What about turbines?

Paperdoc

Platinum Member
Aug 17, 2006
2,315
281
126
I'm old enough to remember a lot of interest in turbine engines for autos in the 19060's. Chrysler in particular tried to get them working well. But interest died out, with a lot of discouragement from materials requirements, engine performance, and many issues. I have heard virtually no reports of any recent interest and I wonder why?

From what I remember there were some issues around the materials needed, especially about metal alloys to withstand high temperatures and high centrifugal forces in a rotating blade system. However, those issues are even more important for jet engines, and development in that field has been substantial. Beyond just developing materials that can do the job, I expect the costs of those materials also have been reduced.

On the performance side, I do recall several areas where turbine engines simply did not match how conventional reciprocating piston engines are used in automobiles. They are very poor for supplying braking power when you throttle back. The do not change operating speed quickly, and have a more limited range of operating speeds than a piston engine. I believe fuel efficiency also is impacted significantly at upper and lower ends of the speed range. The common operating rotational rate is much higher than a piston engine so gearing that down to driveline components is an issue, but not a terribly complex one.

Then I started thinking about current development trends for Hybrid and Plug-In Hybrid vehicles. For many reasons those "problems" with turbine engines are NOT problems in hybrid systems. The engine does NOT provide drive force or braking force directly to the wheel motors. The engine is designed primarily to drive a generator system to keep the battery fully charged, and almost all of the high variability in load demands of driving is borne by the electrical system drawing power from the battery. That battery is a HUGE buffer between engine load and wheel motor load. That means the engine speed can be kept within a narrow range for optimal fuel efficiency and does not need to change quickly. The torque load required from the engine does vary, certainly more than its speed needs to change, but again no rapid or large changes required. I suspect that is managed by fuel / air mixture and not speed, but I don't know. Even the size and max horsepower requirements are easier to deal with. In a classic auto design the engine must be built to provide very high work output for high-acceleration needs, but those last only for relatively short periods before workload settles back. In a Hybrid system the engine needs only to be able to exceed by a reasonable margin the longer-term AVERAGE power needs, since it can play "catch-up" after the battery has satisfied short-term needs.

So there's an amateur looking at this with questions. I consider myself a reasonably good home handyperson and backyard mechanic. But I do realize I do NOT have enough knowledge of these details, particularly about real turbine engines. Any one out there with a much better understanding that might explain why there is NOT much interest currently in turbine engines for Hybrid vehicles?
 

Tech Junky

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2022
3,495
1,175
106
It all comes down to efficiency.

EV - all of the torque is DC controllable on demand

Turbines come into play with sports / racing setups though through Turbos and Superchargers. Both of which are cost prohibitive for EV use since their cost is $4-7K+ and not something someone looking to save money on fuel would be interested in.

I have a supercharged engine and being a V6 it performs at a much higher level than the non SC version. IIRC stock is 330HP but, with some tweaks and addons it's not hitting closer to 500HP. Forced induction is what unlocks the higher performance by boosting the air/fuel ratio. SC's spin 100% of the time where a turbo only kicks in at certain power ranges. When spinning the SC 100% it doesn't give you that kick that a turbo does. The power is much smoother and available all of the time. It's more efficient on MPG as well for the power it provides.

However, a DC setup has more punch for the dollar but, the trade off is the power supply taking up so much space / weight. If the power plant batteries come down in size / weight then it would be more attractive in other market segments than the feeble green segment. We're starting to see some of this though recently with things Ford is producing between the Mustang and Lightning. $50K starting prices aren't quite where mass adoption would occur though.

The other issue might be the ability to do your own maintenance, The battery packs require a whole different approach than ICE. Not to mention those battery packs are not cheap to deal with and the hazmat classifications require additional costs to deal with them.

As for the Turbine considerations I would guess it comes down to how visible we're talking for the blades themselves. There's just not much desire to see the workings exposed to the exterior. The other issue is debris containment to avoid things you might come across like in the airline side things like bird strikes that destroy the internal fins. With small projectiles entering the engine it just seems like a nightmare if you have to do a teardown / rebuild more often to replace broken fins / blades unless they made them more accessible and you didn't need a degree in mechanical engineering to not blow up your vehicle after attempted repair.
 

Paperdoc

Platinum Member
Aug 17, 2006
2,315
281
126
Good points about turbochargers and superchargers. I certainly can see there is little need for those enhancements of a piston engine in conjunction with a battery system in a Hybrid system.

I was thinking more in terms of actual engines - turbine engines, close relatives of jet engines and tuboprop airplane engines. In that vein, you raise one concern I had: debris in the air intake. For aircraft the operating environment on the ground is kept fairly clean, and the engine is mounted high off the ground. In the air there is less loose debris. But a car operates low to the ground with lots of surface debris that can be stirred up. I do not remember how this issue was handled when turbine engines were being tried out decades ago.
 
Mar 11, 2004
23,143
5,610
146
OP, micro-turbines as range-extenders has been considered and I think even prototyped some. Jaguar even made a concept car, but I doubt it functioned (looks like they did make a few prototypes that they sold but they changed to a 4 cylinder ICE instead of the turbines; and then there were some more made for the one James Bond film but they were stunt cars with V-8s).

I think the biggest issue with them is the noise. You're gonna have to add a LOT of sound deadening and/or an elaborate excessive exhaust system in order to limit the high frequency sound a turbine puts out. You'll lose almost all of the efficiency benefits adding all that extra, and it'll almost certainly be much cheaper to just put a more common ICE in instead or just go with a larger battery.

Which, Mazda is looking at rotary engine for similar use, as it has similar synergy with a hybrid system, being compact, focusing on a sweet spot RPM helps limit the emissions and other issues that the rotary has suffered from. Its compact but decent output for the size makes it a good match for packaging. The big questions are reliability and long term support. I don't think Mazda has the long term interest or resources to keep developing it, and I also have questions about the reliability and if it lives up to its potential even in hybrid use. Reviews of it in their lame little SUV aren't great, but it wasn't great to begin with so not surprised the rotary range extender didn't help things much.
 

PowerEngineer

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2001
3,556
732
136
I remember seeing that Chrysler Turbine car when it was making the rounds at new car shows. Yeah... That old.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
31,755
10,251
136
turbines are very power dense (power per kg weight) but unfortunately are very thirsty. still, they are cool AF.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |