per each cylinder block rotation). This means that for example at 8000 RPM of the engine, the cylinder block rotates at 2000 RPM in one direction and while the crankshaft rotates at 6000 RPM in the opposite direction. The engine completes a four-stroke work cycle once every 720° of relative angle, which means 180° of cylinder block angle plus 540° of crankshaft angle. Each cylinder makes four strokes for every 180° of cylinder block movement, i.e., two full working cycles per block rotation. Figure below shows the engine action trough one four-stroke work cycle.

Screenshot (1026)
Pictured: Intake and exhaust ports, plus combustion seals, spark plugs, cylinders, and pistons. Credit: Knob Engines

If that wall of text was too much, I’ll simplify it. The stationary engine case has two intake ports, two exhaust ports, and two spark plugs on opposite ends. It’s like an early two-stroke engine in that the air-fuel mix doesn’t enter the combustion chamber until the piston passes by, allowing the mix in. As for firing order, the crank rotates 180 degrees while the block rotates 60 degrees between firing, for a total relative rotation of 240 degrees. The crankshaft speed maxes out at 7,500 RPM while the block tops out at 2,500 RPM.

ADVERTISEMENT

You may also wonder why there’s a gear reduction going on, and that has to do with the aviation application. Propellers lose efficiency at high RPM due to drag, so gearing the engine down helps keep the prop in a sweeter zone. In this case, the propeller is attached to the spinning block, so the block must move slower than the crankshaft. Indeed, when I’m climbing out of my local airport, my trainer Cessna 172 is usually buzzing around 2,500 RPM.

Birotary Engine Cut View 740x784
This cutaway shows the gear reduction and some of the crankshaft.

Another neat part of the Birotary design is its combustion seals. In a Wankel rotary, you have apex seals at the ends of the triangular rotor. Of course, these seals are subject to all kinds of forces as the rotor spins around, and improving apex seal longevity has been a battle of Wankel engine engineers since pretty much its inception.

This engine is different. Not only is there no Dorito of combustion spinning around in there, but the combustion seals are static, on the stationary engine case. Further, the block is a circle spinning inside another circle. In theory, these seals should last a long time, and the engine should have limited blow-by. Here’s what Knob Engines says about that:

The seal assembly comprises of a side seal, transverse sealing strips, joints and springs. The side seal is divided into circular segments always placed between neighboring transverse sealing strips. The transverse sealing strips pass through the side sealing segments notably reaching over the cylinder bore. This solution prevents excessive bending of sealing strips into the cylinder. Joints are located between the side sealing segments and transverse sealing strips. Each sealing element, including its joints, is equipped with its own spring, which presses it towards the cylinder block. Joints also press the elements, which they sit on.

Screenshot (1047)
The engine’s cycles illustrated. Credit: Knob Engines

Placement of sealing elements in the stationary case ensures the stable application of force on the sealing elements and this force is unrelated to engine speed, unlike the Wankel rotary engine. This feature facilitates a very high engine speed and high specific output parameters. All the transverse sealing strips and side sealing segments have a surface or tangential contact with the outer, rotational surface of the cylinder block, which decreases contact stresses of the sealing elements and the outer surface of the cylinder block. This surface contact of the seal also requires less seal lubrication and increases its efficiency and durability. The sealing of the high-pressure portion in the cylinder, i.e. between the cylinder block and stationary case, is multiple in both, axial and tangential directions. It ensures high reliability of this Seal assembly of engine in the connection with the cylinder block solution. The side sealing segments are placed on the edge of the cylinder bore thus minimizing the crevice between the cylinder block and stationary case.

The Competition

0000466 Rotax 912s
Rotax

The Birotor’s primary competitor will be the Rotax 912S, a favorite among light aircraft builders. The Rotax 912 series has been in production since 1989 and features an air and liquid-cooled flat four design. The 912S has two carburetors, a mechanical fuel pump, an output of 100 horses, a speed reduction gearbox, and 1,352cc displacement.

The Knob Engines team is targeting a 750cc displacement, 100 horsepower, and an overall size that’s several inches thinner than a Rotax 912S.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Knob Engines team has released other important technical notes, too. The engine case is water-cooled, employing liquid channels and a water pump, like your car or motorcycle. The block and its cylinders are cooled through oil.

Screenshot (1043)
The oil and water pumps are visible in this shot. Credit: Knob Engines

Speaking of oil, lubrication is handled through an oil pump at the back of the engine, which drives oil through the crankshaft and associated internals. However, Knob Engines says that, at least for now, the engine does use some two-stroke oil in its fuel to lubricate the combustion seals.

As of now, the engine has an absolutely tiny bore and stroke. This is why it can rev to the moon, but also enabled the Knob Engines team to design an engine so small that it could be an effective replacement for a typical piston engine in a light aircraft. However, Knob Engines says that bore and stroke could possibly be increased for other options, but that would make for a bigger and heavier engine.

They Can Multiply

Screenshot (1034)
This illustration shows four Birotary blocked stacked on each other. Credit: Knob Engines

Knob Engines also says that the engine is scalable in perhaps the silliest way possible. If you wanted a bigger and stronger Birotary, you could make versions with multiple spinning cylinder blocks stacked on each other, and each of those blocks could have perhaps as many as 12 cylinders.

Thus, while Knob is focusing on light aircraft for now, the company believes the potential is perhaps endless, and that maybe a Birotary could work in something like a car or a generator. The company is also hoping to hit a time between overhauls (TBO) of at least 2,000 hours, which would be right on the money with the TBO of a Rotax 912.

ADVERTISEMENT
Screenshot (1044)
A cutaway showing the spinning inner block. Credit: Knob Engines

Of course, it’s too early to tell where this project is going and what impacts it could have in aviation and beyond. At the very least, it’s exciting to see that some engineers have cooked up something truly wild. If you want to know more about this engine, click here to watch a YouTube video by Driving 4 Answers that has even more explanation.

This engine is also yet another example of what I said earlier. The Birotary is complicated and weird, but it’s designed to serve a specific purpose. In this case, it’s to make a tiny engine with few vibrations, lots of power, and great balance. I wish these guys all the luck in getting this to market. Who knows, maybe one day someone might try to swap out their Mazda Miata’s engine with a Birotary rather than a GM LS.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
24 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cars? I've owned a few
Member
Cars? I've owned a few
2 hours ago

This thing hurts my head and if I I remember it, I will be curious what the TBOH is going to be. The Continental O-200 in my Cessna 150 was good for ~2000 hours… about 200,000 miles. And 8,000 gallons of fuel.

Will Packer
Will Packer
2 hours ago

Aren’t the left-turning aspects of light aircraft usually handled by the use of a rudder trim tab? A small piece of aluminum sheet at the bottom of the tail that is deflected to provide a balance against the engine. My Dad’s various Cessna aircraft had this, and he explained that was the function.

Cars? I've owned a few
Member
Cars? I've owned a few
2 hours ago
Reply to  Will Packer

My Cessna 150 had elevator trim, but not rudder trim. Some right rudder pressure climbing out… “Step on the ball” was what the instructor taught me. On the turn coordinator.

It was a little weird that Bell Helicopters required left pedal to keep things straight and Eurocopters, the main rotor of which rotate counter-clockwise, require some right pedal to stay straight taking off. I’ve been told that if you’re going to fly helicopters, you are better off if you’ve never flown a fixed wing plane. Because the instincts you learned in them are often not what you should do in a helicopter, regardless of model, when things happen.

Spaghetti Cat
Member
Spaghetti Cat
4 hours ago

One of my favorite engine/gearhead YouTube channels (Driving 4 Answers) just did a feature explaining the birotory engine. Recommend viewing along with all his other engine videos (especially the one where he 3D prints a sort-of working rotary engine).

https://youtu.be/lKM76zxCfiU

CivoLee
CivoLee
8 hours ago

A radial engine for the 21st century is cool, but I’m on Team Electric for aviation as well as automobiles. Can this run on hydrogen, SAF or synthetic fuel?

Thomas The Tank Engine
Member
Thomas The Tank Engine
7 hours ago
Reply to  CivoLee

Electric will never properly work for aviation because :

Batteries are just too damn heavyThey don’t get lighter as the energy stored within them is consumedThey don’t have the energy density (by weight) of liquid fuel (gasoline is roughly 40 to 60 times higher than lithium-ion batteries)If you want to fly a fully-laden 747 across the Atlantic it’s easily done with jet engines and aviation fuel.

If you tried to fly a fully-laden 747 across the Atlantic using electric motors and battery power, how big would those batteries be, and how much would those batteries need to weigh?

Last edited 7 hours ago by Thomas The Tank Engine
JP15
JP15
5 hours ago

I don’t think electric aviation is exclusively limited to battery power though. There are already some VTOL aircraft that use electric ducted fans for propulsion, but have a gas engine to generate the electricity.

That’s complicated, sure, but opens up different aircraft designs not possible with an ICE directly connected to a propeller, fan, etc.

CivoLee
CivoLee
3 hours ago

There’s more to aviation than commercial jets. General aviation can go fully electric with a proper charging infrastructure. There are hybrid turboprop designs that could take over regional airline duties, as well as hydrogen fuel cell designs for larger aircraft.

Oh, and very few operators are still using 747s. The Airbus A380 is on its way out as well. The age of jumbo jets is over, so we should stop limiting ourselves to thinking of gigantic, heavy airliners as the standard for air travel.

Anthony Magagnoli
Anthony Magagnoli
8 hours ago

How would this deal with the lubrication of the seals? It seems like it would consume a lot of oil, like the Wankel rotary, as lubricating oil would be swept into the compression/exhaust chambers.

BubbaX
BubbaX
9 hours ago

It’s fun to see people trying new stuff — and maybe this thing won’t be too complicated as to present novel failure modes at V1. One of my favorite pieces of writing is A History of Aircraft Piston Engines by Herschel Smith. He basically ends in 1958 (when Termite Terrace was effectively shuttered, but that’s another history) but to that point the book somehow communicates a story of technological refinement, the vehicles it makes possible, and the aesthetic, if not artistic, impulses that express themselves, all behind engaging prose. A must-read for anyone interested in how to write about the subject. Heck, I last read the book a quarter-century ago, so maybe I should take my own advice.

Cerberus
Member
Cerberus
9 hours ago

I don’t see this being a good idea for a car, but there appear to be some advantages for small aircraft, particularly trainers or other use that doesn’t require range. I wonder what fuel burn is. It’s small displacement, but running at high rpm and with so many firing events per rpm, it’s got to be a fuel-eater. It’s a neat idea.

JJ
Member
JJ
8 hours ago
Reply to  Cerberus

I’m going to assume that since they aren’t boasting about efficiency gains, you know the answer.

Needles Balloon
Needles Balloon
6 hours ago
Reply to  Cerberus

I’d assume it’s about the same efficiency as that Rotax flat-4 it’s competing with, but there might be indirect fuel efficiency gains due to the lighter overall aircraft weight and lower yaw moments to correct. It’s mentioned several times that it’s intended specifically for training aircraft, and U wonder if fuel cost is less of a consideration for those since flights should be quite short.

Cerberus
Member
Cerberus
5 hours ago

It does look like it might be TBI, so that’s an improvement over carbs, but it still is going to run far more combustion events per mile traveled than the Rotax. Unless my math is wrong (I’m more of an artist than a mathematician, so that’s quite possible), assuming the same block rpm as the Rotax’s crank rpm (this is a guess based on the manufacturer’s example numbers and what I imagine is a low relative torque output requiring rpm to be on the higher side for a climb out, but for cruising load demands, I have no idea, so I’m just using 2k rpm as a comparison in lieu of better data), “Each cylinder (3) makes four strokes for every 180° of cylinder block movement,” means to me that there are 6 combustion events per rotation (2 per cylinder x 3 cylinders) to the Rotax’s 2. How that equates to fuel volume per event, I don’t know, but that’s a large delta. Of course, it’s also a little more than half the displacement, so let’s say we cut the difference of fuel required per event in half, that’s still an additional combustion event worth of fuel used per rotation. Maybe efficiency gains in fuel and (potentially) breathing negate that disadvantage, IDK and I don’t see how that can be determined with the given info, but my guess is that it uses more fuel per mile. With its benefits in weight and lack of torque effect imparted to the aircraft and in an application where some extra fuel isn’t a significant issue, maybe that’s not important. I think it’s an interesting idea and I’d like to see real world test comparisons.

JDE
JDE
9 hours ago

What are your thoughts on the Liquid Piston reverse Wankel? https://www.liquidpiston.com/how-it-works

Professor Chorls
Professor Chorls
8 hours ago
Reply to  JDE

They were just around the corner when I was in high school and now that I am a grounchy, nearing middle aged careerman with lower back pain, they are still just around the corner.

Every once in a while they pop up to raise more money. The core technology I believe to be sound, but I tend to discount any “new distruptive tech” until I find it behind a Place Order button.

Gubbin
Member
Gubbin
9 hours ago

At first I thought this would be a followup to @vaimais comment that mentioned this: https://innengine.com – it looks like an opposed-piston barrel/cam engine.

JJ
Member
JJ
9 hours ago

Glad D4A is on your radar—I’m really impressed by his content.

My understanding is that the single engine aircraft space is inherently conservative which is why most everyone is flying around with 40+ yr old designs (running on leaded gas…) even though there are clearly better options, even putting aside “exotic” stuff like this. Sort of like how NASA is still using chips from the 1980s in satellites: better to trade performance for proven reliability than risk something new.

All to say, what are the odds anyone will actually use this, even if they hit all their benchmarks? Not knocking the tech, just curious about the challenges of bringing anything new to market no matter how good it is.

CivoLee
CivoLee
8 hours ago
Reply to  JJ

The single engine aircraft industry isn’t totally conservative. Piper offer a diesel version of the Archer, which not only burns less fuel but also has no propeller or mixture control. Plus, Diamond have built their entire lineup around diesels.

But the main reason old airframes are still flying is the old planes were built to last decades with regular maintenance, unlike cars which aren’t designed to last much longer beyond 100K miles. Planes continue to be built that way, since the potential for catastrophe if a plane breaks down while in the air is much higher than with a car on the road.

JJ
Member
JJ
8 hours ago
Reply to  CivoLee

I get why old airframes (or newly produced old designs) are still here. It’s the engines that surprise me given who wouldn’t want better efficiency, or things like fuel injection and so on. Is it a matter of it just not being worth the effort to modify the aircraft for anything other than the engine it was designed for? My only point of reference is commercial aviation where a NEO program inevitably costs billions of dollars of R&D for the airframe.

CivoLee
CivoLee
3 hours ago
Reply to  JJ

If you’re talking about engine swaps for existing aircraft, overhauls are really expensive. Since aircraft ownership is already very expensive, I imagine unless the benefits are obvious, most owner/operators probably wouldn’t think it’s worth it.

James McHenry
Member
James McHenry
10 hours ago

The first production one, if this engine makes it, needs to either go on a Fokker Dr.I or Sopwith Camel replica.

JDE
JDE
9 hours ago
Reply to  James McHenry

It is the Czech Republic, they might actually have one or two of those in inventory to upgrade.

24
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x