VWVortex.com - 2.5L Pseudo Adiabatic Engine(814hp!?)future technology??
Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    Results 1 to 15 of 15

    Thread: 2.5L Pseudo Adiabatic Engine(814hp!?)future technology??

    1. Junior Member bpylantvw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 29th, 2010
      Location
      Munford, Tennessee
      Posts
      22
      Vehicles
      08 Rabbit 5spd(dd) 93 eg hatch(stock and slow) 07 Wolfsburg Jetta(totaled)
      12-10-2012 02:14 AM #1
      Has anyone come across these vids? What are your thoughts about the technology? I did some research on http://www.rtugroup.com/animation and http://www.rtugroup.com/revolutionar...iabatic-engine. Apparently they are from somewhere in Europe(Slovenia or Russia). Enjoy the vids my friends...happy researching this

      Video #1:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVnM8z1nX4k
      Video #2:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TdK0gZsRp8

    2. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    3. Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2nd, 2011
      Location
      West Palm Beach, FL
      Posts
      130
      Vehicles
      2007 Rabbit 5MT, 2013 Beetle 2.5L 6AT
      12-10-2012 07:09 AM #2
      After reading their website, I'm not all that impressed. The high-gloss video makes it sounds like they've created some revolutionary way of magically creating mass amounts of power. But really they simply added a new turbo, intake mani, internals, exhaust, and new software...and viola 800HP. BTW that turbo is boosted to 41psi according to them. So what's with the 'pseudo adiabatic' nonsense?

    4. Member thygreyt's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 7th, 2009
      Location
      fort lauderdale, FL
      Posts
      12,954
      Vehicles
      1k-m-cbta-02q-PTE5858
      12-10-2012 10:18 AM #3
      psudo adiabatic technically speaking means:

      when we have an adiabatic process (almost impossible under real world circumstances) we are basically doing work on a substance without adding heat. Since this cant be done, we have pseudo, or fake adiabatic... in whic, i'm assuming, that so little heat is added that such is negligible. If so, using a turbo in a pseudo adiabatic is almost impossible... and if managed, it would be neat.

      By thermodynamics, when we compress a substance, we increase its internal energy, therefore its temp. All force induction mechanisms have this consequence. Because of it, we often add aftercoolers (cooling after compression was done) in FI systems. what are we doing in a nutshell? compressing, raising temp, and then adding a part on a system in order to cool the substance.

      Some systems take advantage of this raise of temp, such is the way of diesels. They have a compression ratio of ~16 or 17, and when the pistons compress the air, it gets so hot that the fuel is combusted without the need of spark plugs.

      On a gasoline engine, when this happens, we have knocking or detonation (not usually the same, if i remember correctly)

      Now, one of the common ways to do pseudo adiabatic compression is to SLOWLY compress the substance, so that the increase is so small over a period of time, that the overall temp doesnt really changes by much.
      In order to do this in a turbo, which as you pointed, is compressing ~40 PSI (units of english pressure, per definition is force over unit area) we need some serious development... in my mind, when i thought of this, i imagined using water... dunno how they are doing as i havent seen the links yet.

      so, to acomplish this adiabatic compression we would need to intercool... meaning: cooling in the middle of the compression, and hopefully achieving a delta of temp very low (virtually no temp change post compression).
      How would it work with water? place a high atomization injector on the turbo compressor, and apply a thermal shield around it, and additionally, have the compressor made in high temp resistant ceramic materials. The idea of the compressor material and shielding is to prevent the heat of the turbine from spoiling our delta, and to maintain the inside in a controlled enviroment, as ideal as possible to have the most control. Then with the water injector: the high atomization of the water will mean microscopic sized water particules that would have a very high surface of contact, and that would evaporate rather easily. By doing this we could take the heat away.... this is at least, how i picture it in my mind.

      Is it really an adiabatic process? not really because heat is added during the compression, but since we are cooling it befiore the process is complete, we can call it a pseudo adiabatic...

      lol... sorry if i got extensive... i have to take a test in 10 hours about this stuff... and i had my materials science and materials behavior final last week...

      not really proof reading, i have to go back studying... i hope this helps.

    5. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    6. Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2nd, 2011
      Location
      West Palm Beach, FL
      Posts
      130
      Vehicles
      2007 Rabbit 5MT, 2013 Beetle 2.5L 6AT
      12-10-2012 10:49 AM #4
      Quote Originally Posted by thygreyt View Post
      psudo adiabatic technically speaking means:

      when we have an adiabatic process (almost impossible under real world circumstances) we are basically doing work on a substance without adding heat. Since this cant be done, we have pseudo, or fake adiabatic... in whic, i'm assuming, that so little heat is added that such is negligible. If so, using a turbo in a pseudo adiabatic is almost impossible... and if managed, it would be neat.

      By thermodynamics, when we compress a substance, we increase its internal energy, therefore its temp. All force induction mechanisms have this consequence. Because of it, we often add aftercoolers (cooling after compression was done) in FI systems. what are we doing in a nutshell? compressing, raising temp, and then adding a part on a system in order to cool the substance.

      Some systems take advantage of this raise of temp, such is the way of diesels. They have a compression ratio of ~16 or 17, and when the pistons compress the air, it gets so hot that the fuel is combusted without the need of spark plugs.

      On a gasoline engine, when this happens, we have knocking or detonation (not usually the same, if i remember correctly)

      Now, one of the common ways to do pseudo adiabatic compression is to SLOWLY compress the substance, so that the increase is so small over a period of time, that the overall temp doesnt really changes by much.
      In order to do this in a turbo, which as you pointed, is compressing ~40 PSI (units of english pressure, per definition is force over unit area) we need some serious development... in my mind, when i thought of this, i imagined using water... dunno how they are doing as i havent seen the links yet.

      so, to acomplish this adiabatic compression we would need to intercool... meaning: cooling in the middle of the compression, and hopefully achieving a delta of temp very low (virtually no temp change post compression).
      How would it work with water? place a high atomization injector on the turbo compressor, and apply a thermal shield around it, and additionally, have the compressor made in high temp resistant ceramic materials. The idea of the compressor material and shielding is to prevent the heat of the turbine from spoiling our delta, and to maintain the inside in a controlled enviroment, as ideal as possible to have the most control. Then with the water injector: the high atomization of the water will mean microscopic sized water particules that would have a very high surface of contact, and that would evaporate rather easily. By doing this we could take the heat away.... this is at least, how i picture it in my mind.

      Is it really an adiabatic process? not really because heat is added during the compression, but since we are cooling it befiore the process is complete, we can call it a pseudo adiabatic...

      lol... sorry if i got extensive... i have to take a test in 10 hours about this stuff... and i had my materials science and materials behavior final last week...

      not really proof reading, i have to go back studying... i hope this helps.
      That is an impressive explanation. To be honest, it's not a concept I'm real familiar with. Also, I realized after the fact that I somewhat missed the point they were trying to make originally -- they're saying that they are able to produce the power they're claiming all while drastically reducing overall engine temp and increasing fuel efficiency. Interesting.

    7. Member thygreyt's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 7th, 2009
      Location
      fort lauderdale, FL
      Posts
      12,954
      Vehicles
      1k-m-cbta-02q-PTE5858
      12-10-2012 11:57 AM #5
      Quote Originally Posted by HelloMyNameIs View Post
      That is an impressive explanation. To be honest, it's not a concept I'm real familiar with. Also, I realized after the fact that I somewhat missed the point they were trying to make originally -- they're saying that they are able to produce the power they're claiming all while drastically reducing overall engine temp and increasing fuel efficiency. Interesting.
      Exactly, its impressive to think that they are doing 40psi without a traditional front mount cooler, and keeping intake temps at around air temperature.

      Also, by doing this they get nice side effects... You mentioned some.

      On my Sig, click on the link to the turbo article...

      Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Tapatalk 2

    8. Former Advertiser gabe@bwperformance's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 4th, 2011
      Posts
      2,536
      12-10-2012 01:27 PM #6
      I have seen a few examples like this and it is pretty impressive just because of the temps being lowered.

    9. Junior Member bpylantvw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 29th, 2010
      Location
      Munford, Tennessee
      Posts
      22
      Vehicles
      08 Rabbit 5spd(dd) 93 eg hatch(stock and slow) 07 Wolfsburg Jetta(totaled)
      12-10-2012 03:17 PM #7
      The intake turbine does not absorb as much of the heat as with a stock turbo, so the fresh air entering the intercooler is a lot colder. This has dramatic impact on power and efficiency of the engine; however durability is radically improved as well, even when running enormous boost pressure.

      Having a colder than normal inlet air temperature from the RTU turbocharger, the intercooler further cools an already cooled compressed air, which again increases the density of the air to the engine. This further increases the power and efficiency.

      The RTU patented technology would not work effectively, unless the pressurized air coming from the turbocharger through the intercooler would not be processed and further sub-cooled in the RTU patented intake manifold. Fresh cooled air is manipulated so as to allow the engine to run in a lean burn condition further cooling the engine. These superior properties allow for extreme power and efficiency.

      The RTU patented unique combustion technology can be retrofitted to existing engines and rendering efficiencies of 15-24% depending on engine design. Incorporating 100% of the technology in an RTU engine will offer full power and efficiencies of up to 70%.. Not like the inefficient ratios of current petrol/diesel engines, the expansion process produced by RTU combustion applies the main force to the piston while the remaining energy is still wasted by heat. Crucial difference between conventional engines is the proportion of energy converted to work; this would represent two thirds of generated power. The usable energy and waste heat are reciprocated. A typical OTTO cycle engine is 20% efficient with 80% lost to friction and heat, the biggest proponent being heat. This is where our performance and efficiencies are realized!

      Stock internal combustion engines require the water radiator to cool down the heat absorbed from the engine and converts it to wasted heat to the air. The RTU patented low temperature combustion technology provides a unique feature - a closed loop hose system, where there is no need of radiator at all. The loop ensures the normalization of temperatures to even out the cold and hot spots inside the engine. This can offer incredible aerodynamic and durability advantages in any racing field!

      All these patents...they censored the ports and combustion chambers in the video, keeping it secret.

      Says they fitted some of the technology to John McCains Chevy Duramax. I have read this on another forum. http://www.rtugroup.com/united-divisions/tuning

    10. Member thygreyt's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 7th, 2009
      Location
      fort lauderdale, FL
      Posts
      12,954
      Vehicles
      1k-m-cbta-02q-PTE5858
      12-10-2012 04:02 PM #8
      Quote Originally Posted by bpylantvw View Post
      The intake turbine [what is this??] does not absorb as much of the heat as with a stock turbo, so the fresh air entering the intercooler is a lot colder. This has dramatic impact on power and efficiency of the engine; however durability is radically improved as well, even when running enormous boost pressure.

      Having a colder than normal inlet air temperature from the RTU turbocharger, the intercooler further cools an already cooled compressed air, which again increases the density of the air to the engine. This further increases the power and efficiency.
      putting an "intercooler" (after cooler, technically speaking) on a cold air turbo makes absolutely no sense at all.
      i mean, if the air is already at ambient temp, an intercooler wouldnt do any further cooling... On the same sense, thats like putting an intercooler on a Naturally aspirated car.



      Quote Originally Posted by bpylantvw View Post
      The RTU patented technology would not work effectively, unless the pressurized air coming from the turbocharger through the intercooler would not be processed and further sub-cooled in the RTU patented intake manifold. Fresh cooled air is manipulated so as to allow the engine to run in a lean burn condition further cooling the engine. These superior properties allow for extreme power and efficiency.
      hum...

      Quote Originally Posted by bpylantvw View Post
      The RTU patented unique combustion technology can be retrofitted to existing engines and rendering efficiencies of 15-24% depending on engine design. Incorporating 100% of the technology in an RTU engine will offer full power and efficiencies of up to 70%.. Not like the inefficient ratios of current petrol/diesel engines, the expansion process produced by RTU combustion applies the main force to the piston while the remaining energy is still wasted by heat. Crucial difference between conventional engines is the proportion of energy converted to work; this would represent two thirds of generated power. The usable energy and waste heat are reciprocated. A typical OTTO cycle engine is 20% efficient with 80% lost to friction and heat, the biggest proponent being heat. This is where our performance and efficiencies are realized!
      70% thermal efficiency?

      The standard otto cycle is in average ~20% THERMAL efficient. Overall efficiency is different.
      at certain RPMs, an Otto cycle can have a volumetric efficiency of ~90%.

      Quote Originally Posted by bpylantvw View Post
      Stock internal combustion engines require the water radiator to cool down the heat absorbed from the engine and converts it to wasted heat to the air. The RTU patented low temperature combustion technology provides a unique feature - a closed loop hose system, where there is no need of radiator at all. The loop ensures the normalization of temperatures to even out the cold and hot spots inside the engine. This can offer incredible aerodynamic and durability advantages in any racing field!

      All these patents...they censored the ports and combustion chambers in the video, keeping it secret.

      Says they fitted some of the technology to John McCains Chevy Duramax. I have read this on another forum. http://www.rtugroup.com/united-divisions/tuning
      maybe my stress is making me read wrong things... if not, i think you are confusing key words/terms here...

    11. Member thygreyt's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 7th, 2009
      Location
      fort lauderdale, FL
      Posts
      12,954
      Vehicles
      1k-m-cbta-02q-PTE5858
      12-10-2012 04:06 PM #9
      fwiw, i work with turbines...
      we are currently doing a project in which we will be using some GE LMS100... and while that turbine is "highly efficient" is only 44% thermally efficient.

      if what you are saying of having a 70% thermal efficiency on a piston engine, then these guys will be stupid rich in no time, cause... thats what the entire world needs.

      i mean, a water injection kit for the turbines we use is ~500'000 $ and that helps get a few MW more out of the turbine, because it increases efficiency by a few points.

    12. Junior Member bpylantvw's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 29th, 2010
      Location
      Munford, Tennessee
      Posts
      22
      Vehicles
      08 Rabbit 5spd(dd) 93 eg hatch(stock and slow) 07 Wolfsburg Jetta(totaled)
      12-12-2012 01:23 AM #10
      I'm just quoting the website...Don't have real world experience with forced induction. I did work on diesels(Caterpillar dealership), but nothing in the automotive field. The big question is that will the government, Big oil companies allow this technology to be implemented. The trucking industry would benefit tremendously and would decrease our dependence on foreign oil. I remember a co-worker mentioning a guy at auto diesel college who was getting insane high mpg on his ford truck. Turns out some people found out, perhaps government, told him to keep it to himself.

    13. Junior Member oldraven's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 12th, 2007
      Location
      Goshen, Nova Scotia, Canada
      Posts
      34
      Vehicles
      2010 Golf 2.5 5-spd
      12-14-2012 01:54 AM #11
      Quote Originally Posted by thygreyt View Post
      fwiw, i work with turbines...
      we are currently doing a project in which we will be using some GE LMS100... and while that turbine is "highly efficient" is only 44% thermally efficient.

      if what you are saying of having a 70% thermal efficiency on a piston engine, then these guys will be stupid rich in no time, cause... thats what the entire world needs.

      i mean, a water injection kit for the turbines we use is ~500'000 $ and that helps get a few MW more out of the turbine, because it increases efficiency by a few points.
      No doubt. Most ic engines get about 24%, and the most efficient only reaching 27%, and that's with every known technology in use today (marketable on a mainstream automobile), like VW working on exhaust mounted TEG's.

      If this is in fact real (most claims like this.... you know) I would expect one of the bigger auto giants to buy the rights or strike a deal with the producer for exclusive rights to use the technology in their cars. I think you'll see a gay Mexican US president before any of this happens, though.

      This thread reminds me of being in class. Are you a Mechanical Engineer, or a Power Engineer, thygreyt?
      "Time and patience. Is that your answer for everything?"
      "Yes, because it's always the right answer."

      2010 Golf 2.5 5-spd, 2006 Jeep Liberty 3.7 6-spd, 1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe 2.3Ti 5-spd.

    14. 12-14-2012 03:04 AM #12
      There are ICs getting into the 30s pretty easily these days with DI on higher compression, small displacement turbo engines. High compression turbo Methanol/Ethanol can even get into the high 30s/low 40s pretty easily without a lot of trouble. Modern Diesels can see high 30s to low 40s and marine app 2 stroke diesels turning very low rpms with no throttle input will even touch above 50% TE.

      70s is just crazy talk. Those dyno charts at the end defy the laws of physics/math. No 60mm GT 30r turbine wheel pictured in this vid is going to flow 800hp worth of air, I don't care what is happening in the head/motor/injection/compressor/WI method.

      Water injecting pre turbo to get a near isothermal effect as water's latent heat soaks up the heat is a way to widen a compressor map and boost compressor efficiency, but that air/gas still has to sneak past a 60mm turbine at some point at 1600F with a few more ratios of gas expantion.

      This is an awesome paper on thermal efficiency of a vw TDI converted to gas with a high 19.5 compression ratio.

      http://eri.ucr.edu/ISAFXVCD/ISAFXVAF/SuTCAF.pdf
      Last edited by URHank; 12-14-2012 at 03:10 AM. Reason: broken link..

    15. Member thygreyt's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 7th, 2009
      Location
      fort lauderdale, FL
      Posts
      12,954
      Vehicles
      1k-m-cbta-02q-PTE5858
      12-14-2012 04:09 AM #13
      Quote Originally Posted by oldraven View Post
      No doubt. Most ic engines get about 24%, and the most efficient only reaching 27%, and that's with every known technology in use today (marketable on a mainstream automobile), like VW working on exhaust mounted TEG's.

      If this is in fact real (most claims like this.... you know) I would expect one of the bigger auto giants to buy the rights or strike a deal with the producer for exclusive rights to use the technology in their cars. I think you'll see a gay Mexican US president before any of this happens, though.

      This thread reminds me of being in class. Are you a Mechanical Engineer, or a Power Engineer, thygreyt?
      lol, no kidding...

      not yet an engineer... i have a few semesters left. i had 1 year left, but i transfered schools and they took away a lot of credits... so i gained a semester or 2.

      i've worked for some years with a company that specializes in power generation...tis fun.

    16. Junior Member oldraven's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 12th, 2007
      Location
      Goshen, Nova Scotia, Canada
      Posts
      34
      Vehicles
      2010 Golf 2.5 5-spd
      12-15-2012 07:24 PM #14
      Quote Originally Posted by thygreyt View Post
      lol, no kidding...

      not yet an engineer... i have a few semesters left. i had 1 year left, but i transfered schools and they took away a lot of credits... so i gained a semester or 2.

      i've worked for some years with a company that specializes in power generation...tis fun.
      It is. I'm a 3rd class PE, and have spent some time at a coal fired Generation Station here in Nova Scotia. Pretty amazing stuff, really. It's like walking around under the hood of the biggest car in the universe.

      Cheers from a real Steampunk.
      "Time and patience. Is that your answer for everything?"
      "Yes, because it's always the right answer."

      2010 Golf 2.5 5-spd, 2006 Jeep Liberty 3.7 6-spd, 1987 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe 2.3Ti 5-spd.


    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •