h a l f b a k e r yExpensive, difficult, slightly dangerous, not particularly effective... I'm on a roll.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
All intake-charging units use some sort of power from the engine as a direct way of turning them to produce pressurized air into the cylinders for increased power and performance. this means that when you can fill a cylinder more completely, then you'll have better power out of the same displacement.
you can compress gases, but not liquids, for the most part, and so it is possible to almost fully pack air and fuel vapor into a cylinder to increase efficiency.
my design has a different way of powering itself. it doesn't use exhaust gases to spin a turbine, nor is it belt-driven. it is spun by the air passing through the intake manifold at all times. thus you could call it a "vacuum charger" vacuum is normally present in the intake manifold, but once you hammer the throttle down, it does away temporarily, unless you have some sort of external vacuum source like maybe a vacuum canister. you can purchase a vacuum canister from local shops for most V-8s and some 6 cylinders, but i don't know about 4-bangers...you might could, lemme know. anyway, air is always passing through the intake manifold while the engine is running, so there is always the potential for extra power in that air-flow alone. why wouldn't you want to utilize the potentials of this seemingly forgotten power source? air flows out through the exhaust pipes to spin the turbo unit, and the crankshaft spins the supercharger, so why not use the intake air flow to spin this unit? no reason i could think of now anyway...maybe later though...hehe.
the unit is built to look like a small jet engine that has a large diameter opening for air at the front, and has 2 or 3 large turbines in that section, then it reduces down with a venturi to less than 1/4 the size of the main opening diameter. this part also has many smaller, tiny turbines in succession, and all the turbines in the unti are on the same common shaft.
guess what! this makes alot of since now, so here we go!
air enters the frontal openning at atmospheric pressure.
this is aided by the airflow going through the intake setup that air naturally spins the fan blades.
as the larger fans spin of the shaft, they push large amounts of air into the venturi which then spins the smaller fans faster, and faster, and spins the larger fans faster, etc. this will sort-of build up to a maximum which i am not sure about yet, but nothing goes forever. this should make for a decent charging unit that robs no power from the crankshaft and has less lag than the turbo units...i dunno, maybe about the same anyway, but it's worth a shot to find out.
Thanks folks, looking forward to all your opinions.
Pre-compressed-air Supercharger
http://www.halfbake...-air_20supercharger
Look to the above right on this page … I haven't a clue if it or if your idea is more practical. [reensure, May 02 2002]
Tornado
http://www.tornadofuelsaver.com/info/
Non-Moving Vortex Generator [thumbwax, May 02 2002, last modified Oct 17 2004]
SpiralMax
http://www.spiralmax.com/
combination vortex generator, velocity stack, and venturi [thumbwax, May 03 2002, last modified Oct 17 2004]
AirMax
http://www.streetan...nics.com/airmax.htm
Induction Systems provide greater volume of cooler air, with a vortex-like spin, to your engine [thumbwax, May 03 2002, last modified Oct 17 2004]
[link]
|
| |
If I understand this correctly, and I am not _at all_ sure that I do, it seems that the moments when you would most want boost, um, acceleration, are exactly those moments when it would be least available because they coincide with the moments that there is no vacuum available. |
|
| |
And then there is the much more significant conservation of energy thing, which is handled in the next anno, by [half-crazy]: |
|
| |
The way I read this, it sounds like you are using the energy of the intake air to introduce additional energy (compress/increase density of charge) to the intake air without introducing an additional energy source. |
|
| |
If that is in fact what you are proposing then once you get the reaction started you can throw away the engine completely because what you proposed is actually perpetual motion. Around here, that'll get you a quick visit from Homer Simpson who will explain the rules. |
|
| |
If that's not what you propose, then I need a bit more clarification on your idea. |
|
| |
Hey, yeah! And we could mount a fan on the back of our boat for when there's no wind.... |
|
| |
And exactly how fast do you need to be going (or how much vacuum) to effectively gain any useful HP? Nothing gained until you're up to high speed. I'd rather have the extra HP off the line than at top end. |
|
| |
Maybe he means that, while at idle, when there is ample manifold vacuum available, that vacuum is siphoned off and stored in a vacuum cannister and then used to spin the impellers in the supercharger at a constant speed so that boost is available immediately? Also, maybe, there is an element of impeller flywheel-ism going on as well to buffer the loss of manifold vacuum when the vehicle is accelerating? |
|
| |
But, I'm not sure that's what he, or she, means. |
|
| |
I wasn't sure whether the vacuum canister figured in or not. I was going by the closing paragraph which I took to be a summary. The vacuum canister deal would have more merit. But then it would also be a variant of the "Pre-compressed-air Supercharger" as [reensure] pointed out, so I'd have to call "halfbaked". |
|
| |
Bristolz made a good point or two, and i like his perspective. |
|
| |
BristolZ:
you are correct about the manifold vacuum thing, and about how the vacuum canister should work. normally, when you hammer the throttle, the manifold vacuum goes away, but the canister will help to keep it constant in this situation. actually, when the flowing air of the intake goes past the impellers, it is suppossed to turn them, then the smaller impellers on the common shaft will spin fast, due to them being inside the venturi. this is suppossed to make the largr fans spin faster, ultimately making the smaller ones go faster, etc. it's not perpetual motion, because i'm sure it'll have some point when it cannot go any faster, due to bearings and other frictions. |
|
| |
if ya got another question, just send it on down here at the bottom, and i'll try to answer it promptly. |
|
| |
btw, i'm not trying to make perpetual motion anyway. i just want to build one of these baddies...fun fun! Wish me luck, i'm sure i'll need it;) |
|
| |
also, i was thinking about this, and the intake charge is not as dense as the exhaust, so that might be an issue to discuss next. i know the exhaust is gunna go out faster than intake goes in, we'll talk later. seeya |
|
| |
[bifftannon], I'd be interested in knowing how you progress with this. As you can tell, my skepticism meter is pegged on this one. |
|
| |
If you insist on trying, here's the luck you were wishing for: Good luck. See you in the future. |
|
| |
thankz guys and gals for the comments.
i really do like to see other people joining in on ideas, because it makes life so much more robust...ya know what i mean?
two or three or four heads is always better than one, in alot of life's situations. |
|
| |
again, thank you all, and be sure to check out my upcomming idea for the new non-lethal lightsabre that i think will be used for training someone to fight with a sword. seeya latter :) |
|
| |
i dont see where the power for the turbine is coming from, now if you burnt a little fuel in there it would make more sense and have (possibly) zero lag |
|
| |
The power for the turbine is coming from the vacuum created from the incoming air through the intake. |
|
| |
I'd like to reply to bifftannon's idea. This sounds an awful lot like perpetual motion to me too. I'm not sure I've got the concept right in my head, but it sounds like you are obstructing the intake airflow in order to try to capture more of the potential energy of new incoming air. I'm no physicist, but I think this would actually make you lose some power by blocking a passive airflow. |
|
| |
The reason you lose vacuum when the throttle valve opens is that you create a breach in the system much larger than the main idle porting of whatever intake air device is on your engine. While your vacuum may drop dramatically, but your cfm will increase. |
|
| |
If you are trying to create boost using vacuum, think about it: absolute vacuum is negative 14.7 psi. or absolute zero pressure. That's all you get, no more. Wouldn't it make more sense to use the side of your engine that by comparisson has almost limitless pressure? (exhaust). It gets pretty complicated, but on the positive side of the scale, your pressure numbers offer a lot more power to steal. |
|
| |
I want to make sure I understand your idea fully. You may have something. If you'd like, E-mail me some pictures or a more elaborate explanation of your idea. If I can help, I'm always looking for ways to get some extra power out of anything. |
|
| |
It's really not that difficult to understand. |
|
| |
The key to getting more power out of an engine is to get more air through. This is the reason behind turbochargers and superchargers (increased pressure, hence increased volume), intercoolers (denser charge), ported inlet and exhaust manifolds, more and larger valves, gauze filters, more cubes - you name it, it's all about increasing the flow rate. Putting anything in the way which will reduce that flow will rob the engine of power. |
|
| |
The difference cannot be made up with a vacuum store for the simple reason that vacuum is not an entity - it is a nothing. Any extra air sucked through the device will be sucked into the vacuum canister, not into the engine where it's needed. |
|
| |
So sorry, Biff, but it won't work. |
|
| |
okay, it sounds like you've got a good idea for a jet engine there, but I'm not sure of the aplication to the intake side of the normal gas engine I would agree with chud who said that the only way to make power with this is to introduce fuel into the system and burn it, otherwise, the rotation of the device will be very limited, and to make a few corrections, the exhaust of an engine is Less dense than the intake charge, however it moves at much greater velocity, which is why the turbocharger works. |
|
| |
If you still wish to produce your intake turbine, please take my advice, when you build it, be sure that your venturi, tha part that is a quarter the diameter of the rest of the unit, is still larger than the intake track that is stock on your engine, and also consider only having a total ofone set of turbine blades at each end, so as not to restrict flow too much in the time before it starts to make boost |
|
| |
Perpetual motion.
You are essentially proposing a device which takes a little bit of energy and somehow amplifies it without any external input. A "clever" array of energy buffers (vacuum tanks, etc.) will neither compensate for nor prevent the inevitable result, which is that this device is a vacuum-powered vacuum eliminator which will continually strive to eliminate the very source which powers it. |
|
| |
how would it produce boost if there is a vacumm leak in the intake (vacumm canister)? |
|
| |
I think this idea has officially been rejected. The same effect has been accomplished by the tuning of exhaust vacuum, valve overlap, runner length, and vehicle speed (ram air). |
|
| |
how on earth would you get boost by further resrticing intake by placing a turbine in the way...oh and people vaccums are not a good power storage device.if you had a 5ft cubed vacuum the most you could have was a max of 13.7 psi at sea level that would deminish to 0 in a linear patern rapidly.thats why we store enegry in high pressure systems. |
|
| |
if everyone just ignored the word (vacuum) for a minute, it seems to be do-able. even if the throttle is wide open and there is no vacuum, more air is sucked by (through) this turbine. which is what theoretically will make this work. if you don't believe me, cover half of your car's throttle body with your hand then turn it wide open. i think it just might work. i might even build one myself. never know. |
|
| |
When I read this, I don't see a perpetual motion machine...just a slight logical mistake. |
|
| |
Here's the question...if you had any kind of boost (pressure at the other side of your turbines, before the intake valve) would the turbines still have something to propel them? Nope. If you wanted to maintain boost (intake pressure), this idea wouldn't work. |
|
| |
And, a four stroke engine draws in air by the downward motion of the cylinder. So, this vacuum is being created by the downward mation from the cylinder...still robbing power from the crank. |
|
| |
They sort of use this idea in engines though. Since air has mass, it has momentum. So, after the intake valve opens, the air starts rushing in, causing the air in the intake pipes to build up speed and therefore momentum. So, if you time everything right, you can open one of the other valves when the air has the most momentum, causing a slight positive pressure at the intake, helping push air into the cylinder rather than relying on suction. |
|
| |
I believe this idea is baked. |
|
| |
It seems like you're using energy from the very same place you want to place it later. You're robbing pressure to make pressure. I have a hard time understanding how that works. |
|
| |
Okay, I can see that some people have a good understanding of how a turbocharger or supercharger works, and the rest do not have the slightest clue. I'm not even going to get into the details, but I was sitting around working on an engine idea I've been developing, when I started thinking about the turbo and was wondering how I could improve on it. I had a very similar concept to the one proposed here, though it was better informed. It's really very simple in fact, regardless of how you look at it, there is a turbine before the intake side of a head with the intake powered or exhaust powered turbo. The difference is simply going to be waiting for the exhaust to come out and spool it up or having the intake spool it up first. Of course, it still takes time for the exhaust to spool up a turbo, though not very long at all on a properly tuned system. What you'll notice though is the exhaust ISN'T RESTRICTED by the wait time, you just have to wait for it to get spinning before you get that compressed air you want. In fact, neither way is going to keep air from coming in at an acceptable rate to fill the cylinders properly. Have you ever taken a vacuum and tried to clean out a fan on your computer? They spool up instantly, this is the same principle as having the pistons suck the air they need through the turbo compressor. The only difference is you would have BOTH sides of the turbo running to the intake. It would be pulling air through the side that is typically being powered by the exhaust gases and in turn spool up the compressor on the adjacent side to force compressed air through a separate pipe to a place further down on the intake, though it has to be before the throttle body so as not to interfere with the vacuum. Now, you would think that exhaust gas moves faster so that would spool up the turbo faster, which sounds good, but the second it comes out, it's really only moving out at the speed that it's forced out, plus a little in expansion. We're talking some high speeds of operation, so there isn't much room for the expansion to make a big difference in speed. Once the motor gets running the flow is pretty fast. I wish I could give a diagram to show on how this would be set up, but that's a little out of reach at the moment I'm afraid. If I can come up with one, then I'll post a link or something. |
|
| |
MarcStinebaugh, you should post your idea as it's own idea instead of as an annotation to someone else's idea. See on the left side of the screen, near the top, there is a button labeled idea: new, click that. |
|
| |