[TheAntiDoomer]

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/03/transo ... ction.html

Transonic Combustion, based in Camarillo, CA, has developed a gasoline fuel injection system that can improve the efficiency of gasoline engines by 50 to 75 percent, beating the fuel economy of hybrid vehicles. A test vehicle the size and weight of a Toyota Prius (but without hybrid propulsion) showed 64 miles per gallon for highway driving. The company says the system can work with existing engines, and costs about as much as existing high-end fuel injection.

[Tanada]

Company engineers have doubled the fuel efficiency numbers in dynamometer tests of gas engines fitted with the company’s prototype SC fuel-injection systems, Rocke said. A modified gasoline engine installed in a 3200-lb (1451-kg) test vehicle, for example, is getting 98 mpg (41.6 km/L) when running at a steady 50 mph (80 km/h) in the lab.

Lab results are nifty and everything, but how does it do in open course real world driving? What about in varying humidity from stormy weather and seasonal changes? Besides, who in the heck cruises at a steady 50 mph? People are either on the freeway cranked up to their level of comfortable speed (70 is the limit here) or driving stop and go inside the city.

Could this be something useful? Sure it could, but I think they are using a very lose definition of efficiency if they are claiming a 75% increase from what sounds like modifications to a standard engine, not a whole new design concept.

[TheDude]

A Dream Engine Becomes Reality - NYTimes.com Published: November 24, 1996

TOKYO— TWO Japanese auto makers have succeeded in developing a new type of gasoline engine that can deliver substantial improvements in fuel economy without sacrificing power.

Proponents say that the new engine, known as a direct-injection engine, could represent the next fundamental change in engine technology, as significant as the shift in the last two decades from carburetors to fuel-injection systems.

''This engine should be the base concept for all engines in the future,'' said Akira Kijima, general manager of engine design at the Mitsubishi Motors Corporation. He said the new engine combined the fuel efficiency of a diesel power plant with the power and relative cleanliness of a gasoline engine.

In the direct-injection gasoline engine, fuel is sprayed directly into the cylinder -- where combustion occurs -- rather than being first mixed with air. That allows more precise control of the fuel and air mixture, reducing fuel consumption by 25 to 35 percent, engineers say, while offering slightly greater power and acceleration than conventional engines.

Gasoline direct injection - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Later systems

In 1996 gasoline direct injection reappeared in the automotive market. Mitsubishi was the first with a GDI engine in the Japanese market with its Galant/Legnum's 4G93 1.8 L inline-four.[5] It was subsequently brought to Europe in 1997 in the Carisma,[6] although Europe's then high-sulphur unleaded fuel led to emissions problems, and fuel efficiency was less than expected.[7] It also developed the first six cylinder GDI powerplant, the 6G74 3.5 L V6, in 1997.[8] Mitsubishi applied this technology widely, producing over one million GDI engines in four families by 2001.[9]

That article has a detailed timeline. It looks like DI has mostly been implemented in luxury lines, Lexus, Ferrari, etc., the added cost has to be born by the consumer. Dunno how the fuel efficiency paid off in the end. This might make a good starting point for analyzing this new tech. "Supercritical" suggests higher temps and pressures, which would mean even more weighty apparatus than was needed for DI.

[emersonbiggins]

Parents just bought a 2011 Hyundai Sonata, which has one of the first mass-produced GDI engines, a 2.4L I-4. 200 hp, drag coefficient 0.28, PDQ overall. A very large sedan (as big as a Camry), and gets about 35-40 MPG on the highway. Not bad. (for the US, anyways) Stickered at around $26k.

[hardtootell-2]

Parents just bought a 2011 Hyundai Sonata, which has one of the first mass-produced GDI engines, a 2.4L I-4. 200 hp, drag coefficient 0.28, PDQ overall. A very large sedan (as big as a Camry), and gets about 35-40 MPG on the highway. Not bad. (for the US, anyways) Stickered at around $26k.

Wow! Cool!
My 92' Geo metro would get 63 MPG hwy. I sold it for fear of getting hit by an SUV

[brixio]

with a fiat punto 1.3 with an old generation (2007) multijet (the new one is much better) you reach 27km with a liter of diesel (61 miles per gallon), if you go 120km/h (75mph) it does 19km/liter wich is 73 miles with a gallon, if you go 163km/h (100mph) it goes 10km with a liter (38 miles per gallon) That's why chrisler was sold to fiat powertrain...

[Roy]

That's great news.

As a long time auto-enthusiast I can attest to the improvements in technology re: gasoline engine efficiency improvements...

For example, the VQ35 engine from Nissan... a 3.5 liter V-6, or a 213 cubic inch engine, in most applications, produces anywhere from 250 to 300 hp. 20 years ago such horsepower/displacement ratios were strictly in the realm of high-end racing engines. And those engines would have required constant maintenance and were very high wear. Not to mention that such engines were not suitable for street driving due to their peaky torque curves and high fuel consumption, among other things. Any old hot-rodder can attest to this.

The VQ35, in a 3200 lb car, is capable of achieving 30 mpg+ on the highway and it is faster and quicker than most V8 muscle cars sold in this country up to the late 90's that used twice as much fuel... It is also very driveable with a smooth torque curve, excellent reliability, and outstanding efficiency given its performance and displacement.

The GM LS series V8 engines are also very efficient and economical for their displacement, compared to the vast majority of V8 engines produced in this country since the V8's introduction in the mid 1950's as standard equipment in passenger cars.

Most of the improvements in engine efficiency, like variable valve timing (i.e. Honda calls it VTEC), fuel injection, and computerized engine management, have been utilized to increase horsepower rather than to maximize fuel economy up to now.

As fuel prices creep higher, perhaps automakers will move away from HP numbers to MPG numbers as the selling point of their vehicles. At least in America, I think most people are more concerned with HP than MPG though; so the automakers in this market are merely responding to customer demand in order to maximize their profits.

Rather than offering a V6 that makes 1.4hp/c.i. they'll offer a 1.8L engine that makes 130 hp and delivers over 50 mpg like many of the cars in Europe. If I cut my Nissan VQ35 in half, it would offer decent performance and outstanding fuel economy, for example. But it wouldn't beat those pesky 5.0's Mustangs in a stoplight drag race... LOL

When customers demand high fuel economy en masse, that is when we will see the change us peak oilers are hoping for in the future. I think we've still got a ways to go before that happens.

[TheAntiDoomer]

Transonic gets Supercritical with fuel injection, claims 50-75% improvement

http://green.autoblog.com/2010/03/04/tr ... ims-50-75/

Naturally, we take all such amazing-sounding performance claims with an appropriately large grain of salt. According to this article from the Society of Automotive Engineers, though, the technology sounds legit. As much as we'd love to be geniuses that are capable of explaining exactly how Supercritical Fuel Injection works, we're not

Supercritical fuel injection and combustion

http://www.sae.org/mags/aei/7160

Company engineers have doubled the fuel efficiency numbers in dynamometer tests of gas engines fitted with the company’s prototype SC fuel-injection systems, Rocke said. A modified gasoline engine installed in a 3200-lb (1451-kg) test vehicle, for example, is getting 98 mpg (41.6 km/L) when running at a steady 50 mph (80 km/h) in the lab.

The new technology, in addition, is achieving significant reductions in engine-out emissions. Some test engines reportedly generate only 55-58 g/km of CO2, a figure that is less than half the fleet average value established by the European Union for 2012. Two automakers are currently evaluating Transonic test engines, with a third negotiating similar trials.

[SeaGypsy]

That makes sense to me AD.
I used to build glass furnaces. Precise flame placement to avoid heatloss to the inlet walls is crucial to running efficiently. By preheating the air using waste exhaust heat, and mixing right at the point of combustion efficiency is up to 30% better than using cold air and a mixing chamber preignition.
I put a bit of thought into building a gizmo to suck heat from the exhaust of my GM V6. Effectively just a sleeve running around the exhaust manifold into the air ports should achieve a substantial improvement in efficiency.
Thus far I have been too busy to try this out. If I had a workshop full of tools I would give it a go.
The Dude's comment that 'super critical' sounds difficult, it's not. There is more than enough waste heat coming from the exhast of any combustion engine to take any fuel to super critical temperature, precisely controlling this should not be too difficult at all, using a hot/cold air mixing chamber.
I think these guys are really on to something.
Thanks for the find AD!

[TheAntiDoomer]

Ultra-Efficient Gas Engine Passes Test

http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/24701/?a=f

Transonic Combustion, a startup based in Camarillo, CA, has developed a fuel-injection system it says can improve the efficiency of gasoline engines by more than 50 percent. A test vehicle equipped with the technology gets 64 miles per gallon in highway driving, which is far better than more costly gas-electric hybrids, such as the Prius, which gets 48 miles per gallon on the highway.

[TheDude]

That makes sense to me AD.
I used to build glass furnaces. Precise flame placement to avoid heatloss to the inlet walls is crucial to running efficiently. By preheating the air using waste exhaust heat, and mixing right at the point of combustion efficiency is up to 30% better than using cold air and a mixing chamber preignition.
I put a bit of thought into building a gizmo to suck heat from the exhaust of my GM V6. Effectively just a sleeve running around the exhaust manifold into the air ports should achieve a substantial improvement in efficiency.
Thus far I have been too busy to try this out. If I had a workshop full of tools I would give it a go.
The Dude's comment that 'super critical' sounds difficult, it's not. There is more than enough waste heat coming from the exhast of any combustion engine to take any fuel to super critical temperature, precisely controlling this should not be too difficult at all, using a hot/cold air mixing chamber.
I think these guys are really on to something.
Thanks for the find AD!

No doubt countless tinkerers have gone down this road in the past; that in of itself suggests there may be issues with instillation or overall performance. You could easily track this down searching automotive forums. I threw in DI since it seems much more straightforward than this newer apparatus, outstanding claims for its performance were thrown around at the time of its inception, and it was supposed to be industry standard within a decade, as had happened with techs like fuel injection. Well, that didn't pan out. This happens again and again, you notice. Bets are someone's written a book on that general subject, too.

My SOP is to see what other blogs and forums have to say about the latest and greatest: Transonic Combustion - Google Blog Search. Inevitably you find some dissenting voices in there.

[TheAntiDoomer]

That makes sense to me AD.
I used to build glass furnaces. Precise flame placement to avoid heatloss to the inlet walls is crucial to running efficiently. By preheating the air using waste exhaust heat, and mixing right at the point of combustion efficiency is up to 30% better than using cold air and a mixing chamber preignition.
I put a bit of thought into building a gizmo to suck heat from the exhaust of my GM V6. Effectively just a sleeve running around the exhaust manifold into the air ports should achieve a substantial improvement in efficiency.
Thus far I have been too busy to try this out. If I had a workshop full of tools I would give it a go.
The Dude's comment that 'super critical' sounds difficult, it's not. There is more than enough waste heat coming from the exhast of any combustion engine to take any fuel to super critical temperature, precisely controlling this should not be too difficult at all, using a hot/cold air mixing chamber.
I think these guys are really on to something.
Thanks for the find AD!

No doubt countless tinkerers have gone down this road in the past; that in of itself suggests there may be issues with instillation or overall performance. You could easily track this down searching automotive forums. I threw in DI since it seems much more straightforward than this newer apparatus, outstanding claims for its performance were thrown around at the time of its inception, and it was supposed to be industry standard within a decade, as had happened with techs like fuel injection. Well, that didn't pan out. This happens again and again, you notice. Bets are someone's written a book on that general subject, too.

My SOP is to see what other blogs and forums have to say about the latest and greatest: Transonic Combustion - Google Blog Search. Inevitably you find some dissenting voices in there.

From most of the commenters I have read thus far this is based on VERY sound science and it is said that major automakers are already on board. This is a huge development for fuel savings IMO.

[TheDude]

From most of the commenters I have read thus far this is based on VERY sound science and it is said that major automakers are already on board. This is a huge development for fuel savings IMO.

That's because you're a confirmation bias junkie. Get over it. If all liquids production is 10 mb/d higher in 2012 I'll probably not pay so much attention to the ramifications of peak oil, too. But Cantarell crashing and tantamount flat production shore up my confidence that is a reality.

Don't know where you're going for your comments but this is a respected venue for these matters, and the verdict is far from in favor: Transonic gets Supercritical with fuel injection, claims 50-75% improvement — Autoblog Green

"98 mpg when running at a steady 50 mph in the lab" - wow, in the lab.

A couple of points here. When I drive I usually don't keep it at a steady 50 mph. Is this like that Keanu Reeves movie "Speed?" Don't stop the bus or it'll EXPLODE!!! Perhaps this engine would be well suited for use in a series hybrid (aka E-REV) like the Chevy Volt or Fisker Karma to take advantage of its "one trick pony" efficiency at the sweet spot in rpm range.

I'm skeptical about its overall fuel economy while pushing a 3000 lb vehicle through stop and go traffic or up and down hills. I'd love to see the mpg numbers for actual city and highway driving.

As for "major automakers":

The company has demonstrated the technology in its own test engine, and says it is currently testing it with three automakers. One key question is the impact the high pressures and temperatures will have on how long the engine lasts, Rocke says. The company, which is supported by venture-capital investments from Venrock and Khosla Ventures, plans to manufacture its system itself, rather than licensing the technology. It plans to build its first factory in 2013, and to introduce the technology into production cars by 2014.

Read what Robert Rapier has had to say over the years about Vinod Khosla too, if you have a sincere interest in how venture capital really works.

[TheAntiDoomer]

From most of the commenters I have read thus far this is based on VERY sound science and it is said that major automakers are already on board. This is a huge development for fuel savings IMO.

That's because you're a confirmation bias junkie. Get over it. If all liquids production is 10 mb/d higher in 2012 I'll probably not pay so much attention to the ramifications of peak oil, too. But Cantarell crashing and tantamount flat production shore up my confidence that is a reality.

Don't know where you're going for your comments but this is a respected venue for these matters, and the verdict is far from in favor: Transonic gets Supercritical with fuel injection, claims 50-75% improvement — Autoblog Green

"98 mpg when running at a steady 50 mph in the lab" - wow, in the lab.

A couple of points here. When I drive I usually don't keep it at a steady 50 mph. Is this like that Keanu Reeves movie "Speed?" Don't stop the bus or it'll EXPLODE!!! Perhaps this engine would be well suited for use in a series hybrid (aka E-REV) like the Chevy Volt or Fisker Karma to take advantage of its "one trick pony" efficiency at the sweet spot in rpm range.

I'm skeptical about its overall fuel economy while pushing a 3000 lb vehicle through stop and go traffic or up and down hills. I'd love to see the mpg numbers for actual city and highway driving.

As for "major automakers":

The company has demonstrated the technology in its own test engine, and says it is currently testing it with three automakers. One key question is the impact the high pressures and temperatures will have on how long the engine lasts, Rocke says. The company, which is supported by venture-capital investments from Venrock and Khosla Ventures, plans to manufacture its system itself, rather than licensing the technology. It plans to build its first factory in 2013, and to introduce the technology into production cars by 2014.

Read what Robert Rapier has had to say over the years about Vinod Khosla too, if you have a sincere interest in how venture capital really works.

I'm a confirmation Junkie? Laughable dude, you're being very un-dude. You are the one picking random anonymous comments saying it wont' work (typical for "the dude", which ironically is very un-dude). Those comments could be from meth addicts for all you know. Meanwhile everythign I posted was based on data provided by real scientist and engineers. But if we are going to cherry pick comments lets have at it:

This one again shows its not a crazy new science they are just getting efficiencies diesel engines already get:

Ultra fuel efficient engine
Direct injection allows fuel metering the same as deisels, with actual fuel mixtures much leaner than required when fuel is mixed with air outside the combustion chamber. That allows much higher compression ratios, and, eventually, a true flex fuel engine that could use a variety of fuels and would not require high test gas, basically a deisel engine. That is why they don't need to limit the air intake. Sounds like they are moving toward the perfect marriage between gas and deisel engines and the MPG numbers will go higher. Limiting the combustion temperatures and the sulfer dioxide and nitrous oxides will be a challenge, but the major deisel engine companies have already figured that out.

This sounds good too:

neptronix
7:23PM (3/04/2010)
WOW. If the SAE says it's legit, then i have a hard time playing skeptic as i usually do... cuz you know, this stuff usually is snake oil or ends up having terrible drawbacks.

Yep; ICE definetely has some life left in it.

You know I don't really understand why you call yourself the dude, it really doesn't fit your personality, you're more like one fo the muppet guys that sits in the balcony nitpicking all the time:




Take er' easy dude, I know you will.

[TheAntiDoomer]

here's a intersting report accenture did on the tech (pdf warning)

http://www.tscombustion.com/Transonic_DT_CaseStudy.pdf

[yesplease]

From most of the commenters I have read thus far this is based on VERY sound science and it is said that major automakers are already on board. This is a huge development for fuel savings IMO.

That's because you're a confirmation bias junkie.

For the love of Pete... And you're not a junkie too? Just about everyone on this forum is/was including myself.

Anyway, stuff like this is pretty easy to poke holes in. Just look at the unadjusted mileage of a Prius on the HWFET, extrapolate what it would be at a steady cruise, and compare that to their test mileage at a steady 50mph cruise. Hell, the lean burn engine Honda used in the original Insight was easily 15% more efficient in terms of minimal fuel consumption than the current gen Prius engine, but there's no way it would comply w/ current emissions specs in that state.

[TheAntiDoomer]

Fuel-injection System That Delivers 64 Miles Per Gallon

http://www.physorg.com/news187436599.html

Proprietary software has also been developed by Transonic Combustion that allows the system to adjust the fuel injection precisely depending on engine load.

Transonic Combustion is currently testing their new fuel injection system with three automakers. One key concern is the life of the engine when it’s subject to high pressures and temperatures. The company plans to manufacture the system themselves and not license the technology. Transonic Combustion plans to build its first factory in 2013, and place the technology into production cars by 2014.

[Frank]

...interesting. I'd like to see independent test data. You can't outwit Carnot, no matter how good your engineering is...

This is all good stuff but it doesn't negate the need to change the basic process (internal combustion.)