ausmini
https://www.ausmini.com/forums/

Turbo-Zet - Not a real new idea. . . .
https://www.ausmini.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12218		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  kazjim [ Sun Oct 16, 2005 5:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Turbo-Zet - Not a real new idea. . . .
Image

read that again, Feburary 1957.. thats over 48 years ago for you young 'uns ....

I found this while reading through an old Popular Mechanics Magazine, I was given about 400 of them by a friend.... this is the edition where Chevrolet announced the now-famouns '57 Chev Bel Air.... Sweet...

J
Author:  Gilly [ Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
Just shows that people were good bullshitters back then as well
Author:  Angusdog [ Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:36 pm ]
Post subject: 
I am no engineer, but I struggle to see why this idea can't be made to work. Electric motors have great torque, quick response and can spin to huge revs, and pumping more air in is all superchargers or turbochargers do. With electronic engine management systems in most cars post-1990, a chip should look after the electric air pump control.

Don't get me wrong; the one shown here and the other modern ones look like crap, but it should, in theory, work surely. It's just a supercharger that uses an electric motor rather than engine driven. In fact, I'm off to the shed :wink:
Author:  awdmoke [ Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
:lol: Classic !

Shave 4 1/2 seconds off your 0-100kph times :lol:


The motor you need to drive it would need to be several kilowatts
Even those tiny little GMC home air compressors have 1.5kW motors.
Then you need an alternator... the losses are just not viable :wink:
Author:  Gilly [ Sun Oct 16, 2005 9:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
For these motors to provide positive boost pressure the current drain i.e 200amps would be far too much for any alternator or battery to keep up with.
But solve that it should work like a turbo compressor :!:
Author:  awdmoke [ Sun Oct 16, 2005 10:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
The volume of air required is way beyond what a couple of computer fans can push :roll:

A 1,000cc engine revving to 6,000RPM needs 240 litres/minute at zero boost :!:
Author:  Angusdog [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:42 am ]
Post subject: 
I think a true engineer could get this to work. I'm not talking computer fans, but the whole assembly tailored to the situation. So it could be a ceramic bladed turbo, a electric motor driving it through a variable gearbox - you know what I mean? Not knocking one up, but designing from first principles something that works.

Right! Enough chat - I'm back in the shed. Let you know when I'm done...


^^^ This is a lie. ^^^
Author:  WhoDat [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:01 am ]
Post subject: 
Has anyone looked at stored air?

I agree the power needed to drive an "on demand" electric blower system is realistically beyond the capacity of anything affordable, but what about a compressed air tank being trickle fed by a small compressor during normal operations to be released as boost "On Tap"

A poor man's NOS?

Or how about decelleration energy being harnessed to drive the comressor? hmmmm :lol:
Author:  Angusdog [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 7:25 am ]
Post subject: 
Now you're talking - thinking laterally. We'll have this cracked by lunchtime, I reckon.
Author:  awdmoke [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 9:43 am ]
Post subject: 
THE PATENTED WHODAT-ANGUSDOG COMPRESSED AIR SUPERTURBOCHARGER

AVAILABLE AT ALL REPUTABLE NIGERIAN ON-LINE STORES NOW !
Author:  Mick [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 10:15 am ]
Post subject: 
This was looked at once before when the TURBOZET was released and discovered to be nothing more than two PC cooling fans strapped back to back (Sometimes back to front, countering each other's airflow).

An Electrical Eng. student calculated the work performed by a turbocharger to supply a 150 KW engine (Such as the earlier WRX's) and hence worked out the power required of a 12 volt electric motor to provider the same air flow and pressure as a matched turbocharger. It turned out to be about the size of a pool pump if I remember correctly with a current draw close to a hundred Amps :shock: :shock: as well.

Pretty well sank that theory.
Author:  WhoDat [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
I was thinking more along the lines of this sort of thing http://www.theaircar.com/howitworks.html

Have Fun
Dat
Author:  drmini in aust [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think this project falls into the Perpetual Motion category... :lol:
Author:  WhoDat [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
I see you miss the point. This is not perpetual motion, just that the main power source is not on the vehicle. It is simply "stored" motion. It runs out and needs to be topped up like any fuel.

That one is just one of many that are starting to explore this option. An option that makes a lot of sense to me. Big tank of high pressure air - pipe it to where it can do the most good [inlets] then just add a tap and time it right :lol: 8)

I'll leave it up to you mechanical engineers to design the details but when you run out of "air" just fill up your tank at the nearest servo. Current price on compressed air is quite competetive at the moment :wink:

Edit: - Added - I'm talking about taking this concept and adapting the technique of compressed air so as it becomes your blower "source". it provides the air at pressure instead of the blower.
Author:  drmini in aust [ Mon Oct 17, 2005 6:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Whodat, I was talking about the original leccy blower... :lol:

Stored energy as you say has merit- eg they say if you knock the top off a G size Oxy or Argon bottle there is enough stored energy to propel said bottle to 550KMH. So stand clear... :shock:
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/