Slashdot Mirror


Laser Ignition May Replace the Spark Plug

dusty writes "Laser Focus World has a story on researchers from Ford, GSI, and The University of Liverpool and their success in using near-infrared lasers instead of spark plugs in automobile engines. The laser pulses are delivered to the combustion chamber one of two ways. One, the laser energy is transmitted through free space and into an optical plug. Two, the other more challenging method uses fiber optics. Attempts so far to put the second method into play have met some challenges. The researchers are confident that the fiber-optic laser cables' technical challenges (such as a 20% parasitic loss, and vibration issues) will soon be overcome. Both delivery schemes drastically reduce harmful emissions and increase performance over the use of spark plugs. So the spark plug could soon join the fax machine in the pantheon of antiquated technologies that will never completely disappear. The news release from The University of Liverpool has pictures of the freakin' internal combustion lasers."

77 of 388 comments (clear)

  1. Flashing lights by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 5, Funny

    If it makes cool red lights flash under the hood like KITT, I'm all for it.

    --
    Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
    1. Re:Flashing lights by gnick · · Score: 3, Funny

      I've seen those installed. Be assured - An adult driving a car with a red swooshing light thing does not look nearly as cool as we all remember KITT and Michael to be.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:Flashing lights by FlyingSquidStudios · · Score: 5, Funny

      It was the 1980s. Between the feathered hair, the parachute pants and the Members Only jackets, nothing could save you from looking like a complete jackass.

    3. Re:Flashing lights by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wait wait wait, two things
      1. You're saying Members Only jackets are out of style and have been so since the 80s?
      2. Who are you calling a jackass?

    4. Re:Flashing lights by neonsignal · · Score: 5, Funny

      David Hasselhoff doesn't look nearly as cool as we remember him to be either...

    5. Re:Flashing lights by slashdotmsiriv · · Score: 5, Funny
    6. Re:Flashing lights by jcr · · Score: 4, Funny

      OMG, that's worse than a rickroll.

      What is seen can not be unseen. Don't click that link!

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    7. Re:Flashing lights by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Seems like a good way to get a ticket for impersonating an emergency vehicle.

      Indeed. Though it depends on your state, there are restrictions on what lights you can put on a car and in what colors. Many restrict red lights to the back of the car, and some don't allow any light colors than red, white, and yellow on the back of a car (e.g. no neon purple illuminated plate frames). I heard a story from a police officer who pulled someone over just as he left the dealer's lot for having too many high deer lights on his brand new truck; the guy was pissed they'd sold him a car in an illegal configuration.

      And just because something is legal in the state in which your car is licensed doesn't mean you won't get ticketed when you cross into another state. Permanent window tinting is another per-state restriction; you may have to drive with your windows open to stay legal, which will suck in states that experience Winter.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  2. So what happens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When the vehicle gets to be a few years old, and the rings start letting extra oil past. Soon the lenses are covered with soot. Sparks can still jump through a moderate layer of soot, can the laser?

    1. Re:So what happens by cptdondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We're not talking gigahertz, 0.00001% error rate stuff. We're talking honking big pipe firing a few hundred times a second.

      My first thought was, 20% loss? Who cares!??? Just stick a bigger laser on the other end!

      Seriously, this is one of those things where power is good, and more power is better. Early ignition was pretty pitiful. Now electronic ignition is pretty much bullet proof.

      I expect this to be like fuel injection, going from expensive trouble prone disaster to rock reliable. Once they figure it out, it'l be like injectors - maybe 200,000 mile service.

      Honestly, I can't wait. I expect reciprocating engines will be with us a long, long time, burning some sort of liquid fuel.

    2. Re:So what happens by RuBLed · · Score: 2, Funny

      Buy the fuel with little hard working men that cleans the engine from the inside.

    3. Re:So what happens by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's easy, they'll install wipers on them.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    4. Re:So what happens by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not worried about the amount of energy getting to the cylinder, that can just be brute forced as you note. I'm more concerned about what the energy that doesn't make it will do. Fiber fuse could be fairly dramatic in such a system. Video of fiber fuse propagating.

      I don't doubt that they'll work it out in the end, engineers have a long history of being clever like that; but it is going to take a giant pile of tweaks on top of the naive implementation.

    5. Re:So what happens by afidel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Loss=heat, I doubt the cladding would stand up very well to that kind of loss. In my experience solid state lasers aren't very reliable even at fairly low power. In networking gear GBIC's/SFP's are by far the least reliable components, dying far more often then even mechanical components like fans and probably on par with enterprise HDD's.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    6. Re:So what happens by icebike · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Exactly.
      What is the point?

      Obscure claims of increased fuel efficiency and reduced emissions, based on what? A spark is a better combustion source than a laser.

      This looks like a solution in search of a problem if you ask me.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    7. Re:So what happens by PPH · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd be pretty impressed if they can make high energy fibre optics work for any length of time in a consumer auto.

      My money is on the 'free air' optics. In reality, the optical paths and components could be enclosed in some sort of housing. This has been done for spark ignition in a few cars already. The ignition system is one module that sits on top of the spark plugs. In the optical equivalent, the lasers, mirrors and distributor function would be contained in an 'ignition rail', eliminating fiber optic losses and alignment issues.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    8. Re:So what happens by hardburn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The laser can be focused to a specific point more easily, allowing it to ignite a stratified charge better. This makes it better at igniting a leaner mixture. Coupled with Direct Injection and maybe some octane boost trickery, this could make gas engines get the same compression ratio as a diesel while still reving over 3k.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    9. Re:So what happens by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You may be right, in that a spark makes a better ignition source. But, do we KNOW that, or do we just assume so? I won't argue the point, but I will point to explosives, and note that a spark is often not the best source of ignition. Naval guns use electricity to detonate primers. C4 and other explosives use a carefully controlled combination of pressure and temperature. In fact, those explosives can be set alight, and used to cook dinner, because the spark isn't what detonates them.

      Gasoline? Internal combustion engines? They are terribly wasteful of both fuel, and energy. Even a very efficient gas burning engine pumps fuel out the tail pipe, which is the reason catalytic converters are required on vehicles in the US. If a laser can set off a more thorough, more efficient ignition, that burns ALL of the gasoline in the cylinder, fuel mileage will increase, for certain. Polluting emissions will probably be reduced. Is it worth the cost? Only time will tell.

      And, THAT is the reason for research. Very few people will purchase these things if they add $10,000 to the cost of a vehicle - but if the cost is brought down to $50 per cylinder, they never have to be replaced, AND they increase fuel mileage even a little bit, people will buy them.

      Let them research. If/when they have a product ready for market, I'll probably test it.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    10. Re:So what happens by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When it comes to ignition, compression is never a problem these days. What compression does do is increase *heat*. So unless your running gasoline with a higher octane rating, you will get detonation and pre-ignition the higher your compression ration is. This of course, can be offset through timing retardation which in fact often does happen electronically.

      The only real advantage I see with a laser ignition system is greater consistency and timing to be used in high revving engines such as F1 race cars. At 18,000 RPM, precision is everything.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    11. Re:So what happens by nmos · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Gasoline? Internal combustion engines? They are terribly wasteful of both fuel, and energy. Even a very efficient gas burning engine pumps fuel out the tail pipe, which is the reason catalytic converters are required on vehicles in the US. If a laser can set off a more thorough, more efficient ignition, that burns ALL of the gasoline in the cylinder, fuel mileage will increase, for certain.

      Modern gasoline engines already burn something like 95%+ of the fuel that is pumped in so there really isn't that much room for improvement. I suppose any improvement is better than none at all but don't expect any miracles. FWIW this is one of the reasons those gasoline additives that claim to improve efficiency are mostly BS, even if they did cause the fuel to burn 100% it would be hard to even measure the difference in mpg.

    12. Re:So what happens by haifastudent · · Score: 5, Funny

      You ever had a car with Lucas electrics?

      Two. One for the road and one for the mechanic.

      --
      Thank for reading to the sig. You may stop reading now. It is safe. There is no more content. Why are you still reading?
    13. Re:So what happens by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Diesels don't use spark plugs, and already burn all the fuel in the chamber. They run inherently lean, which is why they produce no appreciable carbon monoxide. If you're seeing black sooty exhaust smoke from a diesel, either the fuel rack is turned up too far and it's dumping *way* more diesel in than you can burn, or the air filter is clogged.

    14. Re:So what happens by shiftless · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When it comes to ignition, compression is never a problem these days. What compression does do is increase *heat*. So unless your running gasoline with a higher octane rating, you will get detonation and pre-ignition the higher your compression ration is. ....and what happens when you use a laser to ignite a large portion of the fuel/air mixture at once, rather than using a spark plug to ignite a small flame kernel and waiting for it to propagate? The fuel mixture burns much more rapidly, allowing you to run less ignition advance. The result is more power, fewer emissions, and the engine is LESS prone to detonation. So then you can jack up the compression ratio and gain even more power.

    15. Re:So what happens by smoker2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you're seeing black sooty exhaust smoke from a diesel, either the fuel rack is turned up too far and it's dumping *way* more diesel in than you can burn, or the air filter is clogged.

      No, sorry that's crap.
      Black smoke is due to mechanical failure, either rings allowing sump oil to burn or some other vector allowing oil into the chamber. Too much fuel gives a blue or white smoke. If you get a turbo blow, you get blue smoke out the back, wrong fuel-air ratio. Black smoke is caused by soot. If you have too much fuel that doesn't burn, it can't turn into soot.

    16. Re:So what happens by jcr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would expect the fiber to be replaced with a laser diode right on the cylinder head in the near future. IIRC, you can already get IR laser diodes with quite enough power output to ignite a gasoline-air mixture.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    17. Re:So what happens by cptdondo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I remember in the early days when they went to electronic ignition the spark plug wires couldn't take it either and would fail quickly - they'd get brittle, crack, and lose the ability to conduct. After a while, spark plug wires got better; I don't know anyone who actually replaces them unless it's a high-mileage vehicle (like my 1989 Trooper, about due for another set at 224K miles....)

      As you say, the engineers will work this out, but not before some pain....

    18. Re:So what happens by danbert8 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wow, someone needs a reality check. Diesel in most places is comparable to gasoline and has a higher energy density than gasoline. Add in the extra fuel efficiency and the cost in cents per mile for diesel whips the pants off gasoline. The smoke you refer to was from high sulfur diesel which is no longer sold in the United States. Diesel has been shown to release less emissions than gasoline, and in fact VW is trying to reverse myths that you have with ad campaigns like this http://tdi.vw.com/a-coffee-filter-shows-how-clean-tdi-clean-diesel-is/.

      And the new Turbodiesels get much better mileage than their equivalent gasoline counterparts. For example the Jetta gasoline vs diesel goes from 20 to 29 city and 29 to 40 highway (45% city, 38% highway). For comparison, the Honda Civic gasoline vs hybrid goes from 25 to 40 city and 36 to 45 highway (60% city, but 25% highway). Also note that the VW Jetta TDI won the 2009 Green Car of the Year award.

      And there is no way in hell a hybrid beats a diesel in performance. The Civic Hybrid has 110 HP/123 ft-lb of torque. The Jetta TDI? 140 HP/236 ft-lb of torque. There is a reason diesels have been winning the Le Mans.

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    19. Re:So what happens by MaWeiTao · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gasoline? Internal combustion engines? They are terribly wasteful of both fuel, and energy. Even a very efficient gas burning engine pumps fuel out the tail pipe, which is the reason catalytic converters are required on vehicles in the US.

      I realize it's a fad to crap on internal combustion engines. The fact is that they're by far the best thing we've got for the applications they're used in. If they weren't we wouldn't be driving gasoline or diesel powered cars right now. They provide the best mix of range, efficiency and utility. Gasoline is one of the most energy dense fuels out there.

      This is not to say there isn't room for improvement. Aren't the most gasoline engines only 30% efficient? I'd say there's a ton of room for improvement. Perhaps electric motors will replace gasoline engines, but batteries have a long way to go before that becomes a reality. And then there are the issues with power generation. Electricity in my area is so expensive, I have a hard time believing I'll be saving money by switching to an electric vehicle.

      Anyway, my point is, why not improve the internal combustion engine as far as possible? This not only means a new ignition source, but completely redesigning the whole combustion process, which some are already working on. I want to see people working on improving this technology right up to the day it's replaced with something else.

    20. Re:So what happens by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Informative

      The smoke you refer to was from high sulfur diesel which is no longer sold in the United States.

      Partly, but it was mostly from the low-tech engines used (large mechanical tolerances, no turbocharger, indirect injection, etc.). My 1998 VW New Beetle TDI, which was manufactured well before the switch to ULSD, also produced* very little to no smoke because it has a comparatively modern and high-tech engine. It's not as high-tech as a 2009 TDI engine because it's two generations behind in fuel injection technology (new engines use common-rail injection at very high pressures; mine has a distributor-pump system at fairly low pressures; moderately-high-pressure unit injection systems came between), but it does have a variable-geometry turbocharger, direct injection, etc.

      For example the Jetta gasoline vs diesel goes from 20 to 29 city and 29 to 40 highway (45% city, 38% highway).

      The funny thing is, the older TDIs (like mine) did even better. My mileage is around 35 city/45 highway, and the more-aerodynamic** Golfs and Jettas with the same engine (model years 1999-2003) average about 50 mpg highway easily. The new Jetta is hobbled by three factors: first, it weighs considerably more than the old one. Second, the engine is considerably more powerful (140 HP/236 ft-lbs vs. 90 HP/155 ft-lbs). Third, it's tuned to sacrifice economy in favor of lower emissions.

      (* My car would still produce little to no smoke now, even 11 years and 180K miles later, except that I've modded it for more power. It smokes now only during full-throttle acceleration and only moderately, and does so because I've increased fueling but haven't (yet) increased the air flow to compensate.)

      (** It's counter-intuitive: the Beetle looks aerodynamic, but it's actually got a drag coefficient of 0.38 (compared to about 0.30 for a 4th-generation Jetta). This is because the smoothly-sloping rear end prevents the flow from separating until it gets all the way down to the bumper, which produces "lift" backwards. See this site for more info.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  3. In most likeliness by east+coast · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This will probably arrive as a viable and reliable technology right about the same time the internal combustion engine is on it's way out.

    Don't think fax machine, think FD Trinitron.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    1. Re:In most likeliness by RsG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would imagine that such a technology could be adapted to other fuel sources like hydrogen. In fact, I suspect that hydrogen engines might actually benefit greatly from this.

      I'm not so sure of that. Granted, you can use hydrogen fuel in an IC engine, but storing it is a big PITA. At sea level pressure, gaseous hydrogen has abysmal energy density per volume, and any solution for reducing that volume would have to be adapted for every car on the road. Meaning liquid hydrogen is a non-starter, pressurized hydrogen needs to be stored in a collision-rated tank, and hydrogen dissolved in or bonded with something else needs a cost-effective carrier of limited weight per fuel (else the energy density per weight or price per tank becomes a problem).

      If we've got the hydrogen storage problem licked, and with all the R&D focusing on precisely that we very well might someday in the not too far future, then why use an IC engine over a fuel cell? In a FC + electric motor configuration, the engine makes very little noise, there are fewer moving parts than an IC engine, no need for a separate (and heavy) alternator + battery to power the electronics, and probably other advantages I've overlooked. The one downside is cost, which can probably be substantially reduced via mass production - the cost per cell is high now, but we aren't making them for every car on the road.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    2. Re:In most likeliness by RsG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Hydrogen engine" is vague to the point of uselessness. It's like saying "Combustion engine", which covers everything from steam locomotives to rockets.

      I suspect you read "hydrogen engine" to mean a fuel cell powering an electric motor. From the context, it sounds more like he meant an internal combustion engine, fuelled by hydrogen, which is a different beast entirely. Hence the confusion. An ignition source is indeed potentially useful for such an engine, though not absolutely necessary (not all IC engines use spark plugs).

      Hydrogen IC engines do exist, both on paper and in prototype, but I strongly suspect that if we ever get hydrogen to work as a fuel, meaning we can generate and store it in the needed quantities, we won't be burning it in a piston engine of any kind. Fuel cells make more sense in that context.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    3. Re:In most likeliness by gujo-odori · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Carbon monoxide is a product of all combustion, not just car engines.

    4. Re:In most likeliness by shoor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Another example of an improvement arriving to a technology just as it was obsoleted is the gas mantle, which improved the efficiency of gas lamps just about the time the electric light bulb came along.

      --
      In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
    5. Re:In most likeliness by flyingfsck · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, the hydrogen storage and delivery problem has been licked long ago. If you combine hydrogen with carbon and form long chain molecules, it becomes a liquid at normal atmospheric pressure and temperature. This allows it to burn efficiently in modern vehicles without any modifications required...

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    6. Re:In most likeliness by Falconhell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How pray tell does hydrogen and oxygen burning produce C02? It would be a bloody miracle if it did.....

    7. Re:In most likeliness by RsG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nor is either compound produced by burning hydrogen. For that matter, you get no CO, nor CO2 from burning aluminum or magnesium powder, or any number of other flammable materials.

      I think you meant "carbon monoxide is a product of any form of incomplete carbon combustion" in your original post. Not all combustion needs to involve carbon.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    8. Re:In most likeliness by anagama · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would imagine that such a technology could be adapted to other fuel sources like hydrogen.

      It may be pedantic, but straight hydrogen should be thought of more as an energy store than a fuel source, i.e., as a gas or liquid battery. The energy used to create any amount of hydrogen is going to be higher than the energy returned in use, similar to how a battery requires more energy to charge than it will give back as usable electricity.

      The advantage fossil fuels have is that the initial energy storage took place epochs ago, and we need invest only a tiny bit of energy today to get many multiples of that investment back at this point in time. In that sense, fossil fuels are virtually free energy (not in the perpetual motion sense, but in the sense that they cost so little to get).

      Hydrogen is the exact opposite, that is, we must invest more energy to get less energy. The luxurious lifestyle we all enjoy is rooted in the fact that we can get more energy than we invest. Once that reverses, there won't be surplus energy to spend on making life comfortable. Because H2 as a fuel source represents loss rather than profit, I'm pretty skeptical that it will prove to be some kind of magic bullet.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  4. PETA by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is it one shark per cylinder?

    Yeah, they're gonna be pissed.

    1. Re:PETA by minvaren · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes. And the only way to start the car will be to jump it.

      --
      Big! Strong! Wow! Tada-O!
  5. I'd be too afraid... by Cryacin · · Score: 2, Funny

    Of the freakin sharks in the freakin engine bay!

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  6. Re:misreading by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd go trade mark that name quick if I were you... "SharkPlugs"

  7. Re:bs science as usual- and a waste of time/effort by east+coast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    this is typical insane engineering- if this succeeds then a mechanic would need to be an expert in light theory and frickin laser beams to work on your car.

    Only as much as they need to be an expert in fluid dynamics to change your oil.

    this is not the way to make cars more efficient- spark plugs work great and im sure these lasers cant give any more power - the spark plug ignites the gas already, and it BURNS- how much more combustion could you get?

    It is a good question as to how this would work any better but if you've ever spent any time under the hood you know it doesn't take much in the way of fouling or plug wire degradation to change fuel efficiency. If this system can avoid those kinds of issues it would make certain aspects of tune ups obsolete and would also increase fuel efficiency over a period when traditional plugs and wires would degrade but not to the point of seemingly needing replaced.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  8. Re:bs science as usual- and a waste of time/effort by compro01 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the spark plug ignites the gas already, and it BURNS- how much more combustion could you get?

    It's not so much getting more combustion, but making the combustion behave how we want it to. And there's a long way that can be gone.

    But whether this has any real point compared to other fuels, such as diesel that have a big leg up on gasoline to start with, is up for debate.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  9. Re:Stupid question by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm assuming it's because gasoline is a helluva lot easier to light on fire. My experience from being an adolescent firebug was that gas burns easily, but very quickly, whereas diesel takes a lot more heat to get started, but burns more slowly, and probably releases more energy. I'm no chemist, but my understanding is that different hydrocarbons have different energy yields, and diesel is much more efficient, the tradeoff being a very different kind of engine.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  10. Re:Stupid question by brusk · · Score: 2, Funny

    Duh. The nozzles at the gas station are different sizes.

    --
    .sig withheld by request
  11. IC engine by zymano · · Score: 4, Insightful

    inefficient. Adding a laser is not going to do much.

    1. Re:IC engine by pintpusher · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But it's potentially enough. ISTM part of the reason the ICE has lasted so long is the continued incremental improvements that make it just good enough to stick with. Continued incremental improvements in fuel economy, at a rate roughly equivalent to the inverse of the rise in fuel prices will keep the modern gasoline powered ICE a viable alternative for a long time.

      This kind of improvement, along with better optimized hybrids and other "transitional" technologies effectively allow us to maintain the status quo.

      IMVHO, only two things will pitch ICE's off the top of the pile: 1) a radical, cheap, viable, ready-to-go, drop-in-now replacement, or 2) time, a long time.

      --
      man, I feel like mold.
  12. Re:Stupid question by compro01 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Gasoline will auto-ignite just fine, it's just much trickier to control when it ignites than with spark ignition or diesel ignition.

    Mercades has a engine in development called the diesotto that does this.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  13. Great... by PhotoGuy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Great, the laser pulses will probably be DRM encoded so that only authorized chips are used and vendors that insert the appropriate smart card can perform service on them...

    The advent of CPU-enhanced cars is a great one, but this is one place where the govt really needs to step in an open things up. For standard engine codes, things aren't too bad; but Lord help you if you want to read an ABS or airbag code from a GM vehicle (for example). They're locked down. I have some decent PC-based code reader hardware and software, but in order to read the ABS error that my two vehicles are both showing (GM, learn to design ABS, will ya!), I need to spend hundreds or thousands on their own software/hardware to simply find out which of my four ABS sensors is faulty.

    The more they get into specialized things like this, including laser ignition, the more I worry that I won't be able to be a backyard mechanic any more.

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:Great... by bertoelcon · · Score: 2, Informative

      The more they get into specialized things like this, including laser ignition, the more I worry that I won't be able to be a backyard mechanic any more.

      When's the last you were able to backyard mechanic effectively, at least on a "modern" vehicle?

      Most are locked down to the point that many of the smaller auto garages around my house have closed up because they couldn't afford to get every single piece of hardware/software to work on the new cars.

      --
      Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
    2. Re:Great... by Xenna · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's why I'm putting an open source engine management system in mine:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MegaSquirt

    3. Re:Great... by smellsofbikes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In case anyone is wondering about real-world performance of megasquirt (which has always sounded to me like a bad porn movie title) my ex-boss built a megasquirt system for his 1985 Jeep. It took him over a year to get it working because he had a lot of problems getting the new mass air flow sensor to accurately measure the airflow (positioning it was fairly critical) but once he managed that, the system works beautifully. He's been using it for 5 years, including several cross-country drives and a lot of very serious offroading. He comes back from trips with the roof of his jeep bashed in -- that kind of offroading. It's given him better than 10% improvement on fuel economy, a little more power (hard to measure) and vastly better reliability, particularly in rough offroad conditions. Anyone who has ever done serious offroading in a stock carbureted '70's or '80's jeep knows about how poorly they can perform when the float starts sticking and the engine starts going into fuel starvation.
      Anyway. He loves it and thinks it's the coolest thing ever.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  14. Re:Stupid question by JesseL · · Score: 2, Informative

    Gasoline is a very 'dry' fluid. It provides almost no lubricity. Diesel engines need some lubricity in their fuel to lubricate the very high pressure injection system (might be less of an issue with modern common rail systems and piezo injectors though).

    --
    "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
  15. Let me make a run at a joke! by tiger32kw · · Score: 2, Funny

    "So the spark plug could soon join the fax machine in the pantheon of antiquated technologies that will never completely disappear."

    I always get my secretary to page me when I get a new fax. Then I head over to the closest payphone and give her a call to see what it says. Generally its just spam :(

  16. Re:bs science as usual- and a waste of time/effort by Bobnova · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've spent entirely too much time under the hood of a car(21 year auto mechanic), and you are entirely incorrect.
    Degrading plug wires either cause a misfire, which is blindingly obvious and kills mileage horribly, or doesn't. There is no middle ground. Plug wire misfires happen maybe once or twice in the 300,000 mile life of a (japanese...) car.
    Modern electronic ignition systems are fairly immune to spark plug wear until extreme circumstances, such as missing three tuneups in a row with standard plugs. Then you will sometimes get drivibility issues and lose 1mpg, tops.

    Back in the days of points it was different, plug wear and point wear (mostly point wear) had huge effects on mileage between tuneups. These days, the effects are minimal at most.

  17. Re:Stupid question by confused+one · · Score: 4, Informative

    Those aren't spark plugs, they're glow plugs. different animal altogether. No spark, just a hot wire...

  18. Re:bs science as usual- and a waste of time/effort by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    this is typical insane engineering- if this succeeds then a mechanic would need to be an expert in light theory and frickin laser beams to work on your car.

    No, you do exactly what they do now:
    When it is determined that there is no spark = replace the coil pack (laser sequencer), or replace the plug wires (fiber pipes), or replace the spark plugs (thingies that screw into the cylinders).

    Now...this laser stuff may or may not be needed. But repairs nowadays = remove and replace the bogus part.
    The coil pack on my almost 10 year old truck is a sealed unit. No fix, just replace.
    Plug wires? Trivially replaced
    Plugs? The only thing I might need to do is wirebrush. Or replace at $1.50 ea.

    A laser ignition might be useful in adjusting the ignition rate and level, according to engine load, and balanced with fuel flow/mixture. Similar to a camera flash. Depending on need, you might want it to fire slower or later than under full load.
    With a current spark plug, you get to time it, but not adjust the level of spark. You get spark or no spark.

  19. Has other applications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's another obvious application for this - detonating nuclear bombs.

    Nuclear weapons require that all the charges be detonated simultaneously, within nanoseconds, so that the implosion squeeze is precisely symmetrical. (OK, A-bomb geeks, I'm ignoring asymmetrical designs and flying-plate systems here.) If the timing is even a few nanoseconds off, the core won't be compressed; it will just blow out on one side, and a "fizzle" yield will result.

    The usual trick for this is to use an "exploding wire" detonator. Unlike regular detonators, which have an intermediate explosive to start the main explosive, exploding wire detonators do it in one step, by discharging a capacitor bank through a resistance buried in the explosive. This takes a very fast high-voltage high-current switch, and the traditional solution is a krytron, a gas-discharge vacuum tube from the thyatron family. There have been big flaps over the years about various countries trying to acquire krytrons, which aren't classified but are export-controlled.

    Krytrons are 1940s technology. This laser ignition system could be its replacement. One big laser pulse pumped through fibers of equal length to each detonation point should do the job. And it's off the shelf dual-use technology.

  20. I'm confused by oldhack · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can y'all throw in a car analogy? Help a inquisitive brother out.

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  21. Only problem I see here is... by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sparkplugs cost like, uhm, a dollar.

    1. Re:Only problem I see here is... by socrplayr813 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But if they are able to improve engine efficiency and bring the cost to a reasonable level, the math may work out.

      Regardless, this is why we do research, people. Tons of technologies have been discovered by accident or adapted from less promising research. There doesn't always have to be an instant benefit for research to be worthwhile.

      --
      The confidence of ignorance will always overcome the indecision of knowledge.
  22. Self Cleaning by wooferhound · · Score: 2, Interesting

    > Soon the lenses are covered with soot.

    I would think it would be self cleaning, wouldn't the laser keep all the crap burned off of the lens ?

    --
    We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    1. Re:Self Cleaning by roguetrick · · Score: 2, Funny

      Carbon don't burn too easy boss.

      --
      -The world would be a better place if everyone had a hoverboard
  23. Wake me up when.... by tchdab1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...they replace the fuel spray from injectors with heavy hydrogen pellets.

  24. Lifetime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem with putting lasers in your engine is that it gets hot in there, and laser lifetime plunges drastically when you run them at elevated temperatures. I'm sure the dealers will love us having to replace our laser-plugs every two months, but no one else will.
    (And if you're thinking thermo-electric cooling is the answer, that's going to use a whole lot of juice; don't know how feasible it is.)

    1. Re:Lifetime? by turing_m · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm guessing that's why they mention fiber optics in the summary, to pipe it in from a cold area (e.g. under the dash) and through the firewall.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    2. Re:Lifetime? by toQDuj · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Can't imagine the kind of injuries you'd get from a high-power infrared laser shooting freely into a car accident due to broken fibre optics. Actually, I can. It's not pretty.

      --
      Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
  25. Laser-initiated ordnance systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    We used a similar system starting back in the late 1990s for initiating ordnance systems. The primary explosive would be doped with a small amount of carbon black to enhance absorption. One advantage was that specific equipment was required for proper initiation, which (in theory) made it safer.

    Dynamite and a laser beam indeed.

  26. Re:Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    "My truck has spark plugs"

    No, it has glow plugs, these only operate when the fuel is cold (ie: at cold start), they stop running when the engine is up to temperature.

    "Actually several diesel engines can burn gas for short runs"

    No!. Old diesels can tolerate some fuel contaimination, newer common rail, or other high pressure systems can be destroyed by them, with repair values in the $10,000 range.

    If you accidentally put petrol in your diesel, do not start it for any reason (This includes moving it away from the pump or onto a tow truck) until the tank and fuel lines have been flushed correctly.

  27. Re:Stupid Memes by anagama · · Score: 3, Funny

    Forget that, I'm still waiting for a car analogy even after scrolling by 90% of the posts.

    --
    What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  28. Dependable by Tekoneiric · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hopefully they are dependable. With the heat of engines I'm not sure how long they would last. One good thing is that it'll flood the market with cheap high power lasers. Importing the parts my have to go by the FDA since they regulate lasers.

    --
    *It's not what you can do for the Dark Side but what the Dark Side can do for you!*
  29. So close... by dzfoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    >> "So the spark plug could soon join the fax machine in the pantheon of antiquated technologies that will never completely disappear."

    Aw, you were so close, but missed the mark. There are many other examples that you could have used and kept with the car theme. For instance,

    "So the spark plug could soon join the (carburator | solenoid | manual clutch | cassette player) in the pantheon of antiquated technologies that will never completely disappear."

    --
    Carol vs. Ghost
    ...Can you save Christmas?
  30. Smokey Yunick's adiabatic engine by DevConcepts · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=78116&page=1
    FTL
    For those of you not in the know, Smokey Yunick was a legendary race car mechanic and Popular Science correspondant. He died a couple of years ago. In March 1983 Popular Science carried a story about an engine he had developed that only had two cylinders and 78 cubic inches but developed 150 hp and got 60 mpg when installed in what looks like a Volkswagon Rabbit. He called it his "adiabatic engine." Supposedly all sorts of car companies were quite interested in the engine.

    When I see this I will belive the oil companies have given up.

  31. Re:Is it just me... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Spark plugs last just as long as they ever did in the same conditions (although some of the new coatings do extend life under given conditions.) The difference is that the engines are more reliable now, and more importantly not under the control of the driver. When you're not free to dump any quantity of fuel you like into the cylinder, it's a lot harder to end up burning up your plugs.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  32. Why not use microwaves? by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's probably a good reason, but why not use microwaves? Wouldn't that be better to ensure even burn?

  33. Re:bs science as usual- and a waste of time/effort by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've spent entirely too much time under the hood of a car(21 year auto mechanic), and you are entirely incorrect.
    Degrading plug wires either cause a misfire, which is blindingly obvious and kills mileage horribly, or doesn't. There is no middle ground.

    You are 100% full of shit.

    I have personally had intermittent shorts in spark plug wires which caused them to fire fine sometimes. I found the problem by flexing the wire in question while testing it and watching the resistance go from a few kOhms to infinite.

    In addition, plug wires can go partly bad, to the point where the resistance will be increased, causing a weak spark on some wires. You can find this problem by laying out all the wires on a table and checking their resistance. Longer wires should have more resistance. If you find a discrepancy, you've got at least one bad wire. Furthermore, in a vehicle with a flaky electrical system (say, one out of three alt. coils is bad) your voltage can be highly RPM-dependent, so you can have good spark only at high RPM.

    Modern electronic ignition systems are fairly immune to spark plug wear until extreme circumstances, such as missing three tuneups in a row with standard plugs. Then you will sometimes get drivibility issues and lose 1mpg, tops.

    This has relatively little to do with the ignition system and everything to do with the rest of the engine. Since it's computer controlled, the computer tries to prevent you from doing things with your engine that your plugs can't cover (it learns what causes misfires.) The biggest difference there is really that most modern ignition systems have a higher voltage; in the 1960s you might have 20kV, now it's usually more like 80. But you could get a high-performance coil back then; you'd just burn out your points, which we don't have any more.

    I would be ASE certified in automotive electronics if I could have afforded the exam back in the day. I am ASE certified in heating/cooling/air-cond. You have just told people things that aren't true, and no amount of experience excuses this.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"