Design for Fuel Efficient Piston Engines
Fisher Technologies FAQ Section
Question: What aspects of engine performance are improved with Fisher's Yoke-Arm Technology?
Answer: There are substantial increases in fuel economy and power while also
significantly reducing exhaust emissions.
Question: How much improvement do you expect?
Answer: Based on the first prototype testing and computer modeling the following
result appears very realistic for most engine applications:
Fuel economy: Approximately twice the fuel economy you are now getting
with your own vehicle. The greater than 100 mpg as
advertised applies to smaller and specialized vehicles
not normally used for high speed travel.
Power: About a 25% increase for most engines, and could be more
depending on particular engine model, size, etc. This power
increase will provide significant size and weight reductions
for all engines. Diesel engines especially benefit in power.
Emissions: Much lower because more complete combustion translates
to fewer emissions.
Question: How is it possible to provide such breakthrough performance advantages
when the large auto manufacturers have not done so?
Answer: Many informed engineers and engine designers have always realized that
increased piston dwell during combustion and reduced piston friction, both
provided by Fisher, greatly improve fuel economy and power while also
lowering the emissions. For various reasons, auto and engine manufacturers alike
have only made the necessary changes to provide marginal improvements.
All performance changes have been very calculated with fuel injection being
one of the most notable and effective improvements. Somehow worldwide
engine manufacturers have not given the priority required for the substantial
performance improvements that are possible.
Question: When will this technology become available to the public?
Answer: Contributions are most important during this stage of development while also
helping to influence persons who are in a position to donate funding to facilitate our development.
It is now largely up to the public
how soon this proven technology gets to the market place for everyone's benefit. If you would like to donate to a worthy cause for us all, please consider
making a contribution, whether large or small, by using the “Contributions Welcomed”
Question: In the animation, the acceleration of the piston appears unbalanced, with a net torque force accumulating in the down left direction. Did the prototype seem to have a lot of vibration?
Does the yoke have to be an oval? Seems like a gentle curve could act as a cam and increase dwell even more.
Increased dwell implies increase in accelerative forces on piston and connecting parts. Is this a materials issue?
Answer: The crankshaft counterweights require some adjustment to minimize vibration and will be somewhat heavier when compared to conventional . Once this is done, vibration does not become an issue.
The yoke-arm oval can be reconfigured as you say for much more dwell. Much more than practical for some applications. The yoke shape you see on the website is for basic applications like cars, bikes, aircraft, etc. which provides about four times the dwell of Bourke or any other engine technology possible so far. And with much greater simplicity.
Stress analysis shows once the components are properly designed, there is no issue. Conventional pistons seem to be acceptable. Since the rod is considerably reduced in size and weight by design, rod stress forces are greatly reduced also.