The smallest engine in the world

sure thing

What a mechanical masterpiece.

thats really small,my fat fingers couldnt play with one of those !! what type and size plane would one of those fit in,id like to see a photo of the plane it would fit,gotta be wicked tiny

It might not be a Cox but these are much more addictive!

Valentine engines are beautiful marvels, rather comparable to jewelry.

Phil

Though they will run, I've read that they are so fragile that the internals won't hold up to the stresses. I hope I'm wrong. I'd love to see one run too.

ian1954 wrote:It might not be a Cox but these are much more addictive!

More addictive and much more expensive!!!

A perfect indoor flyer motor

I have several Valentine engines and they are all superb.

If you notice, Ronald makes no claim that the Nano Bee is the smallest engine in the world. I have no doubt that it is



but ............

The Midget 0.042cc



and the Mini Bee 0.021cc



The drop in size is phenominal - 0.042 to 0.021 to 0.006!



I keep seeing the "Have you run one of these?" "I would like to see one running?" and so would I!

BUT..................





you would need more delicate fingers than mine and better eyesight!

Those ARE cool! What strikes me, however, is the propeller issue. Where do you get a prop?

GUS THE I.A. wrote:Those ARE cool! What strikes me, however, is the propeller issue. Where do you get a prop?

I think you would be looking for a one to one and a quarter inch prop. Again my fingers wouldn't cope with that. The smallest I have run is the Blitz 0.05 cc on a 3" prop and it was nerve racking making the delicate adjustments!

hish nano bee is smallest most imposible too run engine cox.010 tee dee is stil more viable engine diesel engine is hard too start and if wat would u run wit paper plane? just not worth its hi value

What are the "levers/knobs " on top of the heads for?

These are "diesel" engines that work on the self ignition principle relying on ether, which is about 1/3 of the fuel (the other 1/3 is kerosene, and the rest is castor). The compression ratio of the engine is gradually increased as the propeller is flipped for starting, by turning the knob/lever clockwise, that will push a tightly fit counter piston down the cylinder until the compression ratio rise causes the temperature in the cylinder to reach the flash point of ether, that will trigger the self ignition of the fuel...i.e. no glow plug is used.

Before the advent of glow engines in the mid 50-s or so, such diesel engines - together with spark engines - prevailed in the model business.

After buying one of these jewels, one has to consider particularly for a diesel, the fragility of the reciprocating parts and also the scale effect of the small combustion chamber. Would it run? Perhaps, but how many Valentine owners have actually tried to run their engines?
A glow engine would have a defined compression ratio whereas the diesels so not. How much compression heat can be generated by such a tiny piston?
No glow engines will be made to this scale the problem being the volume of the chamber needed for the plug coil. We see this when standard glow plugs are fitted to replacement heads and while the engines run, power output is reduced.
Regardless of my musings, these engines are true works of art and I would love to own one.

I always find it interesting hearing the various views on miniature (micro) engines. There are many pros and cons in having one but the biggest plus is that they are the equivalent of mens jewelry. They are beautifully finely machined objects and examples of very fine workmanship,

Are they practical? .............. I don't think so.  As previously mentioned, at this size they are very fragile but will they run?

Yes but .......... the piston on one of these Nano Bees is only 2mm diameter, So imagine the size of the conrod and driving pins! The smaller the diesel negine the less powerful the fuel (less parafin/kerosene - more ether and oil). Smaller diesels are generally more difficult to start on contest fuels where the largest proportion is parafin.

The other problem is the propeller - they are tiny and there isn't much feedback on compression.  Flooding one of these will be catrastrophic.

The smallest diesel I have run is 0.05cc which is the Valentine Blitz and the most complex is the 5 cylinder radial (5 x.098cc). The Cox 010 is about 0.16cc, They ran really well.

However, at these sizes it is imperative that the engines are completely cleaned after running. No trace of castor oil at all. If they gum up then it will be almost impossible to free them without disaster. They must be oiled afterwards with the lightest of machine oils and then checked regularly to make sure that they are still free. It took me 8 hours to clean up the Radial and two hours for the Blitz.

Probably the smallest production engine is the Cox TD 010 (0.16cc) but AE had a production 0.1cc diesel.



The smallest glow I know of is the Valentine Rova/Rasant 0.098cc. But this is made using a much reduced in size TD010 head. ALthough quite a few of these have been made, including multi cylinder, I wouldn't class them as production.



Perhaps the smallest engine I have seen regularly flying is another Valentine - a Dyno 0.07cc. Like this one bit with the integral tank attached in a minator old timer with rudder control.

Ian I thank you for your insights on these small engines. Particularly the requirement to clean them after running. I would not have thought of that. I remember having a gummed up 0.010 and a friend grabbed it and "freed it up" at the same time loosening the ball and socket piston conrod joint. The effect of such action on an engine with a 2mm diameter piston would indeed be catastrophic. And to think that the tiny glow engine shown has a throttled carburetor! I do like your comparison to jewelry. To me such gold and diamond bling has no value whatsoever. I've tried to argue with jewelry lovers that a proper model engine could only be made so cheaply just due to the labour involved. And so to me has so much greater value.

One other question that surely won't be answered is how long one of these would run before it was worn out. I think back to an OK Cub 0.049A that went from normal to zero compression after perhaps one hour of running. Fuel was all castor, snow on the ground so no dust or overheating and at the end of the day completely worn out. Imagine the fit that goes into the tiny pistons on these Valentine engines!

You touch on a very important point-these engines are made from the same materials as the much larger ones-so wear rates will be similar-or in reality-proportionately higher since a small engine tends to run at a lot higher rpm than a larger one. wear that will not even be noticeable in a larger engine will be enough to prevent one of these running....I would imagine a useful life of maybe one or two hours cumulative running.  just as an indication-I have in my collection a RussianAME 049 glow -dating from before the Norvel era-so in the early 1990s-the instruction leaflet quotes an operating life of 4-6 hours!  ....now I imagine any R/c flier being told that his .40 or .60 or .90 2-stroke or 4 stroke was only going to be usable for 4 hours or so would be singularly unimpressed-considering many of these engines accumulate hundreds of hours running-with little maintenance other than perhaps a rod change and bearing change occasionally..but a few ten thousanths wear on the piston and liner of a micro diesel-is proportionately a huge amount compared to the same amount of wear on a .60 or .90 displacement....and it is this I think that is the achilles heel of such tiny engines-the fits are just an order of magnitude more critical-fluid flows are more viscous (on a relative basis)....and the laws of physics and scale effect just start to gang up on them...

ChrisM
'ffkiwi'

ffkiwi wrote:............ just as an indication-I have in my collection a RussianAME 049 glow -dating from before the Norvel era-so in the early 1990s-the instruction leaflet quotes an operating life of 4-6 hours!  ................
'ffkiwi'

I too was shocked to read in a 049 Norvel (and not AME)  manual that life expectancy is "not less than 6 hours" (see photo below)..wow, what a glorious ambition and commitment of the Russian manufacturer!!!....I do not like to repeat myself, but the  COX TD051 in my fleet with longest operation time has around 300 hours on its clock, and that critter is still alive and kicking...and the COX TD051 is early 1960-s technology, compared to the Russian Norvel of 1990-s with only 4...6 hours life expectancy...

balogh wrote:I too was shocked to read in a 049 Norvel (and not AME)  manual that life expectancy is "not less than 6 hours" (see photo below)..wow, what a glorious ambition and commitment  of the Russian manufacturer!!!....I do not like to repeat myself, but the  COX TD051 in my fleet with longest operation time has around 300 hours on its clock, and that critter is still alive and kicking...and the COX TD051 is early 1960-s technology, compared to the Russian Norvel of 1990-s with only 4...6 hours life expectancy...

Just out of curiosity, looking at the academics of the situation.

http://sceptreflight.com/Model%20Engine%20Tests/Cox%20Tee%20Dee%20049.html
Tee Dee: 0.145 BHP at 21,000 RPM. Stroke 0.386 in.

21000 rev/min x 60 min/hr x 2 strokes/rev x 0.386 in. : 12 in/ft : 5280 ft/mi = 15.35 mi/hr x 6 hr = 92.11 miles traveled.

Don't have specifications on the Norvel .049 but the .061, bore x stroke = 0.44 x 0.39 versus Cox = 0.406 x 0.386 in. Offhand seems Cox proportions would be similar for the Norvel .049, why I used above.

Balogh's engine: 300 x 15.35 = 4,606 miles traveled.

I would say Balogh's Tee Dee piston and cylinder got a lot better mileage than the Norvel. Of course, could it be that Norvel rated theirs conservatively, so that if problems arose, that they could say, "see, I told you!" Or, could there be other factors such as wear and tear on the connecting rod joints?

Doesn't seem it would be the fault of the ABC technology, as overall with care seem to wear well, no? Now if we were talking about larger Testor McCoy Red Head's, then may be short life span may be the norm.

not intending to be smart wise guy cuz I love my TeeDes too......but no Cox turns 32~36,000 RPM and survives.....

FF and Combat or even super racing motors are expendable or in the case of 15 second max for free flight----- 6 hours is a LOT of flights.....things are relative