Electric Turbo

[Joe_Limon]

Now before you laugh at my Idea hear me out...

Take a turbo, split it in two

Attatch a generator to one end and a motor to the other

In between the two put a capacitor/battery

I know it wouldn't be 100% efficient, but thats what the battery is for, during Idleing/Coasting/Braking/accelerating the turbo could be storing energy.

And when you need it, (accelerating) you can give the turbo 100% boost no waiting for engine revs, and no supercharger belt draining your overall horsepower

Now that I said what I have to say feel free to comment/criticise remember constructive criticism is the best kind

[UncleBob]

1: good luck finding an electric motor that spins 150K RPM's. Even if you use a overly large turbo, you'd still need at least 60K RPM's. You'd have to gear it to the moon to achieve that, which will be very hard on everything.

2: the driving motor could also be used as the power recovery motor/generator

3: there is hardly any exhaust/intake flow on decel, and you would get nearly no power from it.

4: I don't think you realise, even if you could find a motor to fit the bill for this, how much power consumption it would take for a motor to turn over a turbo at the required output. You would only be able to use it for short spurts, because however many car batteries you have attached to the motor would drain very quickly.

There has been many smart people playing with electric forced induction over the years. The realistic examples that worked well, require around 1000 amps to run.

[AudioGuy93DelSol]

Yea, I agree, the current generated would most likely only be about 1/10, if not less, than the current required to spin the turbo.

[Joe_Limon]

Yes I know the battery would drain quickly...
But the time spent accelerating is minimal compared to the time spent coasting
And yes a transmition between the motor would probably be needed
(there would be energy lossed here, but mixed with 98% Effiecient motors it wouldn't be all lost http://www.tip.csiro.au/Machines/success/sc.html , a benefit to this motor is that it is flat and lightweight compared to traditional motors)

I work around mills that consistently operate at 10k plus rpm they are extremely reliable, yes I agree a 100x gear ratio is high, but it is doable. Besides the turbine itself would be more complicated and expensive to machine.

That and your either forgetting or just leaving out the fact that tremendous power can be captured from the aft end of the turbo charger. Dont forget that end also spins in the 100k rpm range, such power would most likely require a very large capacitor rather then a battery.

Also in the decelerating corner of things... you spend just as little time decelerating as you do accelerating

And who knows If you have the money why not invest in a regenerative braking system... that goes straight to the capacitor

[astroracer]

So, if you do get it to work, what does all of this complicated re-engineering gain you, performance wise, over a simple, lite-weight, exhaust operated turbocharger?
Mark

[MagicRat]

Two words.....leaf blower!!

[Joe_Limon]

What do you get? simple... a hybrid system that combines the best of the supercharger and turbo charger...

At low rpms you can crank the turbine. meaning High low end hp gains, and on the other end of the spectrum... since it still is a turbocharger you keep you high end hp gains. All together more powerful then either a super or turbo charger

[UncleBob]

Originally Posted by Joe_Limon

That and your either forgetting or just leaving out the fact that tremendous power can be captured from the aft end of the turbo charger. Dont forget that end also spins in the 100k rpm range, such power would most likely require a very large capacitor rather then a battery.

if you are coasting/deceling, the turbo isn't spinning at 100K RPM's. No throttle equals no exhaust flow equals turbo is doing nothing worth mentioning.

[beef_bourito]

Originally Posted by Joe_Limon

What do you get? simple... a hybrid system that combines the best of the supercharger and turbo charger...

not really, you're trying to get this to work on a very low power level. a simple small turbocharger will work just as well and won't be nearly as complicated. a small turbo will have no noticeable lag, and it won't have the drain on the engine like a supercharger. basicly you're trying to make a complicated answer for a simple problem. there's no way to get an electric turbocharger to work at any kind of significant power level. it would just be too heavy, too complicated and it wouldn't be nearly as reliable as the tried and true turbocharger. and just try to remember, if there are 2 correct answers to a problem, the simplest is usually the best, there's less to go wrong.

another thing to think about is that there will still be lag. the compressor will need to spool before it can deliver that extra air flow. so you'll still have to wait for the power to come on, it won't be quite like a supercharger. you might not need to wait for engine revs but you'll still have to wait.

[Joe_Limon]

Lets list some answers I might have
-Even though idling/decelerating/coasting may not be as prime as when the car is accelerating, you mustn't forget that at 2000rpm a 3.0 liter engine under no forced induction is still pumping out 6000 liters of exhaust vapours a minute, this time is substantially greater then the couple of seconds needed to counteract the turbo lag on a larger turbine

-Beef burito, I still don't see how you think a turbine spinning at 100k produces a very low power level... You might expect low numbers if your generating system is very ineffecient.

And on a different note, What if for the fore end of the "electric turbo charger" you hooked up a supercharger to your electric motor, that way you don't have to worry about the ineffeciency of a 100x transmition

As for simpler solutions. That is often not the case. I will provide you with three general examples to disprove that conservative saying

1. Cars in general. Go back 30 years and you will find a plethera of "simple vehicles" (by todays standards). Yet why do the complex cars of today last longer, and produce more hp (per liter of fuel)?

2. Computers, many older systems are very prone to crashing, yet today many more people have computers, and they crash alot less.

3. A screwdriver... A very simple invention, one you would think hard to improve on no?


That there is a multi bit screwdriver, no more getting up and looking for the right screwdriver, the one you need is always at your fingertips. Best of all you can replace the bits if they get worn out, or if you want different ones.

[UncleBob]

Originally Posted by Joe_Limon

Lets list some answers I might have
-Even though idling/decelerating/coasting may not be as prime as when the car is accelerating, you mustn't forget that at 2000rpm a 3.0 liter engine under no forced induction is still pumping out 6000 liters of exhaust vapours a minute, this time is substantially greater then the couple of seconds needed to counteract the turbo lag on a larger turbine

The 6000 liters of exhaust volume is only true if there is no restriction in the intake. But you have a closed throttle plate, so there is an extremely large restriction in the intake.

An air pump isn't very effective when you plug up the intake.

[Schister66]

i have an idea....get a turbo and boost your car the old fashioned way like i did...it works and i'm not going to fart around w/ electric motors and other things. All you're doing is trying to build a supercharger w/o running it to the belt. It would be a good idea if you could get it to work, but i doubt it will work and be reliable...

[Joe_Limon]

Just to my car? pfft no... Its gonna be my university project and If I can make it work properly it might even be my gateway into the automotive world

[UncleBob]

honestly, I think a mechanical version might be more productive....imagine a regular turbo with a procharger-like belt drive attached to it, but using a one way cog, or even an electric clutch. At "off boost" the cog/clutch is engaged and forcing the turbo to spin at whatever ratio you have it set up for. Then once the engine flow is high enough to spin the turbo at higher rates, the cog slips or you turn off the clutch.

No power loss, won't need 16 car batteries to make it work, never need to wait for batteries to charge up, and there's always an attractive simplicity to such mechanical "solutions"

But I want credit for it if it does pan out

[Joe_Limon]

Hey that is a good idea, but you still would require alot of power, so Ill expand on your idea with this.

Use a solenoid to engage/disengage the turbo, when the turbo spins to fast for the motor disengage, when your coasting/decelerating/idleing and it slows down let it engage so as to charge a capacitor which would power the motor when you press the gas

also

Originally Posted by UncleBob

The 6000 liters of exhaust volume is only true if there is no restriction in the intake. But you have a closed throttle plate, so there is an extremely large restriction in the intake.

An air pump isn't very effective when you plug up the intake.

Just realised that most cars have a 4 stroke engine