1 2
DaewooOfDeath
DaewooOfDeath SuperDork
11/1/20 2:12 a.m.
boxedfox (Forum Supporter) said:
wheelsmithy (Joe-with-an-L) (Forum Supporter) said:

#3, Look at the Nissan QR25. They tried what is an astronomical stroke to bore for modern engines. They have some potential, but are pretty terrible engines (note, this is largely due to ingesting cats enema-style through the exhaust valves). Nobody else seems to be playing the long stroke game anymore. Give me an early FZR600 any day, or a 351 W.

I remember the QR25. It was torquey enough, but it was so lazy and vibration prone that it felt like it belonged in a compact truck. It had the same flavor as the old KA24s that Nissan built for the Hardbody and the 240sx.

With some more development it may have had some potential. Unfortunately, between the Honda K20's super efficient design and Nissan's own VQ35 beating it in every way possible, it didn't really stand a chance.

A Honda K24 stroke is only 1 mm shorter I'm pretty sure and that seems to be a pretty nice engine.

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/1/20 6:38 a.m.
DaewooOfDeath said:


So what I'm wondering is why if you need 110 hp, you don't make a four banger with a 3 inch bore and a 4 inch stroke that redlines at 6,000 rpm.

I did some poking around out of curiosity.  That's close to the dimensions of a Honda K23 engine. 

The Mazda L/Ford Duratec 2.5 has a slightly larger bore but an even longer stroke compared to the Honda.  Definitely not a 110hp engine smiley

alfadriver (Forum Supporter)
alfadriver (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
11/1/20 7:50 a.m.
GTwannaB said:

The other consideration is EVs. As cool.as the technology potential exists in these approaches. When will the research stop. When did steam.engines stop innovating?

Cost and range.  Until there's that magical battery breakthrough, ICE's will still be the powertain of choice for most cars.  There will be a lot more hybrids before EV's become the norm.  And there's still a possibility that fuel cells will also have that breakthrough, too.

IMHO, the next big step for ICE's is when the corn lobby's monopoly on alcohol goes away, and all other alternatives (sugar cane in the south, sugar beets in the north) can contribute to renewable fuels.

Pete. (l33t FS)
Pete. (l33t FS) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
11/1/20 8:06 a.m.

In reply to alfadriver (Forum Supporter) :

I thought there'd been some development with a GMO crop that directly created a fuel hydrocarbon, without the pesky fermentation/distillation phase required.  Or could that just be one of those "hey look what we could do, but it will not be economically viable" results?

 

 

DaewooOfDeath
DaewooOfDeath SuperDork
11/1/20 7:40 p.m.
alfadriver (Forum Supporter) said:

IMHO, the next big step for ICE's is when the corn lobby's monopoly on alcohol goes away, and all other alternatives (sugar cane in the south, sugar beets in the north) can contribute to renewable fuels.

This ^^^^

Fuel cells could also be affected by breaking the corn monopoly.

DaewooOfDeath
DaewooOfDeath SuperDork
11/1/20 7:42 p.m.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to alfadriver (Forum Supporter) :

I thought there'd been some development with a GMO crop that directly created a fuel hydrocarbon, without the pesky fermentation/distillation phase required.  Or could that just be one of those "hey look what we could do, but it will not be economically viable" results?

 

 

Sugar cane needs distillation but is vastly more efficient than corn. I think beets have had similar results. There have also been promising experiments with ocean algae grown in floating tubes. 

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt UltimaDork
11/2/20 1:20 p.m.

The conventional engine layout has two massive advantages: They're fairly straightforward to maintain, and manufacturers have had over a century to optimize the design for longevity, emissions, power, and efficiency. So oddball competing designs often have a pretty steep curve where the designer needs to deliver solutions that can fix any problems that crop up on an engine nearly as well as it's handled with a conventional engine, unless they can find a niche application where the problem doesn't matter.

For example, a wobble-plate engine has horrific amounts of wear on the equivalent of the crankshaft.

But put it in a torpedo, and having it blow up after ten minutes of run time becomes a feature instead of a bug, and it's worth it for being able to package a good displacement in a cylinder shape.

The opposed-piston engines' main disadvantage is extra complexity - but not nearly as bad as some other alternative engine designs, so you do sometimes see examples crop up. The design is still rather tall (or wide if the pistons move horizontally) and difficult to service, which is why it probably isn't used more often.

Two cams in the block seems like it would be more complexity than a DOHC design rather than less - even if changing the head gasket might be marginally easier.

alfadriver (Forum Supporter)
alfadriver (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
11/2/20 3:36 p.m.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to alfadriver (Forum Supporter) :

I thought there'd been some development with a GMO crop that directly created a fuel hydrocarbon, without the pesky fermentation/distillation phase required.  Or could that just be one of those "hey look what we could do, but it will not be economically viable" results?

 

 

I think you are thinking the oil ones for bio diesel.  Which do exist even beyond algae.

GIRTHQUAKE
GIRTHQUAKE Dork
11/3/20 7:06 p.m.

So-called "Blue Gas" has been in development hell for awhile but nothing seems to have come out of it. I know the Regera mentions its use in the press releases, but Syngas typically ends with someone just making E85 again.

Biodiesel has to be laboratory clean to work, because all that algae is functionally the same creature. All the test batches that I read about died from common algae-eaters getting into the systems.

I hope fuel cells have a breakthrough, but honestly don't bet on it. FCEs problem right now is that hydrogen requires connections of over 15,000PSI and the best way to make hydrogen is through a fossil fuel instead of drinking water (which is a resource we are running out of), and that you're still having to use battery and motors to power the vehicle anyway.

GTwannaB said:

The other consideration is EVs. As cool.as the technology potential exists in these approaches. When will the research stop. When did steam.engines stop innovating?

To try and make a big friggin' wall of text as small as possible:

EV's big advantage is efficiency- you turn 80+% of all energy in the battery into forward motion, irregardless of whatever the hell you're doing (assuming you're using the motors most likely for the project, Brushless DC/Brushed DC/AC Internal permanent magnet). For Motors themselves, we recently (2012) had a big break with Synchronous Reluctance (SynR) motor technology which is in the Model 3 Tesla thanks to current computer controls and solid state technologies in sensors- I can link some papers if you'd like, but essentially it's a motor with super high efficiencies (93%!) that uses a fraction of the rare earth materials standard Internal Permanent Magnet motors use.

Battery is obvious, but essentially it was THE defining reason EVs were overtaken in the 1900s despite what Edison and Ford thought; lithium cells are a massive deal because they're one of the few batteries we know of that can be scaled to such a tiny size and still be comparable (when all efficiencies added up of course) to compete with gasoline. All we had in that era were flooded lead acid and Nickel-Iron, with each having serious drawbacks to things like ambient temperatures and Nickel-Iron being generally inefficient (not all batteries take 100% of the power you put in. Nickel-Iron would store 1 watt for every 3 watts put inside).

Finally, we have motor controllers. In the 1900s motor "speed" controls were literally by altering and changing voltages, and it wasn't until the 90s with modern computers could you actually get a pedal like a gas car. Instead, they had something like a "Low-Medium-High" speed all based on how much battery voltage was going to the motor from position- old electrics jerk, basically. From there, we also have made great strides in moving huge amounts of power as efficiently as possible thanks to Silicon-Carbon bits; we are basically trying to squeeze out every little percentage point possible and we're getting very good at it.

As for steam? We still use it every day, just that it's been outmodded by everything else except for specific use cases.

ProDarwin
ProDarwin MegaDork
11/3/20 7:10 p.m.
boxedfox (Forum Supporter) said:
wheelsmithy (Joe-with-an-L) (Forum Supporter) said:

#3, Look at the Nissan QR25. They tried what is an astronomical stroke to bore for modern engines. They have some potential, but are pretty terrible engines (note, this is largely due to ingesting cats enema-style through the exhaust valves). Nobody else seems to be playing the long stroke game anymore. Give me an early FZR600 any day, or a 351 W.

I remember the QR25. It was torquey enough, but it was so lazy and vibration prone that it felt like it belonged in a compact truck. It had the same flavor as the old KA24s that Nissan built for the Hardbody and the 240sx.

There is a lot more going on here than just a long stroke

 

QR25: 89mm bore, 100mm stroke

Honda K24: 87mm bore, 99mm stroke

 

Edit:  crap, missed page 2. beat to the punch.

kevlarcorolla
kevlarcorolla Dork
11/4/20 10:56 a.m.
Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) said:

I think the primary reason would likely be emissions.  Secondarily, OEMs have spent so many decades honing and perfecting 4-stroke Otto engines that it may be a stretch to lay a bunch of cash on the line for R&D of a new technology that may not pan out.  Faced with several years and millions of dollars for something that might not work may seem scary to OEMs when the more vanilla alternative is "let's take last year's engine, try this chamber design, and lean out the trim a little."

10 years ago, it would be a far more viable risk.  In today's market, if I were an auto manufacturer, all of my R&D money would be going into electric.

If I was actually smart and designing power for anything all my effort would be into battery design,untill the next big thing comes along thats lighter,more capacity,less burney burney and not destroying the planet it promises to save electric can't really meet its goals.

alfadriver (Forum Supporter)
alfadriver (Forum Supporter) MegaDork
11/4/20 11:41 a.m.

In reply to kevlarcorolla :

Given the opportunity, if you are that passionate, I'd seriously look into joining that industry.  The first company that can solve the cobalt problem in batteries will make billions.  

frenchyd
frenchyd PowerDork
11/4/20 12:21 p.m.

In reply to DaewooOfDeath :

Long stroke engines produce astonished high piston speeds. Jaguar for example had a 4.17 inch stroke on their famous six cylinder engine. The problem is that even at 5500 RPM piston speed approached the limits of production based cast pistons.  Forged pistons expand too greatly which results in audible piston slap.  

kevlarcorolla
kevlarcorolla Dork
11/4/20 12:37 p.m.

In reply to alfadriver (Forum Supporter) :

For sure but I'm not bright enough and too old to learn new tricks

 

 Blows me away that Dr Goodenough is still in the game and at the forefront of solid state research at the age of 97

DaewooOfDeath
DaewooOfDeath SuperDork
11/4/20 11:17 p.m.
frenchyd said:

In reply to DaewooOfDeath :

Long stroke engines produce astonished high piston speeds. Jaguar for example had a 4.17 inch stroke on their famous six cylinder engine. The problem is that even at 5500 RPM piston speed approached the limits of production based cast pistons.  Forged pistons expand too greatly which results in audible piston slap.  

So I'm not an expert in this at all but according to Richard Holdener at Westech, this isn't really a problem on modern engines. Drag Week mountain motors, for example, have astronomical piston speeds but remain reliable enough to survive drag week. Those things do 8k plus with 5 inch strokes or more. They are also, presumably, not outrunning the flame front. The LS7 bottom end with a 4 inch stroke was tested to 8,000 rpm for long periods of time with no problems (it was limited by the hydraulic lifters). Then of course the Honda K23/24 can go up over 9,000 rpm in a racing application with a 3.9 inch stroke.  

Carbon (Forum Supporter)
Carbon (Forum Supporter) UltraDork
11/5/20 7:12 a.m.

I always wanted to do a barrel valve style camshaft (basically a cylindrical rod with windows machined into it that as it spins camshaft style, the windows line up with the ports and allow a/f in and exhaust out). This design would seemingly free up a lot of flow because of no valve to shroud the port, no floating, because no valve or valve spring, vvt remains viable, less mass moving around (and spinning mass is centralized), compact design because no valve, no lobes, no springs, etc. 

DaewooOfDeath
DaewooOfDeath SuperDork
11/5/20 8:00 a.m.

In reply to Carbon (Forum Supporter) :

Me too! Wasn't there a guy on this forum who did that to an M30 BMW?

stafford1500
stafford1500 GRM+ Memberand Dork
11/5/20 8:10 a.m.

In reply to Carbon (Forum Supporter) :

The edge effects of a barrel cam give some interesting swirl possibilities, but the duration can become a limiting factor (you cannot have the open section be larger than 90degrees or there will be permanent leak paths. Also any carbon build-up can get problematic (think rotary engine apex seals). Another possible advantage is that the "cam" could turn at 1/4 speed instead of 1/2  crank speed, since the opening goes thru the "cam" and the flow is not concerned with which side is the upwind or downwind side.

No I havent spent any time thinking abouyt this...

Carbon (Forum Supporter)
Carbon (Forum Supporter) UltraDork
11/5/20 8:12 a.m.

Low and behold! Something similar. I was thinking flow through the middle of the "cam" but around tge outside is cool too. Apparently this has been a thing that exists not only in my head. 
 

https://youtu.be/O1yjqvvaHeU

Carbon (Forum Supporter)
Carbon (Forum Supporter) UltraDork
11/5/20 8:15 a.m.

In reply to DaewooOfDeath :

I saw that, he's doing it quite a bit differently than I was picturing (flowing through the "cam" etc.)  looks needlessly complex to my but who am I to talk trash, I've done nothing to actually build something whereas he has a prototype lol. 

MadScientistMatt
MadScientistMatt UltimaDork
11/5/20 9:34 a.m.
Carbon (Forum Supporter) said:

I always wanted to do a barrel valve style camshaft (basically a cylindrical rod with windows machined into it that as it spins camshaft style, the windows line up with the ports and allow a/f in and exhaust out). This design would seemingly free up a lot of flow because of no valve to shroud the port, no floating, because no valve or valve spring, vvt remains viable, less mass moving around (and spinning mass is centralized), compact design because no valve, no lobes, no springs, etc. 

Douglas Self's Museum of Retro Technology has a pretty impressive roundup of oddball ICE variants - along with oddball steam engines and other forgotten technologies. There's a whole page dedicated to rotary-valve designs. This idea seems to date at least as far back as 1886, but sealing it correctly has always been a problem.

1 2

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
CFi2DMfWC2KnN6eFtFlnNI9Au2fjEnDmdV5oELbOPyzTp0clIbcvcweoWZs0mkM6