[greenhorn]

Gurston Down Hill Climb: Manic Beattie Hill Climb Car With Turbine-Powered Turbocharger, 1.8-Second 0-to-60 Ford Puma

Every once in a while, when looking at no holds barred race cars there comes the engineering equivalent of a facepalm moment. It's that second where we wonder 'Why didn't I think of that?' Like when we discovered how Nic Mann's record-breaking hill climb racer uses a turbine engine from a helicopter auxiliary power unit to drive a turbocharger feeding the 1.7-liter Cosworth four-cylinder a constant stream of boost. To eliminate turbo lag, Nic hooked the turbine to the impeller side of the remote turbo, which can feed the engine at up to 43 PSI. Bonkers is one way to describe it.

[jat]

Turbine powered turbo-charger!!!? Any other alternative powering device for turbocharger?

I would love to know, how was the matching of turbine, nozzles and blower done to the engine. This can work, but is generally quite inefficient method of boosting.

[ananthkamath]

Originally Posted by jat

This can work, but is generally quite inefficient method of boosting.

Why is it inefficient?

[headers]

It is inefficient because, he is not using the exhaust gases to run the turbine blades!

[SirAlec]

how many people have heard about Lancia Delta S4?

It had supercharger and turbocharger on a nimble 1.7 liter engine all rolled into one. Legend has it that it used to accelerate from 0-100kmph in just 2.2 seconds on gravel. Official figure was just 550bhp. It was a homologated as a now definuct Group B rally car.
As always a Finnish used to drive the car in which he crashed fatally.
Many rally driver claimed they were afraid to drive it. It was horrifically fast

[teknophobia]

I fail to see how this setup is in any way more efficient than a supercharger, or for that matter, any of the new VW TSI engines.

[ananthkamath]

I fail to see the argument for efficiency here. This car did Shelsley Walsh 8 seconds faster on a 36 second course and we are talking about inefficiencies here. My definition of "efficient" is "whatever gets the job done".

I have been following Nic Mann's work for a few years now and its truly inspirational. The man is brilliant. His V8 morris minor beat a Ferrari F40 (fastest road car in the 80's) in straight line acceleration, and was 0.5 seconds slower than a Group B Quattro driven by Hannu Mikkola at Shelsley. Now that's what I call achievement.

[jat]

Each turbocharger has a proper working band. They are matched to engine with proper nozzle size and blower size. This is to get the maximum energy transferred. If efficiently matched, the air delivery is max with min energy spent. You can't just have a turbine and a blower and connect it to some engine. It is like having a big engine for high performance, but what a small engine can do the same job on that car through gearing, tyres etc.

[DirtyDan]

It seems strange to use a turbine to power a turbo. A high revving electric motor would be simpler.

By the way, dual turbos (not the same thing, I know) have been used in production diesels for years, a smaller one and a bigger one. The smaller one gives "instant on" capability, better emission control and better low end torque. Ford uses a Borg-Warner unit in its high selling Superduty diesel pickup trucks. This allows the 6.4L motor to crank out 350bhp. This large pick up truck can haul a freaking house. Its all ECU controlled.

2008 Ford Super Duty 6.4 Dual Turbo - Exclusive Look at How They Are Built - Diesel Power Magazine

[teknophobia]

Originally Posted by ananthkamath

I fail to see the argument for efficiency here. This car did Shelsley Walsh 8 seconds faster on a 36 second course and we are talking about inefficiencies here. My definition of "efficient" is "whatever gets the job done".

I have been following Nic Mann's work for a few years now and its truly inspirational. The man is brilliant. His V8 morris minor beat a Ferrari F40 (fastest road car in the 80's) in straight line acceleration, and was 0.5 seconds slower than a Group B Quattro driven by Hannu Mikkola at Shelsley. Now that's what I call achievement.

Unfortunately, the world's definition of efficient is "whatever gets the job done with the least amount of resources"
Sometimes, the reason why otherwise obvious ideas are not put into practice are because they are not practical.

[greenhorn]

in a hillclimb, i guess power is the most important thing, not FE

as regarding the electric blower, that would work, but sap power from the engine. this does not

[Sankar]

I like the man and his idea because that's an out of the box thinking!

Electric chargers are a failure because it needs a lot of current to spin the turbo at a pace to produce any useful boost. To produce that much electric current would take a lot of battteries which would weigh a lot. Batteries won't last long if it's used in total loss system, so to charge them it would put an additional load on the engine. Then it's back to square one.

Supercharger again adds up weight + it saps power from the engine + turbos work better at high RPMs.

Brilliance of this man's design is that he uses an auxilliary gas turbine motor to spin the turbo. Advantages are 1) Gas turbine motors are extremely light 2) It doesn't put any load on the engine 3) Gas turbine motors spin at very high RPMS which is how a turbo likes it and will keep turbo spooled regardless of the engine RPM which translates to snappy throttle response. The only -ve would be to carry fuel for this gas turbine or maybe not, his racing engine and the turbine might be sharing fuels.

[greenhorn]

the car in question uses a diesel powered turbine, which he has since managed to get to work with petrol

After tests conducted towards the end of last year, further weight has been saved by dispensing with the diesel fuel tank and running the turbine on gasoline fuel from the main tank. Along with the adoption of a lighter battery, the car now weighs 25 kg less.

Development

[jat]

Actually whay i meant by efficient means what it takes as input and what it gives as output.

Like when we discovered how Nic Mann's record-breaking hill climb racer uses a turbine engine from a helicopter auxiliary power unit to drive a turbocharger feeding the 1.7-liter Cosworth four-cylinder a constant stream of boost. To eliminate turbo lag, Nic hooked the turbine to the impeller side of the remote turbo, which can feed the engine at up to 43 PSI. Bonkers is one way to describe it.

Until and unless he got it quite cheap in scrap, it is not worth using it. He can use cheaper turbo off the shelf and get more boost in the same engine. You just can't pick up something and put it on another machine. If you feel the look up the engine air consumption place on turbos performance map.

A helicopter aux power turbine is completely different kind of product.

[ananthkamath]

Originally Posted by teknophobia

Unfortunately, the world's definition of efficient is "whatever gets the job done with the least amount of resources"
Sometimes, the reason why otherwise obvious ideas are not put into practice are because they are not practical.

This IS the least amount of resources. What is a more efficient way of getting max. boost in transient conditions? Max. boost at zero throttle and idle RPM? I don't know any.