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."
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.
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?
Yes. And the only way to start the car will be to jump it.
Big! Strong! Wow! Tada-O!
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.
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!