What happened to the vapor thread?

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by P-hack

ICE's are gonna get smaller as plug-in takes over, and with that power abstraction we are gonna finally see more turbines that don't waste energy on reversing pistons and dozens of other friction points. But not until we have milked the @#$@# out of the piston.

As far as "downsizing" engines you can go in the direction of Ford's EcoBoost line of smaller displacement, higher specific power output or Mazda's SkyActiv higher displacement, lower specific power output but increased thermal efficiency at required loads. Both have their virtues.

And as far as turbines go for general transportation power - no. As Old Mechanic has already pointed out, there are few reasons to use one in a car if fuel efficiency is a requirement. The best turbines are little better than the average gasoline engine as far as thermal efficiency if no recovery of waste heat is possible. Your Prius has a markedly better engine for economy.

And then there is the cost - gas turbines are simply too costly. My neighbor is an import tuner kind of guy. He dropped by with a very large and costly turbo he was rebuilding. The large amount of Inconel steels for the exhaust turbine and variable vanes is a pretty penny. Imagine ten times that amount in a small horsepower turbine for propulsion. There is no way around it. He told me there are ceramic components in the future, so cost may be reduced somewhat. The bearings are already high temperature capable ferro-ceramic. The compressor wheel is a finely machined aircraft aluminum. The whole rotating assembly is balanced to a fine degree. And, it costs him more than a complete rebuild of the Cummins 6.7L diesel engine sitting on my engine stand.

But, I do agree with you about the increased use of plug in hybrids. They will be the stop gap until improved batteries make electrics viable. But, better engines can be developed. GM has left a lot on the table to improve upon the Chevy Volt's main engine. I believe they understood this and concentrated on the electric drive-train first off. Improved engines can easily follow especially ones that are designed for the lowest specific fuel consumption at a set speed and power output.

[P-hack]

Turbines in such an application haven't really been developed, and closed cycle/combined cycle are certainly feasible in the %60 range. I don't see why not. It took 50 years for the piston to get hemi. Though 3d printers are still in the 9-pin dot-matrix phase, I wouldn't be surprised if printing ceramic blades became a thing either. Dude just printed a cement castle: Concrete 3D Printer Used To Build Castle...in Minnesota - Geek

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by P-hack

Turbines in such an application haven't really been developed, and closed cycle/combined cycle are certainly feasible in the %60 range. I don't see why not. It took 50 years for the piston to get hemi. Though 3d printers are still in the 9-pin dot-matrix phase, I wouldn't be surprised if printing ceramic blades became a thing either. Dude just printed a cement castle: Concrete 3D Printer Used To Build Castle...in Minnesota - Geek

There is truth to what you say about 3D printing. I worked at a firm about 20 years ago that had large SLA (stereolithography) printers. They were large, expensive and messy. But, they worked great. Now, you can purchase similar printers that fit on your desk and cost less than a used Honda. The extrusion printers cost even less. Maybe we will have high powered lasers some day that sinter inconel steel powder into turbine blades with little to no finishing needed.

[oil pan 4]

The problem with combined cycle is that the Rankine cycle is often used as a bottoming cycle to recover otherwise rejected heat.
It works great. But its going to be big. Classical boiler design dictates that for each horsepower you want to extract you need 10 to 12 square feet of heat exchanger.

There has only been one successful on road combined cycle engine setup and it is called the turbodiesel. The bottom cycle here is a brayton cycle.

[P-hack]

well good to know about heat exchanger requirements and combustion surface area and etc anyway. Interesting doc on an open cycle regen turbine (exhaust adds heat the compressed air)
http://waset.org/publications/11973/...ne-power-plant

It seems happiest with a pressure ratio of 4, and colder air, but still an improvement over straight gas turbine.

[user removed]

Animated Engines - Gnome Rotary

Here is relative reciprocation (piston moves "up and down"within the cylinder), but no reciprocating parts, yet it retains the closed chamber efficiency of the normal configuration.

The only piston in cylinder design that has the big end of the con rods rotating (versus oscillating) on the crank journal.

The Le Rhone had slipper rods, which oscillated independently around a groove in the master rod.

Ancient designs, preceeding WW1 but unique inthe fact that they are not reciprocating engines. Even the valvespring tension was augumented by the centrifugal force of the rotating block and cylinders around the fixed crank. Originally designed for better lowspeed air cooling they tripled aircraft speed in 4 years. Many thought those g forces would scramble the pilots brain.

In a modern application like my patented drive hydraulic pressure passes through the "journal" to the cylinder chamber area. The con rods are reversed and do not oscillate relative to the pistons, side loads making piston skirts necessary do not exist.

regards
Mech

[P-hack]

I'm confused about the incentive with the patent though. I mean someone still has to build one and you will claim some undisclosed portion of whatever they make, and they might make nothing, yet prove or disprove all your claims for you and sort out all the nuts and bolts for free? It seems like the onus is on you to come up with a working model that demonstrates the speculated efficiency gains, no?

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by P-hack

I'm confused about the incentive with the patent though. I mean someone still has to build one and you will claim some undisclosed portion of whatever they make, and they might make nothing, yet prove or disprove all your claims for you and sort out all the nuts and bolts for free? It seems like the onus is on you to come up with a working model that demonstrates the speculated efficiency gains, no?

Having someone else do all the leg work for free and still make money?
Sounds like a good plan to me.
How can you not is the bigger question?

[P-hack]

That isn't how it works though. Nobody wants to invest in an unproven design, it is just bad business. Even Felix Wankle took 30 years between the time he applied for a patent before he found a job where he could have it as a pet project (and even then it flatlined last year in the automotive world). The odds of getting someone to do all proof of concept prototype for you are incredibly small, and saying it is patented doesn't prove anything except zero rights for anyone looking into it.

[BobS]

It's hell hanging out with a harbinger, particularly if your mind is closed:

Angloisrael.com/reversetrike/ale.html

and again, in third world country towns , the gas station consists of 1 or 2 55 gallon drums rusting in the rain. Oh, and of course, with vapor carbs our military would be able to burn any fuel, wherever they found themselves. And I sure don't want to deny them that ability.

Much more to come - just not from me.