I was wondering why a gasoline engine couldn’t work this way: instead of having 4-12 cylinders, each firing in sequence, have the following:
-a big pressure vessel, in to which a fuel/air misture is injected.
the valve (admitting the fuel and air closes)
-the fuel/air mistre is ignited
-now you have a vessel with 20 atmospheres pressure, which you run to a steam-engine like piston engine (expansion engine)
-this runs till the pressure drops, at which point the cycle begins again
This way, yo have one ignition cycle in 20 seconds, instead of 8000 per second (for a conventional engine).
Less wear and tear, and more efficient combstion-wold it work?
Big pressure vessels are dangerous, the cycle of pressurization and falling pressure would not make for very consistent power generation, as well as likely not having the capability for on demand sudden power surges comparable to flooring your gas pedal. It would be easier if you want something like this to just make an actual steam engine, with petrol as the fuel. In any case, wear and tear inside gasoline engines is not that much of a problem these days, 250k miles is not hard to reach with modern car engines.
Yes, it’s just not practical. Air motors work this way with lower pressure. One idea is a car powered by a tank of very high pressure air. The energy required to compress that air in the first place exceeds what would be required to propel the car, and the tank of high pressure is a tremendous danger at all times, and especially in an accident. Also, there’s no reduction in wear and tear. There’s probably an increase in the valves that have to regulate the high pressure feed to the engine.
A gas turbine and a car ‘turbo’ works off this principal though it is a turbine instead of a reciprocating engine that power is derived from.
From that the question is why have a ignition cycle at all and not just have a continuos flame? It is the pressure difference that power is derived from, in your system you get high pressure that diminishes till the next combustion cycle, with a continuous flame you maintain full pressure all the time, which leads to more power and efficiency. Also less cycling between high and low pressure would seem to be better for the pressure vessel in terms of metal fatigue potentials.
That’s pretty cool, 68mph and 125 mile range with a ‘few minutes’ refueling time or can be plugged in. Overall seems better stats then the electric car, though top speed leads much to be desired. Wonder if the OP’s concept could be used in conjunction with this to increase range in a hybrid system.
The exhaust gases are held in a compressed state in the pressure vessel after combustion then released on demand through the ‘steam engine like piston’ which would presumably be vented to the atmosphere after that expansion as I read that.
Prototypes have been made. Compressed air is a means of storing energy, so they could be practical if the compressor was powered by solar cells. However, there is no way to recharge them in minutes unless you swap out air tanks. Simply filling such a tank will generate enormous amounts of heat. Ask a scuba diver about refilling tanks. You often have to keep them immersed in water to cool them down. And the pressure has to me much greater than that for practical use. I think they are counting on light weight fiber reinforced tanks, which are still a disaster waiting to happen.
8000 per second? What kind of engine does that? Mine runs at more like 100 or 200 per second.
One problem with your proposal is that the tank is only under pressure until the gasses cool off. That wouldn’t be 20seconds I think, unless the tank radius is pretty big…