New engine sends shock waves through auto industry. 90% decrease in emissions

[TalkingDog]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42460541/ns/technology_and_science-innovation/

Despite shifting into higher gear within the consumer's green conscience, hybrid vehicles are still tethered to the gas pump via a fuel-thirsty 100-year-old invention: the internal combustion engine.

However, researchers at Michigan State University have built a prototype gasoline engine that requires no transmission, crankshaft, pistons, valves, fuel compression, cooling systems or fluids. Their so-called Wave Disk Generator could greatly improve the efficiency of gas-electric hybrid automobiles and potentially decrease auto emissions up to 90 percent when compared with conventional combustion engines.

snip

The Wave Disk Generator uses 60 percent of its fuel for propulsion; standard car engines use just 15 percent. As a result, the generator is 3.5 times more fuel efficient than typical combustion engines.

Researchers estimate the new model could shave almost 1,000 pounds off a car's weight currently taken up by conventional engine systems.

[riderinthestorm]

1. Pretty damn exciting. My daughter will take our VW to college with her

in 4 years (5 years if the school she chooses doesn't allow freshman to have a car) which means we'll be shopping. I really hope they have more engine possibilities by then. This sounds really good.

[Newest Reality]

2. Quick!

One of the big oil companies needs to buy the rights to that technology fast, if it proves viable. It simply has to be shelved ASAP.

Then this news can once again become a brief flash in our memory and a potential that never sees implementation. Remember, we have very powerful and wealthy industries to faithfully support with our sweat and blood. Our labor and future is merely a tribute to their power and control.

The auto industry works hand-in-hand with the oil industry.

Well, hopefully, some of us will keep an eye on this one and see what comes down at the end of the year. Maybe it won't be banished to oblivion like other fuel efficient technology from the past.

[Stumbler]

69. To by honest, those are my cynical thoughts exactly...

For those who missed it, check out "Who Killed the Electric Car."
Just as with the mortgage crisis of '08 & the on-going 'War on Drugs,' there are too many entities currently making money of our existing system to allow a dramatic overhaul/improvement like this to succeed.

[Canuckistanian]

3. "wave disks" I seem to remember something about that years ago

I think it was something about burning fuel in chambers of curved disks connected directly to drive shafts. Am I wrong?

[The Doctor.]

51. Well, that could be the same.

In the video, he's holding a prototype which is a free-spinning disk in a plastic chamber. It appears to function by combusting fuel+air in little chambers on the disk, propelling it to rotate. As combustion engines go, it just seems to make sense.

[Boxerfan]

4. I'm impressed with the claims-A "sandwiched" turbine is a simple way to describe it

Not sure what stopped Andy Granettelli but I'd love to see a working prototype.

However-I'm not sure how he got by the laws of thermal dynamics to get rid of a cooling system...

[tridim]

9. It could be air cooled. It's a small motor.

It'll work great if the fuel efficiency is really as high as claimed.

[The Doctor.]

52. Just picturing how it works;

Getting the timing right would be cake. On top of that, modulating the frequency would be so very easy as well. That way it can use a stepped system with just the combustion alone to run at top efficiency.

I'm really excited about this.

[Logical]

5. It seems like I read these "amazing" stories about once a week and....

most of them never make it to market. Skeptical, but I hope it is true.

[tridim]

8. There's really nothing to be skeptical about, watch the video on the website.

[Logical]

58. In the lab is one thing. On the market is another. The market is the proof. n-t

[FLPanhandle]

26. I agree

Nearing the age of 50, I've lost count of the number of "amazing" breakthrough stories I've seen.

All look great, sound great, but fail to work as well outside of a lab/university.

Maybe this time it will be practical in the real world, but I'm skeptical.

[tridim]

6. The video says it'll be ready in 2-3 years!

I love this because it's simple and totally changes the game. It completely avoids the battery problem.

[Pab Sungenis]

7. Funded by ARPA

which (surprise) the Republicans want to defund.

[opihimoimoi]

10. Torque??? Horsepower?

[IDemo]

12. Prototype may be around 34 hp

"engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year."

25 kilowatts = 33.525 horsepower

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

41. So, about as powerful as my first Volkswagen

It could do about 65 on the freeway, had to wind the engine in first gear to make it over the continental divide, but it was enough power to be practical.

[backscatter712]

60. Put it in a hybrid, and you've got plenty of torque.

Have a bunch of batteries providing power for driving around town, and for decent acceleration, and connect the wave-disk engine to a generator that recharges the batteries and provides auxiliary power.

It'd work great in a Prius!

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

71. That's a great approach

and it would match 99.9% of my driving. I think performance would suffer driving west from Denver, when the long uphill climb would drain the batteries and you're left with whatever a 35hp motor can get the generator to do. But, it would make it over the pass, if slowly. I'd love to buy one of these gas-sipping cars.

:hi:

[jberryhill]

13. Torque is not as important if it is a charging system like the Volt /nt

[thereismore]

15. This engine will just charge batteries. The car will run on battery power. nt

[tridim]

16. The video says the engine/generator makes enough power to drive the electric motors directly

Reserve battery power is only needed for extra acceleration.

That's why this solution is so interesting, it gets rid of the battery problem almost completely.

[opihimoimoi]

23. thank you.... :o)

[thereismore]

25. You are right. My bad. nt

[unkachuck]

11. how....

....are they creating isolated enough cycles, power in particular, crisp and separate to eliminate a transmission from a stop? The rotor looks more like a sump pump impeller. Or is it spinning and they're just using a clutch or torque converter?

....you still need, intake, compression, ignition, exhaust....how is that mechanism in the drawing accomplishing the basic four cycles? I'm not understanding how it's working or what they're doing....

[tridim]

17. It drives a generator, not the wheels.

[unkachuck]

18. thanks....

....is it more turbine or rotary than Otto cycle, or something else?

[muriel_volestrangler]

27. Yes, rotary, not Otto cycle

New Scientist article on it from a couple of weeks ago: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928035.100-shock-wave-puts-hybrid-engines-in-a-spin.html

It's not a Wankel rotary engine, and not a classic turbine, but something in between.

[msongs]

14. great! to sell them here they must be MADE here from bumper to bumper nt

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

42. 100mpg AND you want them made here?

now you're dreamin'

:hi:

[RC]

19. I'm seeing an updated version of the 100 MPG carburetor here.

It can be done, but 0-40 in 20 minutes.

About the weight savings. A light car gets blown around on the road from wind, trucks and even other cars. Also that weight on the drive wheels gives traction when it is wet, icy or snowy. Take a thousands pounds off and the car may be skid prone on the road.

[Nostradammit]

21. What we need are nuclear-powered automobiles, huh RC?

[RC]

46. Sure, why not?

It it can power a Star Trek phaser and destroy stuff, it should be able to power a wheeled vehicle. :hi:

[muriel_volestrangler]

28. Sorry, are you saying that the weight of an old engine is a safety feature?

:rofl:

The weight of an engine is not above the drive wheels in a front-engined, rear-wheel drive car, and yet they manage. Being a hybrid, this also has some batteries you need to put somewhere, which can concentrate weight above an axle. And you can make it 4 wheel drive fairly easily, if traction really is a concern - this engine will just run a generator at its most efficient speed, so it would be a case of wiring to motors at the other 2 wheels.

And the acceleration of this should be fine - it's for use in a hybrid, so battery power is available for short term acceleration. And it weighs less, which makes acceleration easier.

[AngryAmish]

30. How does a F1 car stay on the road?

They are very light. Oh, aerodynamics. And traction control solves the slippage problem. THis is almost standard anyway.

[Erose999]

34. And F-1 tires are twice as wide as your normal car's tires. And F1 tires are made of softer,

stickier rubber that only lasts a few laps so they get changed after 100 miles or so. And the suspension geometry is stiffer and tuned for maximum grip.

Most of this is impractical for passenger cars, and the wide tires in particular are terrible for fuel economy. And the stiff suspension would rattle your fillings out in short order.

[BrightKnight]

40. Bicycles are light and they function properly.

When you have less weight you need less to control it.

[The Doctor.]

54. Not the same.

It's just a turbine to power an electric motor. As for acceleration, an electric car can out-accelerate any internal combustion model.

As for the lightness, that's definitely an engineering issue.

[Mosby]

56. you can recover the traction by using smaller, narrower tires

The wind will still push you around though.

[Beartracks]

62. Add weights, like you would in a Pinewood Derby car...

... something small and compact, so there's still lots of room in the "front trunk." :)

-------------------------

[napoleon_in_rags]

20. Haha! I told you Gregorian.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php/www//seattletimes.nwsource.com/counterpunch.org/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x275858#275867

He says "The efficiency of the auto engine can't be made much more efficient." I say they can be. And now what?

The Wave Disk Generator uses 60 percent of its fuel for propulsion; standard car engines use just 15 percent. As a result, the generator is 3.5 times more fuel efficient than typical combustion engines.

Kudos to those engineers. You RULE!!!

[sofa king]

22. I think what the poster meant to say was,

"The efficiency of the Otto engine can't be made much more efficient."

Nicolaus Otto improved the four-stroke piston engine and first used it in a car. The name "Otto" has since been applied to the four-stroke cycle and to automobile engines more generally. Internal combustion engines are limited by a thing I don't pretend to understand called the Carnot cycle, which is related to initial and peak heat generation, or something. As a result, the otto engine can't be expected to reach an efficiency of greater than around 37%, and in practice only approaches 20%.

This is why engineers get pissed off when some science grifter comes around every summer with a claimed improvement to the 4-stroke that triples its fuel economy. It's simply outside of the possibility of the theories which describe how it works.

But this guy seems to have performed an end-around by developing a different system which is not held back by the Otto design.

[TalkingDog]

36. Perzactly. There is nothing worse than trying to improve a design

that, in the end, gains nothing (or so close to nothing as to be worthless)

But all inventions that hope to be successful tend to gear themselves toward existing tooling. In other words: Assembly lines are set up for automobiles with a chassis and 4 wheels. 3 wheeled cars work just as well and weigh less. But nobody makes them.

Why?

Because retooling the assembly line would cost money and that would cut into short term profit.

[snooper2]

39. Lots of folks make three wheeled cars

:)

http://www.aptera.com/




The Twike made in Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twike





The VERY BAD ASS Campagna T-Rex
http://www.campagnamotors.com/





The Triac
http://greenvehicles.com/

[TalkingDog]

43. Are these made in standard auto production factories?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but showing a few visual examples without comparing the overall numbers of vehicles made is not a valid refutation of my claim.

You suggest "lots" of people make these. How many is lots? How does that compare with the number of standard 4 wheeled vehicles produced? What is the price point comparison? Can an average worker afford any one of these cars?

Part of the reason people buy cars (of any type) is because they can afford to buy them. If this motor cured cancer and corrected global climate change it wouldn't matter if it isn't affordable enough for a large number of people to buy on an average wage.

Which brings me back to my statement: Auto makers claim retooling for a different (insert item of choice here: engine, chassis, etc) makes vehicles too expensive.

So what we need to be asking is: Can this engine be affordable/profitable (for auto makers) to incorporate into their vehicles, while keeping the price affordable for an average wage earner?

[snooper2]

44. To you last question, probably in 20 years if it's a feasible design

small fraction of the cars made out there have three wheels, but you do have options :)

Just used it as a reason to post ( DID I MENTION BADASS ) T-Rex 0-60 3.5 seconds, top end 157...

You can grab one used for around 30-40K 55-60K new...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOsYo9Sv43E

[Gregorian]

63. That is what I meant. And I'm not excited about this design compared to electric.

Why are we still goofing around polishing internal combustion turds? Stupid. Furthermore, things always sound nice until the details start speaking up. But it could be a more efficient design for an engine. And may actually be a valuable engine for some uses.

[Tesha]

64. Carnot efficiency is actually pretty easy to understand.

Basically, all of these "heat engines" work by
mining the potential energy that exists between
the source of heat and the temperature into which
the engine dumps its waste.

It's not unlike a water wheel or hydroelectric dam:
The higher the reservoir of water compared to the
height at which you dump the "used" water, the more
power you can obtain. Raise the dam or lower the
river and things get better.

And for temperature and Carnot efficiency, it all
comes down to absolute temperature: the temperature
of things above Absolute Zero (about -273° Celsius
or -460° Fahrenheit). To make things simple, scientists
and engineers use the Kelvin scale which uses Celsius-
sized degrees but places its zero point at right at
Absolute Zero.

So now we come down to it: the absolute maximum
efficiency you can get out of any "heat engine" is
the distance in Kelvins between the hot and the cold
divided by the total distance from the hot to
absolute zero.

For example, let's take a steam engine (or a steam
turbine; doesn't matter!). Maybe its boiler makes
steam at 273° Celsius / 523° Fahrenheit. That's
546 Kelvins. Let's also assume that our steam engine
rejects heat into the atmosphere or a lake or some
such and that the temperature of the air or lake is
just freezing: 0° C / 32° F / 273 Kelvins.

0----:----1----:----2----:----3----:----4----:----5----: Heat source: 546 K

0----:----1----:----2----:-- Heat sink: 273 K


The *ABSOLUTE BEST* efficiency that our steam engine can
ever reach will be about 50% because that's the proportion
of the distance from the heat source to the heat sink
compared to the total distance from the heat source to
absolute zero. That is to say that our steam engine will
*ALWAYS* waste at least 50% of the heat you provide to
it; gotta shovel more wood into the boiler's firebox!

And our steam engine will usually do worse than this
because of things like friction and the fact that we're
often rejecting the heat into air that's warmer than
freezing. (That's why nuclear power plants are so
often located next to water; that water provides a
nice, convenient, relatively-cool cheap heat sink.)

Gas turbines can be more efficient because the "heat
source" can be a lot hotter than our measly 546 K;
maybe a thousand Kelvins or more.

0----:----1----:----2----:----3----:----4----:----5----:----6----:----7----:----8----:----9----:----10 Heat source: 1000 K

0----:----1----:----2----:-- Heat sink: 273 K

Now we're talking almost 75% potential efficiency!

Perhaps this new engine does this (compared to an
internal combustion engine)?

Tesha

[burrfoot]

67. Holy Shit, Tesha, that was sexy as hell.

End of message.

edited to add: :toast:

If you ever make it to Sarasota, the drinks are on me!

[napoleon_in_rags]

72. Possibly, Gregorian DID come back and agree with the thermal loss in the next post.

Which means he understood the inefficiencies of the status quo. But its still thrilling to see my optimism justified by this discovery...I KNEW we could do better than 15%! I am not an engineer, but I am enough of a scientist to know that thermodynamics doesn't bound us THAT much, we can and do much better in stationary power plants for instance. Even Tesha's post below says as much.

God, I would love for this thing to be just dropped into the market soon, it would be so good for the economy, environment, so much.

[One_Life_To_Give]

24. Forget Cars, Trucks, Ships, Planes and Trains

60% fuel efficiency gives a 20% reduction in fuel consumption over Wartsilla's Record Holding diesel used in Container ships. Why start with something that spends 90% of it's life not operating. When we have machines that spend up to 90% of the time operating at load?

If it can work with Nat Gas. This beats the efficiency of our Gas Turbines used for electric generation. Seems to me that would be a good place to get it introduced to quickly.

[Shagbark Hickory]

29. I'm sure this wasn't the first, nor will it be the last alternative engine that will never see the

light of day.

Can't forget those 800 trillion dollar, non-tax-paying gorillas in the room.

I lived near a college in the early 90's that had a fleet of larger commercial vehicles (vans pickups ets) running on solar. Oil companies don't let stuff like this get off the ground.

[Lorien]

33. Unfortunately so. The powerful fossil fuel lobbies want us to consume more, not less

and if the wave has fewer parts to replace the auto manufacturers won't be keen on adopting it; though one WILL want to purchase the patent so that it never sees the light of day!

[Shagbark Hickory]

37. They got us by the ballz.

And they aint lettin go.

[Ganja Ninja]

31. Here's a you tube on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf_-IMgla34

[kentauros]

32. Sounds like a complex re-invention of the Tesla Turbine

Also a test of the design: Tesla Turbines are Very Different

[Teaser]

35. which emissions? CO2?

.

[wildbilln864]

38. *** A definite k & r! nt

[Thunderstruck]

45. Yawn. Get in line behind every other currently invisible revolutionary

propulsion system we've been told about on the nooz or in Popular Mechanics.

[The Doctor.]

55. Nope, this works.

In fact, it makes much more sense than piston-generators.

[mistertrickster]

47. Damn those gov't-funded research parasites!

:sarcasm:

[mistertrickster]

48. Wow! This looks like the real deal. Would also make gas generators

that are used for off-the-grid applications much more fuel efficient as well.

[LSK]

49. BP to buy it and put on the shelf in 3. 2. 1.....

[leveymg]

50. Looks like a kind of hybrid Wankel Diesel that spins in a stator to generate electricity directly

clever - but, I'd have to know more to form an opinion as to how much more efficient, and lower it's CO emissions behavior, actually are than a conventional hybrid.

[Vincardog]

53. Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype rea

Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year.

[jimlup]

57. Hold your horses ... the engineers still likely have a long way to go with these

There are likely other problems which have not been solved. I'm not saying that it is a bust, I'm just saying there is a lot of engineering behind the current internal combustion-piston engine. We'll have to wait and see if this pans out. I'll remain skeptical until I start to see engineering demonstrations and even then I'll guess it will be years away.

[BrklynLiberal]

59. Will it meet the same fate as the Electric Car and the Tucker?

[Juche]

61. I hope it works, but stories like this happen all the time

Some amazing invention happens in the lab, then you never hear from it again.

FWIW, I don't have the calculation but decreasing the weight of the car by 1000 pounds plus an engine 3.5x more efficient would give you a family sedan that got 140mpg or more.

[Corruption Winz]

65. Price Tag On A New Car With This Engine: 50 billions bucks. Lol....

I would hope not. Still, this is a good sign. I'm glad Michigan is responsible as Detroit and is getting a chance to help the economy around there. They need anything that they can get.

[greiner3]

66. "gasoline engine that requires no transmission,"

My brother's engineering specialty is in transmissions. He works at GM, has his Masters Degree from Purdue and has worked on many of their modern transmissions. He is near retirement and we kid him that he'll die of old age while still at his 'drafting table.' No more, he's soon to become a dinosaur like so many other occupations in the last century. Who'd a thought?

[HBravo]

68. big auto

In the 70's a co-worker of my father had a car that was getting 20+ mpg when the car was listed at 8-10 mpg. They pulled it into their shop and the carburetor had exp. (experimental) stamped on the side. When he took in for servicing at the dealership it came out with the correct carburetor on it. GovCorp only wants to give you what you expect. It is all about control.

[krispos42]

70. Not to put a damper on the fun, but...

... ©2009