![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Lasers Could Boost Engine Efficiency By 27%
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Considering that engines from Hyundai are having issue with carbon deposits and exhaust blockages from using direct cylinder fuel injection and the power and MPG improvements arn't matching up to the hype, i'd say freaking lazers arn't gonna help much either
And then people gripe about turbo lag.....
Darunion
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2010
- Messages
- 5,312
so instead of a feeler gauge to set my plugs ill need a method to focus the laser for tuneups? :/
Turbochargers don't use waste heat to operate, they use the airflow from the exhaust. If they could economically make them out of completely insulated materials to reduce thermal convection to the input air, they would, as cooler air is denser.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
The huge chunk of colder metal currently sat in the middle of the combustion chamber helps not a lot.
Speaking nothing of the laser, removing the spark plug is a bloody good idea!
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Different method of combustion and different burning characteristics.
Cool. But would it be any improvement is the real question.
Because lasers make everything better.
Hey Steve... are those laser goggles you're wearing?
Great! Just got a pair myself.
Nenu
[H]ardened
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2007
- Messages
- 20,315
Agreed, there are many questions, but it depends what you want improved.
There must be more fuel burned because there wont be a large block of metal reducing flow and limiting burn rate by being in the way.
The metal cooling the surrounding area will further reduce the area combustion will occur in.
Displacement of the spark plug reduces the available area combustion can occur in.
The laser could also be applied to diesel, its relative effects wont be as great if its taken up by both camps.
But given diesels greater efficiency, it may not be improved as much.
Too little known really.
Grahamkracka
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,052
In an indirect way they do. The exhaust gasses exit at higher pressure the hotter they are...pressure that drives the turbocharger. At the most basic level, the heat in the gas is simply a measure of how energetic it is. Higher temp = higher pressure = more energy available to compress the input air.
Ashbringer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Messages
- 5,522
Ashbringer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Messages
- 5,522
Unless you have a V8, then you wouldn't have much turbo lag. The peasant 4 cylinder owners would experience this more often. Now I have to turbo everything. To save on gas mileage of course.
No offense, but you just went "full retard". You know how the academy frowns upon that.
Take even the most basic level physics class, and you'll understand how its primarily the heat energy that you are capturing, not "airflow". In fact, what exactly do you think is causing the gasses to rush out of the engine at such a rapid velocity? That they are being PUSHED by the pistons? Well, technically a tiny bit, but peak exhaust pressure is right when the exhaust valve is opened rather than an even push from the cylinder through its stroke, which actually contributes very little. Its the heat causing rapid expansion of the gasses, and the energy extracted by the turbocharger is why a turboed car's exhaust is cooler than a naturally aspirated engine, all else equal.
So the cliffs notes is that its the temperature and pressure drop across a turbine that represents almost all of the energy captured, rather than the minimal energy such as say your blowing onto a pinwheel.
Understanding this very basic concept is why its so important to keep the turbocharger as close to the exhaust ports as possible, and that thermal wrapping of the exhaust is sometimes used to ensure no heat loss before the turbocharger. Otherwise if it were just about "airflow", it wouldn't matter if you mounted the turbocharger in the middle of your car way behind the catalytic converter, since the total exhaust volume exiting the vehicle won't change. But we know that there is heat loss, which is why a turbo mounted too far back won't make much boost and would be extremely laggy trying to build up enough pressure.
Even modified corvettes suffer from turbolag, it all just depends on how big of a turbo you are running in relation to the size of your engine.Unless you have a V8, then you wouldn't have much turbo lag. The peasant 4 cylinder owners would experience this more often. Now I have to turbo everything. To save on gas mileage of course.
You can run a light pressure turbo on a high compression four-banger and be totally lag free, especially if you run a variable vane turbo (common on diesels). VW is known for this, using small turbos with peak torque at really low engine RPM.
Now if you're relying on most of your power to come from boost, and running a low compression smaller engine accordingly, sure you're going to have lag, but that's on any engine. And honestly inline four-bangers make a lot more sense to turbocharge than V-engines anyway, as you only have one perfectly lined up set of exhaust ports which means that the piping is far simpler than trying to use a turbo on the left and right sides of the engine and then having to run the compressed air outlet together to one side of an intercooler and then back up by your intake. For simplicity's sake, IMO a big V8 should just stick with a supercharger.
Unless you have a V8, then you wouldn't have much turbo lag. The peasant 4 cylinder owners would experience this more often. Now I have to turbo everything. To save on gas mileage of course.
In case you hadn't noticed, more and more car makers are ditching V8's and going with V6 and inline 4's so.... Even the new Formula 1 2015 rules have removed V8's from racing, they are now turbo charged V6s
AliceCooper
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,478
Should just switch everything to diesel with turbos. Lots of torque, better for the environment, more efficient, and if you want, you don't need no freakin spark/glow/laser plug. I think every single 5.9 cummins engine ignited the fuel off compression alone. Yes they do have something called a grid heater that helps, but my brothers as well as MANY others have that deleted and they crank and start no problem.
1. American's drivers/consumers hate diesel
2. American drivers/consumers don't know/don't care to know why diesel is better
3. Diesel is more expensive vs gas a pump = American don't want it
4. Diesel engines/cars cost more = Americans don't wanna pay more
5. Diesel smells. Period.
6. Diesel spills are messier
In short, Americans will never embrace diesel.
AliceCooper
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,478
Yeah, sad truth.. I'de have a diesel if I could have afforded the eco-diesel and deleted that stupid DEF. Until I can afford one, I'll drive my 04 hemi around.
America is built by diesel, but it runs on gasoline and that honestly will likely never change
Well, more fuel efficient, but diesel engines still have issues minimizing particular pollutants from their exhaust like much higher levels of soot and NOx: http://www.theicct.org/news/press-r...aust-emissions-modern-diesel-cars-seven-times
Part of the reason they are more efficient is that they run VERY lean compared to gasoline engines. They can run lean as there is little risk of pre-detonation with diesel fuel. That's part of the problem with a lot of diesel owners though is that they chip their diesel, because you can make more power out of a diesel by dumping in more fuel and running closer to stoichiometric air/fuel ratio, but when you do the diesels become SUPER POLUTERS, like BIG TIME!
The a-holes you see that are blowing huge smoke stacks out of their trucks are doing this for example (and sometimes taking out the particulate filters too), and IMO need to be anally raped with a rusty iron serving spoon.
(feel free to slash tires, they are really expensive to replace)
That said, low emissions diesels are getting better every year, and all-inclusive they make more sense than hybrids for probably most of the United States where we travel on highways 90% of the time.
(feel free to slash tires, they are really expensive to replace)
This is the stuff of tree hugging hippies nightmares lol
As a 335D owner I reject your reality and replace it with my own.
1) Certainly not all, as non-truck diesel resale values were out the roof when gas prices were high, and no dealerships could keep enough stock of VW and Audi diesels.
2) Most drivers are stupid, that's true.
3) The price of diesel is a legitimate concern, as you have to factor that as the equivelent of reduced fuel economy if you're going for pure economics. A car running 40mpg on 87 octane is going to be far more economical than a 42mpg diesel.
4) Another valid concern, and they tend to weigh more
5) Diesels don't have to smell, my mom's diesel A3 has no odor
6) Why are people spilling any fuel? Modern gas stations are retard proof.
But there are pros a lot of people do know, such as the good low end torque and general better long-term reliability. You forgot the con of being louder, which generally speaking most diesels are, although measures are being taken to minimize that gap.
You think I'm a tree hugging hippy? This should be the nighmare of anyone that takes pride in their country and doesn't believe in jumping on their kitchen table, taking a giant dump, and then having a bowl of cereal right next to it.This is the stuff of tree hugging hippies nightmares lol
I'm pretty damn conservative, as are my friends, and we give a-holes like this a load of shit when we see them. Its no different than throwing trash out of your window, and you don't mess with Texas!
Yeah but you see, this is free country and...well... They can legally do that, even if you hate it. Thats life.
It has been illegal since 1970. The problem was merely with law enforcement's unwillingness to enforce the law. Its also IMO the duty of any good patriotic citizen to give people a hard time that intentionally try to hurt our country.
Its like people that pour used motor oil down the drain. Cops may not catch many of them, but if you see it happening IMO you have a moral obligation to get in their face and do your best to ruin any chance of future happiness they have, at least in the short term.
So you'd watch a neighbor pouring used motoroil down the drain and just keep watering your plants? If so, maybe you should move to China if you don't give two craps about where you live.
You'll fit in with the commies, as they could give two craps. Enjoy your smog commute, and gong xi fa cai:
http://all-that-is-interesting.com/pollution-in-china-photographs#5
Can't you use lasers in nuclear fusion reactors? For nuclear fusion, you need TREMENDOUS heat to force hydrogen atoms to collide together to form helium. That is the only limitation right now. Currently, whatever energy you put in to do nuclear fusion, you get the same amount of energy back so there is no surplus. Lockheed Martin says they have the solution & expect to release a fusion reactor in 2017.
So what if you use lasers to heat up the reactors?
With nuclear fusion, now you have almost unlimited energy. Byproduct would only be helium, which is not a greenhouse gas & could be used in other things. You would not need to worry about dangerous uranium or plutonium like with nuclear fission. Hydrogen you can get from salt water right out of the ocean. Laser would require energy but you can get that back from the fusion reactor.
You want cars? Boom, electric cars where you get all your energy from the fusion reactors. Then you can just focus completely on batteries OR you can make switchable batteries that you just switch out at any local electric station
So what if you use lasers to heat up the reactors?
With nuclear fusion, now you have almost unlimited energy. Byproduct would only be helium, which is not a greenhouse gas & could be used in other things. You would not need to worry about dangerous uranium or plutonium like with nuclear fission. Hydrogen you can get from salt water right out of the ocean. Laser would require energy but you can get that back from the fusion reactor.
You want cars? Boom, electric cars where you get all your energy from the fusion reactors. Then you can just focus completely on batteries OR you can make switchable batteries that you just switch out at any local electric station
But its OK to promote the damaging of private property and assault with a weapon, both of which are very much "illegal"? But that's all fine and we'll as long as it promotes the well being of "America" future and nature's beauty, right?
Wanna try again Mr Flag Waver?
Sure, awesome sauce. Sound like a winner. Until the politicians and their oil supporters shut your ass down.
And me thinks some scientists and physicists would have some serious qualms with your idea
Well.. which part? I am not making up the "using lasers in fusion reactors" part
Google it up:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/high-powered-lasers-deliver-fusion-energy-breakthrough/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_confinement_fusion
http://www.newscientist.com/article...parked-fusion-power-passes-key-milestone.html
They use lasers already to do small-scale nuclear fusion. I am saying to raise it to bigger scales. I don't know if that is what Lockheed Martin is doing.. They are keeping it under wraps for now
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesco...nuclear-fusion-reactor-in-three-years-really/
Assault with a weapon? You should learn to troll better, its like you're not even trying at this point.
Ashbringer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Messages
- 5,522
Yea except that a V8 Corvette gets better Gas mileage than a Audi S4. OHHHHHHHHHHH!
So yea, LSX engines for life.
Grahamkracka
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,052
No offense, but you just went "full retard". You know how the academy frowns upon that.
Take even the most basic level physics class, and you'll understand how its primarily the heat energy that you are capturing, not "airflow". In fact, what exactly do you think is causing the gasses to rush out of the engine at such a rapid velocity? That they are being PUSHED by the pistons? Well, technically a tiny bit, but peak exhaust pressure is right when the exhaust valve is opened rather than an even push from the cylinder through its stroke, which actually contributes very little. Its the heat causing rapid expansion of the gasses, and the energy extracted by the turbocharger is why a turboed car's exhaust is cooler than a naturally aspirated engine, all else equal.
So the cliffs notes is that its the temperature and pressure drop across a turbine that represents almost all of the energy captured, rather than the minimal energy such as say your blowing onto a pinwheel.
Understanding this very basic concept is why its so important to keep the turbocharger as close to the exhaust ports as possible, and that thermal wrapping of the exhaust is sometimes used to ensure no heat loss before the turbocharger. Otherwise if it were just about "airflow", it wouldn't matter if you mounted the turbocharger in the middle of your car way behind the catalytic converter, since the total exhaust volume exiting the vehicle won't change. But we know that there is heat loss, which is why a turbo mounted too far back won't make much boost and would be extremely laggy trying to build up enough pressure.
I should have figured you'd jump in. You spent way more energy than I did explaining the concept
jojo69
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2009
- Messages
- 11,267
Can lazers improve dis? Cuz 'Murica!!
holy mother of god
is he laying those strips...IN REVERSE??
lol
Read the laws, almost any object used to promote violence against another person as physical harm is considered a "weapon" even a rusty spoon.