I am really surprised why the opposed piston engines are not in use.? They are the highly stable engines and deliver higher efficiency.
You are correct that the opposed piston engine is highly efficient. The issue currently is in the control, especially during transient operation. This is especially true for automotive applications. Due to variations from cycle-to-cycle, the engines running today are typically operated at steady state power, and fairly low speeds.
There is also the issue of defficient lubrication, specially at regions where the piston meets the cylinder block walls.
Disadvantages are complex mechanical systems e.g. for crank drive, problems with lubrication, complex control (to tap the efficiency potential), increased moved masses, more weight, as well as noise- and durability problems, and finally high costs.
Kind regards,
Mario
Mario Hirz Sir,
What I heard is as the no. of moving parts are less the cost if less. Can't we overcome the problems like noise and more moving weight by todays modern technological advancements ... to achieve higher efficiency and which is a major objective today...?
For my opinion, it depends, which technology is compared. It makes a difference, if you compare with 2- or 4-sttroke engines, supercharged or turbocharged engines, different mixture preparation mechanisms. Besides efficiency, other aspects may play a role, e.g. performance across the entire engine operation, transient performance, exhaust gas emissions, qualification for controlled engine operation (e.g. lambda-control), lifetime, cost aspects. I agree with youo, that efficiency is very important today, but there are competing technologies, which may be competitive.
Kind regards,
Mario
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction