Pelican Parts Forums - Disc Gas Engine

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/index.php)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)

- - Disc Gas Engine (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=601874)

Has anybody heard about this?

Supposed to be a game changer...

DailyTech - New Disc Gas Engine Looks to Challenge Traditional Diesel, Gas ICEs

I wouldn't call it a gas engine.....he's discussing a better hybrid. Nice German name and accent.....looks a little young for a kidnapped Nazi scientist.

Here is a sceptic on it:
Wave Disk Engine – New engine design from MSU and ARPA-E that sounds too good to be true – The Blogs at HowStuffWorks

Quote:

Why does this sound too good to be true? Because there are limits to how efficient a real-world gas turbine engine can be, and the claims here (“the generator will use 60 percent of fuel for propulsion”) are beyond those limits. In addition, when looking at the image on this page…

* The first thing that is uncomfortable is the fact that intake and exhaust happen simultaneously, and generally that opens the possibility for flow-through.
* Second, there is no obvious compression step, and compression is important to efficiency. The image says, “Shock waves compress air and fuel”. The only way for this to happen, since there is neither a mechanical volumetric change evident (as in the compression stroke of a piston engine) nor a ramming compression step (as in a ram jet or pulse jet engine), is for the “shock waves” to create some sort of stratified charge in the closed-off chamber. This would have to be a completely new technique, and there is no description or detail on this technique offered, so we are left to wonder what the technique is doing. Also note that if compression is happening through stratification, there would need to be a vacuum forming elsewhere in the chamber. (While it is possible for pulse jet engines to operate statically (without ram air), their efficiency is generally terrible because of lack of compression. So the wave disk engine, again, would be breaking new ground).
* Keep in mind all of the problems that Rotary Engines have with sealing. A gas turbine engine (or a ram jet engine) does not need seals because the compression phase acts as a wall that forces all thrust out the open end. There appear to be no seals in the wave disk engine, so what keeps the compressed stratified charge in its chamber?

I would love to be proven wrong on this – the world could really benefit from a 60% efficient engine. However, these three problems lead me to believe that this engine will not be 60% efficient in the real world. We can revisit in a year and see if I am right or wrong.

Lots of cool stuff on the Dr's website:
http://www.egr.msu.edu/mueller/

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Bob (Post 5952532)

....looks a little young for a kidnapped Nazi scientist.

Maybe he's from Brazil.

He's a professor and doing the one thing professors are good at, Getting tax money from the gubmint in the name of "research".

Anyone remember cold fusion? that clown professor at the University of Utah almost got rich off of his BS scam. He even sold the rights to something that didn't exist, before he got caught and exposed as the incredible fraud he was. Gee, I wonder how much tax money the gubmint gave him to lie?

Besides, why build a psuedo-turbine hybrid that burns gasoline when you can run an engine on 50% water!
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6OS_4ZV-dHA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Yes, I know that's complete BS but there are lots of fools out there who actually believe it, just like they believe some guy invented a 200 mpg carburetor that the oil companies bought to keep it from being produced. Yes, there are people stoopid enough to believe stuff like that.

The world is full of new deal breaking types of engines. A new "technological breakthrough" is announced at least once a year and that has been going on for 100 years.
We've discussed probably 10 "new miraculously efficient" types of engines on this board over the years. They are about as real and practical as a gererator.
The only thing they have in common is the gubmint gave em our money to do research and build something that either doesn't work worth a crap or doesn't work at all. Take the money and run.

Funny thing is, out of all those thousands and thousands of "remarkable new designs" over the past century only ONE new design has ever actually worked well enough to mass produce, the wankel engine.
And it is not even good enough to replace the conventional ICE. It has some advantages but even more disadvantages like poor mileage and wear and relatively low torque and high emissions.

I'm not saying it isn't possible to come up with some new design that is so good it can replace the conventional ICE, but based on history and common sense it is extremely unlikely and logic would dictate that we remain skeptical until proven otherwise.

Failing to be naturally skeptical (considering the odds of it actually happening would be close to the "divine intervention/miracle" range), would just be kinda silly and foolish.

The back and forth linear action of a piston and the crank converting that motion into rotation is ridiculous in the extreme.

It makes much more sense to start a rotational movement and keep it moving, after all; a body in motion tends to want to stay in motion.

I say there is a better mousetrap to be made, just not sure this is it.