Hybrid powertrains grab all the headlines these days, but conventional internal combustion engines are also advancing at a torrid pace. Technologies such as variable valve timing, cylinder deactivation, direct injection, and turbocharging are boosting engine performance and fuel efficiency as never before.
Here, we've collected photos of engines representing some of the latest innovations in powertrain technology. From tiny inline-fours to muscular diesels to split-cycle engines, we offer a potpourri of engine technologies.
Click the image below to start the slideshow:
The Chevy Cruze Eco punched up its fuel economy to 42mpg highway by using a 1.4-liter Ecotec turbocharged engine. The engine's Turbo Airflow uses a compressor wheel (driven by hot exhaust gas) to draw air into the intake. The air is forced through an intercooler and then travels to the engine's intake manifold. The intake manifold subsequently distributes air to cylinders, where fuel is added, and combustion takes place. (Source: GM)
Plants take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen, so there is the benefit. Trees do this very well and don't require a lot of attention to keep doing it for quite a while. Other plants do it also.
Now if the dead plants are not immediately broken down, much of that carbon can remain tied up in other compounds, or perhaps recovered as elemental carbon, which is fairly stable and seldom found as a gas. And just consider all of that wood that is tied up in construction, with the carbon securely anchored for many years. Just consider that, OK?
The main performance benefit from water injection was to allow the engines to be pushed a lot harder without burning up. Switching on the high boost from the supercharger, or turbo-supercharger, would otherwise burn up the engine quite quickly. So the water alcohol mix was injected to prevent destruction. At least that is what I read in the service manual for one of those engines. The manual went into quite a lot of detail. I believe that it was printed by Ford, so the source is valid.
Without the water injection the detonation in the cylinders would destroy the engine in a short time.
Chuck; Sorry this isn't about energy efficient ICE's. For some reason, energy efficiency, which should be a good thing under most circumstances, always brings out the anti-green crowd.
Rob; While plants do convert CO2, that doesn't mean they eliminate it- most of the carbon gets re-liberated when the plant dies, rots, burns, is eaten etc. The case of plants sequestering carbon is typically in the form of the ancient gas, oil, and coal deposits that we have been releasing from sequestration at rates far, far above the rates of deposition. Indeed, what makes the current increase of CO2 so unnatural and worrisome, is the rate of change, which makes the end result highly unpredictable. That includes any predictions that nothing bad will happen.
There have beens periods of earths history where CO2 levels were much higher, but the life forms were much different too. While man may be able to adapt his personal environment enough to survive any changes, it won't be the same earth, and won't be optimized for human life any more.
Oddly enough, conservation should be a conservative's natural ally. I don't get it.
I think everyone is missing a small detail, fossil fuels will be too expensive to burn in under 20 yrs so really this is just the dying gasps of ICE's,nothing more.
Facts are even improving them from 7% eff of thevfuel actuall moving the car to 9 or 10% means little.
What we need are new designs, far lighter, more eff with EV drive. The only ICE needed might nbe a tiny generator running at it's most eff speed, something car only do a few seconds at a time accelerating. Any other time it's just wasting large amounts of power, gasoline.
For instance my lightweight, aero 2 Seat EV sportwagon would go 70 mph on the power these use to idle!! Not sure how that is going to win the future for ICE's.
Vs say the Volt which on their 24kwhr battery pack my EV sportwagon would get 250 mile range!! So they have a lot of work to do cutting weight, drag. Mostly this is because done in composite instead of metal, weighs 30% of the Volt.
Say you charge from your PV EV eff is around 65% to the rear wheels because it only makes the power actually needed when needed at high eff, Sadly ICE can't do this so they are history very soon.
A Prop for Ford who has an Option for it's EV's, a solar PV array for $10k to power the EV and home for 25 yrs for $10k!! Going to be hard to beat that inprice once the EV costs drop to reasonable.
First: the water produced by combustion is already in vapor phase, not liquid. Thus, its latent heat cooling effect is not available, as the water vapor present in the exhaust gases is at their exact temperature. Second, water or water-Methanol injection helps exert a large cooling effect because of its vaporization heat absorption value. Pure water is vaporized and goes together with exhaust. Adding Methanol (cheapest alcohol) helps because of its fuel contribution and Oxygen addition. It was developed just before WW-II in german fighter aircraft, and could add very significant power during some minutes, crucial in air battles. There have been some (a few) Water Injection kits available thru the years for the performance oriented people, but for common, lazy people, the hassle to have to buy pure water (demineralized is enough) and replenish the little tank frequently is too big to do, but it remains a tremendously effective way to increase maximum available in high compression or Turbo/Supercharged engines power, without having to spend a lot more. Amclaussen.
No substitute fir cubes nearly lost the war in the Pacific. Light weight Japanese aircraft out climbed and out turned, the American aircraft. More cubes need more strength and therefore, weight, in turn needing more cubes to propel them. The designer of animals has known that for x.M.years
That's right: The old guru of modified ICE, Mr. David Vizard, always said the Turbocharger was NOT an economy device. The thing is that most Turbo designs are produced with a high maximum specific output power goal. But owing to the lower octane rating of present day gasolines, the designers have resorted to use an excess of fuel at high power levels in order to supress detonation, because excess fuel cools the combustion chamber and allows higher boost levels, reaching top power (a very gross and blunt way of limiting detonation!). Would automotive companies resort to use water injection for maximum power, the gasoline consumption would be quite lower, but public is reluctant to have to do additional chores, like replenishing the small water tank, and therefore water injection is only used by few Turbo and Supercharger aficionados...
Methanol-Water is even more advantageous, but would be too difficult ro cumbersome for daily drivers to use.
Well, before 1995, I believed in that old (too old) saying.
The car I was using at that point, was my old Ford Falcon 1967, which I kept modifying and upgrading frequently. The old Falcon started life with a puny 260 C.I. V-8 engine, which was really underpowered at our high altitude of 7350 ft asl. In 1975 my father replaced the 260 with a much better 289, still with the original 2 barrel carburator. latter on I was given the car and soon I got a newer 302, which had better torque, but lacked top end response.
Some more years and I was able to replace it with a 351, souped up with a proper 4 barrel, dual point centrifugal advance distributor, big air filter and a higher lift cam.
I felt it was a fast car, until a 1986 4 cylinder gave me a beating! It was a 2-door Dodge Magnum with a 2.2 liter Turbo. it was a 5.8 liter vs a 2.2 turbo, and I was embarrassed.
Later on, I bought a used 1991 Dodge Spirit R/T with a little 2.5L Turbocharged engine. It is slightly slower from 0 to about 30 MPH, then the Spirit blasts and leaves behind the Falcon like standing still.
Now I have three cars, since I bought a new Stratus R/T 2002 Sedan with a 2.4L Turbo. The Falcon is a toy used on some week ends, but the 91 Spirit and the 2002 Stratus are the daily drivers (I have to alternate them, as the stupid "Today your car cannot be used" city government program (that has caused people to buy one or two extra, used cars to be able to ride all the week).
For me, the Turbo engines have been great, trouble free (provided you use Synthetic oil and know how to drive them) and magnificent when driving across the high mountain passes, where the normally aspirated ones loose a third of their claimed power. Amclaussen.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.