Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. 25 Mar '11 19:06
    http://www.alt-energy.info/hybrid-electric-cars/transonic-combustion-developing-ultra-efficient-gasoline-engine/

    “..., CA – Transonic Combustion, has developed a new type of fuel injection system that they say can improve a gasoline engine’s efficiency by more than 50%. ...”

    can a similar principle be used to significantly increase the energy efficiency of diesel engines by preheating the fuel-air mix and, if so, can a >50% increase in efficiency be achieved just like with the gasoline engines?
  2. 25 Mar '11 19:47
    Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
    can a similar principle be used to significantly increase the energy efficiency of diesel engines by preheating the fuel-air mix and, if so, can a >50% increase in efficiency be achieved just like with the gasoline engines?
    They claim their engine can run on diesel.
  3. 25 Mar '11 20:25
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    They claim their engine can run on diesel.
    Arrr -I didn't read the very last bit! Yes you are right.
    Although it doesn't say how efficient it is with diesel compared with gasoline.
  4. 26 Mar '11 15:40
    Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
    “..., CA – Transonic Combustion, [...] say can improve a gasoline engine’s efficiency by more than 50%. ...”
    I claim bull right there. If their system really could do this, they'd already be in a multi-million contract deal with one or more of the major car manufacturers, and be under a silence injunction. We wouldn't hear a word about it until the car in question hit the market and sweeped away all competition. Their advertising this on web sites means just one thing: a quest for subsidies, not results.

    Richard
  5. 26 Mar '11 17:49
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    I claim bull right there. If their system really could do this, they'd already be in a multi-million contract deal with one or more of the major car manufacturers, and be under a silence injunction. We wouldn't hear a word about it until the car in question hit the market and sweeped away all competition. Their advertising this on web sites means just one thing: a quest for subsidies, not results.

    Richard
    As a mater of interest, how often does this happen in industry? Does anyone know any great inventions that were kept silent until production?
  6. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    29 Mar '11 00:24 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    As a mater of interest, how often does this happen in industry? Does anyone know any great inventions that were kept silent until production?
    Not in the fuel area but I did see a couple of years ago some Japanese outfit came out with a protective coating for CD's. DVD's, and Blu Ray disks, almost as hard as diamond, cheap to apply, you practically had to hit it with a machete to damage it. Time goes by, nothing heard. I suspect the cd makers didn't want something like that because there were no reports or ads featuring this protective layer.

    did a goog and found this, not sure if this is the original, I thought the original coating was a permanent layer but here it is:

    http://www.d-skin.com/faq.php
  7. 29 Mar '11 06:24
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Not in the fuel area but I did see a couple of years ago some Japanese outfit came out with a protective coating for CD's. DVD's, and Blu Ray disks, almost as hard as diamond, cheap to apply, you practically had to hit it with a machete to damage it.
    Interesting, but it doesn't fit my criteria. Shallow Blue says that unless they are in production and filthy rich, there is something wrong. So I want examples of inventions where the first we heard of them the inventors were in production and filthy rich.
  8. 29 Mar '11 12:08
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    As a mater of interest, how often does this happen in industry? Does anyone know any great inventions that were kept silent until production?
    In the automobile industry, it happens all the time. How many times have you seen a great new invention in motor technology before it was inside some Mercedes or Toyota? Or at the very least inside an official Mercedes test vehicle? Sometimes you get a press campaign about this new, interesting research they are doing in Ford R&R Dept., but not on a random website run by an unknown. I've never seen something announced on tha Intarwebs first of all, and then go on to prove real.
    Every so often an independent comes out and actually shows his work - that guy in Switzerland comes to mind - but those are not complete outsiders making an unexpected breakthrough, they're people who have worked in the industry for years before striking out on their own. Those guys already know what it takes, and prove it before claiming 50% improvements.

    Richard
  9. 29 Mar '11 13:07
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    In the automobile industry, it happens all the time.
    Do you have any specific examples?
  10. 31 Mar '11 13:52
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Do you have any specific examples?
    Well, for starters, the other injection technology that has been such a hit over the last decade or so: common rail injection. First put in publically available cars in the late 1990s. Was it invented by a rogue genius who claimed on his website to get a 50% improvement over current technology? No. The principle was invented decades ago, investigated further by both high-quality technical institutes and industrial R&R centres, and finally matured in the 1990s; and the first most of us heard of it is when it appeared, in working order, inside a Merc. (In fact, Alfa had the first one, but the Merc was more high-profile.)

    Why, do you have an example of a new technology in automotion, or for that matter any mature field of technology, that was announced on a website with grandiose claims, and then proved to be the real thing? 'Cause I don't.

    Richard
  11. 31 Mar '11 20:00
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    Well, for starters, the other injection technology that has been such a hit over the last decade or so: common rail injection. First put in publically available cars in the late 1990s. Was it invented by a rogue genius who claimed on his website to get a 50% improvement over current technology? No. The principle was invented decades ago, investigated fu ...[text shortened]... ing order, inside a Merc. (In fact, Alfa had the first one, but the Merc was more high-profile.)
    But was it kept under wraps until it was put into production? You are not very clear about that.
  12. Standard member RevRSleeker
    CerebrallyChallenged
    01 Apr '11 21:40
    Sort of in topic but I offer it nonetheless. It's over 4yrs ago that I first read about the 'omnivore project' at Lotus Engineering, they've done some marvellous work on the two stroke engine but I've posted a web page, a good read, for those interested at the bottom here.
    When direct injection became a cost effective 'solution' to the perceived 'dirty' 2strokes, there was hope on the horizon for those of us that dearly miss the strokers..naturally we're talking motorcycles but nowadays skidoos, go karts etc all take advantage of the greater power outputs on a weight for weight basis than 4strokes..unfortunately when Japan 'retooled' to 4stroke after dropping the 2stroke in the late 80's early 90's, the worlds biggest engine producers effectively priced themselves out of ever being able to make 2 and 4 strokes alongside one another. The cost would be enormous so they went along with the developments of electronics that massively effect performance, better production techniques \ materials etc etc...just ongoing developments of the 4stroke. Only those interested kept an eye on the small manufacturers that continued down the 2stroke route, my interest being taken by the Bimota V Due 500cc bike...but I digress, this application has a direct benefit not just to the holy grail of an ultra clean 2stroke that improves also on MPG and power of equivalent 4strokes thus making the possibility of such units powering cars, smaller cars would greatly benefit rather akin to diesel but that's another argument \ story. There are far newer working project \ evaluations but it's a starting point for those that take interest, there are even vehicles powered by.
    http://gglotus.org/blog/2009/12/lotus-omnivore-engine-%E2%80%93-10-better-fuel-economy-than-current-leading-gasoline-engines/
  13. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    02 Apr '11 15:30
    Originally posted by RevRSleeker
    Sort of in topic but I offer it nonetheless. It's over 4yrs ago that I first read about the 'omnivore project' at Lotus Engineering, they've done some marvellous work on the two stroke engine but I've posted a web page, a good read, for those interested at the bottom here.
    When direct injection became a cost effective 'solution' to the perceived 'dirty' ...[text shortened]... ngine-%E2%80%93-10-better-fuel-economy-than-current-leading-gasoline-engines/
    I wondered about the lube mechanism, because regular 2 strokes are lubed by adding oil to the gas mixture and running with that, which for sure is not a clean engine which is why I wondered about you putting the dirty in " ". They are lubing the engine with a normal pump and line affair so it could be cleaner. But the overall improvement of 10 percent mpg is not going to drive a huge market for that engine, but the multi fuel capability could attract attention.
  14. Standard member RevRSleeker
    CerebrallyChallenged
    03 Apr '11 10:41
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    I wondered about the lube mechanism, because regular 2 strokes are lubed by adding oil to the gas mixture and running with that, which for sure is not a clean engine which is why I wondered about you putting the dirty in " ". They are lubing the engine with a normal pump and line affair so it could be cleaner. But the overall improvement of 10 percent mpg i ...[text shortened]... to drive a huge market for that engine, but the multi fuel capability could attract attention.
    Yes, there is a lot more to this project than meets the eye..given the weight and power advantage the 2 stroke has always 'enjoyed,' the main concern initially would be the added weight with all manner of ancillary equipment being employed. The first generation unit, as pictured, changed dramatically in a relative short period of time but primarily that unit was intended as the proving ground proper.
    Yes, 10% is not a great great selling point but given the weight, simplicity of the general 2stroke architecture and with it the power advantages, it could all add up to something far more than that that the major engine manufacturers considered too tall an order to surmount...20+yrs ago these considerations were not properly explored and certainly Honda surprised me with this in mind, given they'd already spent a small fortune on 2stroke direct injection and had successfully proven their findings in grand prix racing. It was not by coincidence that the same year they achieved their goals they actually announced the 2stroke production line was closing immediately..it was always assumed that Honda could not ever consider making their findings fit for road applications, massively efficient power wise but racing was primary and given time and R&D, the necessary road going application \ modifications could've been years away. The fuel efficiency and how clean it actually was not of importance to the racing application.. the then general agreement in Japan to foreclose on 2stroke production and dedicate to 4stroke with all manner of new legislation demanding cleaner engines. The 2stroke development was then left to the small independents, bankrupting a few along the way..