Ball Valves again
Discussion
Ball valves have popped up in a few threads in the Engine section. I'm a big fan of them. (see www.coatesengine.com if you've no idea of what I'm talking about)
I'm also interested in renewable energy and was messing about on the net cos I was bored out of my skull when I stumbled across this.
taken from www.shec-labs.com
[quote]
INSIDE TRACK
Valve Redesign = Engine Revolution
Following 15 years of research and development
on his patented spherical rotary valve engine, engineer
and entrepreneur George Coates recently began limited
commercial production of what could be the greatest
technological innovation in internal combustion since its invention.
The Coates Spherical Rotary Valve engine rids the
internal combustion engine of the poppet valve—
responsible for several key shortcomings, such as
overheating at high compression and low engine
efficiency. Coates’ innovation replaces poppet valves,
valve springs, guides, camshaft, pushrods, rocker arms
and other moving parts with two rotating spherical valve trains, enabling more efficient and stronger internal combustion and compression strokes.
The increased horsepower of CSRV engines
generate more kilowatts of electrical output per unit of gas than conventional engines, while their high thermal efficiency results in lower fuel consumption and emissions.
CSRV engines can be fit for nearly all applications
of the internal combustion engine and can operate on a
wide array of fuels. No oil is required in the upper engine, allowing for oil replacement at intervals of no less than 50,000 miles—most certainly bad news for Jiffy Lube et al. should the technology gain penetration into mass markets for vehicles.
In late spring, Coates International Ltd. began making
such inroads, signing licenses with McLean, England &
Associates for $25 million plus royalties to market the
Coates engine for use in four-ton vehicles across North
America. According to Coates, “CIL has received deposits on five more licenses in the United States at $25 million per license.” This includes all Porsche motorcar engines for the US market, as well as other road-racing, marine-racing, hotrodding and V8-retrofit applications. These agreements are still awaiting completion.
The technology will gain its first strong commercial
foothold through Calgary, Alberta-based Well to Wire
Energy, which CIL licensed to sell natural-gas generators and stand-alone power systems. Well to Wire has booked 540 projects to turn waste gas of all kinds into electricity across the United States and Canada with technology based on a 300-KW Coates engine. Full
production of these engines is scheduled for the first
quarter of 2003.
This summer, Well to Wire Chief Executive Officer
Neil Munro met with Portland General Electric’s director of distributed generation, Joe Barra, who told Prospects that the Coates engine does appear to be a very significant advance. Barra is eager to demonstrate the innovation at such sites as wastewater treatment plants, landfills and electricity-generating facilities at swine and dairy farms, and is negotiating with Well to Wire to begin such testing.
Of particular interest to Barra is the reliability of the rotary valve seals, as biogas contains trace elements that deteriorate valve seals and other parts of conventional reciprocating engines, making operation and maintenance expensive. According to Munro, the Coates engine can reduce operating and maintenance costs by 50 to 60 percent compared to conventional engines.
Currently, Coates International awaits the results of
US Environmental Protection Agency emissions testing
of CSRV engines. According to tests conducted by CIL,
Coates engines reduce hydrocarbon emissions by 66 percent over standard reciprocating engines, carbon
dioxide emissions by 32 percent and nitrogen oxides by
97 percent. [G.H.]
More information:
Coates International Ltd. (www.coatesengine.com)
Well to Wire Energy (www.welltowire.com)
Portland General Electric (www.portlandgeneral.com)
[/quote]
The important word in that article is Porsche.
When Coates Engineering tested a 5 litre V8 with these valves they managed to get something like 450hp at 5500rpm. This is pretty impressive for this rpm. Imagine what it would be like fitted to a Porsche flat 6 with variable intakes etc.
Definentley one to keep an eye on.
I'm also interested in renewable energy and was messing about on the net cos I was bored out of my skull when I stumbled across this.
taken from www.shec-labs.com
[quote]
INSIDE TRACK
Valve Redesign = Engine Revolution
Following 15 years of research and development
on his patented spherical rotary valve engine, engineer
and entrepreneur George Coates recently began limited
commercial production of what could be the greatest
technological innovation in internal combustion since its invention.
The Coates Spherical Rotary Valve engine rids the
internal combustion engine of the poppet valve—
responsible for several key shortcomings, such as
overheating at high compression and low engine
efficiency. Coates’ innovation replaces poppet valves,
valve springs, guides, camshaft, pushrods, rocker arms
and other moving parts with two rotating spherical valve trains, enabling more efficient and stronger internal combustion and compression strokes.
The increased horsepower of CSRV engines
generate more kilowatts of electrical output per unit of gas than conventional engines, while their high thermal efficiency results in lower fuel consumption and emissions.
CSRV engines can be fit for nearly all applications
of the internal combustion engine and can operate on a
wide array of fuels. No oil is required in the upper engine, allowing for oil replacement at intervals of no less than 50,000 miles—most certainly bad news for Jiffy Lube et al. should the technology gain penetration into mass markets for vehicles.
In late spring, Coates International Ltd. began making
such inroads, signing licenses with McLean, England &
Associates for $25 million plus royalties to market the
Coates engine for use in four-ton vehicles across North
America. According to Coates, “CIL has received deposits on five more licenses in the United States at $25 million per license.” This includes all Porsche motorcar engines for the US market, as well as other road-racing, marine-racing, hotrodding and V8-retrofit applications. These agreements are still awaiting completion.
The technology will gain its first strong commercial
foothold through Calgary, Alberta-based Well to Wire
Energy, which CIL licensed to sell natural-gas generators and stand-alone power systems. Well to Wire has booked 540 projects to turn waste gas of all kinds into electricity across the United States and Canada with technology based on a 300-KW Coates engine. Full
production of these engines is scheduled for the first
quarter of 2003.
This summer, Well to Wire Chief Executive Officer
Neil Munro met with Portland General Electric’s director of distributed generation, Joe Barra, who told Prospects that the Coates engine does appear to be a very significant advance. Barra is eager to demonstrate the innovation at such sites as wastewater treatment plants, landfills and electricity-generating facilities at swine and dairy farms, and is negotiating with Well to Wire to begin such testing.
Of particular interest to Barra is the reliability of the rotary valve seals, as biogas contains trace elements that deteriorate valve seals and other parts of conventional reciprocating engines, making operation and maintenance expensive. According to Munro, the Coates engine can reduce operating and maintenance costs by 50 to 60 percent compared to conventional engines.
Currently, Coates International awaits the results of
US Environmental Protection Agency emissions testing
of CSRV engines. According to tests conducted by CIL,
Coates engines reduce hydrocarbon emissions by 66 percent over standard reciprocating engines, carbon
dioxide emissions by 32 percent and nitrogen oxides by
97 percent. [G.H.]
More information:
Coates International Ltd. (www.coatesengine.com)
Well to Wire Energy (www.welltowire.com)
Portland General Electric (www.portlandgeneral.com)
[/quote]
The important word in that article is Porsche.
When Coates Engineering tested a 5 litre V8 with these valves they managed to get something like 450hp at 5500rpm. This is pretty impressive for this rpm. Imagine what it would be like fitted to a Porsche flat 6 with variable intakes etc.
Definentley one to keep an eye on.
Jon Gwynne said:
Never use a reciprocating part when you can use a rotating part instead.
Damn straight, this is the crux of it.
This and the reduced parts count is what I see as the big advantages.
And if Porsche are interested then it must be worth something, as companies like that don't perk up interest unless they smell a competitve advantage or a competitor they can buy out.
Andy
Captain Muppet said:
Absolutely, unless the rotating part won't do the job. Engine manufacturers aren't stupid. They are driven by cost, efficiency, ease of manufacturing, packaging and customer power targets. If ball valves beat poppet valves in those five areas they will make it into production. At the moment they don't.
Engine manufacturers are also constrained by what technology they own. Why do you think different manufacturers spend vast sums of money designing slightly different variations on what is essentially the same theme ie. variable valve timing 4 valve + heads. Which, lets face it, Honda had licked ages ago.
Most car companies can only use what rights they own, the alternative is to lease or buy rights which is expensive. Few will do it if they can develop their own.
THIS is the reason that current engine makers still persist with poppet valves. Also there is the cost of tooling up a new type of production.
Captain Muppet said:
Those springs decompess as well
Yes but that deosn't mean you'll get the energy back. It doesn't work like that. Call yourself an engineer....:wink:
Captain Muppet said:
Dear God. Pushrod technology is shite. It's a peice of piss to improve on. Sown me a ball valve that improve on a modern poppet valve system (Honda S2000, BMW M3, any bike engine) and I'll be impressed.
As for this engineer you knew - Engineers are ten a penny, hell I'm an engineer. Yes, we can all improve on someone else's shite design. Improvong on a good design is the tricky bit.
I still think they have. You're not looking at the stats properly.
Take what they say about the ford clucker conversion.
475 lbft torque and 475 hp AT 5350 rpm.
That last bit is the important bit. You show me a quad valve engine that can do that. Really. Try. Its not easy.
All these quad poppert valve engines develop their power by revving. hell the S2000 has its peak torque at 7200rpm. THATS how it develops its power. I'm willing to bet that it doesn't deliver 95 hp/litre at 5350 rpm. Not many and certainly not the S2000.
Now consider if the above engine could hold 80% of its torque till, say, 7500rpm. Shouldn't be a problem if the breathing is as good as they say it is.
Lets see now. That would be 380lbft torque. Which at 7500 rpm is about 530hp. Thats well over 100bhp/litre.
Not so bad now. And without all the complexity of poppet valves.
By the way the reason that Coates probably quoted the torque and hp at that engine speed is cos the power and torque are roughly the same at about 5350 rpm.
Captain Muppet said:
OK, differ. When they convert a cutting edge DOHC engine to ball valves and shrink the package (to create the extra 70mm pedestrian impact clearance that all the designers are looking for) then I'll be impressed. If they are really offering the space saving you think they are then ball valve engines will be in production in five years.
Its not really about shrinking the engine package, its really about simplifying what is a very complex and flawed system. After all wouldn't you want to reduce the parts count in in such a critical area. Plus I still don't trust all those little reciproating parts. Plus they tend to get very hot at the tips thus causing problems. Best elimenated.
I tend to think you're picking holes for the sake of it rather than with valid reasons.
Plus you've missed the biggest trick that ball valves have up their sleeves anyway.
Just think Diesel.....
Andy
>> Edited by andytk on Wednesday 10th March 20:38
Captain Muppet said:
andytk said:
Yes but that deosn't mean you'll get the energy back. It doesn't work like that. Call yourself an engineer....:wink:
You get most of the engergy back - hysterisis losses in spring steel are low.
Its not the hysterisis, its the losses when the springs try to transfer the energy back through the cam. On the Coates website they listed the power requirements needed to drive a standard poppet valve train versus the ball valve. Now granted they probably went looking for the worst poppet system they could find for comparison purposes but even still the difference was huge.
Captain Muppet said:
The rpm that peak torque is developed at depends on a lot more than the valve train. Bore:stroke ratio for a start and tunned lengths in the inlet and exhaust.
My point was that if they converted an engine that was fitted with an adequate valvetrain (pick a low reving BMW V8 if you like) rather than a clonky pushrod pile of poo it would be a much better demonstration of the system, and it would shut me up.
I'll go find the stats.
Captain Muppet said:
Plus you've missed the biggest trick that ball valves have up their sleeves anyway.
Just think Diesel.....
Think huge cylinder pressures and those delicate seals. It would make one hell of an impressive demonstrator if they did it though.
Sigh. They have. Its their main product line.
I don't think you even looked at their website.
Andy
>> Edited by andytk on Monday 22 March 18:40
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff