I used to have seen Speed vs time in a test circuit. It is like mountains. The drivers accelerate hard and brake hard. As they can decelerate faster than they can accelerate, thus their deceleration has steeper slope.
When race car is in decelerating mode, the engine is in extreme light load condition, this is gas wasting stage. As I recall, 1/3 of the race(say Laguna Seca) time the engine is in idle. Even if we put idle gas saving at 20%, this is one heck of an advantage over your competitors. OK say 2% is used for powering compressor, we still are 18% saving at 1/3 of the race time.
Of course, if some one designs a electronic system that stop the engine as soon as it detects deceleration and instantly restart the engine when gas pedal is pressed. Then we lose and I bow to the designer of such a race car.
In real race, if you know that you have such an engine efficiency advantage, I would concern less about fuel usage. Less about strategy etc.
F1 Racing has so much money. A team, if they want to implement such a gadget, can do so very fast. I imagine they can spend ten million and in one year and get it done. At least that is what I hope. Then my posting here would not be in vain.
"When race car is in decelerating mode, the engine is in extreme light load condition, this is gas wasting stage."
when production car is in decelerating mode, the engine is in extreme light load condition, this is no fuel supplied at all stage.
Check it yourself, on a long hill, take your foot off the gas and look at the fuel consumption meter, zero fuel used. It's called overrun fuel cutoff and has been around since, oh, 1987 at the latest.
Thank you Greg for educating me. I do not see that feature in common vehicles.
I would like to talk a bit about patent process. The original intent for the patent is that the patent holder teaches the world how his new gizmo or process is better than the old one. When the world adopt his process or start to sell his gizmo, he collects a royalty for the duration of the patent, 20 years from filing.
Well, this process has corrupted to become offensive and defensive weapons for high technology companies. If you have a particular valuable patent you can prevent other companies from making the same device. In the worse abuse of patent, a company will keep a innovative patent in the vault and prevent other companies of advancing the state of the art, as that patent would stop you cold in court. Of course, this can also be offensive. One innovative company with a particular patent can grow from a small one to a would wide company under the protection of that patent. I do not even need to name names.
Today, I would like to try another innovative approach, this is cloud innovation (we have cloud everything, why not cloud innovation). That is I open up my invention (or just the concept of it) on net, and subject to everybody's criticism. And every one can witness this debate in real time. They can see from expert's critic if this idea is BS. At the end of day, if this idea does not have fatal flaw(s), then everybody can come and play. This is the best of capitalism, free competition of ideas, free competition of capital, free competition of human resources. Every one starts at the same starting line at the same time, give or take a few weeks. Who ever can make better product faster, cheaper, more reliable win.
I have done my front line fighting. I just want to find more problem to solve and patent. I'll leave the exciting part of actually struggling to overcome technical problems to others. I just hope that I can collect some amount of royalties as US patent process intended.
In some way, this cloud innovation is also an innovation. I do not know if it'll succeed or fail. But like all innovation, you must try to find out. If it works fine, if not try something else. This is how the spirit of Silicon valley works. When Steve job has a vision, he does not have anything to substantiate his vision. That is just what it is, a vision. Nothing more. I am no Steve Job, my vision does not count. But when I am on to a solution for something important I do not let go. That is why am here.
every car I've driven that was manufactured in the last 15 years. it's the lowest cherry on the tree. So, do you drive a carburetted jeep, and assume it represents state of the art?
The patent method is what it is. I don't think it is great, I don't even think it is mediocre, it does almost the opposite of what it ostensibly is for, but it is the one we are stuck with. So, can we talk about engines, not the patent process? Or have two threads?
I do want everybody's explanation on why an engine performs better, both in efficiency and power in winter. I was thinking of creating a new thread and have other people pitch in. Then I thought this has to do with what I am doing in this Chen engine thread. So I'll keep that question on this thread. This is an important question, please think about it.
I have surveyed new engine developments in this country. Some are financed by hundred million dollars, managed by seasoned automobile engine executives and supposedly sold one plant to China for $200 million. I look at their proposals and just shake my head. Believe me, I do know why I get 100% zero confidence vote in the beginning and extremely hostile response. Lucky for me, I have seen worse thus I am prepared for it. If I were you, my first thought would be exactly like 100% of you, not AGAIN. Not another better engine, another engine claiming 30% improvement in efficiency. I must protect the world from these frauds, and swindlers. But Chen engine IS for real. I think that I may have change the minds of some of you. I would not rest until some you are convinced enough to get into action.
The thread is Chen engine and I know for the third world, motorcycles is the main mode of transportation. In a country like India most the pollution is from motorcycles. And the gasoline cost put a strain on family budget. I would really like to see the first Chen engine to come out of India. To these Indian engine engineers, Chen engine development is your chance to make a difference to your country, to the world and also to yourself. The remaining engineering work is no harder than a master's theses. You can do it. This applied to all third world engineers and engine entrepeneurs. This time, you can start from the same beginning as all the big guys in the world. Coming from Silicon Valley, I know that you have definite advantages. The reason is that all established companies do not want "disruptive technology" or product, as that threaten their existing products and profits. Also it is because the inertia of their people, their culture, their thinking that we just have to defend against electric cars or at worst, join them. They would not know what hit them, until it is too late. This is how Silicon Valley works.
Chengine wrote: I do know why I get 100% zero confidence vote in the beginning and extremely hostile response. Lucky for me, I have seen worse thus I am prepared for it. If I were you, my first thought would be exactly like 100% of you, not AGAIN. Not another better engine, another engine claiming 30% improvement in efficiency. I must protect the world from these frauds, and swindlers.
You forgot with no math to back it up, Lack of any ability to to show how this new engine is better. Lack of knowledge of basic mechanics of an automobile engine. Constantly changing scope as to what to magic engine does.
Im not sure how you plan to change any ones mind with this display but please continue.
Chengine wrote: I do know why I get 100% zero confidence vote in the beginning and extremely hostile response. Lucky for me, I have seen worse thus I am prepared for it. If I were you, my first thought would be exactly like 100% of you, not AGAIN. Not another better engine, another engine claiming 30% improvement in efficiency. I must protect the world from these frauds, and swindlers.
You forgot with no math to back it up, Lack of any ability to to show how this new engine is better. Lack of knowledge of basic mechanics of an automobile engine. Constantly changing scope as to what to magic engine does.
Im not sure how you plan to change any ones mind with this display but please continue.
yeh, it sounds mostly like a recipe for how to talk gullible investor into parting with their money; talk about seven
different things with wild claims of efficency/improvement/profit/market etc . and when asked to provide some
facts to support the claims talk about seven different subjects
Chen engine in German means small engine or cute engine. I think it is appropriete to call that as only small engine can deliver the gas efficiency needed. The efficiency of an engine depends on running at at least moderate load all the time and with air injection to clean up the energy absorbing waste gas if it must work at low load. With this, Chen engine should be able to deliver very good city MPG. It will not exceed hybrid in city driving, as Hybrid car avoided the issue of low load operation of Otto engine entirely.
US department of Energy published an article called "Where does the energy go?" is 2009. It wants to know why the car engines operate from 35% efficiency on highway and drop to 18% efficiency around town in heavy traffic light situation. Braking alone does not explain the difference. The answer is the energy goes into CO2 and H2O vibrational and rotational modes.
what percentage goes into vibration mode and what percentage goes into rotation? How is this split between the two gasses? How does adding more air prevent the vibration and rotation?
My solution will never reach hybrid if hybrid uses Chen engine operating above 35% load as most hybrid does.
No, Hybrid will be better than Chen engine.
As to the Vibration and rotation part. Let me try to find a net source that can explain it. I'll try here.
When a gas composition heats up, the heat energy is distributed into so called degree of freedoms. For ideal gas, say He or Ar single atom specie, ideal gas low works perfectly PV=NRT. For diatomic molecules such as O2, N2, they have just one vibration mode, the two atoms are connected by a spring, thus simple vibration mode and heat is distributed into this mode and the rotation. When the O2 is at higher temperature, this dumbell molecule is fast rotating as well.
For three atoms molecules such as CO2 and H2O, their vibrational modes are more complicated, they have stretching modes and bending modes(two outside atoms stretches and bend around the center atom, in both they have symmetric and symmetric bending as well, thus all together 6 vibration mode, as compared to N2 one vibration mode.
How the heat is distributed in all these, is simple. Each degree of freedom, or mode, it takes up 1/2 kT, where K is Boltzmann constant (just a number) and T is temperature.
Now O2 has three kinetic modes x, y, z. and three rotation plus one vibration, thus total of 7.
And for CO2 we have x, y, z, Rx Ry, Rz and Vss, Vas, Vsbx, Vabx, Vsby,Vaby, Vsbz, Vasz, thus 14.
All these modes only kinetic modes moves cylinder, the others are just heat waster. Meaning Gasoline energy in combustion is wasted in these vibration and rotations. CO2 and H2O wasted twice that of N2 and O2.
As to the exact distribution of neat energy distribution into all these modes require so call Quantum Boltzmann distribution.
Boltzmann tells us at what temperature how the heat energy is distributed among gas species, O2. N2 etc,
In summary, in the power phase of the Otto cycle, the more H2O and CO2 the less efficient the engine. We can not do anything about the N2 and O2. But we can remove the CO2 and H2O before the combustion. This is the theses of Chen Engine. In combustion, one still produces CO2 and H2O, but these are at 2000 C temperature, they are the base temperature. They are first cooled down by N2, then by CO2 and H2O of the waste gas. thus with waste gas, the combustion force is at its lowest. And the engine converts chemical energy to mechanical energy at its lowest.
For simplicity this is not the whole truth. At very high temperature, the H2O and CO2 actually have three times the heat capacity than O2. I do not even know the reason.
Bottom line, the best engine would have all gases be inert gases, such as He. Then next best thing is all gases before combustion are all diatomic molecules. The worst for efficiency is waste gas where 25% are CO2 and H2O. And in idling, we have the most waste gas before ignition.
Chengine
Of course, I lied, the EPA's lose in city driving engine efficiency is also due to cars standing still burning gas and does not move. We should really reduce this highway city gap.
Chengine wrote:Now O2 has three kinetic modes x, y, z. and three rotation plus one vibration, thus total of 7.
And for CO2 we have x, y, z, Rx Ry, Rz and Vss, Vas, Vsbx, Vabx, Vsby,Vaby, Vsbz, Vasz, thus 14.
All these modes only kinetic modes moves cylinder, the others are just heat waster. Meaning Gasoline energy in combustion is wasted in these vibration and rotations. CO2 and H2O wasted twice that of N2 and O2.
I think you are right about the vibrational modes (hi, chemist here!) and as far as I can see this would be the only real advantage of what you are proposing. Well, maybe also substituting a bit of hot gas with colder gas. The rest would be just adjusting factors to be taken into account into calculations of the effective cylinder volume and fuel needed.
But I think the part about "just" heat waster is overstated. As the cylinder starts to expand and as a consequence its contents cool down, the energy in those vibrational modes will be quickly redistributed to the translational modes, and hence to useful work. I think this equilibrium is reached faster than the gas moves.
But yes, whatever energy was still left in the vibrational modes when the gases move into the exhaust pipe, that's wasted, but so are the translational modes. I think the discussion can be reduced to the calorific capacity (Cp?) of the gases, although of course its value depends on the number of vibrational modes available to absorb energy.
