12 ms·

New engine shakes up auto industry

107 points by pjy04 16y ago

evo_9 16y ago
They should seriously open source this design before the oil industry spooks show up and make it go away.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- ams6110 16y ago
  Oil industry should be happy about this... it's still burning petrol, after all. Many other ideas on the drawing board are trying to take petrol out of the equation.
- uptown 16y ago
  Like Stan Meyer? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyers_water_fuel_cell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyers_water_fuel_cell http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5794212/drive_angry_hydrogen_truck_metacafe_exclusive/ http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5794212/drive_angry_hydrogen_t...
CountHackulus 16y ago
This sounds a lot like a rotary engine with multiple combustion chambers. The idea of sliding seals should be enough to have any rotary afficionado denounce this new engine.
ajays 16y ago
"Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year." I'll pay attention once this happens. As they say, there's many a slip between the cup and the lip. Lab projections invariably end up being over-optimistic.
- hugh3 16y ago
  Yeah. Would it have killed 'em to at least build a working prototype before sending out the press release? Even if the claims they're making do turn out to be true, it could still suck in any number of other ways. How durable is this engine? Is it still gonna be running after a hundred thousand miles?
  - iwjames 16y ago
    "Last week, the prototype was presented to the energy division of the Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is backing the Michigan State University Engine Research Laboratory with $2.5 million in funding." I am just as skeptical, but if this is how they get their funding to build that working prototype than I'd say it's fair enough.
  - quanticle 16y ago
    Even more importantly, how easy is it to maintain this engine? The reason rotary engines haven't become more mainstream is that the first attempt (the Mazda RX-7) was notoriously difficult to repair. The RX-8 is better (I hear), but the damage has been done - of all the major carmakers out there, only Mazda offers a rotary engine.
    - KaeseEs 16y ago
      Also because they tend to light on fire, have next to no torque where you want it, purposefully burn a metered amount of oil, get crap mileage (which degrades relatively quickly to boot), ... Eventually people tire of playing the rotary game, usually when they realize the weight savings and high redline aren't worth the numerous flaws on anything but a track car (and even then, only if you can live without much low-end torque).
    - mpakes 16y ago
      Untrue. The RX-7's rotary engine (the 13B series) is actually phenomenally reliable, and there are many examples with well over 300k road miles. The RX-8 uses a newer variant of the same engine - the 13B-MSP RENESIS. Additionally, Mazda used the rotary in competition (in the infamous Mazda 787B) at the 24 hours of LeMans, which is a notoriously difficult test of engine reliability. The myth of poor rotary reliability primarily stems from the 3rd-generation RX-7. The notoriously-complex mechanically-controlled sequential twin-turbo system (affectionately known as "the rat nest") was prone to hose disconnects and failures, which often led to over-boost situations. Additionally, owners that modify their cars often exacerbated the problem, installing free-flowing intakes and exhausts, as well as boost controllers, and did not properly modify air-fuel ratios to compensate. These situations led to increased engine heat and premature failure, which gave the rotary an unfair bad reputation. Many owners now convert to a simpler single-turbo setup with electronic boost control and careful air-fuel tuning, which is far more reliable. The actual (and admittedly significant) drawbacks of rotary engines are poor fuel efficiency and high exhaust emissions, both due to incomplete combustion. This has kept them out of mainstream applications and thus they tend to be used primarily in performance applications.
modeless 16y ago
Why is this better than a gas turbine?
- rayiner 16y ago
  IIRC it uses the same principle (Brayton cycle). It's just a lot easier to put in a car.
aidenn0 16y ago
Dup: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2337237 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2337237
jvdh 16y ago
There is nothing in this story and video to back up any of the claims they are making. He just waves around a rotating disc. He could be talking about cold fusion in just the same way ;) [edit] looking at the duplicate link, they refer to their own article from 2006. Cold fusion would either have been laughed away or taken over the world. Same thing here I would assume. [/edit]
VladRussian 16y ago
there is a lot of ingenious engines. The question is which one can be made into practically usable product. There is even productized version of rotary-vane engine coming supposedly next year in a Russian car: http://www.fastcompany.com/1709400/russian-billionaire-unleashes-countrys-first-hybrid-vehicle http://www.fastcompany.com/1709400/russian-billionaire-unlea... I'd be though very surprised if they pull it off as beside Mazda rotary i don't know other mass-produced cars with non-traditional engines.
cubicle67 16y ago
Colour my cynical. There's been alternative engine development for almost as long as there's been the combustion engine, and nothing yet has made an impact. Ralph Sarich invented the orbital engine [0] almost 40 years ago, formed a company and spent millions on the idea but it went nowhere. Interestingly, they knew when to change direction and ended up making a number of breakthroughs in the field of two stroke engines. The company is still in business today [1] [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_engine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_engine [1] http://www.orbeng.com.au/ http://www.orbeng.com.au/
- ugh 16y ago
  The situation today is different. This engine is supposed to optimize hybrid cars (it is supposed to generate electricity to drive an electric motor) and hybrids are something new, they haven't existed for more than a century, which means that there is likely more untapped potential for optimization. This engine wouldn't be practical in a standard gasoline car and it's not designed to be used in one. It obviously can still fail but I don't think it's possible to draw historical parallels.
  - aidenn0 16y ago
    Well if we're talking about that, then reciprocating engines can do pretty well (the prius engine is over 33% efficient when running in the ideal range, and it actually exists today; diesels do even better)
  - jnw2 16y ago
    But maybe an electric car needs a gasoline engine as much as a tablet computer needs a keyboard, and maybe we're several years away from seeing that in the electric car case, just as the belief that a tablet didn't need a keyboard didn't become widespread until the iPad.
- jclaassen 16y ago
  That's exactly what I was thinking. Any Mazda fan will tell you that automobile engines don't need pistons.
- 16y ago
Zak 16y ago
Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year. It should be noted than 25kW is 33HP. Though it's possible to make a useful car with that little power, 33HP is generally considered an appropriate power level for a beginner's motorcycle, not a car. Even if it's much lighter than a piston engine and has such a wide powerband that it doesn't need a gearbox, it's likely they'd need a lot more power for consumer acceptance even in small cars. Edit: I googled this and found that the intent is to use this engine to run generators to charge batteries in hybrid cars, not for direct propulsion. In that case, the cars probably won't be much, if any lighter than standard cars since all the weight savings will be replaced with batteries. Power output could, of course be lower than a standard car engine and still provide good performance since the electric motors could have peak outputs far exceeding the sustained output of the generator.
- yason 16y ago
  It should be noted than 25kW is 33HP. But the design obviously isn't limited to this? A bigger engine could give more power yet still consume less than a regular piston engine. Or 1-2 of these running in parallel, depending on the load.
- darklajid 16y ago
  My first car, and one that I'm still very fond of, had 29HP [0]. I'm 31, so I'm not talking with a 'get off my lawn' 'glorify the past' attitude. In fact, I liked the car that much, that I had several of those in my life. Oh - yeah: I drove a hell of a lot on the German Autobahn with it as well. Fast? Hell no. But I still have that speeding ticket (went just a tiny bit faster than 100km/h) somewhere as a nice souvenir. 0: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_2CV https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_...
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  I don't think you're giving it quite enough credit. For a hybrid car what you can do is marry this to a more powerful electric motor (say, 40HP). When the car is cruising at a constant speed it's running on the engine and charging the batteries (or using just the batteries with the motor off). When the car is accelerating a lot it's using the batteries/motor and the engine at the same time (generating say 70HP or more). Given the lower weight and higher efficiency of this engine that's pretty significant. If it's possible to create a hybrid drive-train (including batteries) that weighs only as much or only a little more than a pure gasoline drive-train that could translate into much cheaper hybrid vehicles on the market. P.S. For clarity's sake, modern hybrids are enormous compromises due to the weight of the battery and electric motor. For a hybrid you want the highest efficiency possible and thus the lowest total vehicle weight you can manage without compromise safety. The necessity of heavy batteries fights in the opposite direction, so in order to produce a fuel efficient vehicle car makers use more expensive, lighter weight materials in the construction of the vehicle. This increases the complexity of manufacturing (more different materials are being used) and raises the price of the vehicle. If you could drop in a drive-train which kept the weight the same that would change the industry dramatically.
Jach 16y ago
http://www.aptera.com http://www.aptera.com Prototype by the end of the year? I swear Aptera has been saying that for the last few... (Okay, they have prototypes but they're not on the market yet.)

107 points by pjy04 16y ago

evo_9 16y ago

They should seriously open source this design before the oil industry spooks show up and make it go away.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
ams6110 16y ago
Oil industry should be happy about this... it's still burning petrol, after all. Many other ideas on the drawing board are trying to take petrol out of the equation.
uptown 16y ago
Like Stan Meyer? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyers_water_fuel_cell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyers_water_fuel_cell http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5794212/drive_angry_hydrogen_truck_metacafe_exclusive/ http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5794212/drive_angry_hydrogen_t...

CountHackulus 16y ago

This sounds a lot like a rotary engine with multiple combustion chambers. The idea of sliding seals should be enough to have any rotary afficionado denounce this new engine.

ajays 16y ago

"Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year." I'll pay attention once this happens. As they say, there's many a slip between the cup and the lip. Lab projections invariably end up being over-optimistic.

hugh3 16y ago
Yeah. Would it have killed 'em to at least build a working prototype before sending out the press release? Even if the claims they're making do turn out to be true, it could still suck in any number of other ways. How durable is this engine? Is it still gonna be running after a hundred thousand miles?
- iwjames 16y ago
  "Last week, the prototype was presented to the energy division of the Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is backing the Michigan State University Engine Research Laboratory with $2.5 million in funding." I am just as skeptical, but if this is how they get their funding to build that working prototype than I'd say it's fair enough.
- quanticle 16y ago
  Even more importantly, how easy is it to maintain this engine? The reason rotary engines haven't become more mainstream is that the first attempt (the Mazda RX-7) was notoriously difficult to repair. The RX-8 is better (I hear), but the damage has been done - of all the major carmakers out there, only Mazda offers a rotary engine.
  - KaeseEs 16y ago
    Also because they tend to light on fire, have next to no torque where you want it, purposefully burn a metered amount of oil, get crap mileage (which degrades relatively quickly to boot), ... Eventually people tire of playing the rotary game, usually when they realize the weight savings and high redline aren't worth the numerous flaws on anything but a track car (and even then, only if you can live without much low-end torque).
  - mpakes 16y ago
    Untrue. The RX-7's rotary engine (the 13B series) is actually phenomenally reliable, and there are many examples with well over 300k road miles. The RX-8 uses a newer variant of the same engine - the 13B-MSP RENESIS. Additionally, Mazda used the rotary in competition (in the infamous Mazda 787B) at the 24 hours of LeMans, which is a notoriously difficult test of engine reliability. The myth of poor rotary reliability primarily stems from the 3rd-generation RX-7. The notoriously-complex mechanically-controlled sequential twin-turbo system (affectionately known as "the rat nest") was prone to hose disconnects and failures, which often led to over-boost situations. Additionally, owners that modify their cars often exacerbated the problem, installing free-flowing intakes and exhausts, as well as boost controllers, and did not properly modify air-fuel ratios to compensate. These situations led to increased engine heat and premature failure, which gave the rotary an unfair bad reputation. Many owners now convert to a simpler single-turbo setup with electronic boost control and careful air-fuel tuning, which is far more reliable. The actual (and admittedly significant) drawbacks of rotary engines are poor fuel efficiency and high exhaust emissions, both due to incomplete combustion. This has kept them out of mainstream applications and thus they tend to be used primarily in performance applications.

modeless 16y ago

Why is this better than a gas turbine?

rayiner 16y ago
IIRC it uses the same principle (Brayton cycle). It's just a lot easier to put in a car.

aidenn0 16y ago

Dup: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2337237 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2337237

jvdh 16y ago

There is nothing in this story and video to back up any of the claims they are making. He just waves around a rotating disc. He could be talking about cold fusion in just the same way ;) [edit] looking at the duplicate link, they refer to their own article from 2006. Cold fusion would either have been laughed away or taken over the world. Same thing here I would assume. [/edit]

VladRussian 16y ago

there is a lot of ingenious engines. The question is which one can be made into practically usable product. There is even productized version of rotary-vane engine coming supposedly next year in a Russian car: http://www.fastcompany.com/1709400/russian-billionaire-unleashes-countrys-first-hybrid-vehicle http://www.fastcompany.com/1709400/russian-billionaire-unlea... I'd be though very surprised if they pull it off as beside Mazda rotary i don't know other mass-produced cars with non-traditional engines.

cubicle67 16y ago

Colour my cynical. There's been alternative engine development for almost as long as there's been the combustion engine, and nothing yet has made an impact. Ralph Sarich invented the orbital engine [0] almost 40 years ago, formed a company and spent millions on the idea but it went nowhere. Interestingly, they knew when to change direction and ended up making a number of breakthroughs in the field of two stroke engines. The company is still in business today [1] [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_engine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_engine [1] http://www.orbeng.com.au/ http://www.orbeng.com.au/

ugh 16y ago
The situation today is different. This engine is supposed to optimize hybrid cars (it is supposed to generate electricity to drive an electric motor) and hybrids are something new, they haven't existed for more than a century, which means that there is likely more untapped potential for optimization. This engine wouldn't be practical in a standard gasoline car and it's not designed to be used in one. It obviously can still fail but I don't think it's possible to draw historical parallels.
- aidenn0 16y ago
  Well if we're talking about that, then reciprocating engines can do pretty well (the prius engine is over 33% efficient when running in the ideal range, and it actually exists today; diesels do even better)
- jnw2 16y ago
  But maybe an electric car needs a gasoline engine as much as a tablet computer needs a keyboard, and maybe we're several years away from seeing that in the electric car case, just as the belief that a tablet didn't need a keyboard didn't become widespread until the iPad.
jclaassen 16y ago
That's exactly what I was thinking. Any Mazda fan will tell you that automobile engines don't need pistons.
16y ago

Zak 16y ago

Michigan State's team of engineers hope to have a car-sized 25-kilowatt version of the prototype ready by the end of the year. It should be noted than 25kW is 33HP. Though it's possible to make a useful car with that little power, 33HP is generally considered an appropriate power level for a beginner's motorcycle, not a car. Even if it's much lighter than a piston engine and has such a wide powerband that it doesn't need a gearbox, it's likely they'd need a lot more power for consumer acceptance even in small cars. Edit: I googled this and found that the intent is to use this engine to run generators to charge batteries in hybrid cars, not for direct propulsion. In that case, the cars probably won't be much, if any lighter than standard cars since all the weight savings will be replaced with batteries. Power output could, of course be lower than a standard car engine and still provide good performance since the electric motors could have peak outputs far exceeding the sustained output of the generator.

yason 16y ago
It should be noted than 25kW is 33HP. But the design obviously isn't limited to this? A bigger engine could give more power yet still consume less than a regular piston engine. Or 1-2 of these running in parallel, depending on the load.
darklajid 16y ago
My first car, and one that I'm still very fond of, had 29HP [0]. I'm 31, so I'm not talking with a 'get off my lawn' 'glorify the past' attitude. In fact, I liked the car that much, that I had several of those in my life. Oh - yeah: I drove a hell of a lot on the German Autobahn with it as well. Fast? Hell no. But I still have that speeding ticket (went just a tiny bit faster than 100km/h) somewhere as a nice souvenir. 0: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_2CV https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Citro%C3%ABn_...
InclinedPlane 16y ago
I don't think you're giving it quite enough credit. For a hybrid car what you can do is marry this to a more powerful electric motor (say, 40HP). When the car is cruising at a constant speed it's running on the engine and charging the batteries (or using just the batteries with the motor off). When the car is accelerating a lot it's using the batteries/motor and the engine at the same time (generating say 70HP or more). Given the lower weight and higher efficiency of this engine that's pretty significant. If it's possible to create a hybrid drive-train (including batteries) that weighs only as much or only a little more than a pure gasoline drive-train that could translate into much cheaper hybrid vehicles on the market. P.S. For clarity's sake, modern hybrids are enormous compromises due to the weight of the battery and electric motor. For a hybrid you want the highest efficiency possible and thus the lowest total vehicle weight you can manage without compromise safety. The necessity of heavy batteries fights in the opposite direction, so in order to produce a fuel efficient vehicle car makers use more expensive, lighter weight materials in the construction of the vehicle. This increases the complexity of manufacturing (more different materials are being used) and raises the price of the vehicle. If you could drop in a drive-train which kept the weight the same that would change the industry dramatically.

Jach 16y ago

http://www.aptera.com http://www.aptera.com Prototype by the end of the year? I swear Aptera has been saying that for the last few... (Okay, they have prototypes but they're not on the market yet.)