Quote:
Originally posted by Fenring
That's not where the piston engine loses out anyway. It's that constant loss to inertia and friction that beats the piston engine when compared to rotary engines.
Can't say if MYT is vapourware or not, but after many heresay and rumors about all sorts of highly efficient engines that got misteriously lost, this is the first time i actually see someone presenting it out in the open, so maybe that's a good sign.
Still, nothing gets close to the efficiency of an electric motor, but that's another story.
|
All IC engines lose most of their energy to the heat cycle involved. I can't remember the exact numbers, but with typical combustion and heat sink temperatures, the absolutely theoretical efficiency (no losses whatsoever) of an IC engine OF ANY TYPE is around 30%. Friction may cost you a couple percent on top of this, but is very small in comparison. So whenever you see anyone talking about truly dramatic changes in fuel efficiency for a new engine, your bull**** meter should immediately peg.
IC engines that double fuel efficiency get "lost" just about as often as the 150-mpg carburetors that Detroit was keeping off the market. And if this is the first you've seen of this sort of thing you need to get out more - both YouTube and the web are littered with "new technology engines" are are going to revolutionize the industry - there's an entire Nigerian-style industry revolving around bilking investors in such ventures.
Electric motors are highly efficient but that's because they are converting electrical energy to work rather than heat energy to work. The process that generates the electricity, if it uses a heat cycle, has the same problems with low theoretical efficiency. The most efficent coal-fired and gas-fired powerplants can do quite a bit better than IC engines in cars because they run at higher temperatures and there are economies of scale, but efficiencies are still in the 35-40% range.
- Mark