shock wave generator replaces pistons

[dragon]

cool if it works especially the 60% fuel versus the typical 15% of a normal engine

Michigan researchers have built a prototype of a new auto motor that does away with pistons, crankshafts and valves, replacing the old internal combustion engine with a disc-shaped shock wave generator. It could slash the weight of hybrid cars and reduce auto emissions by 90 percent.

The generator is about the size of a saucepot, and would replace the 1,000-pound power train in most cars — no transmission, cooling system, emissions regulation or fluids needed. Norbert Müller and colleagues at Michigan State University showed off the new motor prototype at a meeting with the Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency.


Related Articles
Maker of Electric Hummer Challenges Chevy Volt on Record-Breaking Fuel Economy
Video: New Liquid Pistons Made of Magnetic Droplets Could Power Self-Focusing Lenses
Airfish Blimp Moves Like a Trout, Uses No Engines

Tags
Cars, Rebecca Boyle, automobile engines, automobiles, fuel economy, fuel efficiency, gasoline engines, internal combustion engine, pistonIt consists of a rotor carved with wave-like channels. Fuel and air enter through central inlets, and the rotor spins to block their exit through a separate outlet. The sudden build-up of pressure generates a shock wave, compressing the mixture. Then it’s ignited, and as the rotor keeps spinning, the outlet opens again to let the hot gases escape. New Scientist explains in further detail.

The novel generator would use about 60 percent of fuel for propulsion, according to MSU. This is a dramatic improvement over typical car engines, which use only 15 percent of fuel for forward movement. The system could also make cars 20 percent lighter, improving fuel economy even more.

MSU received a $2.5 million ARPA-E grant to develop the technology. Müller said he hopes to have an even larger 25-kilowatt prototype by the end of this year.

boom

[someone_else]

About fucking time. Current internal combustion engines are getting far too complex now.

Being relatively simple I hope it won't take that long to hit full-scale production.

[Chardok]

This sounds an awful lot like a Wankel rotary engine. It also sounds implausible as all shit. No oil? no coolant? Bullshit. where there's fire and metal, there's a need to cool it, and if it's going to be of any practical use, it had better damn well be more powerful and efficient than an air-cooled beetle engine. Plus, no actual output figures? I call shenannigans. Let's see this thing cope with a real load, first, then we'll see how "revolutionary" (Get it? it's punny.) this really is. (I'll go ahead and predict: not very.)

[dragon]

video of the professor describing the device and how it works.
link

and a pdf about the project from ARPA-E, granted not like the first time they funded crazy stuff on the off chance it might work
link

[Shaka[Zulu]]

hi all... long time lurking quietly, but decided to come back and see what's going on...

is it just me, or does this device look like a variation of a Tesla Turbine?

[Ted C]

@Charkok: It is my understanding that the shockwave generator is only expected to work in hybrid vehicles. It would supposedly be a more efficient way to generate electricity; it would not be expected to generate a lot of torque to actually move the car's mass itself.

[Elheru Aran]

Right; for that they have separate electric motors. The misconception is that this equates a normal automobile engine; this is more like a battery or a... what do they call it? The thing that charges up the battery when you drive the car around. Capacitator? No, that's not it. Anyway, I can see the potential of this as a power generator as well. The only issue I have is how do you create the shock waves? Surely that requires power from *somewhere*...

[Ted C]

Right; for that they have separate electric motors. The misconception is that this equates a normal automobile engine; this is more like a battery or a... what do they call it? The thing that charges up the battery when you drive the car around. Capacitator? No, that's not it. Anyway, I can see the potential of this as a power generator as well. The only issue I have is how do you create the shock waves? Surely that requires power from *somewhere*...

Well, it's like a mini-motor that turns the alternator, not the alternator itself, but I see what you mean.

And my reading of the article indicates that this "shock wave generator" is a gasoline-powered motor.

[Atlan]

Sounds like someone build a flat turbine. And just like a regular turbine it'll have high revs and low torque. If you optimise it for running at a certain amount of revs it would be very nice for running a alternator off.

[eion]

Would this being an ARPA funded and/or sponsored project affect who can manufacture this turbine?

This looks like a very cool prototype, and if it lives up to the hype could bring the cost and size of cars down while raising their efficiency.

[someone_else]

The thing that charges up the battery when you drive the car around.

That would be a charger. But this critter seems to be more like a small motor, since it only converts fuel energy in mechanical energy. Then you hook it up to an alternator to convert the mechanical energy in electrical.
The alternator could also double as "starter engine" since I doubt this thing can start spinning on its own.

The only issue I have is how do you create the shock waves? Surely that requires power from *somewhere*...

Of course, but not necessarily from a spark plug.
Diesel engines don't have spark plugs for example. The diesel-air mixture ignites on its own when compressed enough, and this probably uses the same trick.
I suppose that compressing it heats it up or something, anyway that's still energy you give it somehow .

[someone_else]

I wonder how useful this (a very larege specimen anyway) could be in a oil/gas based power plant.
Would it be better than what we have currently?

[General Trelane (Retired)]

I wonder how useful this (a very larege specimen anyway) could be in a oil/gas based power plant.
Would it be better than what we have currently?

Probably not. With a power plant, you don't need space/weight savings so much, so for gas, a gas turbine works quite well and is a mature, well-developed technology. Not sure about achievable efficiencies for those; around here, they're used to supplement peak load rather than provide baseline power (gas turbines can be brought on line quickly compared to steam turbines and their boilers).

[Sea Skimmer]

Regenerative gas turbine power plants, ones with a secondary steam cycle running on the turbine exhaust heat, can reach about 60% thermal efficiency after warm-up. That can go even higher if you have a cogeneration load on hand (like a factory that needs hot water to wash stuff) to use the condensed steam from the steam cycle. Right now that 60% figure is the best that large internal combustion engines can manage. Its better then even the largest, slowest turbodiesels ever. However without the regenerative stage gas turbines have more like 45% efficiency, while a gasoline engine in a car is in the range of 30-35% so this new concept might be considerably superior to existing engines without the complexity of multiple turbines.

A few BMWs do have a regenerative steam stage combined with a gasoline engine. One of them actually has TWO steam turbines, one for the exhaust heat and one for the radiator heat, but this is stupidly expensive and absurdly hard to maintain in a car. We'd really like to avoid that in future designs as it is not like extensive shop maintenance and replacement parts don't require energy as well.

[krakonfour]

Compare the cost of developping a new 'shockwave generator' to replace the proposed hydrogen fuel cell designs to get a sense of how economic it is.
For ease of passing the message, give the public the wrong impression that hydrogen fuel cells go boom when the car crashes...

[LaCroix]

Compare the cost of developping a new 'shockwave generator' to replace the proposed hydrogen fuel cell designs to get a sense of how economic it is.
For ease of passing the message, give the public the wrong impression that hydrogen fuel cells go boom when the car crashes...

And cripple a valuable research branch for a very longe time in the process. Good idea...

[Winston Blake]

I think this is very much a 'wait and see' kind of technology.

Hundreds of new designs for radical engines are patented every year, often rotary engines, like this. The claims of 'no radiator or cooling system needed' and 'no lubrication fluid needed' set off red flags for me. Vane/impeller based engines like this usually have the problem of sealing the sides of the vanes against the front and back planes (a major problem in the Wankel engine, the only production rotary engine ever). Such engines often look like they have short sealing-length in a 2D straight-on view.

Further, the rotor/vanes usually cannot be effectively cooled or lubricated (other than by putting lube in the fuel). So inventors claim 'no problem, it doesn't need cooling or lubrication'... until they try to build a realistic model. If you look closely, it seems this design uses wafer-thin vanes, exposed to direct combustion. Somehow I doubt they will be built of single-crystal superalloys for ordinary consumer cars.

Importantly, most of the claimed advantages are not advantages of this particular technology, but rather advantages of electric power trains (no transmission, high efficiency, low emissions, long range, etc). It's quite misleading for them to compare this to 'existing' engines, with conventional power trains.

So yeah, wait and see. A lot of very clever and well-funded people have been inventing rotary engines for the last 80 years, and only the Wankel has survived the brutality of full development. Reality is a harsh mistress.