Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Land Rover's straight six ingenium engine, clean diesel now a thing.

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    661
    Quote Originally Posted by jonesfam View Post
    I'm going to ask a dumb question which probably should be somewhere else.
    Why don't they use electricly driven Turbos/superchargers?
    Jonesfam
    We looked at developing a motor/generator cartridge for a turbo similar to what F1 are doing but when the client came back and revised his target price to $2500 with a qty of 10 we quietly told him to go jump. The main issue was building an affordable stator with sufficient magnetism that didnít self destruct on overrun and would withstand the conditions found in an engine bay while strapped to an exhaust turbine.

    You need a *lot* of power to compress the volumes of air needed for an ICE and while its not in complicated In theory, it kinda is in practice.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Perth Western Australia
    Posts
    1,598
    I dont see any new technology there...

    If you research all the "latest greatest tech" you will find it's been around a lot longer than being used in a Land Rover engine.

    BUT I do like a good straight six cylinder engine! bring back the straight six is what I say!
    Regards
    Daz


  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The new Gold Coast, after ocean rises,Queensland
    Posts
    10,697
    I'm thinking VW had an electric supercharger on it's last version of the 1.4 in it's Golf wagon.

    It certainly had both turbocharger and supercharger.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brisbane West
    Posts
    21,805
    Toyota made an electric supercharger.
    The difference between a turbocharger and supercharger is the former utilises energy that would be otherwise wasted. Superchargers are power by the engine (belt, electrically), ero they create parasitic loss. Swings and roundabouts.
    Relatively recently, Volvo trucks had a turbocharger dedicated to providing extra power to the flywheel. It was discontinued, being highly complex for marginal gain.
    If you don't like trucks, stop buying stuff.
    http://www.aulro.com/afvb/signaturepics/sigpic20865_1.gif

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kalamunda: Perth
    Posts
    3,406
    Quote Originally Posted by jonesfam View Post
    I'm going to ask a dumb question which probably should be somewhere else.
    Why don't they use electricly driven Turbos/superchargers?
    Jonesfam
    No engine guru but hot gases exiting the exhaust is wasted energy that the engine has been unable to make use of. That energy can be further utilised by letting the hot gases expand and cool through a turbine to drive something else, a compressor typically.

    So maybe there will always be exhaust driven turbos on modern ICE for efficiency reasons. What they drive in the future is another thing, perhaps could be a generator rather than a compressor with the compressor driven electrically, who knows.
    2011 D4 3.0 SDV6
    1999 D2 V8, in heaven
    1984 RRC, in hell

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    24,747
    Exhaust turbines driving the propeller shaft were a 'thing' as large aeroplane piston engines fought a last, failing, battle against turbines. The Napier Nomad, perhaps the most ambitious one, featured a 12 cylinder two stroke diesel from memory, with 70% of the power coming from the exhaust turbines. It is also considered by some to be the most complex aeroplane engine ever built (although competitors in this space were the four row radials from the other side of the Atlantic). There were, however, several versions built, with quite different design. None reached the design 6,000hp, and by the time any were ready for testing, it was clear that the future was turbines.

    The major theoretical advantage of the layout was that it was effectively a turboprop engine with the combustion chamber replaced by the diesel engine, allowing both a higher combustion temperature (higher thermal efficiency) and a lower turbine inlet temperature (less demanding on blade metallurgy). But at the expense of complexity, size, and mass.
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    brighton, brisbane
    Posts
    27,413
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    Exhaust turbines driving the propeller shaft were a 'thing' as large aeroplane piston engines fought a last, failing, battle against turbines. The Napier Nomad, perhaps the most ambitious one, featured a 12 cylinder two stroke diesel from memory, with 70% of the power coming from the exhaust turbines. It is also considered by some to be the most complex aeroplane engine ever built (although competitors in this space were the four row radials from the other side of the Atlantic). There were, however, several versions built, with quite different design. None reached the design 6,000hp, and by the time any were ready for testing, it was clear that the future was turbines.

    The major theoretical advantage of the layout was that it was effectively a turboprop engine with the combustion chamber replaced by the diesel engine, allowing both a higher combustion temperature (higher thermal efficiency) and a lower turbine inlet temperature (less demanding on blade metallurgy). But at the expense of complexity, size, and mass.
    Was that the same company that produced the Napier Deltic, which was used in our Ton class minesweepers?

    EDIT. The Deltic (after the Greek letter Delta) diesel was a supercharged, two-stroke, opposed-piston engine with no valves. The engine block was arranged in a triangle of cylinder banks forming the sides. Each apex of the three connected cylinder banks was connected by a crankshaft. The crankshafts were linked by phasing gears, so they could send power to a single output shaft. Built in this three-sided configuration, the Deltic diesel featured six banks of pistons working the three crankshafts.

    Significant Engines In History: How The Napier Deltic Diesel Works
    halfbacks were invented to stop prop forwards taking over the world.

    Ladies, if a man says he will fix it, he will. There is no need to remind him every 6 months about it.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, Inner East.
    Posts
    10,996
    Quote Originally Posted by JDNSW View Post
    Exhaust turbines driving the propeller shaft were a 'thing' as large aeroplane piston engines fought a last, failing, battle against turbines. The Napier Nomad, perhaps the most ambitious one, featured a 12 cylinder two stroke diesel from memory, with 70% of the power coming from the exhaust turbines. It is also considered by some to be the most complex aeroplane engine ever built (although competitors in this space were the four row radials from the other side of the Atlantic). There were, however, several versions built, with quite different design. None reached the design 6,000hp, and by the time any were ready for testing, it was clear that the future was turbines.

    The major theoretical advantage of the layout was that it was effectively a turboprop engine with the combustion chamber replaced by the diesel engine, allowing both a higher combustion temperature (higher thermal efficiency) and a lower turbine inlet temperature (less demanding on blade metallurgy). But at the expense of complexity, size, and mass.
    The turbo-compound Wrights were another complex horror. The turbochargers drove the crankshaft via shafts and gears and fluid couplings. They must have taken lessons on oil leaks from, Rolls Royce and Land Rover.
    URSUSMAJOR

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Brisbane or Arrawarra
    Posts
    9,782
    Quote Originally Posted by DazzaTD5 View Post
    I dont see any new technology there...

    If you research all the "latest greatest tech" you will find it's been around a lot longer than being used in a Land Rover engine.

    BUT I do like a good straight six cylinder engine! bring back the straight six is what I say!
    Many seem to go on about LR being innovators,but in many cases,its not true.

    Dont yell too hard about straight six engines,we might end up with a nice and simple 186 ....
    paul

    D4 MY12 white,2.7(with a few more killer wasps) rear air,e diff,xenons,arb bar,7 seat ,18" bfg KO2

    Puma Defender 110 (son's)ARB
    bar,snorkle,rocksliders,rack,KM3's,BAS chip

    '56 S1,been in the family since...'56

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    24,747
    Quote Originally Posted by bob10 View Post
    Was that the same company that produced the Napier Deltic, which was used in our Ton class minesweepers?
    ....
    Yes. The Deltics seem to have been quite successful as locomotive engines - I don't know how they went in minesweepers.
    John

    JDNSW
    1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
    1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!