Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 


Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 07-22-2013, 05:00 PM   #21 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 18,062
Thanks: 4,947
Thanked 5,971 Times in 4,774 Posts
GreenHornet -- Thanks. My friend found this <<youtube=watch=c4bNOLdhchA>> as fast as I could spell b-o-u-r-k-e, but it still doesn't show the gas flow. I don't see how it's anything but an out-of-balance two-stoke.

ConnClark -- I always appreciate your input. Can you point to a similar critique of the Scuderi engine without going too far off-topic?

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 07-22-2013, 05:27 PM   #22 (permalink)
DieselMiser
 
ConnClark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 967

Das Schlepper Frog - '85 Mercedes Benz 300SD
90 day: 23.23 mpg (US)

Gentoo320 - '04 Mercedes C320 4Matic
90 day: 22.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 227 Times in 156 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post

ConnClark -- I always appreciate your input. Can you point to a similar critique of the Scuderi engine without going too far off-topic?
The Scuderi split cycle actually has some promise (not to mention that they have working prototypes with decent results). I don't have a link to a critique of it. As I can see the only potential loss of efficiency is the transfer passage between the two pistons. This loss is not like what would be experienced on the Bourke engine. For one, it doesn't waste the energy of compression. Also losses from the transfer passage will be offset by keeping the combustion in the hot cylinder thus reducing cooling losses ( To the extent of how much this is offset I can't say).


The biggest obstacle to it would probably be the retooling costs for mass production. Also big business might just wait for their patents to expire.

It looks as though the company has ran afoul of the SEC recently
Scuderi Group announces engine deal, won't name company it is working with | masslive.com

However, it they are spending money on actual work and research unlike Bourke Engine developers.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ConnClark For This Useful Post:
freebeard (07-22-2013)
Old 07-22-2013, 06:08 PM   #23 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 18,062
Thanks: 4,947
Thanked 5,971 Times in 4,774 Posts
Thanks. Your critique is what I was asking for.

Big business has to wait, but the owner-builder doesn't. I think Scuderi's proprietary in-line VR-4 block isn't as suited to development work as a VW flat 4 boxer. The biggest problem I foresee is containing the pressure in any intercooler in the connecting passage. And sourcing a custom crankshaft and camshaft.
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 01:39 AM   #24 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
GreenHornet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Oregon
Posts: 429
Thanks: 41
Thanked 108 Times in 68 Posts
I would like to thank Mr. ConnClark for pointing out a few of the engines potential weak points. One thing I think we can all agree on is that no engine at least at this point in time in our history is perfect. All engines have flaws and weak points. However there are far more pros to the Bourke engine than any other engine I have seen to date.

As far as the comment about the Bourke engine being a scam well that is completely false and can not be further from the truth really. However I will agree with ConnClark in that some of the people that operate these Bourke websites are in fact scam artists and in fact do nothing but try to steal your money. This is not the case for all of them though and I have confirmed this point!

Is this engine an inefficient gas guzzler?

Well I can not say for sure until I build one and thoroughly test it out but what I can say for sure is its no worse than the gas guzzler you have in your car right now! At least with the Bourke you will not need to pay for oil changes or tune ups LOL :-) Or have to worry about rebuilding the engine after you have driven it its course. These engines can easily be serviced with simple tools. Not to mention far less parts to potentially replace and service. The Bourke engine has no Flywheel, camshaft, cam gears, poppet valves, or gaskets.

This engine would easily save you money in total life repair costs and maintenance over traditional 2 and 4 stroke designs of gas or diesel engines. The 4 cylinder version is said to gulp 1 gallon of fuel per hour at 6500rpm. Now run the 2 cylinder 30 cubic inch version at around 4000rpm or the 10 cubic inch model at 1800rpm with biodiesel. You would have an engine fuel economy similar to our best diesels yet much more versatile and hundreds of pounds lighter with double the power potential. Not to mention you would not need all that emissions crap such as cat converters, urea injection, and all those sensors because you have virtually no emissions!

Despite what some may say this engine was built for one purpose and that was efficiency and simplicity. The simplicity is obvious it takes no rocket scientist to see this. The efficiency is what is always in question and often attacked. So this is the area I would like to focus my research on moving forward. There are a few people around the world who have been able to really work and test these engines and what I can say based on our discussions is that there is little doubt that this engine is for real and can do exactly what Mr. Bourke himself stated.

Where is Myth Busters when you need them

GH..
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 03:01 PM   #25 (permalink)
DieselMiser
 
ConnClark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 967

Das Schlepper Frog - '85 Mercedes Benz 300SD
90 day: 23.23 mpg (US)

Gentoo320 - '04 Mercedes C320 4Matic
90 day: 22.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 227 Times in 156 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenHornet View Post
I would like to thank Mr. ConnClark for pointing out a few of the engines potential weak points.
Weak point hell! These are full out flaws when it comes to efficiency.
Quote:
One thing I think we can all agree on is that no engine at least at this point in time in our history is perfect. All engines have flaws and weak points. However there are far more pros to the Bourke engine than any other engine I have seen to date.
The only thing it has going for it is that it has few moving parts.
Quote:
As far as the comment about the Bourke engine being a scam well that is completely false and can not be further from the truth really. However I will agree with ConnClark in that some of the people that operate these Bourke websites are in fact scam artists and in fact do nothing but try to steal your money. This is not the case for all of them though and I have confirmed this point!

Is this engine an inefficient gas guzzler?
Well according to the only independent 3rd party to observe a test of it, yes the Bourke engine is a guzzler.

The Bourke Engine

(Note when contacted to verify if this story for wikipedia was true Paul Niquette swore it was. he also has the credentials to back it up Paul Niquette Resume -- CH2M HILL )
Quote:
Well I can not say for sure until I build one and thoroughly test it out but what I can say for sure is its no worse than the gas guzzler you have in your car right now! At least with the Bourke you will not need to pay for oil changes or tune ups LOL :-) Or have to worry about rebuilding the engine after you have driven it its course. These engines can easily be serviced with simple tools. Not to mention far less parts to potentially replace and service. The Bourke engine has no Flywheel, camshaft, cam gears, poppet valves, or gaskets.
You forgot to mention that the Bourke engine also has no proper lubrication for its piston rings due to the seal around the connecting rod. That tends to shorten the life of an engine.
Quote:
This engine would easily save you money in total life repair costs and maintenance over traditional 2 and 4 stroke designs of gas or diesel engines. The 4 cylinder version is said to gulp 1 gallon of fuel per hour at 6500rpm. Now run the 2 cylinder 30 cubic inch version at around 4000rpm or the 10 cubic inch model at 1800rpm with biodiesel. You would have an engine fuel economy similar to our best diesels yet much more versatile and hundreds of pounds lighter with double the power potential. Not to mention you would not need all that emissions crap such as cat converters, urea injection, and all those sensors because you have virtually no emissions!
There is no real emissions data on the Bourke engine to go off of. The only data is off of another Bourke engine scam site claiming 10ppm for NOx. Unfortunately there was no output power level given for this reading so I would suspect it was at idle. NOx output of a Bourke engine with its extended dwell time near top dead center should be rather high at full power.
Quote:

Despite what some may say this engine was built for one purpose and that was efficiency and simplicity. The simplicity is obvious it takes no rocket scientist to see this. The efficiency is what is always in question and often attacked. So this is the area I would like to focus my research on moving forward. There are a few people around the world who have been able to really work and test these engines and what I can say based on our discussions is that there is little doubt that this engine is for real and can do exactly what Mr. Bourke himself stated.

Where is Myth Busters when you need them

GH..
Mr. Bourke was a politician and they have a poor track record on stated vs real benefits.

So few have looked at improving the efficiency of the Bourke engine because they can see straight off that its a lost cause.

If you want clean oil all the time go install a frantz bypass oil filter.

I move that this thread be placed in the unicorn corral
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 05:12 PM   #26 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 18,062
Thanks: 4,947
Thanked 5,971 Times in 4,774 Posts
Oh man, I'm going to 'get some popcorn' and see what happens next!

I think I understand the 'never change the oil' a bit better. They say there's only two moving parts, but I'd never heard of a three-piece slipper bearing before. Doesn't that up the parts count 50%?

I read the Niquette story. That was awesome writing for an engineer.


Volkswagen sized? That sucker's 4' across and 5' long.

Edit: Maybe that is the 400 cubic inch version.

Last edited by freebeard; 07-23-2013 at 08:34 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 06:40 PM   #27 (permalink)
DieselMiser
 
ConnClark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Richland,WA
Posts: 967

Das Schlepper Frog - '85 Mercedes Benz 300SD
90 day: 23.23 mpg (US)

Gentoo320 - '04 Mercedes C320 4Matic
90 day: 22.44 mpg (US)
Thanks: 46
Thanked 227 Times in 156 Posts
I double checked my emissions data i cited. It turns out I was in error on the data I quoted. It looks like the website that posted some emissions data listed hydrocarbons at 80 ppm and carbon monoxide at less than 10 ppm but without an output power associated with these readings. No NOx measurements were given.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 01:22 PM   #28 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
GreenHornet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Oregon
Posts: 429
Thanks: 41
Thanked 108 Times in 68 Posts
Its popcorn time everyone

Now looking at the engine from an emissions perspective it is my opinion that it would show decreases in all levels except NOx. This is the Achilles heal of the HCCI engines of today. The Bourke design is for all intent and purposes an HCCI engine that helped pave the way for modern designs. So it would not surprise me one bit if we were able to test a prototype and see elevated levels of NOx similar to what we find today in modern HCCI engines. When you run an engine lean this is what you get and this is the reason we do not see these engines to often currently. Honda has lean fuel burning engine technology such as in there Insight Gen1. They can use it because they provide proper catalyst technology to help keep the NOx emissions in check.

The mechanical weak link has always been considered the scotch yoke. Many have tried to overcome and improve upon this and have failed. As of recent there are a few who have succeeded in improving upon the design. The article links below detail just how they improved upon the Bourke design and its significance. These two engine designers obviously feel that the Bourke engine was more than just a scam or lost cause! You can also see my thread how to increase diesel engine efficiency where Mr. Pattakon was kind enough to post more about his genius engine designs.

#1. Advanced Technology for Piston Engines
#2. http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonOPRE2.htm

Again I am going to throw this out when something is not well understood people will be quick to judge and often discredit. When things don't go as planned people tend to give up and throw in the towel way to soon! The Bourke engine is not perfect nothing ever is! I could write a page on how inefficient our current gas and or diesel engines are. However we spend millions on improving them every year! The 2 inventors I provided article links for above believe conventional engine design can be improved upon as do I. What is interesting is they both used the simple Bourke engine design and principles as a basis for conventional improvement go figure!

The Bourke engine has more than just an incredible short list of parts going for it. The engine can idle extremely low and have almost instant power. The engine is not dictated by RPM but rather engine load similar to what you would find in an electric motor. At idle it uses a very small amount of fuel unlike our conventional engines. The engine can run very lean and to very high rpm. The engine can run a plethora of fuels not just simply gas or diesel! Pretty much all low grade fuels can be run on this engine which gives it the ability to further clean up emissions. This engine is much lighter than conventional engines and will put out much more horsepower and torque than any crate engine we could purchase currently pound for pound. The engine can be coupled in series to easily create a 4,6,8,10,12 or more cylinder engine.

Now all of these advantages are confirmed and is much more than just the advantage of having far less parts and only 2 moving parts in the entire engine. Or the fact its a mono stroke that takes care of all 4 engine cycles 2 times per revolution. This engine actually has much going for it if you really take the time to look at it. If you took a quarter of the development costs we spend on our current conventional engine technology and put it into this engine we would have an engine that could be a game changer.

Mr Bourke did make some lofty claims about his engine design and from what I can determine from talking to individuals who have worked on the engines and really understand it the majority so far have been tested to be true. Not all of it has been tested and confirmed but enough to know at this point Mr. Bourke was not lying to create hype for his engine. However there are limitations and areas that need worked on and improved that the people who have worked and experimented with these engines will tell you. They will also tell you that even Mr. Bourke new it had limitations and was quietly working on improvements as most all great inventors do. He ran out of time before he could implement his improvements. Had he had more time who knows where we could be today!

Engine control and fuel injection are 2 areas that could really use improvement with the Bourke engine and modern fuel injection has matured to the point this could definitely be a possibility. Also engine electronics has improved and matured as well so this could have potential in helping control the Bourke design.

Now a few things I would like to make clear. First I am no engine design expert and second I am no Bourke engine expert either. I have come to my own opinions and conclusions from research not only from internet readings but also by talking with people who have far more experience in engine design than I as well as people who have first hand knowledge and experience in Bourke engines and the like.

Does the Bourke Engine deserve the Unicorn Corral maybe for some but for me I think it has much potential and sometimes it takes looking out of the box to see such potential. I can appreciate others opinions such as ConnClark and he brings up very valid arguments. Good arguments are constructive for improvement in anything and is something I highly value.

At this point I am so immersed into my kit car project Tigon that there is no way I have the time to build a prototype engine and perform testing to help us gain better knowledge into its claims. However once the car is complete and tested I will have much more time on my hands and would be willing to put my time and energy into such a task of helping us to understand the Bourke engine design much better. Until then the best I can do is talk to others and try to gain insight that way. Which to this point has showed me that The Bourke engine design is very real and not a scam. Also that it has helped us gain valuable insight to HCCI design and other engine design platforms that will help us to improve our current conventional engine designs and theories way into the future.

Oh and as far as the point about poor piston ring lubrication which I did not forget to mention btw because they are more than adequately supplied with oil by a small hole in the cylinder wall at bottom dead center However I do love the Frantz by pass oil filter for our current conventional engines and will utilize it in my small 2 cylinder diesel in my Tigon hybrid design...

GH
  Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 03:08 PM   #29 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,019 Times in 1,302 Posts
Here is the solution to high NOX emissions.

Transonic Combustion | Revolutionizing Combustion Technology

Regardless of the engine design.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to user removed For This Useful Post:
GreenHornet (07-24-2013)
Old 07-24-2013, 04:01 PM   #30 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
GreenHornet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Oregon
Posts: 429
Thanks: 41
Thanked 108 Times in 68 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Mechanic View Post
Here is the solution to high NOX emissions.

Transonic Combustion | Revolutionizing Combustion Technology

Regardless of the engine design.

regards
Mech
Hey Old Mech thanks for chiming in here and pointing out this tech. I agree with this solution and support this technology. I can not wait for it to go mainstream!

GH

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Heated Fuel bennelson EcoModding Central 74 01-25-2014 04:50 PM
Moving air intake into the engine compartment? pasadena_commut Aerodynamics 5 07-25-2008 04:24 PM
Coasting experiment: engine on VS engine off on a fixed route = 12.9% gain MetroMPG Hypermiling / EcoDriver's Ed 6 02-22-2008 09:38 AM
Basic EcoDriving Techniques and Instrumentation SVOboy Instrumentation 2 11-17-2007 12:38 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com