HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept?
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 1
From: Midwest, USA
HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept?
i saw this posted on another board, and found it kind of interesting. its basically a compromise between turbo and sc with some interesting benefits....
~~~~EDIT~~~~
i just found a link to the original article; less typos and a picture: http://www.turboprelude.net/PeaceTur...percharger.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~
From apr 1999 Sport Compact Car
**********************************************
The turbocharging vs supercharging debate has been raging for as long as men have associated horsepower with testosterone. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, of course, but the natural human instinct is to pick a favorite and then defend it with religious conviction. For those of you prone to prejudging a car based on the choice of air compressor, Garrett is about to rock your world.
Garrett's upcoming HydraCharger blurs the line between turbochargers and superchargers, giving most of the advantages of both, and few of the disadvantages of either Before we go too far into the HydraCharger, though, let's review the debate, just so we know which side we are on.
Turbocharging is usually the preference of engineering purists because it captures wasted exhaust energy and puts it to work. Using a turbo, the heat and horror of the exhaust stream can be used to compress the intake air, making more power, and more heat and horror in the exhaust, which compresses more air, etc, etc. It's a veritable perpetual power machine. In addition to capturing wasted energy, turbochargers tend to be the most efficient types of air compressors, meaning that they heat the intake charge the least when they compress it.
The disadvantages, of course, are numerous, and most of them have to do with packaging. Because a turbo is driven by the exhaust, the exhaust and intake air both have to go through it This not only means one side of it has to get extremely hot, but a lot of plumbing has to be used to bring the intake and exhaust systems to the same place and then back out where they belong. Add an intercooler (a good idea with either a turbo or supercharger) and you have more plumbing than a hardware store.
Finally, there is the lag. The centrifugal compressor of a turbo has to be spinning quite fast before it can effectively move air. Getting the turbo up to speed takes a certain exhaust volume, which takes a certain intake volume, which takes a certain compressor speed, yada, yada, yada. Careful sizing of the turbine and compressor can bring lag to a minimum, but it still takes a certain amount of time to get the perpetual power machine going.
Superchargers vary tremendously, and so do their strengths and weaknesses. Centrifugal superchargers are essentially the same type of compressor as a turbocharger, but are driven off the crankshaft instead of by exhaust energy. Centrifugal superchargers still need to be spinning quite fast to be effective, but because their speed is mechanically linked to engine speed, there is no turbo lag. At high speeds where the compressor is effective, throttle response is immediate, but at lower speeds where the compressor is still struggling there is no boost available no matter how long you wait.
Posifive displacement superchargers (such as roots-type blowers) are a different story. Instead of airflow being dependent on a complicated relationship between airflow, compressor speed, and boost, positive displacement superchargers simply move a certain amount of air for every revolution, no matter what. The linear nature of positive displacement superchargers makes for excellent drivabilty and instant throttle response. The downside is that most positive displacement superchargers either have relatively low compressor efficiency (in other words they heat the air a lot) or they are just plain expensive, or both.
Packaging tends to be easier with superchargers, since you don't have to deal with the exhaust system, but you still have to find enough room for the compressor in a location where a belt can reach from the crankshaft and where the intake air plumbing makes sense.
The achilles heel of superchargers, though, is parasitic drag. Driving that air compressor takes a certain amount of power, and you take that power from the front of the crankshaft there is less power to go out the back of the crankshaft and down to the wheels. Power cornsumption depends on what kind of compressor is used and how much air it has to move, but 10 to 15 hp is not uncommon.
Most of these turbo vs. supercharger debates eventually break down to each party alternately yelling "turbo lag!" "Parasitic drag!" "Underhood heat!" "Low efficiency!" Fisticuffs inevitably ensue, and if one side is unlucky, the debate will end with a ceremonial *** kicking.
Playing mediator in this senseless battle is the new HydraCharger. The HydraCharger concept is quite simple. Essentially it is a compressor and center section from a conventional Garrett turbocharger, but instead of an exhaust-driven turbine on the other side, there is a tiny (about the size of a quarter) turbine driven by hydraulic fluid (oil, water, whatever). That fluid is, of course, provided by a pump which is driven off the crankshaft so technically, the HydraCharger is a mechanically driven centrifugal supercharger, but one with a brlliant hydraulic transmission.
The advantages of the HydraCharger take a few moments to sink in, so let's walk through them. First there is compressor efficiency. Even centrifugal superchargers seldom approach the efficiency of a modern turbo compressor. Since any turbo compressor can be used with a HydraCharger, its compressor is every bit as efficient.
There, that shut the turbo guys up for a second.
Next there is packaging. The hydraulic pump is only about the size of a power steering pump, so finding a place to mount it is much easier than mounting a supercharger. The HydraCharger itself (which is about the size of a turbo) can be mounted anywhere and unlike a turbo, which has to be mounted horizontally, the HydraCharger can be mounted in any orientation. That should keep both sides quiet.
Since the HydraCharger is driven off the crank, there is no turbo lag, but unlike a convenional centrifugal supercharger, it can be made to work at low rpm as well. By simply overdriving the pump and using a bypass valve at higher rpm (like a wastegate for the fluid pressure) the HydraCharger can be made to spool up to a useful speed just off idle. If required to do so, the HydraCharger can accelerate from stationary to 100,000 rpm in one second, so lag needn't be a worry. That will keep the positive displacement boys quiet.
Now that the bickering has quieted down, look at what we have. There is the responsiveness of a positive displacement supercharger, the compressor efficiency of a turbocharger, and ease of packaging that is unparalleled.
The downside? You've probably noticed that I didn't mention parasitic losses. Since it is still driven off the crank there will still be parasitic losses, and since we have to worry about the power consumed comprming the air, the power consumed pumping hydraulic fluid, and the power lost due to the efficiency of the tiny fluid turbine, the power consumption will probably be slightly more than a purely mechanical supercharger. The difference is small, however, and probably more than offset by the extra power available as a result of the better compressor efficiency.
The flexibility of the hydraulic drive system and the faster response of the hydraulically driven turbine compared the an exhaust-driven one opens up even more possibilities. The hydraulic bypass valve could easily be controlled by a driver-adptable valve, one much simpler than the sophisticated controllers needed to accurately vary turbo boost. If you do use more sophisticated controls, even more could be possible. Traction control via variable boost, perhaps, different powerbands that can be selected for different driving conditions, or even different boost levels for different rpms, maximizing acceleration on traction limited cars.
The fact that a liydracharger can be mount- ed anywhere leads to interesting possibilities. An engine originally designed for a HydraCharger, of course, could integrate the hydraulic pump into the engine--much like the oil pump-- and the turbine into the intake mani- fold, for an incredibly compact high- output powerplant. That's all well and good, but we aren't designing engines from scratch---think of what an eager tweaker could do.
There are a variety of reasons to do so, but no matter what your mofivation, secrecy can be very valuable thing. Looking at a Sentra SE-R engine compartment-somediing I do on a regular basis-you could actually super- charge the engine with a HydraMarger with- out leaving any visual cues that the engine was anything but stock.
First mount the hydraulic pump on the backside of the engine where it would be hidden under the intake manifolds The hydraulic lines could be run in the midst of Nissan's messy stock wiring without most people noticing, and the HydraCharger itseff- now this is where we get malicious--would easily squeeze into a fake battery. Put the real battery in the trunk and use one of the hollow plastic battery shells used for display vehicles for concealing the HydraCharger. Intake air would have to be drawn in from the fenderwell, but the battery is close enough to the fender that a black hose passing into the fender could easily be overlooked. Pressurized air could feed out the back of the battery and into the air filter box behind it-they are only about an inch apart. The air filter box would just act as a nonfunctional shell and the pipe feeding air from the fake battery to the fake air mass sensor would pass right through it. A reprogrammed ECU and stock-looking 300ZX fuel injectors would round out the package and again, would be invisible.
Of course, you can't go out and buy a HydraCharger just yet-it's still under development. The original intention wasn't even to be used as a stand-alone supercharger. instead, it was to be used on large, turbocharged diesel engines to boost low-rpm output and help the turbocharger spool up more quickly. It wasn't until people started getting excited about shoving superchargers in fake batteries that Garrett engineers started considering it as a stand- alone device. When it is finally available to the aftermarket you can bet we'll be getting our hands on one.
[Modified by keebler65, 11:42 PM 3/9/2003]
~~~~EDIT~~~~
i just found a link to the original article; less typos and a picture: http://www.turboprelude.net/PeaceTur...percharger.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~
From apr 1999 Sport Compact Car
**********************************************
The turbocharging vs supercharging debate has been raging for as long as men have associated horsepower with testosterone. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, of course, but the natural human instinct is to pick a favorite and then defend it with religious conviction. For those of you prone to prejudging a car based on the choice of air compressor, Garrett is about to rock your world.
Garrett's upcoming HydraCharger blurs the line between turbochargers and superchargers, giving most of the advantages of both, and few of the disadvantages of either Before we go too far into the HydraCharger, though, let's review the debate, just so we know which side we are on.
Turbocharging is usually the preference of engineering purists because it captures wasted exhaust energy and puts it to work. Using a turbo, the heat and horror of the exhaust stream can be used to compress the intake air, making more power, and more heat and horror in the exhaust, which compresses more air, etc, etc. It's a veritable perpetual power machine. In addition to capturing wasted energy, turbochargers tend to be the most efficient types of air compressors, meaning that they heat the intake charge the least when they compress it.
The disadvantages, of course, are numerous, and most of them have to do with packaging. Because a turbo is driven by the exhaust, the exhaust and intake air both have to go through it This not only means one side of it has to get extremely hot, but a lot of plumbing has to be used to bring the intake and exhaust systems to the same place and then back out where they belong. Add an intercooler (a good idea with either a turbo or supercharger) and you have more plumbing than a hardware store.
Finally, there is the lag. The centrifugal compressor of a turbo has to be spinning quite fast before it can effectively move air. Getting the turbo up to speed takes a certain exhaust volume, which takes a certain intake volume, which takes a certain compressor speed, yada, yada, yada. Careful sizing of the turbine and compressor can bring lag to a minimum, but it still takes a certain amount of time to get the perpetual power machine going.
Superchargers vary tremendously, and so do their strengths and weaknesses. Centrifugal superchargers are essentially the same type of compressor as a turbocharger, but are driven off the crankshaft instead of by exhaust energy. Centrifugal superchargers still need to be spinning quite fast to be effective, but because their speed is mechanically linked to engine speed, there is no turbo lag. At high speeds where the compressor is effective, throttle response is immediate, but at lower speeds where the compressor is still struggling there is no boost available no matter how long you wait.
Posifive displacement superchargers (such as roots-type blowers) are a different story. Instead of airflow being dependent on a complicated relationship between airflow, compressor speed, and boost, positive displacement superchargers simply move a certain amount of air for every revolution, no matter what. The linear nature of positive displacement superchargers makes for excellent drivabilty and instant throttle response. The downside is that most positive displacement superchargers either have relatively low compressor efficiency (in other words they heat the air a lot) or they are just plain expensive, or both.
Packaging tends to be easier with superchargers, since you don't have to deal with the exhaust system, but you still have to find enough room for the compressor in a location where a belt can reach from the crankshaft and where the intake air plumbing makes sense.
The achilles heel of superchargers, though, is parasitic drag. Driving that air compressor takes a certain amount of power, and you take that power from the front of the crankshaft there is less power to go out the back of the crankshaft and down to the wheels. Power cornsumption depends on what kind of compressor is used and how much air it has to move, but 10 to 15 hp is not uncommon.
Most of these turbo vs. supercharger debates eventually break down to each party alternately yelling "turbo lag!" "Parasitic drag!" "Underhood heat!" "Low efficiency!" Fisticuffs inevitably ensue, and if one side is unlucky, the debate will end with a ceremonial *** kicking.
Playing mediator in this senseless battle is the new HydraCharger. The HydraCharger concept is quite simple. Essentially it is a compressor and center section from a conventional Garrett turbocharger, but instead of an exhaust-driven turbine on the other side, there is a tiny (about the size of a quarter) turbine driven by hydraulic fluid (oil, water, whatever). That fluid is, of course, provided by a pump which is driven off the crankshaft so technically, the HydraCharger is a mechanically driven centrifugal supercharger, but one with a brlliant hydraulic transmission.
The advantages of the HydraCharger take a few moments to sink in, so let's walk through them. First there is compressor efficiency. Even centrifugal superchargers seldom approach the efficiency of a modern turbo compressor. Since any turbo compressor can be used with a HydraCharger, its compressor is every bit as efficient.
There, that shut the turbo guys up for a second.
Next there is packaging. The hydraulic pump is only about the size of a power steering pump, so finding a place to mount it is much easier than mounting a supercharger. The HydraCharger itself (which is about the size of a turbo) can be mounted anywhere and unlike a turbo, which has to be mounted horizontally, the HydraCharger can be mounted in any orientation. That should keep both sides quiet.
Since the HydraCharger is driven off the crank, there is no turbo lag, but unlike a convenional centrifugal supercharger, it can be made to work at low rpm as well. By simply overdriving the pump and using a bypass valve at higher rpm (like a wastegate for the fluid pressure) the HydraCharger can be made to spool up to a useful speed just off idle. If required to do so, the HydraCharger can accelerate from stationary to 100,000 rpm in one second, so lag needn't be a worry. That will keep the positive displacement boys quiet.
Now that the bickering has quieted down, look at what we have. There is the responsiveness of a positive displacement supercharger, the compressor efficiency of a turbocharger, and ease of packaging that is unparalleled.
The downside? You've probably noticed that I didn't mention parasitic losses. Since it is still driven off the crank there will still be parasitic losses, and since we have to worry about the power consumed comprming the air, the power consumed pumping hydraulic fluid, and the power lost due to the efficiency of the tiny fluid turbine, the power consumption will probably be slightly more than a purely mechanical supercharger. The difference is small, however, and probably more than offset by the extra power available as a result of the better compressor efficiency.
The flexibility of the hydraulic drive system and the faster response of the hydraulically driven turbine compared the an exhaust-driven one opens up even more possibilities. The hydraulic bypass valve could easily be controlled by a driver-adptable valve, one much simpler than the sophisticated controllers needed to accurately vary turbo boost. If you do use more sophisticated controls, even more could be possible. Traction control via variable boost, perhaps, different powerbands that can be selected for different driving conditions, or even different boost levels for different rpms, maximizing acceleration on traction limited cars.
The fact that a liydracharger can be mount- ed anywhere leads to interesting possibilities. An engine originally designed for a HydraCharger, of course, could integrate the hydraulic pump into the engine--much like the oil pump-- and the turbine into the intake mani- fold, for an incredibly compact high- output powerplant. That's all well and good, but we aren't designing engines from scratch---think of what an eager tweaker could do.
There are a variety of reasons to do so, but no matter what your mofivation, secrecy can be very valuable thing. Looking at a Sentra SE-R engine compartment-somediing I do on a regular basis-you could actually super- charge the engine with a HydraMarger with- out leaving any visual cues that the engine was anything but stock.
First mount the hydraulic pump on the backside of the engine where it would be hidden under the intake manifolds The hydraulic lines could be run in the midst of Nissan's messy stock wiring without most people noticing, and the HydraCharger itseff- now this is where we get malicious--would easily squeeze into a fake battery. Put the real battery in the trunk and use one of the hollow plastic battery shells used for display vehicles for concealing the HydraCharger. Intake air would have to be drawn in from the fenderwell, but the battery is close enough to the fender that a black hose passing into the fender could easily be overlooked. Pressurized air could feed out the back of the battery and into the air filter box behind it-they are only about an inch apart. The air filter box would just act as a nonfunctional shell and the pipe feeding air from the fake battery to the fake air mass sensor would pass right through it. A reprogrammed ECU and stock-looking 300ZX fuel injectors would round out the package and again, would be invisible.
Of course, you can't go out and buy a HydraCharger just yet-it's still under development. The original intention wasn't even to be used as a stand-alone supercharger. instead, it was to be used on large, turbocharged diesel engines to boost low-rpm output and help the turbocharger spool up more quickly. It wasn't until people started getting excited about shoving superchargers in fake batteries that Garrett engineers started considering it as a stand- alone device. When it is finally available to the aftermarket you can bet we'll be getting our hands on one.
[Modified by keebler65, 11:42 PM 3/9/2003]
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (keebler65)
Wow thats a very interesting concept, I wonder when they will start selliing those to the public. I know the turbos jets use have air berings, bacilly no lag.
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 1
From: Midwest, USA
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (Arturbo)
I do remember that. I dont know how true this is, but I heard that it was too expensive to do R&D to continue.
art
art
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
From: Milky Way
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (keebler65)
Found it last week. I was doing a patent search on some "key words" that Larry mentioned on the Endyn Bulletin Board and found this concept. Not saying they are related. Very interesting concept, especially for control and packaging. The hydraulic pump may be the size of a power steering pump, but it will be packing a lot more ponies.
Regards,
BigMoose
Regards,
BigMoose
Trending Topics
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,666
Likes: 0
From: Vila Velha, Brasil
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (BigMoose)
A shop by my house has it on their car (East Coast Precision Racing). The car is a street driven 96-00 hatchback. If you pop the hook, you can't tell its S/C except for the BOV. He put the pump where the ac compressor was and the S/C he put it on the drive side under the fender. He said it can produce about 35-40 lbs. He charged me $4500 to install it on my car. But i ended up going with the turbo kit intead.
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
From: Greensboro, NC, US
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (keebler65)
I think we should all just have Variable Nozzel Turbos instead.
Neat idea though, but I'm surprised the article didn't mention the fact that you could easily setup the "Hydracharger" in a way that would lend itself to air/air intercoolering.
Neat idea though, but I'm surprised the article didn't mention the fact that you could easily setup the "Hydracharger" in a way that would lend itself to air/air intercoolering.
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (johnisenglish)
i wonder how much psi of hydraulic needed to spin the turbine at 100,000 rpm. even full boost at idle, it must not take a lot of psi to spin the turbine.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
From: Caracas, Venezuela
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (rice4life)
i wonder how much psi of hydraulic needed to spin the turbine at 100,000 rpm. even full boost at idle, it must not take a lot of psi to spin the turbine.
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,047
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY, USA
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (GZERO)
i think my friend was talkin about this the other nite. he couldnt quite explain it tho, just said it was a turbo and sc together. i assumed he was just crazy or stupid. i guess not. oh well, i'll wait and see when this comes out
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 1,519
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, Fl
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (GZERO)
I heard Garret had a system like this they sell for Trucks with large turbos as a pre-turbo to help spool. I have never seen it on any onther application , Sport compact magazine also did a piece on it.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,516
Likes: 1
From: Okie in training, usa
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (CRVRX)
I'm a bit confused on the "compressor efficiency" issue. To me, using the compressor the way the hydracharger is basically makes it a centrifugal supercharger like the Vortech. I don't see what's so "efficient" about that. Maybe it's simply efficient relative to a roots type blower.
IMO, what makes turbos great is their use of "free" (or wasted...) energy in the form of rapidly expanding exhaust gas. This new gizmo takes no advantage of it whatsoever, instead sitting like a parasite on the crankshaft. Call me a zealot, but I think an exhaust driven turbo is still the most elegant power adder available...
IMO, what makes turbos great is their use of "free" (or wasted...) energy in the form of rapidly expanding exhaust gas. This new gizmo takes no advantage of it whatsoever, instead sitting like a parasite on the crankshaft. Call me a zealot, but I think an exhaust driven turbo is still the most elegant power adder available...
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 1
From: Midwest, USA
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (fsp31)
did you read the whole article or just skim it? 
anyways, yes i think a turbo would still be more "efficient" however it comes down to what makes more power, and the advatages you get along the way. i dont think turbos will ever be replaced though. as far the difference from a vortech, it sounds like this would have a "mini-transmission" that would keep the blower at a high level of boost at any rpm. again, thats why i asked if you read every word.
anyways, yes i think a turbo would still be more "efficient" however it comes down to what makes more power, and the advatages you get along the way. i dont think turbos will ever be replaced though. as far the difference from a vortech, it sounds like this would have a "mini-transmission" that would keep the blower at a high level of boost at any rpm. again, thats why i asked if you read every word.
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (keebler65)
it saids the main advantage over turbo is instant boost(no lag). even boost at idle. supercharger is belt driven, so the faster the engine spin the more power it robs. with the hydracharger, there's a relieve(waste gate) valve that lets excess hydraulic pressure pass only using what it needs to make the desire boost level. so, no lag like possitive displacement supercharger, more efficient than supercharger at high rpm. i would love to see this someday, in a compact sport car.
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 705
Likes: 0
From: DC Suburbs, USA
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (rice4life)
This would need to take a nice little oil pump to get the psi high enough to spin the compressor. Imagine what would happen if the lines or seals busted on that thing. 
splooge!
splooge!
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 997
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere, United States
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (pub)
would be dope to have, god knows how much it would actually cost to buy a 'kit'. though if someone ever perfected it then wouldn't racing cars be using them first?
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,516
Likes: 1
From: Okie in training, usa
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (keebler65)
>>did you read the whole article or just skim it?<<
I read the whole thing. Even clicked on the link. It was interesting, but I didn't find the concept all that impressive. Certainly not "efficient". That was the term I tripped over. The article does allude to the hydracharger being "efficient like a turbo". Well, it ain't at all.
As for the mini transmission idea, I'm not quite clear on how this is any different from swapping pulleys on a supercharger. That is unless there is some way of governing the stream of hydraulic fluid from the pump efficiently. If that's the case then the pump is actually working against itself. I guess I gotta get some more info on this idea...
edit: it is a cool idea though!
[Modified by fsp31, 3:18 AM 3/12/2003]
I read the whole thing. Even clicked on the link. It was interesting, but I didn't find the concept all that impressive. Certainly not "efficient". That was the term I tripped over. The article does allude to the hydracharger being "efficient like a turbo". Well, it ain't at all.
As for the mini transmission idea, I'm not quite clear on how this is any different from swapping pulleys on a supercharger. That is unless there is some way of governing the stream of hydraulic fluid from the pump efficiently. If that's the case then the pump is actually working against itself. I guess I gotta get some more info on this idea...
edit: it is a cool idea though!
[Modified by fsp31, 3:18 AM 3/12/2003]
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 1
From: Midwest, USA
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (fsp31)
As for the mini transmission idea, I'm not quite clear on how this is any different from swapping pulleys on a supercharger. That is unless there is some way of governing the stream of hydraulic fluid from the pump efficiently. If that's the case then the pump is actually working against itself. I guess I gotta get some more info on this idea...
edit: it is a cool idea though!
[Modified by fsp31, 3:18 AM 3/12/2003]
edit: it is a cool idea though!
[Modified by fsp31, 3:18 AM 3/12/2003]
Honda-Tech Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
From: Milky Way
Re: HydraCharger -- anyone heard of this concept? (BigMoose)
Patent 5 924 286 dated July 99 by Kapich has a very nice write up on a derived hydraulically driven variable displacement supercharger cycle. The patent has some great exploded drawings of the hardware for your viewing pleasure. Patent 5,471,965 by the same author has the design and specifications for the high speed hydraulic turbine. Since no one has probably seen one of these that might be interesting. I wanted to get a handle on the hydraulic HP required. He states:"700 psi and flow of 19.5 GPM. The 0.8 inch turbine produced 5.9 HP at 62,000 RPM driving the compressor portion of a TO4B-V turbocharger." and there you have it.
______________________________________
MODEL 1 2 3
______________________________________
Engine Power (HP) 140 220 300
Turbonetics Compressor Model
TO4B S3 TO60-1 TO67
Compressor Pressure Ratio
1.52 1.52 1.52
Hydraulic Turbine Power (HP)
9.6 14.8 19.5
Hydraulic Turbine Pressure (PSIG)
930 1020 1130
Hydraulic Turbine Flow (GPM)
23.5 32.0 38.0
Hydraulic Turbine Efficiency
0.75 0.77 0.78
Hydraulic Turbine Speed (RPM)
69,750 64,500 62,500
Hydraulic Turbine Wheel Dia. (mm)
20 20 22
Hydraulic Turbine Blade
1.55 1.58 1.65
Height (mm)
Number of Nozzles 8 8 12
Nozzle Angle (DEG.)
11 11 11
(measured from tangent)
Rotor Blade Angle (DEG.)
28 28 28
Number of Rotor Blades
27 27 30
______________________________________
Patents are your friend.
Here is where I go for my patents http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm You have to install a free TIFF viewer to get the drawings. Enter patent number, then when it comes up hit images. You may have to poke around the site to find the link to the free viewer. It was not obvious when I loaded it a year or so ago. Have fun.
Regards,
BigMoose
[Modified by BigMoose, 8:54 AM 3/12/2003]
______________________________________
MODEL 1 2 3
______________________________________
Engine Power (HP) 140 220 300
Turbonetics Compressor Model
TO4B S3 TO60-1 TO67
Compressor Pressure Ratio
1.52 1.52 1.52
Hydraulic Turbine Power (HP)
9.6 14.8 19.5
Hydraulic Turbine Pressure (PSIG)
930 1020 1130
Hydraulic Turbine Flow (GPM)
23.5 32.0 38.0
Hydraulic Turbine Efficiency
0.75 0.77 0.78
Hydraulic Turbine Speed (RPM)
69,750 64,500 62,500
Hydraulic Turbine Wheel Dia. (mm)
20 20 22
Hydraulic Turbine Blade
1.55 1.58 1.65
Height (mm)
Number of Nozzles 8 8 12
Nozzle Angle (DEG.)
11 11 11
(measured from tangent)
Rotor Blade Angle (DEG.)
28 28 28
Number of Rotor Blades
27 27 30
______________________________________
Patents are your friend.
Here is where I go for my patents http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm You have to install a free TIFF viewer to get the drawings. Enter patent number, then when it comes up hit images. You may have to poke around the site to find the link to the free viewer. It was not obvious when I loaded it a year or so ago. Have fun.
Regards,
BigMoose
[Modified by BigMoose, 8:54 AM 3/12/2003]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DragSource
Forced Induction
2
Apr 1, 2005 07:52 PM
