Company designs new engine that's 80% efficient

[Wisconsinwagen]

This may have already been posted on here, I don't post in this section a lot. But this was very interesting to watch and it really makes a lot of sense. Enjoy!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=f5xXBb_mrYc

 

[mrGutWrench]

__. Oh, yeah, a dual wobble piston with four crankshafts, 8 crank bearings, 4 big ends, what looks like port controlled intake/exhaust timing. Goody, goody, more MAJIK!!!! Put it in a hybrid and it will be so efficient that after 30 miles, gas will overflow out of the filler cap.

 

[40X40]

Sorry, it doesn't look that promising(to me). Actually it LOOKS kinda 'frictiony'. (high internal friction losses)
But thats just looks, it could work out fine... but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

Where is Tdimeister? He is actually qualified to comment on it.

Thanks for the post though, it was quite interesting!

Bill

 

[12MPGHWY]

Complexity fails

And large (very large as in power plant) turbine generators can best 50% efficency.

 

[TDIMeister]

I agree with all the replies so far. Nothing in the design of the engine that was disclosed in the video, and what could be extrapolated by a qualified engineer, suggests a new engine process.

It's still a thermal engine, and therefore the laws of thermodynamics, and in particular the Carnot efficiency, defines the upper boundary of efficiency. 80%, not going to happen!

Efficiency values of that magnitude are only possible if a powerplant is coupled in a CHP (combined heat and power) setup, but then, almost any engine can do that, and it doesn't have to have particularly noteworthy thermal efficiency to begin with.

The engine will suffer from a lot of friction.

 

[Wisconsinwagen]

I think it's a cool concept still. The idea of removing the heads means compression is infinite. And diesel is by far the best fuel to use in an engine like that. It may not be advantageous in cars, but imagine large scale applications where you don't need a lot of revs. I could see that being applied to ships and trains pretty easily.

 

[redmondjp]

Does it run on HHO???

 

[TDIMeister]

The idea of removing the heads means compression is infinite.

Ummmm, no.

 

[TDIMeister]

I've never heard more engine BS in 35 minutes in my life. It's shameful that a self-proclaimed missile engineer and corporate CEO could be so wrong in so many facts and engineering fundamentals.

 

[MrMopar]

The idea of removing the heads means compression is infinite.

Infinite is infinite - and is out of the realm of achievement by man. Only god (if you believe in him/her/it) can achieve infinity when the universe was created.

 

[TurbinePower]

I've never heard more engine BS in 35 minutes in my life. It's shameful that a self-proclaimed missile engineer and corporate CEO could be so wrong in so many facts and engineering fundamentals.

I couldn't make it more than ten minutes in, and I'm not even done with my engineering education.

I believe the phrase was "Make it stop, oh dear god make it stop" moaned with my head between my knees. I should send it as a "must see" link to engineering majors I don't like.

 

[TurbinePower]

I think it's a cool concept still. The idea of removing the heads means compression is infinite. And diesel is by far the best fuel to use in an engine like that. It may not be advantageous in cars, but imagine large scale applications where you don't need a lot of revs. I could see that being applied to ships and trains pretty easily.

Compression is not infinite. It can't be. Compression is the result of taking a big volume and squeezing it (compressing, maybe? ) into a smaller one. To have infinite compression you'd need one of the two areas to be infinite in either the large or small direction.

Removing the heads is a viable route to improving efficiency, primarily by removing "dead" surface area that heat migrates out of. See also the Junkers opposed piston diesels, two stroke, opposed piston twin-crank engines. Quite efficient, but not 80%. Also Napier Deltics.

Also, this guy has obviously never heard of the RTA96-C, which is 51% efficient (and a normal, two-stroke, massive diesel) at its best.

 

[Dieseltoys]

I'm certainly no engineer here but I'm curious Tdimeister, you ever check out cavitation water heaters? I was wondering how the majority of engineers explain it's efficiency?

 

[nicklockard]

I couldn't make it more than ten minutes in, and I'm not even done with my engineering education.

I believe the phrase was "Make it stop, oh dear god make it stop" moaned with my head between my knees. I should send it as a "must see" link to engineering majors I don't like.

Amen. I groaned when he said 70% of the fuel in a modern engine is thrown out the tail pipe as unburnt fuel. I also groaned every time he said 'gubmit.' Noooooo! Head hurts *puke*

 

[TDIMeister]

I was wondering how the majority of engineers explain it's efficiency?

The only words engineers need to hear to make a conclusion is, "It gets more energy out than what is put in."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yh_-DUKQ4Uw

 

[GoFaster]

... and in case any non-engineers don't understand what that conclusion would be, the conclusion is that the claims being made are wrong.

As soon as there is a claim implying more energy is coming out of a system than is being put in, the discussion need not go on any further. A claim like that is a violation of the laws of thermodynamics, and that means the claim is impossible.

 

[nicklockard]

Ah, but then the hucksters have to invent new phrases like "over-unity" to fool you clever clever in-jun-eeeerZ.

 

[Dieseltoys]

hehe...agreed. I was not implying that I understand these systems and that they're for real. I'm just curious if you've looked into the "science" behind said system and come to any conclusions. It is curious how it works then as it instantly turns water into boiling hot steam.

 

[mavapa]

texasmeat, I am not familiar with what you are talking about, but it's not hard to turn superheated water, which looks just like regular old water, into boiling hot water instantly. All you need to do is tap on the side of the container. It's a phenomenon that some people have talked about happening (infrequently) when you heat a cup of water in a microwave oven. Could that be what you are talking about?

 

[Dieseltoys]

From what I understand, the cavitation heaters use an electrical motor to spin a machined metal drum with cavities strategically placed along the metal drum. Feed in cool tap water on one end and the water cavitates from the inside of the drum toward the outer radius of the drum. This process superheats the water from cool to boiling within seconds. It is said that the energy it takes to spin the electric motor is less than the output of the engine (violates law of thermodynamics). I was curious if anyone with a science background had seen it and their reaction.

 

[TDIMeister]

Master of Science in Energy Engineering, specializing in Combustion Engines. 8+ years engine and powertrain development experience. Nope, no background.

 

[mrGutWrench]

Master of Science in Energy Engineering, specializing in Combustion Engines. 8+ years engine and powertrain development experience. Nope, no background.

__. Hey, Meister, sometimes it doesn't work to try to be an educator. The chief mechanic at work here told me that he'd paid $50 for the plans for a "hydrogen generator" to save gas in his car. "It's only going to cost me 4 oz. of water to run 100 miles". No, Lynwood, those things don't work, you have to put more energy -- which comes from burning gas -- in from the alternator than you get out in hydrogen. "Oh, yeah, this works. You run on the hydrogen from water - I can build this for less than $500 in parts". .... OK ...

__. In just about every other way, he's about the savviest guy I know. I guess that's what happens when you let wishful thinking (kinda like wanting to believe a hybrid is *majik*) get in the way of thinking.

 

[GoFaster]

That type of reaction is not uncommon in people who don't have a technical background. They not only don't understand the technical fundamentals, but they also don't even KNOW that they don't understand the technical fundamentals. To me, as an engineer, that is scary.

Texasmeat, I can assure you that the contraption that you are describing, will require precisely the same mechanical energy input from the motor as the increase in enthalpy ("heat") of the water and other parts of the apparatus that are incidentally heated along with the water. The first law of thermodynamics dictates that this MUST be so. In other words, it's a big complicated contraption for turning hard-won mechanical motion into heat - otherwise known as a "brake".

 

[Dieseltoys]

I dont know at what time I said that I thought the cavitation water heaters are some sort of free energy, overunity device.I was simply asking if any of you experts had actual experience with them or not.

 

[Curkkic]

I'm certainly no engineer here but I'm curious Tdimeister, you ever check out cavitation water heaters? I was wondering how the majority of engineers explain it's efficiency?

they measure it in terms of temperature change. cavitation is not even 100% efficient. as a form of heat. its very efficient in its own right but its also very unstable. its not intended for extended prolonged applications. I.E. generating power. If it were it could be used to generate steam. combine that with an invention (very similiar) made by TESLA way way back before we were all born. to turn the cavitation heater making a never ending loop of pure free energy. hahaha it is fun to dream though.

 

[TDIwise]

Have you guys read these articles? Seems like breaking 50% with on highway, low emission diesels is very likely.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/deer_2006/session3/2006_deer_nelson.pdf

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/deer_2006/session3/2006_deer_aneja.pdf

 

[darkscout]

THE MAN is obviously keeping this stuff down.

Larger diesel engines and turbines have broken 50%.
-
Here's what I 'learned' up:

"Since Nitrogen and Oxygen make up our atmosphere, they liquify at the same temperature."
Oxygen — Boiling Point: 90.20 K (-182.95 °C, -297.31 °F)
Nitrogen — Boiling Point: 77.36 K (-195.79 °C, -320.42 °F)

I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that they're close on the periodic table.

"The most efficient engine built and operating today is only 30% efficient"]rh
Large diesels are over 50%.

"Only 30% of the fuel is burned, the rest goes out the tailpipe is pollution."
I could have sworn that the rest was turned into heat. Unless you're smoking all of your fuel should have been burned.

Then the Hindenburg, how to make a pressure vessel, bridges.... I give up. It'd take me hours to do this,

Best part: This guy was entrusted with our national security on the ICBM, good thing we never had to use them.

-----

Kerosene == Diesel.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/Feg/byfuel/BifuelCNG2004.shtml
According to him they were getting 2 MPG out the Honda CNG they had.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radial_engine
Looks like someone has figured out how to make an even numbered cylinder radial.

They haven't been able to make a diesel engine catalyst
Let these companies that sell a diesel oxidation catalyst.

"The only way to go faster is to burn more fuel, which means you burn less fuel."

And there are 2 ways to make liquid N2 or O2. Compress it OR cool it. You can have liquid N2 at room temperature if you jack the pressures WAY up.
--

The thing that does sound interesting is the comment about the head. If you could mold a cylinder with a perfectly round top (like a propane container). Get coolant lines run, etc, but you'd eliminate the 'weak spot' of the the head gasket.

 

[Kabin]

The rambling guy in the video sounds misinformed in some areas. And the slurred words makes me think he's drunk.

 

[MrMopar]

To have infinite compression you'd need one of the two areas to be infinite in either the large or small direction.

But the small direction can indeed be infinite.

Just take the volume of the combustion chamber, and compress to half. And then compress to half again. And then compress to half again. Repeat to infinity. The compressed volume keeps getting smaller by a factor of half. But no matter how small the volume gets, it can still be halved again.

Note that this is merely a philosophical argument, and is definately not achievable by man. Hence my previous comment that only god can achieve infinite anything.

 

[pruzink]

I wonder if anyone has ever looked at trying to capture the wasted heat from a car engine and converting it back to. The hybrids take advantage of two efficiency improvements: 1) you can use a smaller more efficient engine but still get those boosts of higher power when pulling onto the highway because the battery & electric motor can do it, 2) The electric braking the motor/generator provides is usefull as compared to energy wasted by brake pad on rotor braking. If you look at the two other sources of energy waste on a car I would have to pick the energy that gets rejected from the radiator and the heat of the exhaust gas. Stirling engines have been around for a long time, all they need to run is a source of differential temperature (cool air & hot air). If you combined the gas/diesel engine and recovered the waste heat via a stirling engine I wonder how much energy could be recovered. The typical electric power plant being built these days are Combined Cycle Units where a Gas Turbine's Exhaust is run through a Heat Recovery Boiler which produces steam that goes to a steam turbine. This was a really big efficiency improvement over a plain steam cycle boiler (the down side is the Gas Turbine requires more expensive fuels like gas as compared to coal or residual oil). I guess as you try to recover more energy the cost and weight of a vehicle might price itself out of being practical.