Garrett E-Turbo promises more power, better efficiency and less lag

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
In a typical application, the turbocharger is sized to balance its turbine’s power delivery timing with engine needs. The larger the turbo compressor, the longer the lag before it kicks in to offer more power. Often this compromise means that the turbo is too small to operate efficiently at very high RPM. At high RPM rates, these turbos often shut down and more fuel is pumped into the engine to compensate and allow the turbo to cool down.

Companies like Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz have developed two-stage turbochargers that use an electric motor to spin the turbo’s compressor until the exhaust gasses can catch up and take over at higher speeds. These dual-stage turbos are limited by the physics involved, as a small motor can only spin a compressor of a given size. Thus the aforementioned balance to size versus heat remains.


https://newatlas.com/garrett-turbo-promises-more-power-and-efficiency-less-lag/
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
So if pumping more air into the cylinder makes the fuel burn more efficiently, why not pump in straight O2 instead of air? Get rid of the 70% nitrogen and you wouldn't have to have the high pressure.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
So if pumping more air into the cylinder makes the fuel burn more efficiently, why not pump in straight O2 instead of air? Get rid of the 70% nitrogen and you wouldn't have to have the high pressure.
Outside of making sure the engine can handle the additional power, storage is the problem.

Since the ratio in internal combustion engines is about 1g of fuel to 14g of O2, you'd need 86.8lbs of oxygen to one gallon of gas. Obviously, O2 doesn't weigh much so to get almost 87 lbs of it, you'd need a little over 972 ft^3 of oxygen storage per gallon of gas.

20 gallon gas tank? Figure about 20,000 ft^3 of oxygen. Or about the size of a standard 2,500 ft^2 house.

You could compress it, but even then it would take 100 ft^3 (@3,000psi) to store it. Or about 250 SCUBA tanks.

Nitrous oxide is better suited for this and it still has Nitrogen in it.
 
Last edited:

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
So if pumping more air into the cylinder makes the fuel burn more efficiently, why not pump in straight O2 instead of air? Get rid of the 70% nitrogen and you wouldn't have to have the high pressure.
That's sorta what NO injection does. But that technology still has storage issues and only a few "squirts" can be delivered by a larger system before it's exhausted. Here's an engine of mine that has two-stage port-injection NO... Raw fuel has to be injected in exactly the correct ratio to the nitrous when the buttons is pushed..wne
141903
 

glhs837

Power with Control
More power and better efficiency than a similar motor with a huge turbo. This is another way to skin the cat is all. Bigger turbos dont do well down low. Smaller turbo gets you fast repsonse, but runs out of steam on the top end. BMW tried two turbos, one small and one large, then they went to a single two stage turbo. Mopar did a Ti-AL turbine to get fast respsponse from that larger wheel.
 

Merlin99

Visualize whirled peas
PREMO Member
Outside of making sure the engine can handle the additional power, storage is the problem.

Since the ratio in internal combustion engines is about 1g of fuel to 14g of O2, you'd need 86.8lbs of oxygen to one gallon of gas. Obviously, O2 doesn't weigh much so to get almost 87 lbs of it, you'd need a little over 972 ft^3 of oxygen storage per gallon of gas.

20 gallon gas tank? Figure about 20,000 ft^3 of oxygen. Or about the size of a standard 2,500 ft^2 house.

You could compress it, but even then it would take 100 ft^3 (@3,000psi) to store it. Or about 250 SCUBA tanks.

Nitrous oxide is better suited for this and it still has Nitrogen in it.
Is this total O2 requirement or in addition to the ambient air?
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
More power and better efficiency than a similar motor with a huge turbo. This is another way to skin the cat is all. Bigger turbos dont do well down low. Smaller turbo gets you fast repsonse, but runs out of steam on the top end. BMW tried two turbos, one small and one large, then they went to a single two stage turbo. Mopar did a Ti-AL turbine to get fast respsponse from that larger wheel.
The high performance marine diesels we use in some craft are sequentially turbo charged...with the control of sequencing and overall boost done by computer of course.
 
Top