At idle, an internal combustion engine is at it's worst efficiency. Having to pull the piston down hard against a vacuum and not getting much work out of it because of the small intake charge. Granted, an engine can idle way longer than it can sit under load but it's efficiency is extremely low. This also holds true for en engine while at part throttle say on the highway the engine works hard against the vacuum that is created in the intake because of the throttle body. The idea here is to rid the engine of having to work against the vacuum.
The idea is to equip a 5m with a high pressure hydraulic system on the intake side only that will replace the cam altogether. Instead, a hydraulic system with actuators will hold the intake valves open allowing you to hold the valve open as long as you need to. At idle you might hold it open thru it's entire normal intake stroke and say 7/8ths of the compression stroke to purge the air from the cylinder again. This would result in some losses as it has to repump the air out of the chamber but not near as much as the losses from pulling down against 18-23inches of vacuum would. This would mean that you do away with the throttle body completely and just close the valve erlier in the compression stroke to increase the engines charge at TDC of the compression stroke. This of course means the engine has to have a direct chamber fuel injection. I've thought about this and the system can be further enchanced with a variable compression system
This is how it would work:
At idle your engine is running at say 1/16ths displacement so a Toyota 5m-ge I-6 would essentially be a .175L engine running wide open at say 10:1 compression. Then you hit the throttle, the hydraulic system backs off to halfway thru the compression stroke increasing displacement to 1.4L and dropping off the compression system to account for the larger charge at TDC to give you 10:1 again. At 50% you've got the equivelant of a 1.4L I6 at wide open throttle.
This won't add much for you at full throttle except what the direct injection and variable compression system adds but the savings in economy would be incredible. You're talking an engine with the highway/city economy of a metro(or better) and the power on tap of a full displacement 6 cylinder engine.
--------------------------------------------------
'96 Cavalier Good ol' Pushrod 2.2
-24X,000 miles on factory build
-Some oil loss between changes, me thinks it be rings.
Oh yeah, construction started yesterday.
--------------------------------------------------
'96 Cavalier Good ol' Pushrod 2.2
-24X,000 miles on factory build
-Some oil loss between changes, me thinks it be rings.
im confused as @!#$ after reading that, but if it works id patent that @!#$ asap!!
Joey Baggs (Eazy716) wrote:im confused as @!#$ after reading that, but if it works id patent that @!#$ asap!!
x2
where's MadJack or slowolej? LOL
Desert Tuners
“When you come across a big kettle of crazy, it’s best not to stir it.”
sounds like adding a whole bunch of extra stuff to a setup to get somewhat better economy... im not saying dont try it, im actually interested in seeing it work. but just the way i see it explained, cost of making it work properly as described> potential savings.
JBO Stickers! Get yours today!
Yeah....more BS stuff that won't be completed or work as thought.
I used to race cars, now I race myself.
5K PB: 24:50
10K PB: 54:26
so basicly your taking the load off of the piston on the intake stroke, and making it use less power to spin the same speed. hence lower fuel input and lower emmsions.
In theroy it works, but I think theres a few things that would probably be an issue. for starters whats going to lubricate the system? and how in the hell is that thing going to stay closed on combustion. thats a @!#$ load of force man. what did you plan on using to drive the system.?
can it work... like I said in theroy it should, but if thats true than why hasnt some one thought of it? I would hate to think that the people that have been doing this for years havent worked every angle availbe.
Give it a try
"
boobs now with Riboflabin"
I'm going to have it use the main engine oil for the hydraulic fluid. As for remaining closed it'll have a valvespring like normal but there will be a modified a/c compressor for the pump. One putting pressure in the system and one pulling a "vacuum". The actuators are actually pretty simple. Think of it as a double sided valve. One side is open and the other is closed. Actuate the valve and it swaps so that it goes from pressing in to pulling back on the actuator. I know that this might not work and stuff but the engineering school I'm trying to get into looks for this kind of stuff in a student...I've already done the cad drawings but I feel like building it now. Might not use the toyota engine tho I think a OHC mower engine would be alot easier.
--------------------------------------------------
'96 Cavalier Good ol' Pushrod 2.2
-24X,000 miles on factory build
-Some oil loss between changes, me thinks it be rings.
Quote:
At idle you might hold it open thru it's entire normal intake stroke and say 7/8ths of the compression stroke to purge the air from the cylinder again.
Miller cycle. Neat idea, not new. Miller cycle combined with turbocharging has the potential to create good economy.
Quote:
I'd like to know where you are going to find actuators with a super high MTBF for a reasonable price....
Good point. There are many patents for engine improvements which use interesting parts made out of "unobtanium." But it's not completely impossible. Indy cars use air powered actuators. Lexus and Mercedes are just 2 more companies which have produced working throttle-less engines. Just look at the fuel injector in the Powerstroke diesel for an example of a working computer controlled high pressure hydraulic actuator with a (very) large MTBF.
Quote:
At idle your engine is running at say 1/16ths displacement so a Toyota 5m-ge I-6 would essentially be a .175L engine running wide open at say 10:1 compression. Then you hit the throttle, the hydraulic system backs off to halfway thru the compression stroke increasing displacement to 1.4L and dropping off the compression system to account for the larger charge at TDC to give you 10:1 again. At 50% you've got the equivelant of a 1.4L I6 at wide open throttle.
The laws of physics think your description is in violation of something.
Reducing displacement means altering piston stroke or cylinder bore. Otherwise the piston displaces 100% of its volume every time the crank moves through one complete revolution. And the mechanical compression ratio won't actually change unless you're altering the volume of the combustion chamber or the stroke. But talking about dynamic compression, you'd be better off to keep dynamic compression at it's maximum at all times to increase thermal efficiency. Since you can alter valve timing and ultimately, charge density, you can control combustion chamber temps by altering the relationship between intake and exhaust strokes thereby eliminating 2 enemies of high compression: Knock and NOx production.
The simplest way to do what you want may be to make a hydraulic lifter in which the bleed rate is controlled electronically. Lifters are small hydraulic pumps. If you find a way to control the valving of that pump electronically then you can alter the work done by the pump.
Quote:
sounds like adding a whole bunch of extra stuff to a setup to get somewhat better economy
I agree. The learning experience may be extremely valuable. But I feel there are still more conventional methods to improve performance. Replace the poppet valve with an inexpensive and reliable rotary valve and you've suddenly removed the greatest factor limiting engine rpm while dramatically increasing volumetric efficiency. Accessing high rpm is the key to making more power quickly. Replace the friction bearings used in the crank, cam, and rods with needle bearings and replace the rings with low tension units and you've attacked one of the greatest causes of inefficiency in an engine.
Good luck.
-->Slow
um what? lol
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2090440
Engine oil makes a VERY poor hydraulic fluid. Might want to research what happens when you compress a fluid, but I'll give you the jist of it...
When you compress a fluid, it heats up. When you compress a fluid many, many times in rapid succession, it boils. Hydraulic fluid doesn't do that (at least not very easily). Engine oil however will boil. When you boil anything, you turn it from a liquid to a gas, the gas takes up more area than the liquid (creates pressure), so eventually if you use engine oil, the actuators would stick open at the wrong times (it only takes a split second for the valve to be in the wrong position).
4cyltuner.com - Information Source For 4 Cylinder Tuners
Buy stuff from CarCustoms Ebay! Won't be disappointed!
Theres no way your going to find actuators on the market that will open and close fast enough. There is just no way, and if you do they are going to be hella expensive. I understand the theory of it, but what then are you going to do with the FPR, HVAC, brakes, and everything that uses the vacuum to run it system's.
You just joined in Aug of this year. I do not know you, and do not know what your capabilities are, but I extremely do not think you will ever accomplish this. Also if I was you I would ensure your not stepping on any patents....
Prove me wrong
PRND321 Till I DIE
Old Motor: 160whp & 152ft/lbs, 1/4 Mile 15.4 @88.2
M45 + LD9 + 4T40-E, GO GO GO
I was wondering about that....I guess I'd use ATF then...I also figured engine oil would be a bad idea because engine oil increases in viscosity as it's compressed and that'd cause timing issues.
--------------------------------------------------
'96 Cavalier Good ol' Pushrod 2.2
-24X,000 miles on factory build
-Some oil loss between changes, me thinks it be rings.
Quote:
Engine oil makes a VERY poor hydraulic fluid. Might want to research what happens when you compress a fluid, but I'll give you the jist of it... When you compress a fluid, it heats up. When you compress a fluid many, many times in rapid succession, it boils.
This is only true if you can't remove the heat fast enough. Every time a valve is opened in your engine, engine oil is placed under compression. Yet it doesn't boil. There's reasons for this. Heat is removed through the mass of the engine surrounding the lifter, and heat is removed as oil cycles in and out of the lifter.
The problem of heat accumulation is aggravated by the pressure the fluid's placed under and by the frequency of the compression cycles. The frequency of the cycle is very low. A four stroke engine operating at 7000 rpm will only open a single valve 58 times per second. And though the pressure generated in a lifter may seem high, possibly exceeding 1000 psi in certain applications, millions of running engines and many years of automobile production prove that it's acceptable. Eengine oil is acceptable as a hydraulic fluid provided it stays within limits.
How to determine limits? The Powerstroke will quickly show them. Through an arrangement of pistons Ford uses engine oil pressurized to 3000 psi to create fuel pressure in the range of 21000 psi at the injector. This oil pressure is almost 100 times greater than the average street car's oil pressure. At 3000 psi oil pressure you could overcome even the strongest race valve springs (pressures in the 1000 psi range). With springs typical for our J cars you'd need an actuator with less than .100 square inches of surface area. That's about the thickness of two dimes. It's well within the reach of todays technology. And the low volume of fluid needed ( about .03 ounces of oil could provide .500" lift ) means there's little chance of overheating the engine oil used in the actuator. Replacing valve springs with a hydraulic version of the Desmodramic valvetrain would reduce required pressures considerably to put even less demand on the system. Replacing valve springs would also remove one of the largest sources of heat in the engine oil.
Heat is not the primary reason why valvetrains do not use completely hydraulic actuators.
FWIW, Ford is pushing the limits of today's engine oil. They constantly warn that oil must be in good condition, must meet their specs, must be changed when needed. They even sell an anti foaming additive in the cases where the oil isn't of acceptable quality. Luckily there are several oils which have proven themselves acceptable.
Quote:
Theres no way your going to find actuators on the market that will open and close fast enough.
That's the challenge. The primary issue is one of speed. A lifter works because it is the pump and actuator in one package. And even it has limits as to what's possible. When you try to move the pump and any valving to a remote location you have to deal with delays, or "latency." If you have too much latency you'll be limited as to the maximum rpm you can achieve.
And then, once you design a system which is fast enough to open the valves quickly you have to design a way to slow it down. You can't simply slam a valve against a valve seat like a hammer hitting a nail. It won't take long for the valve to give up the fight. You need to slow down the approach is the valve gets closer to the seat.
-->Slow
Team Vision Racing (aka hypsy) wrote:Yeah....more BS stuff that won't be completed or work as thought.
and you know this, how? you good friends with him, so you know he will fail?
god i love the .org so much hate, so little time.
White 98'Z-alive n kickn
Black 97'Z-down for the count
Z YAAAA wrote:Team Vision Racing (aka hypsy) wrote:Yeah....more BS stuff that won't be completed or work as thought.
and you know this, how? you good friends with him, so you know he will fail?
god i love the .org so much hate, so little time.
Go take your whining elsewhere. Your just butthurt because you got put in your place. I wish more @!#$talkers would be put down like you've been lately.
I used to race cars, now I race myself.
5K PB: 24:50
10K PB: 54:26
Team Vision Racing (aka hypsy) wrote:Z YAAAA wrote:Team Vision Racing (aka hypsy) wrote:Yeah....more BS stuff that won't be completed or work as thought.
and you know this, how? you good friends with him, so you know he will fail?
god i love the .org so much hate, so little time.
Go take your whining elsewhere. Your just butthurt because you got put in your place. I wish more @!#$talkers would be put down like you've been lately.
come on man.
how does saying anyof this help. if you just post to talk trash, of course your setting your self up for an argument. so why bother posting?
Im not name calling, becuase weve made amends, but you do this alot.
just trying to point something out no offense meant
"
boobs now with Riboflabin"
if you allow more air into the system to relive vacum pressure, then wont the compression and eventual explosin be bigger? basicly its leaving the the throttle open right???
"
boobs now with Riboflabin"
I may be a bit clueless...but what are you putting the 5m into? A cavalier? Or a supra? Im really confuzed....
One of the drawbacks of the 5m was getting the air in there. They are quite fun little engines. But toyota in their wisdom used an afm and stuff to squench the raw power of the dohc. The people doing the stuff to them now after going to standalone management should net some great results.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
I just saved a bunch of money on my car insurance by fleeing the scene of an accident!
Actually the 5m is in an 88' Cressida.
And yeah the throttle is left open, actually, it's removed. The intake valve just stays open long enough to let the cylinder purge the unwanted air back into the intake until it reaches the amount it needs. Which means instead of pulling hard to get just a little air like you sucking thru a small straw vs your nose.
It'd be hard to meter air like that tho...standalone is required but the engine was gonna get one anyways because my tubular intake is useless with an AFM in there.
--------------------------------------------------
'96 Cavalier Good ol' Pushrod 2.2
-24X,000 miles on factory build
-Some oil loss between changes, me thinks it be rings.
if i understand (from what i read), you're saying to have electromagnetic actuated valves.
we spoke about this the other day in my internal combustion engines class (top engineering university in the nation) and the biggest problem is finding something that small that can open and close so quickly. it takes a lot of energy, and with the inertial forces that are generated at high rpms, there just isn't anything out there that can feasibly work (at our current technology). once the 42 volt system comes out though and there's more research into it, this will essentially revolutionize engine technology because it will create an infinitely variable and controllable intake/fuel mixture that will be easily controllable and modifyable for economy and emissions purposes.
but currently, it aint hapnin.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sold my beloved J in April 2010 -
Not to bash, I applaud anyone for thinking outside the box. However, to me it seems you just wish to improve efficiency at idle. The easiest and most effective way to accomplish this is to cut off the motor at idle, i.e. as we see on almost every other hybrid vehicle. For the expense and complexity you are proposing, it would most likely be simpler to build an on/off actuator for the motor. I am no electrical engineer (I'm mechanical), but I'd think that the motor shutoff would be much more practical and more effective. There would be many difficulties with this system too, but the actual components you are looking for probably do not exist outside of laboratory research. Just my $0.2 for you, but again don't forget that most good innovations come from those thinking as you are.
"If you aren't shifting, then you certainly aren't driving!"
Team Vision Racing (aka hypsy) wrote:Z YAAAA wrote:Team Vision Racing (aka hypsy) wrote:Yeah....more BS stuff that won't be completed or work as thought.
and you know this, how? you good friends with him, so you know he will fail?
god i love the .org so much hate, so little time.
Go take your whining elsewhere. Your just butthurt because you got put in your place. I wish more @!#$talkers would be put down like you've been lately.
stop being an a$$hole to ppl and i'll stop "talking" sh!t.
simple as that.
