New "Shockwave" Engine Design Solves Energy Crisis

[murphy7801]

It does kinda look like the 'chantry' symbol from the Dragon Age series.

They made the engine tranquil!

 

[faefrost]

Ok, that's pretty cool. Why hasn't this idea been come up with before - I mean, where are the car companies' research funds going?! If it works well enough, it could be pretty sweet, and might even make alternative fuels easier to deploy - hydrogen, for example.

This doesn't make any sense... how do they direct the force of the ignited gas to only one direction? Wouldn't the explosion provide an equal torque clockwise and counterclockwise thus keeping the turning stationary?

No, the curves in the channels create vectored emissions. Think of how a wind-turbine works, or a water turbine. Similar idea.

But a wind turbine is hit by wind perpendicularly to the turbine, from what I read in the article it sounds like this ignites gas while it's sitting between two of the raised ridges.

No, the gas is in the centre of a spiral of channels, so its expansion out through the parallel spirals generates angular motion.

So you're saying the expansion forces it to hit the turbine perpendicularly at a high speed? That actually makes a lot of sense, I'm sure pistons waste a lot of energy by traveling in two different directions, so this might really be a major breakthrough.

Actually the core tech behind this has been around for years. Just no one has applied it this way. This type of design has been used as a more efficient way to pump water (essentially this engine concept working backwards) for almost 30 years now. The best example of this is Fire Trucks. Up to the 70's many trucks used a traditional Piston pump to pump water. Since the 1980's most new trucks were built to use a centripetal pump (almost exactly what this shockwave is,). The old piston pumps could at most get about 1000 gallons per minute (maybe, on a good day). and that was using complex mechanisms to get power off of both strokes of the piston (something modern engines don't do.) The centripetal pumps will do 4500 to 6000 gallons per minute. They are just that much more efficient. I can easily see how the same concept can be used to leverage a gas powered engine. (heck I think the C&O railroad experimented with a coal powered turbine engine right at the end of the steam era that worked somewhat similarly).

So this probably is a valid concept.

 

[DanDeFool]

I'm sorry, but I'm getting more annoyed about every little invention that 'solves the X crisis' while still using oil.

No people, recycling or Shockwaving isn't saving the world, its just not screwing it up as fast. End of!

Alright, stop using anything petroleum and oil-based this instant, and see how things work out for you. If you think its so easy to go cold-turkey off of oil, then put your money where your mouth is.

And while you are busy not doing that, it proves a point. Alternative energy isn't quite at the level to be completely effective for us. It can be expensive as sin, and would require a large shift to even get started. We would be lucky to be running Alternative-only after several years of getting it competitive, because that's just how things are.

And on top of that, there isn't any energy storage system that's as functional as fossil fuels; in terms of cost, weight, and volume per unit of energy.

I'm not a mechanical engineer, but I suppose it's possible that a drive shaft could also be attached to this engine to eventually transfer the energy to the wheels of a car. What's not clear is whether this shockwave engine will produce enough torque to start a heavy car moving from 0 mph, but hopefully the reduced weight of the vehicle would make that possible.

The motor wouldn't need to produce a lot of torque if it's used to produce electricity. If you have existing battery storage (you wouldn't need as much as you do for current hybrid vehicles), you can use your batteries to get the car moving while the motor spins up. Once the motor's at operating speed, it can keep running at a constant rate, producing electricity to charge batteries or capacitors from which the electric motors can draw power.

This is how gas turbines are used to produce electricity, but a turbine isn't a very effective solution for a small vehicle. This motor could do the same thing at the small scale, assuming it's practical.

Pshh, like OPEC would let that thing go into mass-production without a fight. I think we are still years away from something that will truly solve the energy crisis.

Conspiracy theories aside, the biggest obstacle to the adoption of this type of system would be that automakers will have to scrap a tremendous amount of infrastructure if they were to go from producing the ridiculously complex internal combustion engines we have today to a simpler system like the one shown here. That's a big change, and it's going to have to happen slowly. Not to mention that a lot of people are going to lose their jobs when the parts they're involved in making suddenly become obsolete. Forget OPEC, the unions are going to be a bigger obstacle to the adoption of any kind of new engine technology.

And of course, as we gamers have seen with SEGA, being the quickest to innovate doesn't necessarily make you the biggest winner in business.

But as for solving the energy crisis, the substantial majority of our current petroleum usage comes from transportation, and a big chunk of that is cars and trucks. Considering how wasteful current engines are, if we could double or triple the fuel efficiency of all the new vehicles produced, we could take a big chunk out of the demand for gas and diesel. It won't solve the energy crisis per se, but it'll certainly help make fuel prices more manageable for the foreseeable future.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Reduces petrol consumption by 90%? IE, 10 times most efficient than what we have now?

According to this article, current engines are only 15% efficient...doesn't this mean that this engine is 150% effective? Um...

If one engine design gets 50mpg and a new one gets 125mpg, that's a 150% increase in fuel-efficiency. Math.

Which, is all very well, except it has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

According to the article, current engines are 15% efficient, that is, they use only 15% of the total energy present in the fuel they consume. For each unit of total energy, they only get 0.15 units of energy they actually use, the rest being wasted. From 10 units, you get 1.5 in usuable energy, and so on.

For this engine to cut fuel consumption by 90%, it has to be able to get the same energy output from 1 unit of fuel the old one did with 10, that is, it has to be 10 times more efficient than the old sort of engines.

So, instead of needing 10 units of total energy to get 1.5 units of usable energy, you only need 1, given you an efficiency of 150%.

 

[Catalyst6]

I'm sorry, but I'm getting more annoyed about every little invention that 'solves the X crisis' while still using oil.

No people, recycling or Shockwaving isn't saving the world, its just not screwing it up as fast. End of!

Every energy innovation since the dawn of time has been based around inventing a source of energy, then improving upon it until it's practical, then improving until something better is created. "Alternative sources" are still in step two, meanwhile scientists are making positive progress with what they have. Even the smallest improvement is postive progress, and this is a pretty good one.

If it really bothers you then feel free to get a degree in physics/chemistry and get on the issue yourself!

 

[RicoADF]

It looks like a good step in the right direction

 

[Dhatz]

im getting more and more annoyed by every invention that doesnt drastically improve storage of electricity per mass. At least somone made a engince that looks and works scifi but is actual(which means byby lame obsolete blocks in hybrids).

 

[Twilight_guy]

We've finally reached the point where people realize the engine's ridiculously low efficient won't fly? thank god. I mean really 85% of energy lost is just terrible. You don't even need to aim for high efficient here, just getting as poultry 50% would zoom circles around the old model.

 

[godfist88]

Why did I see the word 'engine' and automatically think of something you base a game off of and not what you use to power a car?

maybe because this is a gaming website?

 

[Idlemessiah]

Why did I see the word 'engine' and automatically think of something you base a game off of and not what you use to power a car?

Damn yeah =/

OT: This won't stop the oil running out and it won't reduce petrol prices. If anything they'll make "Shockwave brand" fuel and market at +50% the price of regular gas.

Go Google Honda Clarity. Somebody needs to start chucking some money at that.

 

[PurpleLeafRave]

Why did I see the word 'engine' and automatically think of something you base a game off of and not what you use to power a car?

That's exactly what I thought. Maybe it's because I don't drive because I don't need to, or I need to play less games.

EDIT: PS sorry, I've just realised how many people are quoting you. Bet that's annoying.

 

[fgdfgdgd]

I'm sorry, but I'm getting more annoyed about every little invention that 'solves the X crisis' while still using oil.

No people, recycling or Shockwaving isn't saving the world, its just not screwing it up as fast. End of!

Slowing it down is the first step to reversing the damage done, glass half full out looks didn't get us here and it won't get us to solving the worlds problems.

 

[Johann610]

Reads like that "static electricity engine" from "Atlas Shrugged."

 

[rsvp42]

Reduces petrol consumption by 90%? IE, 10 times most efficient than what we have now?

According to this article, current engines are only 15% efficient...doesn't this mean that this engine is 150% effective? Um...

If one engine design gets 50mpg and a new one gets 125mpg, that's a 150% increase in fuel-efficiency. Math.

Which, is all very well, except it has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

According to the article, current engines are 15% efficient, that is, they use only 15% of the total energy present in the fuel they consume. For each unit of total energy, they only get 0.15 units of energy they actually use, the rest being wasted. From 10 units, you get 1.5 in usuable energy, and so on.

For this engine to cut fuel consumption by 90%, it has to be able to get the same energy output from 1 unit of fuel the old one did with 10, that is, it has to be 10 times more efficient than the old sort of engines.

So, instead of needing 10 units of total energy to get 1.5 units of usable energy, you only need 1, given you an efficiency of 150%.

I read your comment wrong, apparently.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Sweet so make a working engine that produces some HP and Torque numbers and compare it to an existing engine and see how the figures stack up.

otherwise color me uninterested in theorycrafting.

It's not for HP and Torque. It's to turn a generator which powers an electric engine. Turning a generator doesn't require hp and torque. The great thing about this is: that it turns that generator with amazing efficiency and doesn't need several big, heavy car parts that a traditional combustion engine needs.

In the end it still needs gas. But it uses gas much more efficiently and allows the car to be 20% lighter. The end result is a car with an electric motor that runs on gas. 1/3 to 1/4 as much gas as what a normal car needs to run. No having to plug it in and no severe limitations on how far it can go like what battery run electric cars have.

It says all this plainly in the article so I really doubt you actually read it.

Color me interested in a car that can go 90 miles on a gallon of gas.

than put it up against a hybrid, which this is and see how they stack up. I need real points of comparison.

 

[M4rsch]

I lol'd at "almost $4 a gallon"...

 

[Latinidiot]

I'm sorry, but I'm getting more annoyed about every little invention that 'solves the X crisis' while still using oil.

No people, recycling or Shockwaving isn't saving the world, its just not screwing it up as fast. End of!

Assuming that it works at all?

Reduces petrol consumption by 90%? IE, 10 times most efficient than what we have now?

According to this article, current engines are only 15% efficient...doesn't this mean that this engine is 150% effective? Um...

No, it means it's ten times as effective.

For some reason all I can think about is Iron Man suit when I see a disc shaped energy thingy.

The pop culture is strong in this one.


On topic, I am relieved. I was wondering the other day how we were ever going to get ourselves out of this mess, and this certainly helps.

 

[solidstatemind]

This has got 'Nobel Prize' written ALL over it.

If it can produce enough power to provide performance along the lines of todays cars, it's a great idea; however, even then, I bet it will take forever to be adopted.

People are very fond of their cars.

 

[Darkauthor81]

Sweet so make a working engine that produces some HP and Torque numbers and compare it to an existing engine and see how the figures stack up.

otherwise color me uninterested in theorycrafting.

It's not for HP and Torque. It's to turn a generator which powers an electric engine. Turning a generator doesn't require hp and torque. The great thing about this is: that it turns that generator with amazing efficiency and doesn't need several big, heavy car parts that a traditional combustion engine needs.

In the end it still needs gas. But it uses gas much more efficiently and allows the car to be 20% lighter. The end result is a car with an electric motor that runs on gas. 1/3 to 1/4 as much gas as what a normal car needs to run. No having to plug it in and no severe limitations on how far it can go like what battery run electric cars have.

It says all this plainly in the article so I really doubt you actually read it.

Color me interested in a car that can go 90 miles on a gallon of gas.

than put it up against a hybrid, which this is and see how they stack up. I need real points of comparison.

This... IS a hybrid. Just a different, better, way of doing it. Ya know what? Never mind. You don't understand this at all and I don't feel like arguing with you about it.