How the Scuderi Air Hybrid Engine Works

uh, standard engines -use- one oil and two pressure rings. The reason for this is to keep friction and scuffing down, as well as to keep the (very) high pressure exhaust gases over the piston, instead of leaking past it, where no work is done (of course!)

Figure them out on your own, genius. Actually, you're guaranteed to "see it." The hardware will be completed early next year. The only issue is whether it will be as efficient as Scuderi thinks.

My only motivation for posting here was to clear up blatant misconceptions about this engine that are running rampant. But, your view is obviously completely unobjective. You're right that it might not work. But, like every other naysayer
I've seen, your reasons are nonsense. I don't care enough to argue with you. Believe whatever you want.

I don't see why the Scuderi design would need more oil rings than a standard engine. In fact, my guess is that it would require less oil rings because the power piston wouldn't need them.

You're comparing apples and oranges. Why does turbulence in the induction system of a standard engine decrease volumetric efficiency? My guess is that this turbulence increases the amount of air that escapes the firing chamber. In the Scuderi design the turbulence is on the power side, not the intake.

Well at least this gets people thinking. That's a start!

I like it. The air tank can also power an air starter, which is already in use on work trucks with compressed air for tools or brake power.

Perhaps you don't realize turbulent flow reduces volumetric efficiency. It's no coincidence that high performance induction system have large radius, highly polished surfaces. This is to encourage laminar flow. Turbulence in the induction system reduces the mass of air (and volumetric efficiency) of the system.

Perhaps this design uses magic to keep the compressed gases from leaking past the pistons. But I doubt it. You'll need an oil ring and (most likely two) pressure rings per piston. These generate friction.

What remaining engineering issues? This works MUCH better than a conventional internal-combustion engine. I'll believe it when I see it, which likely is never.

Keep your obsessions to yourself, and stay on topic.

This is the next generation.come on and get it into some cars already.

I just read about air engines in Wikipedia; the benefits/disadvantages sections were helpful. I think the Scuderi design will be far less efficient running as an air hybrid as they are. And, while there are a # of air engines actually working, there aren't any even non-hybrid Scuderis. And I don't understand, how can a Scuderi piston that develops 50 bars (750 PSI) at peak compression replenish a storage tank holding 7,000 PSI air? I'm very skeptical about the "air hybrid" aspect of the Scuderi.

I don't know off the top of my head how far you could go with an 8 cubic foot tank. It depends on too many variables to give you a straight answer without a lot of study. It would depend on how quickly you wanted to get there, the PSI that whatever air-tank you use is capable of withstanding, the degree to which you want to rely on the compression piston to recharge the air-tank, etc.

That said, I certainly don't think this project is a sure success. There are issues that require further study. But, I am unable to provide a sure reason that the project will fail. And, every criticism that I've seen from naysayers has been something that Scuderi has already resolved.

No, I'm not paid by Scuderi. I wish. I'm an engineer and a Scuderi investor. I was as skeptical as anyone else when I first came across this design. Like many other people, I tried to poke holes in the design. But, Scuderi was able to sufficiently rebut every worry that I had (e.g., valve speed, cooling, etc.)

Are you paid by the Scuderi group, engineguy32? I see that all of your many comments are in defense of the S-engine & its related design aspects.
I want to know how many feet or yards an "air hybrid" S-engine design can power a 3,000 lb. car on level ground with a full air tank of 8 cubic feet (2x2x2) with the normal compression & PSI.

Yes, of course they'd care. I'll rephrase. These issues are barely even relevant to proof of the concept. The air storage tank is not intended to power a car by itself. It's an "air-hybrid" engine not an "air" engine. Any OEM, or practically any engineer for that matter, could easily optimize the storage tank to fit their specific needs.

"But who cares?" Anyone who intends using compressed air for motive power. How many PSIs does the Scuderi generate? What size tank is needed for one mile of level running under normal load? I think there are more Qs re: the air hybrid aspect than the split cycle and a cavalier dismissal of these issues suddenly raises doubts to me about the Scuderi concept.

I think we should be comparing the air-hybrid aspect of the Scuderi design with other hybrid designs, rather than with e-Volution cars.

Obviously there would be a point that you can't pump more air into whatever storage tank technology an OEM would choose to use. But who cares? If you reach that point you just start using some of the stored air to power the car.

The air-hybrid concept raises many questions to me. e-Volution cars (compressed air driven) have tanks at about 8,000 psi. BUT can a Scuderi piston pump in more air against that amount of pressure? Increasing pressure on a gas generates heat; releasing it drops temps (Boyle's Law). How will these huge temp swings be handled? It seems to me that an "air hybrid" model creates as many (if not more) problems to be solved as the original Scuderi twin cylinder concept.

Volumetric efficiency increases with additional friction-generating passages for gases to flow through SINCE Scuderi realized that when you fire after TDC in a split-cycle engine the gas is so turbulent that you end up with a 3x faster flame speed.

I didn't say anything about doubling the number of friction-generating rings.

There must be losses in the gas passage. However, the gains of utilizing an offset are likely to be greater. Think about it, in the Otto cycle most of the thrust of the explosion is directed directly into the crankshaft. In the Scuderi design you can optimally offset the pistons without losses on in the other strokes.

It's a simple business decision. If the data is released then everyone else could realize that it has potential, discover the remaining engineering issues, and file for patents that could potentially be blocking.

Twice the number of pistons with twice the power strokes is not the same? Wrong again.

Let's use an example. In a 4-piston Otto engine you get 2 power strokes for every revolution of the crankshaft. In the a 4-piston (2 pairs of pistons) Scuderi design you also get 2 power strokes for every revolution.