Jump to content
IGNORED

New engine design could save money, increase power


DEF

Recommended Posts

How does this conceptually differ from a mechanically supercharged engine? Supercharging with a piston instead of a rotor turbine could well have only similar efficiencies. The potential for loss to the water jacket would seem greater here.

 

I'm saving my money.

Link to comment

Wow...a new engine. Seems very cool.

 

They said the cross-over valve remains open for a short time after the start of combustion. I don't understand valves that much but if this is the case, would the cross-over valve edges and rod (or whatever that thing is called...you know, the thing that slides in the valve guides) be exposed to more heat? Is this an issue or are the metals used now-a-days able to stand those temperatures?

 

I seem to remember "burned" valves in the old days were when they were open during combustion.

Link to comment

Have you seen the latest in Hybrid technology adaptable to motorcycles

 

And the angle of the cone helps keep the front wheel on the ground during, er, ah....acceleration? grin.gif

Link to comment
How does this conceptually differ from a mechanically supercharged engine? Supercharging with a piston instead of a rotor turbine could well have only similar efficiencies. The potential for loss to the water jacket would seem greater here.

 

I'm saving my money.

 

Studies showed engine efficiency increases from 33% to almost 40% while toxic emissions are reduced by as much as 80%.

 

More efficiency means more power......

Link to comment
Wow...a new engine. Seems very cool.

 

They said the cross-over valve remains open for a short time after the start of combustion. I don't understand valves that much but if this is the case, would the cross-over valve edges and rod (or whatever that thing is called...you know, the thing that slides in the valve guides) be exposed to more heat? Is this an issue or are the metals used now-a-days able to stand those temperatures?

 

I seem to remember "burned" valves in the old days were when they were open during combustion.

 

Well, Chip old boy, why don't you communicate with them and find out?

 

Then, let us know their reply.

Link to comment

Probably one of the most serious problems of the design is that the extra plumbing between the 2 cylinders will limit the compression ratio to a relatively low value. Balancing, too, will be challenging I think, and the poppet valves are likely to be troublesome and seriously limit high RPM use.

 

Actually, it reminds me a little of the old Puch split cylinder 2-strokes of the early 1960s (2 pistons, one common head). This one was a bit of a dead end.

 

Bob.

Link to comment
Studies showed engine efficiency increases from 33% to almost 40% while toxic emissions are reduced by as much as 80%.

 

More efficiency means more power......

But not necessarily in a manageable size, considering you need double the number of cylinders, and a bunch of fancy valve gear.

 

Emissions are not an issue, since the cat cleans them up anyway ....so much so that it is normal on a smoggy day for the emissions of a vehicle with a 3-way cat to have less NOx in its exhaust than is in the surrounding air!. Their statement of an 80% emissions reduction is RAW emissions (before passing through a cat).

 

Bob.

Link to comment
How does this conceptually differ from a mechanically supercharged engine? Supercharging with a piston instead of a rotor turbine could well have only similar efficiencies. The potential for loss to the water jacket would seem greater here.

 

I'm saving my money.

 

Have you priced a turbocharger lately? Also, where do you put it on your BMW boxer?

 

Also, the mixture could be used for engine cooling in an air-cooled design......your boxer just needs a bit of plumbing and it is converted.....watch for kits soon......

Link to comment
Joe Frickin' Friday

They've made a lot of predictions, but I don't seen any actual test data yet.

 

"In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is." crazy.gif

Link to comment

It may not be completly new, but Royal Enfield has a new lean-burn engine in their bikes. It'a supposed to get 80 to 100 mpg.

Link to comment

Well, Chip old boy, why don't you communicate with them and find out?

 

Then, let us know their reply.

 

Dennis, that's a darn good idea. I was hoping that sooner or later I might actually add value to this forum grin.gif

 

Stay tuned.

Link to comment
Well, Chip old boy, why don't you communicate with them and find out?

 

Then, let us know their reply.

 

Dennis, that's a darn good idea. I was hoping that sooner or later I might actually add value to this forum grin.gif

 

Stay tuned.

 

You'll go to the top of my list once you report their comments.

Link to comment
skinny_tom (aka boney)
Also, where do you put [the supercharger] on your BMW boxer?

 

This then begs the qeustion, "where will I put two more cylinders on my boxer?"

Link to comment
Also, where do you put [the supercharger] on your BMW boxer?

 

This then begs the qeustion, "where will I put two more cylinders on my boxer?"

 

You already have two...you don't need more.....read the tech info carefully.

Link to comment
skinny_tom (aka boney)

Okay, I get it. I had to think about it for a minute. Since, in essence one cylinder is being turned into a compressor and the other a modified 2-stroke, there would be greater cooling demands put on the power cylinder and less needed for the compressor. Yes?

 

I am not current with my automotive technology, but I know that VW/Audi has been toying with direct inject gasoline engine for quite some time now. It seems to work under the same firing principal- inject the gas when you want to burn it, just as the deisel and this new design do, but rather they still rely on the "old" method of compressing the air in the same cylinder as they burn it.

 

I am curious what the advantages and disadvantages of the "new" design vs. a direct inject supercharged 4 stroke gasoline engine would be.

Link to comment

Boney,

 

In principal, one would think that one cylinder is a parasitic loss while the other has to do extra duty. Well, that's correct to some extent. However, the pumping cylinder can use a longer stroke and smaller bore to achieve the charging of the working or firing cylinder. Also, remember, the firing cylinder provides a power stroke every revolution not every other revolution. Such a design can improve the firing of the charge by igniting it LATER rather than BTDC, due to the faster rate of combustion. This approaches diesel combustion efficiency. And since the pumping cylinder does no work, it remains cool if oriented in the appropriate location...more BMEP and higher charge density...just what a turbo or supercharger does. The BIG improvement is more work from a given engine size. With clever plumbing and engine management, the cylinders could be reversed changing the engines power delivery for say, low speed torque or low octane fuel or sundry other duties. You now would have a variable displacement engine design with extremely versatile power output.

 

As for valve timing, easy,…this engine would likely be a relatively low RPM design which means, valves could be controlled with oil or solenoids…the platform is clever and could open a whole new field of reciprocating engine designs, clean emissions as well as improved fuel economy. I really like the opportunity for lower emissions.

Link to comment

It seems to be a heavy unit. The crossover is an additional chamber that is subject to combustion stresses. The non power stroke cylinder still produces heat from its rings therefore needs lubrication.

 

Porche does a nice job with their turbo chargers, but they get hot (3,000 - 4,000rpm)

 

What about the Wankle? Is anyone doing anything with that?

 

The boxer is 30s technology, no point in chasing that format with new tech.

Link to comment
It seems to be a heavy unit. The crossover is an additional chamber that is subject to combustion stresses. The non power stroke cylinder still produces heat from its rings therefore needs lubrication.

 

Porche does a nice job with their turbo chargers, but they get hot (3,000 - 4,000rpm)

 

What about the Wankle? Is anyone doing anything with that?

 

The boxer is 30s technology, no point in chasing that format with new tech.

 

The Wankel is too costly to build.

The boxer is old tech but works well (cars and aircraft still use opposed flat engines).

It is difficult to keep ECO clean, however.

Lubrication is not an issue.

The crossover is not an issue.

The valve gear would be a bit more complex but, not an issue.

Turbochargers are bulky, costly and produce heat, reducing volumetric efficiency.

A power stroke evey time the power piston comes to the top? Priceless!

 

Remember, this design cuts emmisions by 70%+...BIG BONUS!!!

Link to comment
skinny_tom (aka boney)

Forgive me for not being able to read your mind. Hydrogen.gif

 

The Wankel is too costly to build. Because of the machining involved?

The boxer is old tech but works well (cars and aircraft still use opposed flat engines). But typically only used in places where tradition or engine height/profile are important.

It is difficult to keep ECO clean, however. HUH?

Lubrication is not an issue. Since it's in the same block it's oiled in the same way as other cylinders.

The crossover is not an issue. There is an intake valve on the crossover. Timed correctly it closes before the combustion process enters the crossover.

The valve gear would be a bit more complex but, not an issue. Toyota has variable valve timing Honde V-tec (Porsche uses a similar method). I see that technology is already there.

Turbochargers are bulky, costly and produce heat, reducing volumetric efficiency. All compression produces heat, (are you referring to heat conducted to the air by the heated metal bits of the turbo from the exhaust that's spinning it?) so the compressed air in the crossover tube will be hot as well. There will be less of a possibility for "intercooling" conidering the short length of the crossover tube. Higherer pressures will also be required in the "new" engine since it's injecting the air straight into the combustion process- requiring greater compression and creating more heat.

A power stroke evey time the power piston comes to the top? Priceless! My old Vespa does this. So does my lawn mower.

 

 

Remember, this design cuts emmisions by 70%+...BIG BONUS!!!

Can we get rid of the cat then? grin.gif Sorry, cheap shot.

 

I enjoy a good debate, but your last post resorted to cursory statements that you didn't make an effort to back up. If you'd like some intelligent interaction, you need to provide a bit more than "that is the way it is" type statements.

Link to comment

doing a careful look on the site - this engine (and all it's benefits) exist in theory only...

 

It will be quite interesting to keep an eye to the progress of this company to see how much of the modeled gains are realized with a prototype.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...