View Single Post
Old 01-01-2014, 11:23 PM   #26 (permalink)
RustyLugNut
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
Assertion and argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slownugly View Post
I didn't know there was an argument haha
It is the classic flow of any discussion. But never mind, I had too much college.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slownugly View Post
Yes true the mileage to weight ratio has increased. Does it impress me ? Not in the least. You win I surrender. Whether the technology is superior or not does not change the fact that my 1993 vx gets better mileage than a comparable class new vehicle non hybrid.
It was your assertion that current tech was inferior. Impressing YOU was not the goal of the manufacturers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by slownugly View Post
Gettin back on topic, if they do achieve extremely lean afrs above 50:1 what effect will that have on performance? My car has significant power loss at just 20-22:1 afrs. What kind of driving characteristics can we expect out of ultra lean burn engines?
Your "high tech" lean burn engine flames out at 22:1 AFR. A similar engine was used in an Xprize endeavor with heated fuel resulting in the ability to run 24:1 AFR. A small change in the the combustion enthalpy is the reason for this. They set the ratio at 20:1 to provide acceptably snappy response which still resulted in excellent fuel economy from their lightweight aero tri-wheeler.

The Ale'

There is little need to go leaner than this as the gasoline combustion becomes so lazy that even with complete combustion, you would have to gear the vehicle to accommodate very low engine revolutions.

This is where hydrogen augmented combustion becomes viable. Even the small amounts produced by a HHO electrolysis generator can extend the effective lean limit significantly. Much faster flame speeds mean I can run my Daihatsu engine at 28:1 AFR ( the limit of my wide band O2 sensor )at freeway cruise speeds. This engine has a very lazy, low turbulence combustion chamber, so it is far from ideal.

I do not see much point in running 50:1 AFR even if we could get there except at idle and very low load situations. And believe me, in lab tests combustion can be sustained at 100:1 AFR with enough hydrogen augmentation and turbulence. A paper by College of the Desert, has them running an engine with pure hydrogen as a fuel at 180:1 AFR. But, power production is minimal.

Last edited by RustyLugNut; 01-02-2014 at 03:50 AM.. Reason: Spelling.
  Reply With Quote