Posted on 05/04/2006 7:36:00 AM PDT by Reaganesque
Scuderi Group Air-Hybrid Engine claimed to double fuel efficiency
May 3, 2006 On March 7, we wrote of the coming of Scuderi Group's Air-Hybrid engine which claims the title of the world's most fuel efficient internal combustion engine. The Scuderi engine makes its European debut May 9 - 11 at the Engine Expo 2006 in Stuttgart, Germany on a bit of a roll. With three additional worldwide patents recently filed, the air-hybrid system potentially doubles the fuel efficiency of today's gasoline and diesel vehicles and reduces toxic emissions by up to 80 percent. The design is ingenious, has been verified by a world renowned independent laboratory, just landed a US$1.2 million DoD grant to develop the technology further, and it was clearly the talk of the Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress in Detroit where it was officially declared the most visited stand. The technology can be adapted for either diesel or gasoline engines of any size and is claimed to halve fuel consumption compared to today’s internal combustion engines. Autoblog has a succinct well-crafted peice and this animation will help you conceptualise this clever twist on the Otto cycle. There's also the official how it works and theory of operation.
The engine takes advantage of Scuderi's split-cycle by recapturing and storing energy in the form of compressed air. Unlike conventional engines, the Scuderi Engine produces compressed air during its normal operation. By adding a small air storage tank with some simple controls costing only a few hundred dollars, the Scuderi Engine can recapture energy normally lost.
Currently under development, the first diesel and gasoline prototypes are expected to be completed in 2007. It looks to be the real deal so everyone is watching closely.
bump
Not to mention making shale and sand extraction economically viable. Once oil prices crash, and they will, we should tarrif imported oil to keep domestic tar sands and oil shale economically viable. Only Canada should be exempted from the import tarrif.
It will definitely take some time, remember how long it took to eliminate leaded fuels? I think the first tank of unleaded I remember my dad buying was in 1975, and I was able to get unleaded at the Sinclair station until 1996 in my hometown (I had a '68 LeMans at the time.)
It's the early 80's all over again, one reason I tend to view higher gas prices with less than unmitigated terror. As a Newsweek article of the time was entitled, "OPEC, Meet Adam Smith".
I would have gone for a hydraulic fluid-gas compression system, with individual hydrostatic motors on each wheel, to act as both an all-wheel drive system without the complication of shafts and differentials, and the application of a regenerative braking system that did not depend on either a bank of batteries or a flywheel to store energy.
But the air pump combined with a diesel power unit is technology that could be used right now. If the system could be combined with adiabatic expansion cooling, it dould be even more efficient than today's best diesel designs.
Then there is a system which takes advantage of the exhaust heat from a diesel to flash-boil water, to drive an auxiliary steam engine, also on a closed recycling circuit.
We are not done engineering automobiles by a long shot. 100 MPG for a 4,000 pound vehicle traveling 75 MPH may yet be possible. Without ever getting to the use of hydrogen as fuel.
Looks like a good way to turn wasted heat energy into kinetic energy. Might be good for a 20-30% increase in MPG, is my guess.
I agree. One thing to keep in mind, however, is that as we get higher mpg (up to 100mpg for a full size car in some peoples dreams) what it really means is that the marginal price of fuel drops, leading to even higher consumption.
I haven't worked the numbers, but I'd bet that on a cost per mile basis, we aren't paying any more on average now with $3 gas than we were in the 1960s when most all cars were major gas hogs. Over that time, the number of cars on the road, the average number of miles driven, and the total amount of fuel used have skyrocketed offsetting fuel efficiency advances.
If any of you reading this believe that this is for real (or in this case *will be* for real) I have a bridge in NYC to sell you.
"We can get compression ratios of 100 to 1"? ROFLMHO
Maybe someone can tell us all what difference there is in horsepower drain, or compression power, between this and a supercharged engine?
BB62
The fuel efficiency of vehicles on the road has nearly doubled since 1973. Gas prices, in inflation adjusted terms have remained fairly stable, so in effect, the COST PER MILE DRIVEN was halved by CAFE. In which alternative universe can the CONSERVATION of a commodity be INCREASED by making it cheaper to use? So, we have proceeded to move further from urban centers, use mass transit less, and we drive 35% more today than 1973. We are 60% dependent on foreign oil now versus 30% then. CAFE is a mirage, a placebo, CONSERVATION as national energy policy should be replaced by REPLACEMENT THERAPY with renewable fuels.
I do not normally advocate the government funding R&D, but energy indepedence is an overriding concern now. Anything that could boost internal combustion engines by even 5% would have far reaching consequences. Besides the DoD grant of 1.2 million, the government should offering any kind of assistance that will speed up the timetable for prototyping this engine from 2007 to sometime this year. We need real solutions to be implemented ASAP! A mini-Manhatten Project, if you will.
Whether this particular invention works out is not relevant. The higher the price of gas goes, the higher the incentive becomes to find an alternative. This invention might not work, but some of the other multiple alternatives just might. Can you imagine the amount of money the person or company that solves this problem will make? It's basic economics/entrepreneurship. Find a need and fill it. OPEC is creating the need and scientists around the world are rapidly developing techonological solutions. It will happen.
Turbocharging is a better solution IMHO.
We are not done engineering automobiles by a long shot. 100 MPG for a 4,000 pound vehicle traveling 75 MPH may yet be possible. Without ever getting to the use of hydrogen as fuel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Over twenty years ago I went to a seminar on vapor carburetors presented by an engineer. I still have the handbook on how to build the carburetors. The presenter offered to bet anyone a sizable amount of money (don't remember the exact figure but it was meaningful) that he could DEMONSTRATE 105 miles per gallon in his Cadillac Fleetwood.
what does it do with the compressed air?
except that the oil market is manipulated - you will see $15 oil again, for a short time, if that's what it takes to wipe out the investments all these new companies are making in various technologies.
I haven't worked the numbers, but I'd bet that on a cost per mile basis, we aren't paying any more on average now with $3 gas than we were in the 1960s when most all cars were major gas hogs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mileage is better now but not by that much. Even a gas hog would get 12 miles per gallon and gasoline sold for 30 cents or so. You won't find anything you can drive for under 3 cents a mile today except maybe a moped. Now if you are talking inflation adjusted costs you are no doubt right. My old F-150 costs nearly 20 cents a mile for gas but that is less than three cents was back in the sixties.
You have to look at inflation adusted dollars. To not do so is silly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.