Diesel/Gas Engine

[user 13531]

Diesel or gasoline application, no spark plugs, excellent mileage, good hp and torque numbers...

 

[highdesertranger]

looks pretty complicated, but all of todays engines are overly complicated, IMO. a note this is not a multi-fuel engine it will be built to run gas or diesel not both. highdesertranger

 

[Motrukdriver]

Hmmmm... gasoline on compression combustion only. If that is what the fella said then I can see problems right from the start. Oh well, it is just a prototype so I'm sure their will be refinements if there becomes an interest. I have always liked boxer engines.

 

[Redbearded]

Looks interesting! It kinda reminds me of a HCCI engine (youtube link). 
Another one that is kinda cool is the one being developed by Koenigsegg called the freevalve.

 

[JD GUMBEE]

Paccar/Volvo/White did a study on these way back.
They used oil like an old Detroit 2 stroke and could not meet even near the diesel emission levels required.
Also, while the "boxer" is a novel design best applied to aircraft, this is an "inverted boxer" turned on its side.
Think about what you need to do to rebuild this one. How about when a ring or piston cracks and you need to drop a jug (or sleeve it) (ouch!)
Not to mention a turbo AND a $upercharger. $cary $tuff that co$t$ lot$.. (Look up the Volvo marine engine that tried this. It worked well in the Detroit 2 stroke...because it was a 2 stroke.)

I think the sales guy is being a bit misleading. Once you start to demand power from it, it burns a LOT more fuel to make it. (At least it did in the test report summary I saw.)
Empty truck might get 30+ combined, but put an 8K trailer behind it in tall elevations and you could be seeing 12MPG easily, along with EGT's that would melt Superman.

Also, I bet you a plug nickel they pass emissions by the skin of their teeth...meaning the moment it gets a little wear on it, you will need a re-ring to pass emissions. This is one PITA of an engine to reman.
Huge money involved to set it up right also.

I give them credit for making it pass emissions and the HP/displacement ratio is good.

Too bad they stopped with steam. (I am not joking.)
For a tractor trailer rig that runs 12 hours a day...every day...being able to burn 100% of the fuel means nearly zero emissions.
With todays lubricants and electronic controls, I sure would like to see what could be done with good old steam power.

 

[JD GUMBEE]

Good catch on how my previous post reads, Sam!

I seem to imply that the exact engine in the video is what Paccar tested. It isn't.

The inherent issues with this engine type stand however.

 

[Trebor English]

Fairbanks-Morse opposed piston engines were common in WWII diesel electric submarines.  Nuclear submarines have them too as a sorce of electricity to get the nuclear power plant started and backup power for coolant pumps.  They had some use in locomotives in the US.  A Soviet knock off had much more locomotive popularity.

These are not like horizontally opposed engines as found in old air cooled VW beetles or water cooled Subarus.  They have two crankshafts, one at each end.  There are no intake or exhaust valves.  The pistons uncover cylinder wall ports.  At one end there are exhaust ports.  The other end has intake ports.  Intake air is provided by a blower.  The two crankshafts are geared together.  They run about 5 degrees apart.  

The Fairbanks-Morse 38  8 1/8 are big engines.  The bore is 8 1/8 inches and the cylinder is 38 inches long.  I think the smallest are 4 cylinder, largest are 12.  

What makes this system unique is the different crank shaft timing.  The early piston gets to the maximum pressure position.  Then as the early piston begins to retreat the later piston continues to compress.  The result is that there is a longer time at maximum compression for the fuel to be injected and combust.  The following power stroke has more fully combusted gas at the time when both pistons are beginning to retreat.