Research Project - Replacing diesel engines... PLEASE HELP

What about a rotary engine like the Wankel ? Can it be made to run on diesel ??? Few moving parts & probably easier to work on than a gas turbine ?

 

I'm just really concerned about all those scorched pigeons on the underpasses.... why?

Because you know some jack-wagon is gonna try and soup one up.

On the plus side, we might be able to put steam catapults on loading docks, and even though we'll probably be spilling our Big Gulps all over the floor, just think of the thrill when you see that dock lock light turn green!

Instead of hearing, "Back 'er in to Door 19, Driver..." come over the CB, now it'll just be, "Call the Ball, Maverick"

I think it's a great idea. Can I be a test pilo......er, driver?

 

There are other considerations for the truck, you can't just dump a turbine in an existing production truck.

First thought is you are going to have to add another braking system to replace the one you took out (the diesel motor).

 

If it doesnt say "Catterpillar 3406E 6NZ" on the side, I am not interested, that motor is as close to perfection as you are going to get, I say why mess with a good thing? You could devote 10 millon dollars to research and still not come up with something better.

That engine will do anything and everything I could ever ask it to do, it is efficiant reliable, and makes #### good power. It is simple enough that I can work on it, or even overhaul it myself. It is easy to mantian and care for.

If you run one long enough, you would know why I love them so.

 

turbines have been tried in cars and trucks before--they are really not feasible--the initial acceleration is to slow
one car at indy ran a p&w--i think it was early 1970's--it was leading and out preforming the other cars--but the transmission couldnt handle it--next year indy outlawed turbine engines---
a turbine is less mechanical---but just starting one up-- the chances of cooking it are very high if you dont follow procedure
chrysler also tried a turbine car--and ran in to same acceleration problems--actually there is one left---beautiful car

 

they use a turbine in the M1A Abrams tank, but that is a whole different kind of animal.

 

The M1 is basically a big truck and seems pretty reliable. except the maint. is horrendous .

 

Not fuel efficient either gents...... one must recover the heat from the exhaust and do something productive with it. ( like heat water )

Had this discussion the other day...... we don't need a better diesel...we need better fuel......somewhere between kerosene and JP1 will get about all the umph out of the diesel but who can afford it?

Of interest.... my carrier is running propane diesels. Start diesel and run propane. Drivers report a bit more horses and carrier is reporting over 8 mpg. So far so good.

Problem is...can't get 18 into local K.O.A. campground...yet.

 

Did some research and asked some guru's ...got a bit more. A diesel engine is only 35% efficient..... means if you spend $2.00 for a gallon of fuel only.70 cents worth is used for power and the rest is discharged out your stack. ( 25% for gas engines )

Sulfur is to diesel ( cetane ) what octane is to gasoline....enhances ( adds) to the BTU content so as the Feds ( EPA ) reduce the sulfur content ( ppm ) for emissions then you need more liquid to do the same work .( get worse fuel mileage )

Also, the heating of the fuel ( used to cool the heads ) causes the fuel to expand thereby again providing less BTU's in the given injection ( done as cc's per stroke ) and as we raise engine water jacket temps ( emissions again ) we also heat the fuel more. ( less molecules per cc of stroke )

It is speculated that one could gain efficiency by flowing the entire intake system including the heads, grinding the valve seats ( and valves ) to a more preferred angle like 45 deg. Cummins started down this path with the pulse manifold. Point being to make the engine breathe better. Another suggestion was propane injection.....and water injection. Couldn't be used in the city but would work in cruise mode.

The engineers have applied all these technologies and did get a Ford 9000 up to 10 mpg loaded. They were unable to maintain it though.

Hydrogen is the way to go EXCEPT the only way to carry enough fuel is in a liquid state. Hydrogen is very volatile and you cannot allow untrained people to handle it. Imagine a Swift driver transferring liquid H2 ? Sheet ! Run!

That help?

 

i have seen trucks with propane and water injection--the water one was a bit hokey--but he said it helped--he built it off plans from the net--was in a volvo/detroit--in the sleeper in spot for hanging clothes on right side