Register to reply

YOU!: Fix the US Energy Crisis

by russ_watters
Tags: crisis, energy
Share this thread:
russ_watters
#865
Jan13-13, 11:14 PM
Mentor
P: 22,312
Quote Quote by Buckleymanor View Post
It's difficult to understand if there is an actual energy "crisis" or that it the whole thing is just politicts.
There are several classes of problems. In no particular order:
1. Resources
2. Politics
3. Population/development
4. Engineering/technology

Though as an engineer, I may prefer to call engineering a solution, not a problem. Or -- a problem is just a solution that hasn't been found yet.
Where I live GB.
By the way, to answer a previous poster who was less cordial about it, I posted this from an American perspective because:
1. I'm an American.
2. This forum is hosted from America and has a mostly American membership.
In addition:
3. As the world's largest energy user, any problems are more American problems than anyone else's.

But I do not intend to limit this discussion to American problems. Every country has problems, some similar and some different.
there are finacial incentives to insulate your home to save energy and disincentives if you don't which seem reasonable.
Agreed, and it is similar here, with building codes and home improvement incentives.
However automobile and comercial vehicles escape.I don't know what your vehicle uses but I know mine uses more energy than my house. So how come the automotive industry avoids legistlation to save energy yet households don't.
I'm not sure if fuel economy standards exist in the UK, but because of the wide variety of cars and driving conditions, it is difficult to mandate simple standards. The UK maintains higher car fuel economy than the US though, via a simple method: fuel taxes that are 6x higher than in the US.
I don't just wan't to imply that the engine could be insulated but the cab and battery etc.
So tell me I am wrong!
There isn't much that insulation can do for a car. The engines are actually designed to lose heat as quickly as possible to avoid damaging themselves. However, improvements that enable them to get up to operating temperature faster can have a big impact.
OmCheeto
#866
Jan14-13, 09:28 AM
PF Gold
OmCheeto's Avatar
P: 1,435
Quote Quote by russ_watters View Post
...There isn't much that insulation can do for a car. The engines are actually designed to lose heat as quickly as possible to avoid damaging themselves. However, improvements that enable them to get up to operating temperature faster can have a big impact.
I disagree. See my very first PF thread. I've been developing the idea since then.

Insulating the engine, and extracting the waste heat energy is one part of the 11 part hybrid I'm working on. Patent to be filed within the next 24 months. Unless of course, Buckymanor takes my cue, and does it first. I may have to cut a deal with the Bavarians. I would imagine they've patented their turbo-steamer idea.

And in honor of Chroot, I'm adding a pedal option. I don't see any good reason to just sit there at a stop light. Might as well get some gym time in.
mheslep
#867
Jan14-13, 01:12 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,098
Quote Quote by russ_watters View Post
...
3. As the world's largest energy user, any problems are more American problems than anyone else's.

...
That day has come and gone. Among large countries, the per capita energy use prize now goes to Canada, while Australia is atop the per capita carbon centric energy usage (via coal).
Buckleymanor
#868
Jan14-13, 02:05 PM
P: 504
There isn't much that insulation can do for a car. The engines are actually designed to lose heat as quickly as possible to avoid damaging themselves. However, improvements that enable them to get up to operating temperature faster can have a big impact.

I disagree also.
I realise there is an optimum level at which the temperature should be kept and that the temperature should not rise too much above this or damage will happen to the engine.
Insulation of different types and placed at different locations could enable the operating temperature to be reached faster and the heat generated could be retained for longer.
An engine that can retain heat will get up to operating temperature quicker.
A cab that is better insulated requires less heat from the engine in winter to keep warm than one which is not which results in the uninsulated one requireing more fuel.
The same applies to air con in the summer months.
More cab insulation the less work the air con unit has to do.
OCR
#869
Jan14-13, 04:32 PM
P: 124
Quote Quote by OmCheeto c.2007
I'm looking for the most efficient vehicle of course.
It was, and still is... with respect to improved engine efficiency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourke_engine
http://www.rogerrichard.com/4436.html ← Just has to be a Labor of Love...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-stroke_engine
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...THISWEEKSISSUE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_cycle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EcoMotors
http://www.ecomotors.com/
http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatOP.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Ef...y_Hybrid_Cycle
http://www.liquidpiston.com/technologycycle/tid/2.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuderi_Engine
http://www.engineerlive.com/Design-E...iciency/22066/

The engine folks were already working on this, when I got my A&P certificate back in 1973.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camless

The camshaft is probably the biggest technological stumbling block left, that prevents an almost totally 'tunable' piston engine.




OCR
AlephZero
#870
Jan14-13, 05:30 PM
Engineering
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 7,274
Quote Quote by russ_watters View Post
I'm not sure if fuel economy standards exist in the UK, but because of the wide variety of cars and driving conditions, it is difficult to mandate simple standards.
It's easy enough to mandate a simple standard, and the current one is even on track to be met: average CO2 emissions for cars in the EU, of 130 g/km by 2015.

The next target after that one is 95 g/km for cars and 147 g/km for vans, by 2020.

http://www.transportenvironment.org/...standards-2020

In the UK the "carrot" for car owners is a graduated annual vehicle license fee, e.g.
30 for 110 - 120 g/km
100 for 120 - 130
and rising in increments to
475 for worse than 255.
OmCheeto
#871
Jan14-13, 08:43 PM
PF Gold
OmCheeto's Avatar
P: 1,435
Quote Quote by OCR View Post
It was, and still is... with respect to improved engine efficiency.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourke_engine


Don't mean to roll on the floor, but, 1920, vaporware?

(If it takes more that 90 years to bring an idea to market, even once, then there might be something wrong with the idea.)

-----------------------
ps. I said vehicle, not engine. They are not the same.
OCR
#872
Jan15-13, 02:42 AM
P: 124
Quote Quote by OmCheeto
Don't mean to roll on the floor, but, 1920, vaporware?
Lol... yes, Russell Bourke probably should have received the Golden Vaporware award, and I shouldn't have linked to it as an example of possible evolving engine technology.

Bourke's design is however, very similar to that of EcoMotors....
http://www.ecomotors.com/technology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EcoMotors
And... Uncle Bill does seem to have a slight involvement there....
The two primary investors in EcoMotors are Khosla Ventures and Bill Gates.
Maybe it's time for his next... Golden Vaporware award? ...

This was in reference to the post date of your first thread, not Bourke.
Quote Quote by OmCheeto c.2007
I'm looking for the most efficient vehicle of course.
It was, and still is... with respect to improved engine efficiency.
Also, to your image link: http://home.europa.com/~garry/energy%20split.JPG



OCR...



-----------------------
ps. I said vehicle, not engine. They are not the same.
I know... ↑ ...as well...↑...but of course...↑
Buckleymanor
#873
Jan15-13, 05:00 PM
P: 504
Why don't you patent your insulated engine, cab, battery idea and make a billion pounds?
Money attracts politicians. Being a billionaire will make you politically powerful.

Then you could be the one pulling the political bullshtrings.



I like money, being a billionaire sounds very attractive but the downside would be the attention of politicians I don't think I would like to encourage them.
On the other hand.
johnbbahm
#874
Jan24-13, 12:09 PM
P: 143
Quote Quote by OCR View Post
The camshaft is probably the biggest technological stumbling block left, that prevents an almost totally 'tunable' piston engine.
OCR
Several years ago, I had lunch with a friend who works at a university in Germany.
One of the things they were working on was an voltage activated valve stem for
Diesel engines. At the time he said they were getting close to Carnot efficiencies.
Low-Q
#875
Jan29-13, 04:19 PM
PF Gold
Low-Q's Avatar
P: 244
Quote Quote by OmCheeto View Post
Insulating the engine, and extracting the waste heat energy is one part of the 11 part hybrid I'm working on. Patent to be filed within the next 24 months. Unless of course, Buckymanor takes my cue, and does it first. I may have to cut a deal with the Bavarians.
This is a very good idea. The bigger difference between hot and cold, the better the engine runs. Very important to harness waste heat, but primarily from the hot exhaust.
However, with the wrong fuel at the wrong temperature, it might detonate before the piston reach the top.


You might increase efficiency further with a pistonless engine - not the Wankel engine, but a design more like a gerotor design which is 100% rotary, which is 100% vibration free. I believe it is just a matter of fairly simple engineering to make this work well. See picture of a gerotor. This type of pistonless motor can suck in air and gas, compress it, ignite it. It needs valves as a piston engine does.

.

It can be made as several rotary "discs" so the exhaust is efficiently cooled before it leaves the engine. The best of this design is that the exhaust side can be cooled separately with coolant flowing between them (separate from the combustion side) for as long the volume inside decrease, but at the same time the combustion side keeps hot for as long as the volume expands during combustion. This is exactly what we want with a heat engine like this.
A normal cylinder have very little cooling surface compared to the volume inside it, so the exhaust is still pretty hot when it leaves the cylinder - > poor efficiency.

So increasing the efficiency of 20 - 25% for a normal engine, to maybe 40 - 50% for a gerotary engine, would not only reduce pollution and cost due to efficiency, but also save weight - which result in even lower fuel consumption.

If this doesn't save the world alone, I hope my contribution would be helpful - at least triggering some ideas

Vidar
Felchi
#876
Jan29-13, 05:08 PM
P: 25
Well, doesn't the act of running coolant through the discs use energy?

If you add the energy needed to run the coolant system to the efficiency equation, is it still 40-50%?
Low-Q
#877
Jan29-13, 11:52 PM
PF Gold
Low-Q's Avatar
P: 244
Quote Quote by Felchi View Post
Well, doesn't the act of running coolant through the discs use energy?

If you add the energy needed to run the coolant system to the efficiency equation, is it still 40-50%?
A piston engine haven't poor efficiency because of the coolant flow.
The coolant isn't flowing through the rotating parts. Only through the housing mass between somewhat like coolant in a piston engine flows though the block and not through the piston and cylinder
Low-Q
#878
Jan30-13, 03:42 AM
PF Gold
Low-Q's Avatar
P: 244
Gerotor engine explained as I imagine this will work. It would probably be possible to do more than one operation at the time. For example start the intake again at the bottom while it is combustion. And start combustion while there is compression - it right order, somewhat similar to a 5 cylinder radial engine.

Remember this is just an idea I have, that hopefully will reduce pollution and costs.





OmCheeto
#879
Feb2-13, 09:47 PM
PF Gold
OmCheeto's Avatar
P: 1,435
Quote Quote by Low-Q View Post
You might increase efficiency further with a pistonless engine - not the Wankel engine, but a design more like a gerotor design which is 100% rotary....

If this doesn't save the world alone, I hope my contribution would be helpful - at least triggering some ideas

Vidar
I can't seem to find a working model of a gerotor motor.
I found a Forum where the President of Star Rotor talked about it's development. Dated 2004.
9 years later, the Star Rotor engine is apparently still under development.

hmmm... Wiki claims the gerotor dates back to 1787.
2013-1787 = 226 years.

I think I'll call this one vaporware also.

And I think I'll stick with a water cooled diesel engine as my prime mover, as I'm still a big fan of Algae derived fuels.
zanes
#880
Feb9-13, 05:04 PM
P: 3
I read your thread, and agree that nuclear electricity generation should be the ultimate answer. Good luck with that politically. I would like to offer a painless and inexpensive way for us to reduce significantly our use of fossil fuels for vehicles...eliminate unnecessary stop signs, and where necessary install yield signs.

In my small condo complex (200 units) there are 8 unnecessary stop signs. Most of the units have 2 cars. If each car leaves the complex twice daily and has to stop at at least 2 of these signs, this is 800 unnecessary decelerations from 20mph to 0, and then accelerations to 20mph. I have no idea how much gas is wasted, but suspect it must be thousands of gallons (low thousands) annually. How many stop signs could be eliminated nationwide? Don't know that either...probably millions.

Whatcha think?
AlephZero
#881
Feb9-13, 06:30 PM
Engineering
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 7,274
Quote Quote by OmCheeto View Post
I can't seem to find a working model of a gerotor motor.
If you look at the drawings in this thread, it's not hard to see why IMO.

Assuming the working gas is a uniform pressure at each instant in time, figure out the directions of the resultant forces on the two rotors. Then convert those force directions to torques about the central axis.

Compare with a Wankel engine, or a conventional piston engine, and see which design wins in converting the same gas pressure into useful work.

Of course that reasoning why a gerotor would make a poor engine is the exact same reasoning why it makes a good fluid pump.
OmCheeto
#882
Feb10-13, 12:00 AM
PF Gold
OmCheeto's Avatar
P: 1,435
Quote Quote by AlephZero View Post
If you look at the drawings in this thread, it's not hard to see why IMO.

Assuming the working gas is a uniform pressure at each instant in time, figure out the directions of the resultant forces on the two rotors. Then convert those force directions to torques about the central axis.

Compare with a Wankel engine, or a conventional piston engine, and see which design wins in converting the same gas pressure into useful work.

Of course that reasoning why a gerotor would make a poor engine is the exact same reasoning why it makes a good fluid pump.
Well, I was going to say all that*, but not being able to turn an oil pump, into an engine, struck me as a deficiency, in my own brain.

As usual, thank you Aleph, for getting me out of the mud.

----------------------------
*Ok. I lied. I would have never said that. But if I were as smart as you were, I would have.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Solutions to the energy crisis / global warming problem Earth 10
EMF Crisis Biology 4
Split from YOU!: Fix the US Energy Crisis Current Events 42