0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
It would be immensley efficient,
Okay if its a question of identifying work done (useful or not) then find a large mass of a material that is immune to deformation or cracking at these forces (high grade cast iron?) Stick it and the hammer in a vacuum, then measure how much the worked material heats up. After all where else can the energy go?One problem: the hammer's engine would need to be cooled, plus some of the heat from it could conduct through the foot to the worked material.
It would be immensely efficient, -but for fuel yield type and -full usage of compression ratio -with the 15:1 parts carburation mix.Depends what those three points reach.
Do they still use those things, I haven't seen one for years?
The OP asked about efficiency of the machine - not just the combustion bit....As a lad, I used to see compressed air hammers. They would have a very different time profile.
I have a feeling that you would possibly need an FG flywheel, which might make it a bit of a lump to hold!
I was referring to the relative timing of the two cylinders! 
Maybe this technology would be better suited to braking up material fed in to a stationary device. As I alluded to earlier, the design could partly pulp waste wood or other dry biomass in batches as a step in bio-fuel (or similar process) production.
Alternatively, like I think you were alluding to previously, using opposing stokes would overcome this:
If the rock it is trying to break up doesn't break - or if you try to break up a trampoline (see above) then there is no useful work.
sophiecentaur: Neither of these could easily be related to 'real life' work situations.