Hi Rudy,
I've seen a number of Cyclone engines, mostly unassembled for inspection. I also have seen the their first 2 cylinder engine, a WHE mockup and their tubine.
When you ask if I saw them run, that is a tricky sort of question. I saw the 2 cylinder turn over under its own steam, I saw the WHE mockup turn connected to another steam source and I saw the turbine spin on compressed gas.
For most internet demonstration purposes, the fact that the shafts spin is proof that they run and are thus valid, and revolutionary, engines. But, as Quick Draw McGraw used to say "Hold on, thar!" By the definitions of 'work' and 'power', none of these did work or produced power. That only occurs when you have a load on the shaft creating some kind of resistance.
As it turns out, I haven't seen a Cyclone developing power or doing work. They may have been moving, but so do those dunking birds you put on a glass in the kitchen window, so far no one claims those are a power source. The two cylinder engine hardly matters as almost every bit of technology it employs is not found in the Cyclone product line or patents, basically it is 70s Clean Air era tech that works. The WHE mockup is one reason I can claim the spider bearing clunks....I've seen much bigger engines, spinning faster and actually pulling a load....they were much quieter. The turbine...well....Cyclone was claiming very high efficiency at relatively low rpm based on the 'fact' that the blade design was very efficient. Efficient is right, it is impossible to generate that kind of efficiency at those rpm from a turbine. I could go into vector force diagrams but in the end it all boils down to the fact that such performance defies Newton's Laws of Motion. Maybe all those huge corporations building turbomachinery actually know what they are doing...
Regards,
Tom
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
