Direct Injection?

NVMYVPR

Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Posts
152
Reaction score
0
Location
Miami, FL
Ok, I understand direct injection for the fuel but what about a twin nozzle for fuel and air? If my understanding is correct, and I may be suspect here, but it seems you could eliminate the intake valve altogether and likely then entire intake plenum. Obviously it would take a pressurized air system and a lot of computing power but would this be feasible or am I off the mark here?


Craig,
 

AZTVR

Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Posts
3,043
Reaction score
7
Location
Chandler AZ
Depends on what definition of feasible that you are using. "Capable of being done?" Then probably yes. I think that the problem to be overcome would be how to get the volume of air needed into the chamber. You would either have to run a compressor to compress ambient air in order to inject it, or carry a storage tank. "Reasonable?" Probably not. I doubt that the efficiency of compressors is very good, and tanks full of air take up lots of space. I don't see it being anything that would be practical. Of course, Mr. Benz probably also heard that kind of stuff from his buddies down at the pub.
 
OP
OP
N

NVMYVPR

Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Posts
152
Reaction score
0
Location
Miami, FL
So if the intake plenum is your "pressurize air storage tank" then the question is what volume of air would the tank have to be able to have on hand to keep up with the demand for air being injected. Size of tank vs compressor capacity.

Allan, why not? 50 years ago would it have not been the same issue as directly injecting fuel?
 

Allan

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Posts
2,546
Reaction score
0
Location
La Junta Colorado 81050
14.7 parts of air to 1 part of fuel ...by weight. ...........8.4 liters displacement, .......means that at 100% volumetric efficiency, the motor will consume 8.4 liters of air/fuel mixure every 2 crankshaft revolutions. -think about 5000 rpm or what ever. I don't think any 'high pressure air nozzle' spraying into the combustion chamber is gonna fill the cylinders at all, let alone better than a 2 inch+ intake valve thats open a half inch at a time. If N.A. is not enough air, we have turbos and blowers, or NOS.
 

Allan

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Posts
2,546
Reaction score
0
Location
La Junta Colorado 81050
I guess we could re-design the Viper V10 without intake valves.......-as a 2-cycle engine. That way it'll rev higher as well. But we'll have to mix our gas instead of just using straight from the pump.
 

Allan

Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Posts
2,546
Reaction score
0
Location
La Junta Colorado 81050
If we go the 2-cycle route, we should also do away with that stupid idea of the electric starter. We need to figure out a way to revert back to some sort of pull-start cord, or manual crank lever like the old school Model-T. .......or just always park on a hill so that you can get a good running coast to pop the clutch to start it.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
153,202
Posts
1,681,939
Members
17,700
Latest member
Ar Tee Ten
Top