90% mechanical & 44% brake thermal efficiency are already within the range of modern diesels (at least at peak efficiency operating points). Interesting concept non the less. The potential mechanical efficiency advantage I see would be lower side forces on the piston.
I think the motion of the piston is still the basic slider-crank motion, so as far as the in-cylinder combustion, I think everything should be identical. Therefore closed cycle efficiency (and I assume pumping efficiency) should be the same as a conventional engine. So, the only advantage this engine would have efficiency-wise would be the mechanical efficiency. Even if the friction goes to zero, you're not going to get a 30% brake thermal efficiency advantage.
Interesting, but I guess I don't see a 30% efficiency improvement. The long-term durability of that "wristpin" joint concerns me too.
__________________
Diesel Dave
My version of energy storage is called "momentum".
My version of regenerative braking is called "bump starting".
1 Year Avg (Every Mile Traveled) = 47.8 mpg
BEST TANK: 2,009.6 mi on 35 gal (57.42 mpg): http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...5-a-26259.html
|