Kenetic Energy Recovery Systems

[RichFox]

When I started at UA we had DC-7 aircraft wit5h 3350 turbo-compound Wrights on them. As I remember the turbins drove into the crankshaft. No particular conection to the supercharger.

[jl222]

When I started at UA we had DC-7 aircraft wit5h 3350 turbo-compound Wrights on them. As I remember the turbins drove into the crankshaft. No particular conection to the supercharger.

 Thats right Rich, the 3350 had 3 exhaust turbines on them each driven by the exhaust from 6 cylinders geared back to the crank by shafts with hydraulic couplings.My aero books say each turbine made 200 hp.or 600 more total. Wish i could take photos and post.
 From what i understand the late Bruce Johnson was the person responsible for inserting '' This will include systems such as turbo compounding'' in the rulebook under SUPERCHARGED.
 Either Cummins or Detroit is turbo compounding their new diesel engine but using the excess exhaust energy after using the turbos in the normal way but still picking up 50 hp.

            JL222

[Ratliff]

If you really want to recover some of the lost energy from an engine, like the heat energy that is going out the exhaust, I would think that building a compound engine would probably be legal and not a big technical challenge.  Use a big belt driven centrifugal blower and the hot wheel from a really big turbo connect the two with a shaft that has a simple "sprag form" one way clutch. The motor turns the blower the exhaust gasses turn the turbine once the turbine speed reaches the speed of the blower it will start to drive it and if you use a big enough turbine it will then over come the power required to drive the blower (so now you have effectively a turbo charged car) but if the turbine is big enough it will develop more hp than is required to drive the blower and that horse power will be feed into the engine crank thru the blower drive gears and belt. Bingo!! compound motor!! Don't laugh this set up was used on the B29's engines. Remember at 60,000 rpm every inch pound of torque thru the connecting shaft is one horse power so if you could make a couple of hundred more inch pounds of torque than is required to drive the blower that would be an extra 200 hps!!

This is also one of the ideas that the FIA is considering for the next F1 engines.



Rex

I wonder with turbocompounding how much additional gain might be made by injecting water and/or additional fuel into the engine exhaust?

[Blue]

When I started at UA we had DC-7 aircraft wit5h 3350 turbo-compound Wrights on them. As I remember the turbins drove into the crankshaft. No particular conection to the supercharger.

Actually, this is a DIRECT connection to the supercharger in that the turbo and supercharger shafts are fixed at all times through the accessory gear case.

A typical turbocharger installation is considered a "free turbocharger engine" as opposed to a 3350 PRT which is a "fixed turbo-compounded engine".

For a fixed output and altitude (LSR) linking the turbo to the crank (compounding), allows a larger expansion ratio and much higher specific power.  This was limited in aircraft due to the need for variable altitude and power.  On the DC-7 and super-Connie, the altitude was fixed by pressurization limits and there was no such thing as enough power.  So compounding made sense.

There is MUCH more power available in the turbine of a typical turbo than is used to compress the intake charge.  Harnessing this excess power and coupling it to the crank is a good idea for LSR, although the cost in mechanical complexity may be high.

[Rex Schimmer]

Blue,
Didn't the DC-7 and the Super Connie run PW4360s? I was not aware that they componded the 4360. Going along with what you were saying about additional power in the turbine section of a turbocharger the line of progress is: turbocharged motor, turbocharged motor with compounding, turbocharged motor with all power coming from the turbine, gas turbine. Vesco new where the real hp is.

Much of the mechanical complexity of my approach is already done by using a fairly standard engine driven centrifugal super charger, the step up/down gear box and connection to the crank is already there. The challenge is doing the shaft between the turbine and the blower, should have a sprag type one way clutch and needs to be able to carry enough torque to make some usable hps and do it at 60000 rpm!

Rex

Rex

[Dr Goggles]

Ok Franklin , seeings how you have suggested the flywheel idea maybe we should ask you to expand on the idea for us the unenlightened( excuse the pun please).Give us some figures, how do you suggest it be powered up ? What mass , what diameter. What sort of clutch would you use , how do you deal with the issue of the declining speed of the flywheel , the requirement for peak power at top speed , how do we get a small frontal area, I don't want to seem dubious but , and but , and but............................ I'm struggling to devote the brain power to really think about this but in an event that doesn't consider fuel consumption , doesn't brake and considers only terminal speed I'm betting it is irrelevant , any comment?

Maybe I've missed something but what is the relevance of the F1 connection?

Compounding ? now that's a whole different, interesting and plausible process to achieve higher speeds from a given motor................

Now,below I found a great design for a perpetual energy machine , frankly with this little beauty the sky's the limit.....

[Ratliff]

Ok Franklin , seeings how you have suggested the flywheel idea maybe we should ask you to expand on the idea for us the unenlightened( excuse the pun please).Give us some figures, how do you suggest it be powered up ? What mass , what diameter. What sort of clutch would you use , how do you deal with the issue of the declining speed of the flywheel , the requirement for peak power at top speed , how do we get a small frontal area, I don't want to seem dubious but , and but , and but............................ I'm struggling to devote the brain power to really think about this but in an event that doesn't consider fuel consumption , doesn't brake and considers only terminal speed I'm betting it is irrelevant , any comment?

Maybe I've missed something but what is the relevance of the F1 connection?

Compounding ? now that's a whole different, interesting and plausible process to achieve higher speeds from a given motor................

Now,below I found a great design for a perpetual energy machine , frankly with this little beauty the sky's the limit.....

LSR cars come in all weights and sizes. Why do you expect an answer that only involves one size flywheel?

[RichFox]

The only 4360s UAL ever had were on the Stratocruisers. No turbo-compounding. They were gone before I got there. The 7s had 3350s. Our Convair 240 at that time had "Exhaust augmented thrust" Which was a cool set of headers on the 2800 and a recess in the engine faring so that the collectors pointed aft and added a little push to the deal.

[Dr Goggles]

LSR cars come in all weights and sizes. Why do you expect an answer that only involves one size flywheel?

I'm not fussy , choose a weight between an ounce and ten tons.

Am I the only one Franklin who thinks that for an expert you're all questions and no answers?Is it because you're not interested in answers?

LSR is not spec car cookie cutter clone homogenized pasteurized road racing.

If LSR is not moving forward with new ideas it's moving backwards.

And have you ever really sat down and thought about the amount of ballast some of these cars carry? There are cars out there with a thousand pounds of just dead weight. Why not actually do something with that?

1./ Spec car cookie cutter homogenized pasteurized road racing is like that so it is competitive, otherwise it would be like the Wacky Racers, ...........I think I see a connection here

2./ You have missed the possibilty that it may be neither of the above , it may also be chasing it's tail obsessing about " kEnetic energy storage systems"

3./By jingoes this is a biggie....it's an enundrum wrapped in a conigma cloaked in a streamlined body

[Ratliff]

LSR cars come in all weights and sizes. Why do you expect an answer that only involves one size flywheel?

I'm not fussy , choose a weight between an ounce and ten tons.

Am I the only one Franklin who thinks that for an expert you're all questions and no answers?Is it because you're not interested in answers?

LSR is not spec car cookie cutter clone homogenized pasteurized road racing.

If LSR is not moving forward with new ideas it's moving backwards.

And have you ever really sat down and thought about the amount of ballast some of these cars carry? There are cars out there with a thousand pounds of just dead weight. Why not actually do something with that?

1./ Spec car cookie cutter homogenized pasteurized road racing is like that so it is competitive, otherwise it would be like the Wacky Racers, ...........I think I see a connection here

2./ You have missed the possibilty that it may be neither of the above , it may also be chasing it's tail obsessing about " kEnetic energy storage systems"

3./By jingoes this is a biggie....it's an enundrum wrapped in a conigma cloaked in a streamlined body

"otherwise it would be like the Wacky Racers..." INCORRECT. Otherwise it would be late sixties/early seventies CAN-AM.

Spec car cookie cutter clone homogenized pasteurized road racing is like that NOT so it is competitive, but (A) so that privateer racers can still afford it [even if they still have to be millionaires] and (B) so that the 99% who can't innovate their way out of a wet paper bag don't wake up one morning and find themselves made obsolete by the 1% who can.

It wasn't Tony George's rules that cut costs in Indy car racing. It was Tony George killing the television audience and driving away all the sponsors that cut costs in Indy car racing.

And while we're on the subject, if Formula One really wants to freshen up the show they need to stop looking down their noses at American racing and put a couple of high banked turns in each of their tracks.

[STUTZ]

I wanted to bring up the subject of KERS so i thought i better have a look first.  It's been over a year since this was brought up here and it's interesting to read all the different thoughts related to this technology before the rest of the world was to learn thanks to the rules changes in F1 racing. Results this year have found the cars using KERS have a 1/2 second a lap advantage over those cars not running with it and this is with a system that is regulated. Some here think KERS to be useless in landspeed racing but i am of the opposite belief. Nothing is mentioned in the rulebook prohibiting it's use. My question is this:
If i was to enter a vehicle with KERS and beat an existing record/records, would i be protested against?

[Tzoom]

I would think so.  Although there is nothing in the rules restricting its use you would be violating the spirit of the rules in a gas or fuel class.  It would be like adding one of Ratliff's propellers to the back of your car and driving it off the crankshaft.   

[STUTZ]

Where in the rulebook does it mention anything about the violation of the "spirit of rules"? That would be like prohibiting the use of a screw supercharger over an outdated roots style. Or are you saying those who run with KERS will be highly frowned upon?

[SPARKY]

you put a KERS on a Roadster and I can  "ALMOST GURANTEE" you will be protested!!!!!!!! 

[STUTZ]

And the reason being?