New "Free-Piston Linear Alternator" Engine - ScienceDaily

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the free-piston linear alternator (FPLA) engine, exploring its design, efficiency, and potential applications. Participants express varying opinions on its viability compared to traditional internal combustion engines, particularly in the context of two-stroke versus four-stroke engines, and the implications for emissions and performance.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the FPLA's novelty and practicality, suggesting that the internal combustion engine is nearly perfected.
  • Others propose that the FPLA could be beneficial for small, lightweight engines, particularly in hybrid applications, due to its lack of a crankshaft or gearbox.
  • Concerns are raised about the emissions of two-stroke engines compared to four-stroke engines, with some arguing that modern fuel-injected two-strokes may not necessarily have worse emissions.
  • Questions are posed regarding the efficiency of two-stroke engines, with some participants asserting that they are inherently less efficient than four-strokes, while others highlight their potential advantages in specific applications like UAVs.
  • There is a discussion about the energy loss associated with the FPLA's design, with suggestions for alternative engine designs that might mitigate these issues.
  • Some participants comment on the engineering challenges posed by the FPLA, particularly regarding vibration and mechanical reliability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the efficiency, emissions, and practicality of the FPLA engine compared to traditional engines.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the implications of two-stroke engine design on emissions and efficiency, and there are unresolved questions about the specific performance characteristics of the FPLA engine.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in engine design, alternative energy solutions, and the comparative analysis of different internal combustion engine technologies may find this discussion relevant.

wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
551
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080915164550.htm

ScienceDaily (Sep. 15, 2008) — In an advance toward introduction of an amazing new kind of internal combustion engine, researchers in China are reporting development and use of a new and more accurate computer model to assess performance of the so-called free-piston linear alternator (FPLA).
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Wow, that's got to be a systems engineers nightmare! Getting all the porting timing down and being able to evaluate huge amounts of sensor data real time like that, better them than me. It doesn't really look like anything special though. The IC engine is pretty close to perfected. The only useful research being done these days is the HCCI engine.
 
Topher925 said:
It doesn't really look like anything special though.
Might be useful for small light engines, especially in hybrids - no crankshaft or gearbox.

Especially clever if you can use the alternator as a solenoid so no need for a starter motor.
 
Topher925 said:
The only useful research being done these days is the HCCI engine.
i looked up hcci engines and i have a doubt. how come the mixture doesn't auto ignite at say, c.r. of 16 when the mixture is being compressed to 20:1 or 21:1
 
The inherent fact that it is a two-stroke engine also means the engine would have significantly worse emissions than a four-stroke engine.
 
Mech_Engineer said:
The inherent fact that it is a two-stroke engine also means the engine would have significantly worse emissions than a four-stroke engine.
Is that necessarily true - or does it just apply to nasty little 2strokes that use lubricating oil in the fuel?
Industrial diesel engines are 2 stroke because it is the most efficent, I would have thought that to get the best efficency you need to burn the fuel most completely and so produce less polution.
 
chhitiz said:
i looked up hcci engines and i have a doubt. how come the mixture doesn't auto ignite at say, c.r. of 16 when the mixture is being compressed to 20:1 or 21:1

Did you look up what the acronym HCCI stand for?

2-stroke engines will always be less efficient than 4-strokes in most applications. The only thing that makes them more efficient is that they can be made significantly lighter than four strokes which would increase fuel economy due to weight which can be very important in something like a UAV.
 
Mech_Engineer said:
The inherent fact that it is a two-stroke engine also means the engine would have significantly worse emissions than a four-stroke engine.

I know that was true in the past. But what of the new fuel injected, high tech two-strokes?
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KJI/is_6_115/ai_103990207
Right now, the engine is clean enough to pass California's 2008 standards.

And as far as the FPLA goes, it strikes me that it still suffers from the problem of loss of energy due to the constant changing of direction of the pistons. If people want a "one moving part" efficient engine, why not build a mini gas-steam combined cycle single shaft turbo generator?
 
That would be just too easy to transform into a steam driven system:cool:

Good clean power:smile:
 
  • #10
OmCheeto said:
I know that was true in the past. But what of the new fuel injected, high tech two-strokes?


And as far as the FPLA goes, it strikes me that it still suffers from the problem of loss of energy due to the constant changing of direction of the pistons. If people want a "one moving part" efficient engine, why not build a mini gas-steam combined cycle single shaft turbo generator?

You posted while I was looking.

I'm not sure the gas is needed, but I need to be careful and protect my $75.00 special :wink:

Ron
 
  • #11
Topher925 said:
Did you look up what the acronym HCCI stand for?

2-stroke engines will always be less efficient than 4-strokes in most applications. The only thing that makes them more efficient is that they can be made significantly lighter than four strokes which would increase fuel economy due to weight which can be very important in something like a UAV.

because they are so stubborn and unreliable, no person would ever step into an airplane with a 2-stroke powerplant...lol
 
  • #12
Topher925 said:
Wow, that's got to be a systems engineers nightmare!
A mechanical engineer's nightmare too - if they ever build one, they'll want to put a picture of it next to the word "vibration" in the dictionary.
 
  • #13
Re: vibration, what if it was a 2 shaft 4 piston unit with the shafts at 180 degrees out of phase? would they sort of cancel each other out?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
7K
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
32K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
591
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
24
Views
8K