Laser Ignition(Spark Plug Replacement)Boosts Efficiency 27%

[MitchJi]

Hi,

http://gas2.org/2015/03/03/laser-ignition-boosts-efficiency-27/

Laser Ignition Boosts Efficiency 27%

Engineers at Princeton Optronics say they have figured out a way to use lasers in place of spark plugs in internal combustion engines. Why is that important? Because using lasers increases efficiency by a whopping 27%. All that extra efficiency means more power and lower emissions, too.

Every time the world declares the internal combustion engine is dead, someone comes along and revives it. Think back to the 70’s, when the campaign to clean up exhaust emissions gave us evil smelling engines that wouldn’t turn off. They would run your air conditioner or move your car forward but didn’t have enough power to do both at the same time. Corvettes left the factory with engines rated at a meager 150 horsepower. Everyone agreed the internal combustion engine was obsolete. Yet today, four-cylinder engines with twin turbos and electric superchargers crank out 450 horsepower reliably and do it while meeting ever tightening emissions rules. So much for the end of the gasoline engine.

Engines have changed a lot over the years, but spark plugs have not. Yes, some now use platinum instead of copper for longer life, but the idea of shooting a high voltage current across an air gap to make a spark hasn’t changed much in 100 years. The biggest problem with spark plugs is they have to be mounted on the edge of the combustion chamber, which leads to less than optimal burning of the fuel/air mixture.

Princeton Optronics says it has figured out how to focus a laser beam directly in the middle of the combustion chamber for more complete burning of the mixture. That means more power with fewer emissions. Lasers could also be targeted at several areas within the combustion chamber for even more accurate control over the combustion process. Cancel the funeral for the “infernal combustion engine” — again.

The research was funded by a $150,000 grant from the US government. The laser system has not yet been tested under the hood of a road car, but the company says it can withstand the heat, pressure and high rpm found in a typical internal combustion engine. Already, inquiries have come in from several shipping companies, which are under pressure to reduce emissions from their emissions spewing marine engines. The Navy is also investigating the use of lasers in aircraft engines.

Toyota says it was working on a laser ignition system back in 2011, but never developed a working prototype. If the benefits of laser ignition are proven in real world use, the internal combustion engine just got another long term lease on life.

http://www.princetonoptronics.com/

 

[Drunkskunk]

That is all kinds of awesome. I'm excited by this, not so much because it make more efficent gas engines, blah blah blah, etc, etc, etc. I'm excited because it means high powered lasers will be mass produced.

Now I can finally build that anti-squirrel turret for my back yard. Muhahahahaha! /madscientist.jpeg

 

[friendly1uk]

That could be the quickest re purposing I have ever seen lol

Totally overshadowed the efficiency boost. Just give us the fricken laser beams

 

[nicobie]

27% ????

 

[cal3thousand]

27% ????

Current internal combustion is so wasteful there is room for much improvement. 27% sounds great.

 

[Lebowski]

27% what ?

The typical ICE is at 33%
So does this make it 60% ?
Or 1.27*33 = 42% ?
Or has the (i dont know) 10W taken by the ignition system been reduced to 7.3W ?

 

[ErnestoA]

They must have done the study on a really crappy engine. Having built engines myself, if more than a small percentage of the fuel injected comes out unburned, which is necessary for cooling, something's terribly wrong. Lasers are neat though! I wonder how they're keeping the optics clean and cooling the valves/pistons.

 

[Doctorbass]

27% what ?

The typical ICE is at 33%
So does this make it 60% ?
Or 1.27*33 = 42% ?
Or has the (i dont know) 10W taken by the ignition system been reduced to 7.3W ?

Lebowski I love your questions!!

especially this one: Or has the (i dont know) 10W taken by the ignition system been reduced to 7.3W ?

witch would turn this discover to very ridiculous!!! lol :lol:

A typical car need about 10kW average to drive.. so saving 2.7W from the alternator witch represent 0.027% improvement on the overall consumption lol...

I just hope its from 33 to 60% overall efficiency!

 

[Doctorbass]

A question remain...
How the hell could the optical path to be isolated from the combustion waste and not make all lenses or mirror become dirty just after few explosion??, diming the beam with all the absorption of the dirty lens and mirrors..

Maybe the same way as a laser cutting machine with high pressure air jet along the focalized beam??..
But that airjet pressure would need to be higher than the explosion to overcome the generated force...

Doc

 

[cal3thousand]

They must have done the study on a really crappy engine. Having built engines myself, if more than a small percentage of the fuel injected comes out unburned, which is necessary for cooling, something's terribly wrong. Lasers are neat though! I wonder how they're keeping the optics clean and cooling the valves/pistons.

Just because fuel is all burned doesn't mean it's highly efficient. That just means it is good on emissions.

Wasted energy in ICE is expressed as heat. These lasers must help create more force from the combustion at a lower heat to be more efficient.

 

[MrDude_1]

They must have done the study on a really crappy engine. Having built engines myself, if more than a small percentage of the fuel injected comes out unburned, which is necessary for cooling, something's terribly wrong. Lasers are neat though! I wonder how they're keeping the optics clean and cooling the valves/pistons.

possibly.
but more likely they are measuring the increase in peak pressure.

Spark plugs ignite the fuel on a edge of the cylinder, and the flame front carries across the chamber.

A "laser" that can ignite across the entire thing at once, would ignite more fuel at once.. and increase peak pressure. Probably by around 1/3.... so it sounds about right.

if you REALLY wanted to be interesting, combine this with a modern 2-stroke design, and you'll have an engine that runs just as clean as a 4-stroke, but with much more power in a smaller, lighter package... maybe perfect for a hybrid... or a kickass motorcycle.

 

[Doctorbass]

They must have done the study on a really crappy engine. Having built engines myself, if more than a small percentage of the fuel injected comes out unburned, which is necessary for cooling, something's terribly wrong. Lasers are neat though! I wonder how they're keeping the optics clean and cooling the valves/pistons.

Just because fuel is all burned doesn't mean it's highly efficient. That just means it is good on emissions.

Wasted energy in ICE is expressed as heat. These lasers must help create more force from the combustion at a lower heat to be more efficient.

The way I understand it is working is that with the laser focalized on the center of the combustion chamber, this make the explosion to start from the middle and expand in all direction at the same time witch reduce the explosion time and increase peak power of each explosion. On the actual system the explosion are made form the top of the combustion chamber where the spark is created and it spread from the top down to the bottom and sides, witch don't make it to expand with the same delay in all direction and to hit the wall of the chamber at the same time....

Doc

 

[Doctorbass]

Next problem is that to make a spark do they need a femtosecond laser? :lol: because the peak power required to ionize the air and make a spark usually require one of these complicated laser....

it I seasy to imagine a beam to focalize somewhere.. but it does not mean it create heat at this area...

To create a spark they need insame power with many digits!! during femtosecond duration scale...

it is called laser induced air breakdown


Just like this: [youtube]1HHJhpStza0[/youtube]

Doc

 

[Drunkskunk]

27% what ?

The typical ICE is at 33%
So does this make it 60% ?
Or 1.27*33 = 42% ?
Or has the (i dont know) 10W taken by the ignition system been reduced to 7.3W ?

The way I read it, " increases efficiency by a whopping 27%" I would assume they meant a 27% increase of the original efficiency, so I agree with your reading of "1.27*33 = 42%"

 

[friendly1uk]

Glass is getting very tough now. Perhaps the piston wipes a window that the laser shines though. Or a wiper valve could be invented. The fuel injected used as washer fluid, as the spark would be much later than normal anyway. As I imagine combustion times would be halved. Which brings a shower of thoughts forward.

 

[Hillhater]

27% what ?

The typical ICE is at 33%
So does this make it 60% ?
Or 1.27*33 = 42% ?
Or has the (i dont know) 10W taken by the ignition system been reduced to 7.3W ?

The way I read it, " increases efficiency by a whopping 27%" I would assume they meant a 27% increase of the original efficiency, so I agree with your reading of "1.27*33 = 42%"

Hmmm ? I believe there are a few Laws of Thermodynamics to be broken if you want to get an ICE efficiency above 35%.

Oh, and why would marine engines benefit when they are mainly compression ignition (diesel) 2 strokes. .?

 

[Punx0r]

Some marine diesel engines already exceed 50% thermal efficiency.

I agree that the claims for this laser ignition system sound suspect. I imagine it was based on an unusual set of circumstances, like a very lean mixture, where the charge isn't homogenous and the spark plug doesn't always reliably ignite the charge. Although direct-injection would probably render it moot.

A modern spark ignition system is extremely effective, that's why power-increasing/fuel-saving plugs or ignition leads are scams. If charge ignition wasn't reliable you would see the effect on an emissions test.

Using a laser to simultaneously ignite the entire charge, rather than having a progressive burn doesn't sound like something you'd want to do. It'd be like detonation, putting unnecessary mechanical shock loads on the engine. The burn speed of petrol is already very high (unlike diesel).

There may be advantages to a laser ignition system, but I doubt it's going revolutionise the ICE.

 

[bigmoose]

I agree, the baseline must be awful. As a new engineer, for an agency back in 1977 I was called on to evaluate a proposal for laser ignition of a gasoline engine. The concept is not new... and I question the results promoted by these folks.

In December, I broke down and bought a new Tahoe. It is getting about 40% better gas mileage than my old one. It has a direct injection gasoline engine, with ... now get this ... 11.5 to 1 compression ratio on regular fuel. I have yet to see a good cut away of the head, but rumor is it is shaped like a top fuel head, Luke would recognize it as a "Larry Widmer" head. Apparently with the direct injection, there is no fuel in there to preheat and detonate, then the shape of the chamber is such that it burns quickly as injected. Raising the compression ratio is a win win for overall cycle efficiency.

Just when you thought nothing new would come out... it does. This thing is a beast with 40% or so more horsepower than the old one and the quickest vehicle I have had since a Porsche 911. If it is reliable we will be very happy for an ol' guy.

Larry Widmer was truely a man way ahead of his time!

 

[MrDude_1]

I agree, the baseline must be awful. As a new engineer, for an agency back in 1977 I was called on to evaluate a proposal for laser ignition of a gasoline engine. The concept is not new... and I question the results promoted by these folks.

In December, I broke down and bought a new Tahoe. It is getting about 40% better gas mileage than my old one. It has a direct injection gasoline engine, with ... now get this ... 11.5 to 1 compression ratio on regular fuel. I have yet to see a good cut away of the head, but rumor is it is shaped like a top fuel head, Luke would recognize it as a "Larry Widmer" head. Apparently with the direct injection, there is no fuel in there to preheat and detonate, then the shape of the chamber is such that it burns quickly as injected. Raising the compression ratio is a win win for overall cycle efficiency.

Just when you thought nothing new would come out... it does. This thing is a beast with 40% or so more horsepower than the old one and the quickest vehicle I have had since a Porsche 911. If it is reliable we will be very happy for an ol' guy.

Larry Widmer was truely a man way ahead of his time!

Unrelated to the laser ignition topic, but related to direct injection.... just be aware that in a few years the back of your intake valves, that would normally have fuel "cleaning" them, will have a slight buildup of oil. The PCV system still works, so light amounts of oil touches the back of the valve... and then oxidizes there from the heat. looks really nasty.

Other than that one issue, I love direct injection. I just cant wait for them to solve the valve issue... preferably with NO VALVES... can you imagine an engine with an ideal intake and exhaust timing and duration for every RPM?

 

[bigmoose]

Thanks for the insight into direct injection issues... wonder if a little seafoam injected from time to time might help?

 

[flathill]

Laser ignition has been used in opposed free piston detonation engines since the late 80s

Nothing new but costs are down to go mainstream

 

[cal3thousand]

Thanks for the insight into direct injection issues... wonder if a little seafoam injected from time to time might help?

Not likely to help.

Maybe if you do the seafoam into a vacuum port, but I doubt it. Guys with Audi RS5s on this forum I follow are having their heads cleaned with walnut shell blasting every other oil change at the tune of $800+ a pop. It only makes a huge difference at the loads these guys are regularly pushing. I have a direct injected 3.2 that has not been cleaned but I'm planning on it.

 

[MrDude_1]

Thanks for the insight into direct injection issues... wonder if a little seafoam injected from time to time might help?

Not likely to help.

Maybe if you do the seafoam into a vacuum port, but I doubt it. Guys with Audi RS5s on this forum I follow are having their heads cleaned with walnut shell blasting every other oil change at the tune of $800+ a pop. It only makes a huge difference at the loads these guys are regularly pushing. I have a direct injected 3.2 that has not been cleaned but I'm planning on it.

Yup. you nailed it.
its pretty stuck on there... the Audi guys have it worse as far as I know.

I dont know what I'm going to do when it becomes an issue for my wifes car. She has a Direct Injected Subaru BRZ. same Direct Injection heads as the new Toyotas, except in a boxer layout I expect no issues for atleast 5 years, but after that... no idea. This engine hasnt been out long enough in its direct injection form to tell...

 

[Punx0r]

It sounds like it's the PCV that's the problem. I wonder if a venture drawing it directly into the exhaust wouldn't be a better DIY fix than decoking the head?

 

[Hillhater]

...... but related to direct injection.... just be aware that in a few years the back of your intake valves, that would normally have fuel "cleaning" them, will have a slight buildup of oil. The PCV system still works, so light amounts of oil touches the back of the valve... and then oxidizes there from the heat. looks really nasty.

How have Diesel's dealt with this issue ?
They have had direct injection for much longer than gas motors, and presumably use a PCV, but are renown for high mileage reliability.