Worlds Smallest Petro Engine

WutGas?

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Location
Oklahoma City
TDI
The Last Real Jetta Sedan
Pretty amazing if you ask me...
http://geeknizer.com/worlds-smallest-petrol-engine/



If you thought batteries are greener Technology for tomorrow, let us raise the curtain over a Internal combustion engine that runs on Petrol and is more efficient that any other electrical equivalent.
Scientists have built the world’s smallest petrol engine that is tiny enough to power a Watch.
The mini-combustion engine can run for two years on a single dose of a light fuel.
To give you an estimate of the power, it produces 700 times more energy than a conventional battery despite having a size less than a centimetre long . If the technology continues to innovate with the same pace, it could be used to power laptops and mobile phones for months.
Energy evangelists believe that this new mini-motor can make batteries look conventional and even phase them out in half decade.
The engine has been produced by engineers at the University of Birmingham.
“We are looking at an industrial revolution happening in peoples’ pockets. The breakthrough is an enormous step forward. Devices which need re- charging or new batteries are a problem but in six years will be a thing of the past.”
These tiny engines would find applications in other fields such as medical, military gadgets, and future robots.
Today, charging an ordinary battery to deliver one unit of energy involves putting 2,000 units into it. This is due to the fact that energy is wated at several steps before it is effectively stored. On the contrary this engine produces energy locally, and hence is far more efficient.
Micro engines have been produced several times in the past, but all of them failed at dissipating heat to surroundings, and burned themselves over a small period of operation. The Birmingham team overcame this by using heat-resistant materials such as ceramic and silicon carbide. They brought together all the engineering disciplines, both materials, chemical engineering, civil engineering, and mechanical engineering.


Read more: http://geeknizer.com/worlds-smallest-petrol-engine/#ixzz2CnjTJKrp
Imagine the possibilities...
 

Lug_Nut

TDIClub Enthusiast, Pre-Forum Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 20, 1998
Location
Sterling, Massachusetts. USA
TDI
idi: 1988 Bolens DGT1700H, the other oil burner: 1967 Saab Sonett II two stroke
I'm extremely skeptical, almost to the point of calling it a fake.
The volume to surface area ratio is such at these dimensions that the engine can't be compression ignited as the heat wouldn't be enough to ignite before dissipation through the cylinder walls. If it's spark ignited the spark generation would likely take as much energy as the engine would produce running.

Valves? Valve train? nope, not at that size. It'd have to be 2 stroke and use cylinder ports for intake and exhaust, but that requires a closed crankcase and this one isn't closed.

Let me change my mind and call the one shown in the image a fake.

http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=69270
first mentioned in 2003, now 2012, so more than 9 years later and it's nowhere.


And more:
http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-eps/mechanical/research/micro.pdf
The one on the thumb is an air motor powered by compressed CO2.
 
Last edited:

snakeye

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2009
Location
Montreal, Canada
TDI
2003 Jetta and Wagon, GLS 5sp
My reaction when reading the article was "suuuuuuure". How long before our watches need mufflers and catalytic converters? :D
 

nicklockard

Torque Dorque
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Location
Arizona
TDI
SOLD 2010 Touareg Tdi w/factory Tow PCKG
I'm extremely skeptical, almost to the point of calling it a fake.(snipped)

Let me change my mind and call the one shown in the image a fake.
For me, this part set me off: "Today, charging an ordinary battery to deliver one unit of energy involves putting 2,000 units into it."

Uh, what? They're telling me a battery is only 0.05% efficient? Ridiculous!
 

PondRacer

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 17, 2012
Location
Provo UT
TDI
2000 Jetta TDI
Man, i'd hate to be hearing an ittybitty engine in my hearing aid going *bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt* all frackin day long! I think I'll stick with the good old 675 size hearing aid batteries, tyvm! :p

PondRacer
 

No More Buffalo

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Location
Greenville, NC
TDI
Current: 2015 Golf SEL 6m Sold: 2012 Golf 2dr DSG
For me, this part set me off: "Today, charging an ordinary battery to deliver one unit of energy involves putting 2,000 units into it."
Uh, what? They're telling me a battery is only 0.05% efficient? Ridiculous!
Might not be that ridiculous if you consider true total lifecycle cost - the metal and chemicals have to be mined and refined, transported, packaging printed, shipped, etc.
 

nicklockard

Torque Dorque
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Location
Arizona
TDI
SOLD 2010 Touareg Tdi w/factory Tow PCKG
No, I think it's beyond ridiculous. Find a peer reviewed lifecycle analysis of any commercially-available, rechargeable battery chemistry that requires 2000 watt-hours of energy for every watt-hour of delivered energy.

No. Fricking. Way.
 

No More Buffalo

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2012
Location
Greenville, NC
TDI
Current: 2015 Golf SEL 6m Sold: 2012 Golf 2dr DSG
Ok, here's some info for you...

Not sure who did this study, but the primary author has an MIT email address so I'm going to assume the results are not totally bogus.

http://www.epbaeurope.net/documents/NEMA_alkalinelca2011.pdf

The number given for cumulative energy for 1kg of alkaline batteries is 68 megajoules.

A AA battery has an energy content of ~9 kilojoules, and weighs 24 grams.

So, that's 68 megajoules to produce and dispose of 41.6 AA batteries, or 1.632Mj per battery, for 9Kj of energy.

That gives a ratio of 181:1 for energy used => energy released.

Not quite 2000:1, but it shows that it really is pretty bad.
 

nicklockard

Torque Dorque
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Location
Arizona
TDI
SOLD 2010 Touareg Tdi w/factory Tow PCKG
You made my case adequately well. That paper analyzed single-use, non rechargeable batteries, which are a worst-case example. Actual two-way charge/discharge efficiencies of rechargeable batteries is 90% or better, meaning their lifecycle energy in to energy delivered ratio will asymptotically approach 90%.

I did a look at the math for 2000 recharges of a nickel-cadmium battery. It's lifecycle efficiency is 82% at end of lifecycle (roughly 5 watt-hours of input for every 4 watt-hours delivered), which is a damn sight better than 2000:1 claimed.
 

MrMopar

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Location
Bloomington, IL
TDI
none
I am still waiting for the methanol fuel cells I was promised would take over for lithium batteries in notebook computer. 5 years ago they said it would be on the market within 5 years . . .
 

Lug_Nut

TDIClub Enthusiast, Pre-Forum Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 20, 1998
Location
Sterling, Massachusetts. USA
TDI
idi: 1988 Bolens DGT1700H, the other oil burner: 1967 Saab Sonett II two stroke
Note that the battery energy is calculated on a gram watt hour basis, meaning that the battery weight is considered in the energy density.
That's only fair if they count the liquid or gas fuel tank's weight in the comparison.
If not counting the container, but just the energy, then the electrons in the battery are much lighter than the liquid or gas fuel. The energy density calculation result is flipped and the electric looks great!
 
Top