Live data from Hacker News

Internal Combustion Engine

ciechanow.ski

241–250 of 415 posts

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#241
post #169
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would assume that by some point, if one of his cars won, the officials just took the whole thing apart to find out what sort of bizarre loophole he'd found that met the letter of the requirements while totally violating the spirit. His antics weren't secret, even at the time he was working. He was just really good at it.

And nobody considers that dishonest? It's cheating in the spirit of the rules if not the letter of the rules.

No. You're free to abide by a conservative interpretation of the rules, it just means you'll literally never win against a team with a more creative interpretation. It's very much of a realm of "That which is not explicitly forbidden is permitted." And the range of "explicitly forbidden" tends to be based heavily on what the rules body feels offers too much advantage.

It's quite literally a major part of what makes the sport interesting. Yes, driver skill matters, but an exceedingly creative crew chief (see Smokey) is worth quite a bit more.

Some of it is certainly "cheating, good luck catching us." Some of the trick throttle body restrictor plates that look like a perfectly valid restrictor plate ("A hole of X diameter to restrict airflow to the engine so everyone has the same power") end up flowing a lot more are pretty clearly cheating - they're against both the letter and spirit of the rules, but you have to catch them, which is hard.

Others? It's literally just undefined areas. To borrow a few of Smokey's antics, sure, the car has to be based on a stock car you can buy - but does it have to be dimensionally identical, or can you get creative? He did things like create smoother windshield/frame junctions to reduce drag, extended the bumper down to improve aerodynamics, etc. Is that cheating, or is that just creative optimization within the rules? You were, at one point, allowed to use an alternative frame for the car. As worded, that doesn't prohibit a custom made frame with the drivetrain offset to one side for balance improvements for circle track duty... but is that actually cheating? It never said you couldn't.

One might reasonably assume that a fuel line routing would be "a more or less direct and protected path from the fuel tank to the engine." But, if you've not specified this, and someone stuffs the frame rails with a couple gallons worth of spiraled fuel line... the requirements specify fuel tank capacity. They don't specify fuel line length or capacity. So if you stuff a ton of the largest diameter fuel line you can get your hands on in just about every frame rail and it doesn't say you can't... well, is that cheating?

The rules have gotten more strict over time, but there are still plenty of creative ways to use the provided parts. A few years back, some team found some way to use the provided suspension components, within spec, to meet the ride height requirements at the start of the race, when it was measured. They were consistently lower than they ought to be at the end of the race, but they used the provided parts and met the requirements, as written, at the time they were racing. I believe the letter they got was essentially, "We can't figure out what you're doing, but stop it, and we're going to start checking ride height at the end of the race, here's the tolerances." They met every requirement provided, but found some way or another to get an advantage.

And that's just NASCAR. You get into F1 with "functionally unlimited budgets" and some of the engineering insanity that is entirely within the bounds of the rulebook, but is still wonderfully absurd...

Stuff like "You never said we had to race with the physical engine we qualified with, so our qualifying engine is run at the literal edge of holding together and we replace it before the race." I believe it was BMW that got around 1500hp out of a 1.5L motor (so 1000 HP/L), but the engine more or less came apart at the end of the qualifying laps.

Can you water cool your brakes? Well, OK, nothing against it. Whoops, did you water cool your brakes so much you're underweight during the race, but refill the tank before post-race weigh in? Well...

Far as I'm concerned, this is the sort of thing that makes racing interesting!

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#242

When I was a boy, my dad decided that our '66 Mustang with a straight 4-cylinder engine needed new piston rings. I helped a bit but mostly watched as he tore down the engine to the barest elements, only the engine mounts keeping the block held up in the compartment. The crankshaft, connecting rods, tappers valves, piston heads, piston rods, all laid out neatly on the garage floor along with all the nuts, bolts, washe…

> Although I really appreciate the reliability, efficiency, and durability that modern engine design has brought, a part of me is sad that modern cars are all about chips and software, and the average guy in his garage or under a shadetree can no longer break one down to the bare bones of electromechanical parts and put it back together better than it was.

That's a totally flawed understanding of modern ICE vehicles.

There was an era of vacuum-line misery separating the 70s and 90s, where you'd almost certainly never get it back together and functioning good as new again with the literal miles of vacuum lines and solenoids.

But modern stuff, especially with just 4 cylinders, is relatively simple and entirely DIY servicable. Wiring harnesses have replaced all the vacuum lines, and everything has a physically unique connector pair, and the harness routing is well described in the service manual. So all the guesswork is gone there, honestly the worst part on new stuff is not overlooking any of the grounding lugs.

I share your attitude WRT modern EVs, but I bet if we just treat the controller and battery as black boxes we don't attempt to disassemble and service, the rest is just more of the same simple machinery except with no hazardous gasoline and motor oil to drain and handle.

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#243

One of those web pages which deserves an award. Some place in some kind of Internet Hall of Fame, an historical archive which shows the only best highlights of what websites were actually capable of presenting. Milestones of web development. This page summarizes pretty good what web technology is capable of, when in the hands of a real professional. --- Ok, I just realized this is from Bartosz Ciechanowski, and this…

I like the the interactive visualizations a lot and some of the setup (a camera picture is a thing that changes in certain ways as you fiddle with these 3 parameters, etc). But I always have a hard time telling who the actual audience for this stuff is. If it's someone who has very little exposure to how cameras actually operate, is a Bayer filter really the second thing they need to be aware of? I don't really follow the pedagogical narrative/intent here.

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#244
post #161
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> EVs don't need a catalytic converter, so that's a big thing in their favor. I feel there is some sort of scam going on with catalytic converters for the last few years. I actually worked in a small family owned auto shop in the early 2000's. If a car came in with a clogged cat, we'd first fix the source of the issue (usually a mis-firing cylinder allowing raw fuel into the exhaust) and then we'd cut out the cat, an…

Catalytic converters don't reduce greenhouse gases. Their function is to reduce poisonous gases: NO, NO2, O3, CO, HO2, and sometimes HCN and H2CO. The good news is that all of these compounds are thermodynamically unstable so a catalyst can destroy them. I don't know where you got the 14.7:1 number but I am certain that NOx are unstable at any concentration (at or near STP) and will always be depleted by a catalyst.…

>I don't know where you got the 14.7:1 number

The cat has to be hot to catalyze. The engine is run rich so unburnt fuel makes it to the cat and is combusted there, warming it up enough to also kill the undesirable gases. This is wasted heat... unless you mount a turbocharger after the cat, which has its own set of weird tradeoffs. (I've never heard of a factory car with a rear turbo)

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#245
I spent a couple years trying to fully understand automotive systems tip to tail and did pretty well (excluding transmissions, they're magic). This is the best illustration of how engines work that I've ever seen.

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#246
post #235
post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm hoping LiquidPiston's rotary engine design pans out: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25450477 In theory, it should fix some of the maintenance issues (apex seals are attached to a stationary part of the engine where they can be more easily lubricated) and fuel efficiency / emissions issues (combustion chamber is closer to spherical). I like the idea of the Mazda rotary engine, but I'm not really surprised th…

Wow, that LiquidPiston rotary looks very interesting! I hadn't seen that before - I too hope it pans out. > I'm not really surprised they stopped making them, due to fuel economy... Eh, nobody bought that car for the fuel economy! The car sold itself... just one test drive and you had to have it. I've owned and driven muscle and other sports cars, and still nothing compares to the RX-8 - it's just such a unique exper…

> Eh, nobody bought that car for the fuel economy!

True enough, but I'm sure there are other factors in play, such as public policy. Fuel economy standards have been going up.

The motor I'm putting in my conversion is a Netgain Hyper9 (high-voltage, double-ended shaft version). It's about 120 horsepower and less than 200 foot pounds of torque, so in theory the clutch/transmission/driveshaft should be fine. (I'm keeping the 6-speed transmission.) It probably won't be particularly fast, but we'll see. More powerful AC motors exist, but they tend to be expensive.

I haven't posted any pictures yet; I've been meaning to, just haven't gotten around to it. There's another guy in the UK I think with a youtube channel that's doing close to the same thing, but with a Leaf motor.

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#247

I have always wondered, if it would be possible to make a small enough internal combustion engine so that you could just have it laying around in an apartment, sitting a few feet away from you, powering your appliances or charging a 12V or 24V battery. Dispensing the exhaust through a long tube. If all goes well, complete combustion of propane should yield CO2 instead of CO anyway. An additional enclosure shouldn't b…

>Micro combined heat and power is an extension of the idea of cogeneration to the single/multi family home or small office building in the range of up to 50 kW.[1] Usual technologies for the production of heat and power in one common process are e.g. internal combustion engines, micro gas turbines, stirling engines or fuel cells.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_combined_heat_and_power

Unfortunately, looks like the smallest CHP unit Dalkia Aegis will sell you in the United States is the Yanmar CP35, which does 204,040 BTU/h. https://aegischp.com/products/product-comparison/

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#248
post #195

Isn’t it risky for the timing to rely on a rubber belt? Does it never slip? Even a mm of slippage seems like it would make the valve timing stop matching the pistons?

Timing belts have teeth. Occasionally chains are used instead; more expensive and heavier, but more durable. You do need to maintain the timing either way it it will destroy the valves.

I think another reason belts are common is that chains tend to be a bit noisier.

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#249
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reciprocating machines are fairly remarkable when you consider all of the components involved, forces, etc. Even more so when you think about how long a typical car engine lasts. These incredible forces are why rotary and turbine engines are substantially more reliable. Some gas turbines have only 1 moving part, and in some applications this moving part experiences zero wear due to magnetic/aerodynamic/active bearing…

[*] more reliable in theory. Mazda RX8 and rotary engines are famous for being a bit maintenance heavy and unreliable. The amount of engineering and brain power that has gone into making common ICE engines in cars in wide deployment reliable is staggering.

I've own an RX8 maintenance came down to adding oil every few fill ups, and changing spark plugs every 10k miles. If you treat the engine correctly, the will easily get to 100k miles, if you drive the engine incorrectly (run at low RPM), or run low on oil things won't last long. The car is a sports car and won't get you worry free 200,000 miles like Accord or Camry. Even the S2000 had similar oil usage.

Talking to the dealers I took the car too, many of the issues with related to people who didn't warm engine up, or baby the engine below 3,000 rpms causing carbon build up.

Re: Internal Combustion Engine

#250

If you want to take the experience further, I would recommend the following Redline engine rebuild time lapses that Hagerty has. They are mesmerizing and incredible. Their engine re-builder David is a master. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHKCmmH-x9mI1aCu3Xr4_...

That's the one nicer thing of motorcycles, is their simplicity.

This fellows videos are pleasant. In that he makes 'experimental' engines with a very modest shop. Often using a hacksaw and a BBQ. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-Xr1bmbZ_s

Post reply on HN