Ricardo Hyboost car, E-supercharger + turbo

[spinningmagnets]

These guys took a 4-cylinder Ford Focus that gets (claimed) 38-MPG from a conventional 2.0L gasoline burning engine. Replaced the stock engine with a 1.1L engine that gets roughly 40% better fuel mileage during highway cruising. The single turbo is sized to just replace the stock horsepower at the engines normal RPMs, but a turbo that size has a slow spool-up time.

Capacitors in the trunk coupled with a sophisticated software management system power up an electrically driven supercharger instantly when ever a sudden increase of accelerator pedal is sensed. This E-supercharger isn't big, and it only runs for a couple seconds. It not only removes any turbo lag, it increases the torque over the stock engine.

The cars engine also stops completely when the car isn't moving, and then it is started instantly when you step on the pedal. It is reported to cost only $1100 over the stock vehicle cost, and if the original 2.0L engine is retained, the kit can be used as a performance upgrade. The original prototype system was developed for the McLaren P1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLaren_P1

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/03/17/jay-lenos-garage-ricardo-hyboost-video/

 

[Hillhater]

That is part of what this years F1 motors are doing.
They have the turbo connected to a motor generator that can either drive the turbo to boost the motor output, or it can "harvest" electrical energy from the turbo when its no needed for intake boost.
In addition they have the "hybrid" drive motor that can add 120kw to the main transmission and collect regen from the car retardation.
All software controlled and programmable to suit track and driver needs.
Result is ~700+ bhp and huge torque from a 1.6 liter motor that uses 30% less fuel than a similar powered V8 F1 motor from last year. A 25kg battery pack handles the energy storage.

But you are spot on SM, we can expect to see this kind of "Eboost" technology becoming available on mainstream shopping cars in the future

 

[Punx0r]

Clever, but...

1) Why not just have the "momentary" supercharger driven by the engine via an elecromagnetic clutch?

2) Is it needed? Yes, small engine + big turbo has traditionally been poorer to drive than a larger, naturally aspirated, engine of equal power due to lag. However, turbos have gotten better and there is still (AFAIK) the potential for variable-geometry turbos on petrol engines, which would improve things further.

Even with a small amount of turbo lag, is it worth the complexity and weight of that system to eliminate it? In F1, probably. For Joe Bloggs on the street? Could he really tell or care if throttle response improved by 200ms?

If they're presenting this as an example of lateral thinking and creativity with new technologies, then fair enough. I'm just not sure it's what we'll all be driving in five years

 

[Hillhater]

I would be impressed if they really can offer that system for $1100, ..even if only as a kit of parts !
24v motor generator
24v electrical Supercharger ( 6 kW ?)
24v Supercapacitor bank ( 6 kW discharge capable ?)
High power DC/DC converter
Control system and software.

Sounds like a lot more than $1100 to me ?

 

[Hillhater]

... is it worth the complexity and weight of that system to eliminate it? In F1, probably. For Joe Bloggs on the street? Could he really tell or care if throttle response improved by 200ms? ..

The "200ms"...was the lag between hitting the throttle and the Echarger activating.
The Turbo lag was much greater.. " like an early Porsche Turbo"...to quote JL.

VW does basicly the same thing with their "TSI" motors using a combination of a mechanical supercharger and Turbocharger without all the electrical complication, yet getting similar end results..55mpg etc
EDIT: .. Reviewing the figures
VW get ...120bhp from 1.4ltrs = 86 bhp/ltr
Hyboost gets.. 143 bhp from 1.1 ltrs = 130 bhp/ltr ..... that 50% more than the VW for similar fuel use.

I wonder why Ricardo didnt just use an electrically "assisted" Turbo, instrad of adding another device.?

 

[Punx0r]

Sorry, 200ms was just me speculating about a hypothetical improvement in turbo lag on a well setup engine.

At one point it did seem that supercharged or turbo-supercharged engines would be the future, then turbos got a lot better and with petrol-direct-injection (like the TSI) you can run compression ratios on a turbocharged engine that you'd normally associate with a naturally aspirated engine. Result: drives like a NASP off-boost. Clever stuff and may well see a large reduction in the popularity of diesel engines (along with the tightening emissions restrictions on those).

120HP from 1.4L is really NASP territory. There have been several engines making~100hp/litre over the last 10-15 years.

An electrically-assised turbo would be an interesting proposition. I guess it would be difficult to interface an electric motor with a lightweight turbine that normally spins at ~200,000 rpm.

I guess it's easy for me to sit here and criticise...

 

[Hillhater]

120HP from 1.4L is really NASP territory. There have been several engines making~100hp/litre over the last 10-15 years. ..

True ..but how many of them could also return 55-60 mpg ? !

 

[liveforphysics]

Its way too little too late to save gas vehicles from being replaced by electric, and quickly.

Anything that improved efficiency substantially is a good thing though. I would definitely run LTO cells over supercap though. Super caps just don't hold much energy (at the moment at least).

 

[Punx0r]

Very true, Hillhater. I think the engine is benefiting from a range of modern fuel-efficiency-increasing technologies.

A pointless aside, but this talk of 100HP/litre reminded me of the BMW M12 engine. It was said to be producing ~1500HP from 1.5 litres in the 1985 Formula 1 season. Nevermind a horsepower from a cubic inch

Luke, I think the ICE car will continue to play a signficiant role for quite some time, at least outside California