# Half a flame licker



## Bogstandard (Aug 19, 2007)

Got the twin flame licker running today, but only half of it. Both sides run but I haven't made the twin burner yet and there is too much friction for one cylinder to run both sides, so one has to be disconnected.
Here are a couple of pics of the engine, it still needs to be finished off and polished.












The engine runs really nice, and I have found a use for a load of glass fibre string I had, it makes great wicks and doesn't burn away.

Here is a vid of it running (on one half only)

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF9bvnobZ0k[/ame]

John


----------



## tattoomike68 (Aug 19, 2007)

Great job, thats running nice on one cylinder and a little flame.

I have got to build a flame licker now. I would run it for as long as I could just to watch it run.


----------



## Bogstandard (Aug 19, 2007)

Thanks for the compliment.
The only real problem I have had with this engine is the lapping in, it took many hours and sore fingers. If you can't get the friction down low enough, the engine will just not run. The valve timing is also fairly critical on the initial set up, but once you have done it a few times it is dead easy.
Of all the suckers I've seen this must be the slowest runner of the lot, when first warming up you can count the pops between strokes.
Hopefully by tomorrow I will have a double burner made then the fun starts.

John


----------



## rake60 (Aug 19, 2007)

Excellent John!
A vacuum engine has to be the most difficult model to get to run
properly.  _OK the Elbow is a very close second._  :? 
Your version runs beautifully!   
I'll have to get back to working on the one I have in pieces.


----------



## Bogstandard (Aug 23, 2007)

I have had to admit defeat on the twin cylinder version.
The flames are interferring between the two cylinders, I have had the twin running, but what a beast, flames everywhere because I had to have a much larger flame on each one as the opposing cylinder blows the flame out of shape. Tried a baffle plate between the two but that again raised problems with the flame going out of shape.
Rather too dangerous for my liking.
So now it is a damage limitation exercise to make two separate ones, one left and one right handed, or maybe a horizontally opposed one, which would be a lot easier.
Ah! well, that's what making these small engines is about, win some, lose some. Only half a grin this time.

John


----------



## RollaJohn (Aug 23, 2007)

John: How about exchanging the two cylinders so that the ports would be pointing away from each other. Or maybe I lost one of the parameters of the design :?:


----------



## Bogstandard (Aug 23, 2007)

Hi Rolla,
I considered your idea a few days ago and it is a good suggestion, there is one problem as far as I am concerned, the engine will be getting a bit ungainly in width due to the burners having to be on the outside, also if I will be showing it working, the aspect of third party injury comes into the equation due to having to look thru the flames to see it working.
I made a small lash up propane burner this morning and got over the problem of soot blocking up the engine, and the engine ran well on it, plus the flame was only about quarter of the size of the spirit burner, so your suggestion just might be reconsidered, but the opposed cylinders look favourite at the moment as it is just a matter of making two new parts and drilling a couple of new holes.
I can't spend too much time on this engine at the moment as I have other certainties that need to be sorted in the next couple of weeks.

John


----------



## rake60 (Aug 23, 2007)

It would be tough to turn that particular design into a two cylinder.
Jan does have a two cylinder flame licker on his site, with plans at:
Jan Ridder's Two Cylinder Flame Licker Engine
It's far beyond _MY_ abilities, but have you seen it John?
I know you could make a working version.


----------



## shred (Aug 23, 2007)

I've always thought a 'boxer' style horizontally-opposed flame licker would be cool..  Go for it.

Now if you wanted to get really wacky, could you do a double-acting flame licker like the Snow engines?


----------



## Bogstandard (Aug 23, 2007)

I had looked at this one Rick, but it looked a bit complicated for my first licker, but in hindsight I should have gone for it.
You have built flamelickers before, are they all so critical on flame position?
I still haven't given up on this one, I WILL get the better of it, but I haven't got time at the moment to waste on getting it to run.
I have decided to build my own design turbine, so today hope to get most of that wacked out. I am taking piccies as I do it just in case it turns out to be a good one, then maybe I can do a bit of a post on it.

John


----------



## rake60 (Aug 24, 2007)

Bogstandard said:
			
		

> You have built flame lickers before, are they all so critical on flame position?
> John



I've found flame position to be the most critical issue to getting a flame
licker to run.  It has to be drawing the hottest gasses in.
The fuel can make a big difference as well.  Mine will run on Isopropyl
alcohol, but they run much better on Ethel alcohol.
I tried propane once on an aluminum cylinder model.  It ran great until
the heat warped the thin walled to the point of no return.   

I'm always trying to prove that nothing is as critical as they are said to be.
Such as the timing on a flame licker.  Mine will run with the timing + or -
10 degrees as long as the flame is hot enough to carry it.


----------



## Bogstandard (Aug 24, 2007)

Thanks for the tips Rick.
Had the single running great yesterday on propane, but when I came to it today is was locked up almost solid with gunk inside it, so I think I will go for liquid based fuels. I have heard of Isopropynol alcohol in the UK but have never heard of Ethel. Will have to go to the local chemist and see if he can help.
Many thanks again

John


----------



## rake60 (Aug 24, 2007)

Ethel is made from grain.  It's what gives our favorite beverages their
kick.    :wink: 

The problem with ethyl alcohol is, it burns with a very pale blue flame.
Is some lighting conditions you can't even see the flame.  I have several
healed burns to attest to that


----------



## Bogstandard (Sep 7, 2007)

Just for a little update on this monster.
I spent a couple of hours on it today and got it running fairly safely on my original design by getting rid of the fibre glass wicks and making cotton wicks instead, it allowed a much smaller and hotter flame.
I also played about with the crank positions, 180 apart ran the smoothest, 90 deg separation gave a bit of an unstable speed, but when I put them at the same crank position, all hell broke loose, both firing at the same time made it speed right up but the vibation was shaking it all over the place. So that answers a question I asked earlier in this post, go for the 180 split.
Now that I know the engines will run as a pair, just for pure looks alone, I think I will go for the horizontally opposed version instead, it will also be a lot easier to tune the burner positions.

John


----------



## rake60 (Sep 7, 2007)

John I have never built a two cylinder flame licker, but I do know how
sensitive a single cylinder engine can be to flame placement and heat
range.  I'm currently experimenting with a burner constructed from an
adjustable butane grill lighter.  By adjusting the flame I can throttle the 
engine.  I'm wondering if such an adjustable set up might work on the 
synchronization of your two cylinder engine?   Two burners with independent
adjustments.

Rick


----------



## Bogstandard (Sep 7, 2007)

Hi Rick,
I have played about with a gas burner and got fairly good and consistent results.
But I don't think I had the air mix correct and the engine, when cooled down was totally locked up with a 'gunk' residue that meant the engine had to be stripped down and cleaned out with spirits before each run.
Jerry E. Howell does the plans for a burner specifically for these engines, and looks like it sorts out the mix ratio of the gas, maybe I should purchase a set, but the problem is that he doesn't take plastic which makes it difficult from this part of the world.
Thanks for the welcome input. I am on a very steep learning curve on this type of engine, I jumped in with both feet and there was no water, just thick mud.

John


----------

