Gale Banks needs to take two identical duramax engines with stock tuning one engine with the dimple pistons and the other with oem pistons and do several dyno pulls and compare the results because i seriously doubt those dimple pistons will make any noticeable gains 🤷🏿♂️
dern right! Id love to see him peel that onion apart! I dont care to ever own a diesel truck but Gale makes it super interesting to learn about diesels!
Does less than just about any other aftermarket design. Ask yourself why no serious race team uses this. If it isn't used abundantly in racing, it's shit at best, fake at worst.
Please show your source data. I don’t see any logic technical argument presented here, just a reiteration of the manufacturer’s claims, which is likely pseudoscience at best. The claims are very significant, so prove it… with actual data, generated under scientifically controlled conditions.
Diesel engine is compression based. Very different from gas engines. The dimples act as partial combustion chambers upon compression stroke. Upon exhaust stroke the air velocity gets an added boost due to the dimples and the airs ability to go from a pressure positive to exhausting the gasses.
It's relative motion between the dimples and the air. The pistons are moving up and down and the intake charge is swirling and compressing. = relative motion
@@hotrodray6802 its not relative motion. The direction and spin are relevant to a golf ball but doing this to a piston would not have the same effect given that you only get the effect with air rushing past the dimples not air hitting the dimples directly. Other companies have tried using the golf ball dimples but the aerodynamic increase was barely anything and in this case it could be a failure point and it just doesn't apply here
@@robbsharp9014 There are 7 grooves at the edge of the Combustion Chamber that work to fragment the Flame Front. The pressure is coming from the Squish Band as the piston is traveling past TDC. The following is a test of a single cylinder Diesel engine. The difference between RGP 6 and RGP 9 is the amount of piston grooves at the edge of the combustion chamber. I added a link in a second reply bc YT might not allow the outside link. CONCLUSION The following conclusions are drawn based on the present investigation. • The maximum increase in brake thermal efficiency for RGP 9, RGP 6 compared to normal piston was found to be 21.00%, 20.07% respectively. • The reduction in the brake specific fuel consumption for RGP6, RGP 9 compared to normal piston was found to be 16.28%, 20.01% respectively. • The maximum increase in Volumetric efficiency for RGP 9, RGP 6 compared to normal piston was found to be 32.48%, 17.49% respectively. • The exhaust gas temperatures are minimized for RGP 9, RGP 6 as compared to normal piston was found to be 12.12%, 8.13% respectively. • The carbon monoxide emissions for RGP 9, RGP 6 are found to be reduced by 30%, 20% respectively. From the above conclusions, the RGP 9 piston configuration can be suggested on diesel engine compared with the other piston configurations. REFERENCE
@@Obamaistoast2012when you take not everyone looks after their investment 😢 it's honestly and makes no sense why buy something so expensive and not look after it
Fuel consumpion reduced almost 50% in some constant speed machinery? I doubt that. So let me get this straight, burn a half of fuel and still stock performance? What's the thermal efficiency of that kind of engine? Almost 100%? Really? I'd believe when I see it.
Funny how fuel consumption in their test 5.9 cummins resulted in 3.2% fuel savings, but they claim 50% savings on "constant speed machinery". Wouldn't you lead citing that test over the measly 3.2% savings.
the emissions reductions are profound. as thats always an issue in diesel engines.. however, honda made a diesel engine that gets 70mpg and doesn't need eurea injection to meet emisions standards.. not available in N.A. markets..
Exactly, so why are t these put in production now ? ? These so called improvements seem way to exaggerated. Pie in the sky ? ? Talk is cheap , walk the walk & put these in production for the average consumer. WTF 👍🤛⚾️
This video doesn't talk about all the pieces. Pistons are also ceramic coated and a gapless 2nd ring is used. I would thing that half of these benefits are from that alone.
Real or not, R&D for something seemingly as simple as this is awesome. Taking technology from other sources and applying it to something new is fundamental.
These would only seem to work well with diesel. A Heron head gasoline motor with the dish in the piston and a high squish I could see cause detonation issues from hot spots on the dimples when the mixture is compressed, it could get squished into the dimples and not towards the inner part of the chamber for ignition. Engines with the combustion chamber in the piston do interest me though, it's very interesting and I think a lot more could be done with that design.
All numbers are too high imo. But diesels should profit from it to a degree. Swirl is very positive for diesels and hotspots dont really matter with no knock chance.
Would this piston concept operate in an Achates opposed-piston Diesel engine? The combustion space in an opposed piston engine is contained between the tops of two pistons, so it would seem that this combustion control would strongly affect the efficiency of an opposed piston Diesel.
The answer is yes…the Germans had a very similar design in WW2 for their opposed piston aviation engines …this concept is nothing new and it only has applications in sleeve valve or opposed piston engines
Dimples like that would possibly be beneficial, in having an effectively larger surface area to the piston head, and might help somewhat for the turbulation and scavenging. However the inlet/outlet geometries are still the truly deciding factors when it comes to that, and I think I can foresee some problems with compression and manufacturing from that head design. So yeah. And the moment they were like "up to 80%" I was... yeah. Here's a smarter solution which might give something of the same advantages, but without the same engineering problems; Spherical chambering, from a spheroid formed by both the cylinder top and the piston head; You make the piston conical outside of the concaved-out center so that it gives a very definitive compression squeeze, to account for the concaveness. Would make for a far more idealized combustion volume than a flat disc, for both explosion/burn consistency, better pressure dispersion and temperature dispersal. Lel. Now have fun trying to design a valve setup that works with that.
@@retiredbore378 True, on the one technical end; On the other end, if consequently you improve heat dissipation and homologation throughout the actual metal, and you can more ideally match detonation and propagation, then you win all of that back and then some through being able to use closer tolerances and better explosion matching.
We all know the most efficient diesel engine is the opposed piston variety. Something like the Fairbanks Morris or the Junkers Jumo. Would be stellar all around for a Hybrid diesel drive train. To bad their is not a radioactive catalyst that simply makes tons of gaseous hydrogen or some other from of Methane/ Natural gas etc.
To everyone here calling “bs”, you are wrong. It is possible, but you are missing something he didn’t mention in this video because he didn’t recognize it’s importance. Watch the video again and note the rings. They are Total Seal Gapless. Those alone keep the oil clean, improve efficiency and power.
If those numbers are real then the cost of those pistons should be very pricey! It's hard to imagine that this change makes such significant improvements in all areas. 50% better fuel economy? Come on.
@@Motor-City-Mike If I was making a guess as to why this is true, Id say these wouldn't help a gas engine because gasoline is pretty much already maxed out with its btu's, but diesel fuel has a lot more power in the fuel and this piston design simply extracts more of the fuels potential instead of it going out the exhaust.
Been done for 40 years. Engine masters guys have used them as well as used the Singh Grooves. If they didn't think they helped torque they wouldn't have used them, right?
It's not just the dimples, the geometry of the face of the piston is completely different, this geometry would create vortices inside the cylinder, probably better air fuel mixture hence more efficient combustion.
I call BS. Dimpled pistons have been tried before, and they just collect carbon in the holes, and pre-detonate because of the nature of the sharp facets at the top of the dimples to be way above the flash point of the fuel.
It’s trying to help the quench. Builders been doing this is drag cars for a long time. Not really a diesel only thing it’s about better mix and reduces the ping from to large gab.
I agree with most of the comments on this. I believe a flat top piston, with a very shallow combustion area, produces a better twin swirl combustion chamber, by the angle and flow of the intake ports. Let me overlap my camshafts, for better scavenging effects. And I can show you a higher performance on the stock engine. But if we're talking about diesels. They're over-sexed 2-stroke engines.(Same idea) Just saying...........
Please post the piston companies websites and information. Wouldn't it be worthwhile on a old cummins to install new pistons and zero gap rings. How much more power Would it make?
1:25 they talk about a fuel air mixture but diesels don't mix the fuel like gasoline. Diesel is direct injection and injects fuel after the piston has compressed the air. No fuel enters the combustion chamber with the air when intake valves are open.
Doesn't this just mean that the turbulence at the piston head is lessened? The whole piston is still making a vacuum in its chamber with every return, so turbulence doesn't feel like a major factor. Unless the turbulence is continuously fighting the gas intake, this won't do anything.
0:12 that's exactly what drag racers have been doing for 50+ years, porting it so the air goes straight in, knowing most of it goes towards the back of the valve.
Gas ported pistons for top ring only Very short ring life and engines torn down usually under a hundred passes at 1/4 mile. There have been ported heads with dimpling and it was a failure. Fueled puddled and wrecked atomization and caused detonation through lean outs and destroys the engine. If the dimples carbon up how can they still work? Worth the testing only way to find out long term
@christopherduggan9227 where in the fuck did you hear that bud? We've bench tested ported and dimpled vs ported and polished head and atomization and air flow was significantly better on the dimpled heads. I'm talking over 90hp better on the engine dyno.
They enough problems with the newer skinny skirt type pistons they're using in modern diesels. As a workshop mechanic I can honestly say I've never seen so many engines with split pistons as I do today.
At around $650 a piston this doesn't work for most people. If all the numbers work out this would only be viable for fleet vehicles. This video also doesn't mention that they are ceramic coated and use a gapless 2nd ring. That ring probably makes the biggest difference on some of those numbers by reducing blow. That alone keeps the oil cleaner, more fuel in the combustion chamber.
08/07/2023 Hello Look Auto. Does this manufacturer offer these pistons for gasoline engines? I have watched other videos about diesel engine remanufacturing using whatever they are called deep cone like pistons without the demples. I would like more mathematical engineering data. I would think that this type of piston would not have the factory spec compression ratios. I have seen some data or bragging about the use in racing engines. I do not know about the authentic source of other videos. Thanks for the video. Don
The dimples will fill with carbon over time and pre-ignition/knock will destroy the surface. You really don't want a rough surface with grooves and such when we talking about internal combustion engines. We see carbon build up in the most expensive perfectly fine materials with catastrophic effects on high performance engines. This would work on areas that air is clean ( throttle bodies ,intake manifolds and cylinder head porting)
We need to look into fuel-injected two-stroke engines. A power stroke per crankshaft revolution is where the torque is generated, particularly since manufacturer are making smaller displacement engines. No valvetrain enertia. Crankcase gases burned next power cycle, PCV system basically maintenance free. Go back to heatsinks around cylinder heads, no poisonous radiator fluid to kill your doggos. Magneto ignition electonically advanced and retard. .....
I mean we can I like the two stroke idea but we really need to bring back the Detroit 71 series and do some refining on it but those things would grab and go and they sound great when they scream.
If these dimples would reduce fuel consumption by 50 %, every car manufacturer would have them already. They have been researching how to make an economical engine a lot longer than these guys and have probably simulated or tested just about every "piston shape" under the sun.
For those that can't believe it's possible. Many people have made higher efficiency engines over the years. Gas or diesel. In gasoline especially with computers today it doesn't burn efficiently. Actually it's made to waste, just to keep the catalytic working all the time. So just that waste, not to mention why they do the intentional waste. Because it wasn't burning off all the fuel to begin with. So they waste more to get the catalytic to burn it off so there is cleaner emissions. Check out the world record Ford opal. That's an actual Guinness book of world record. Many other examples. That one was vapor deposition.
Ok, so the actual efficiency increase was 3.2% in testing with real world diesel pickup engines. Still, with more power output, if people could get keep their foot out of it, it would further increase efficiency, i.e., less pedal for the same work.
In real world circumstance you won't notice those 3,2% fuel savings, because many people will drive more aggressively when having more torque and power.
It doesn't matter. Look at what the EPA did to VW. VW produced diesel engines that had very good fuel efficiency. And, because they used so little fuel, they were very clean. This created a HUGE problem for the EPA. People were starting to ask why we would need to switch to electric cars when diesels caused so little pollution -- less pollution than the EVs if you looked at all pollution sources throughout the life of the car. The EPA wants to do away with internal combustion engines for the plebes so that we can be easier to control. So they attacked VW (and threatened other car manufacturers who produced clean and efficient diesel cars.) That's why VW doesn't sell diesels in the US anymore -- even though people would love to buy them. And it's why this invention will never get used.
Watch the fuel saving the MythBusters achieved when they covered a car with dimples. They were both shocked, since it was about 10%. Think if they could do that with 18 wheelers. But the interior space would be a problem, since you couldn't make the outside wider & standard stuff would no longer fit inside a narrower interior.
@@pauldatche8410 How are you going to create these 'dimples' in aircraft? The skins are thin and the dimple much deeper than the skin is thick which would compromise the strength or add weight...both undesirable. If these pistons actually do provide any improvements it's more from the coating and less from the dimples which have been tried on and off for 40+ years now. Mostly they're not worth the bother of creating them but for sure a thermal barrier coating on the piston does improve performance...but again it must improve things enough to be worth doing....and the fact that manufacturers who are desperate to meet emissions and efficiency targets are not flocking to use this technology should be a bit of an indication of how good it is.
May I suggest you get onto their website and look at their videos etc. As a mechanic of more than forty years experience my impression is that these people are the real deal.
My thermodynamics is a little rusty, but wouldn't "combustion occurring at a lower temperature" reduce efficiency? IIRC the efficiency of an engine is directly proportional to the difference in temperature between the inside and outsite.
That's not quite what they mean. Because the combustion is supposedly more efficient (by which they are suggesting it happens more quickly and completely) which probably means it happens faster, then less fuel is needed, so less overall heat is produced
I would like to see more independant test. If it's good then it's good. Truckers are being hammered with fuel prices. $ 1000.00 to fuel up is rediculous.
In the case of the dimples at the cylinder head inlet, for example, they do not improve the aerodynamics of the incoming air, they only serve to generate turbulence and create a more homogeneous mixture of air and fuel admitted into the cylinder... placing them on the piston does not the slightest sense! in the golf ball, it rotates in the air, and this minimizes the effects of drag... but if it were applicable to objects that don't rotate, formula 1 cars would be full of dimples, including ferraris and lamborghinis!
Detrimental emissions 😂😂😂 Fun fact: Trees require CO2 in order to produce the oxygen we all need to survive! The real effect of a greenhouse is a rapid plant development and not a rapid plant death as all these pseudoscientists would make you believe. But I have to admit one thing, it's fun watching people going absolutely insane about non-existent world issues while simultaneously being absolutely oblivious to the real ones 😅
That's remarkable, but probably overstating the resultss. It's a pity that it's too late. Still, in the swansong of IC Engines, it will provide useful improvements in efficiency and emissions.
Yeah, it’ll be the longest “swan song” in history. EVs do nothing to improve the environment and come at horrendous costs (child labor for materials, huge dumps for used hazardous materials, ya da ya da… I know, “but they’re gonna save the world, eventually). Get back to me in 20 years, my bet is that the transition will STILL be 20 years away (as always).
@@matthewfredrickmfkrz1934 I believe it was Howard Hughes who eloquently pointed out the problem with steam using a well aimed hammer. Also, ICEs can reach much higher than 25% with proper investment (my own developments are predicted to reach about 40% but funding at the federal level is geared to battery development and other forms of transportation, like trains; I’ve applied and D.O.E. and N.S.F. won’t even review the application). Yes, the fuel efficiency of existing ICEs is too low, but that doesn’t preclude improvement (and no, I’m not going to just tell you what I’ve put 10 years of effort into). Also, there are even more pressing contributions to greenhouse gas emissions than cars but the bottom line is that EVs will NEVER contribute to the solution because they are at least as bad as ICE for lifetime carbon emissions.
The explanation about the golf ball and applying that to airflow on the cylinder and related heat is wrong and backwards. Most likely lies to protect the patents. The dimples on a golf ball promote shear using turbulence at the ball's "widest" part thru the wind, not turbulence behind the ball. This upsets laminar flow around the ball which would cause unwanted drag. 1:20 "allowing fuel-air to adhere to the cylinder wall while also reducing pressure" . . . on a Diesel . . . near the top of the compression stroke . . . where the fuel is sprayed in from the top-center . . . . !!
Then, if i open my old aspirated vw 1.6 diesel 1gen, take the pistons out, make light rounded holes with a drill on surface top of cylinder, my car thats do 18~20km/L will go all way to 30km/L? XD
What about gas engines? Sorry not to sound like a hater but if these numbers were true every company that builds engines would make their own, one way or another
Show a Dyno chart. 15% in power is a decent increase. Building race engines things like that dnt gain a lot of any power. So to make that in an engine that's not that dnt have as high a cylinder pressure dnt sound accurate. Just some more internet yadda yadda
Between ducted injectors, opposed cylinder 2 strokes and these dimpled pistons, may extend the life of piston engines. Electric vehicles have their place. But an electric drive, piston powered generator vehicle is likely to be the preferred drivetrain in the near future.
If this was true that this pistons really make more fuel efficient than they wouldn't allow us to know about this because of greed gets in the way. I have to literally install these in my truck or car to see if this is actually accurate
lol golf ball dents won’t change 30% heat loss thru cylinder walls or 30% loss thru exhaust or 20% mechanical loss. Turbulence and complete combustion is not the main efficiency issue.
Game changing would be complete vaporization of the fuel before it enters the combustion chamber. Even if you could do so, the difference between ICE & electric is no comparison. Electric is so much more efficient that it makes ICE obsolete.
Why these improvements haven’t been put in place before ? They didn’t give a fuck about efficiency and fuel cost ! Now that they see they are about to loose they are desperate. Electrics motors are so efficient compare to combustion engines and they have less moving parts therefore fewer risk of breaking.
Gale Banks needs to take two identical duramax engines with stock tuning one engine with the dimple pistons and the other with oem pistons and do several dyno pulls and compare the results because i seriously doubt those dimple pistons will make any noticeable gains 🤷🏿♂️
dern right! Id love to see him peel that onion apart! I dont care to ever own a diesel truck but Gale makes it super interesting to learn about diesels!
Agreed!
@@gpw203 so how would you make the pistons magnetic without adding weight?
Does less than just about any other aftermarket design. Ask yourself why no serious race team uses this.
If it isn't used abundantly in racing, it's shit at best, fake at worst.
@@rattyratstuff7125 ya rekon!!, hey at least the video is getting clicks, lol
No way.
I don't believe this for a second.
Not theses 50% changes.
No way.
n
o way.
This is science, not religion. Believe in a fake deity, know that mechanical engineering is bettering your life.
Please show your source data. I don’t see any logic technical argument presented here, just a reiteration of the manufacturer’s claims, which is likely pseudoscience at best. The claims are very significant, so prove it… with actual data, generated under scientifically controlled conditions.
Agreed..how does this not cause hot spots causing pre ignition
Dont waste ur time looking at videos like these its bogus
Spam accounts with AI or computer generated BS for clicks
Diesel engine is compression based. Very different from gas engines. The dimples act as partial combustion chambers upon compression stroke. Upon exhaust stroke the air velocity gets an added boost due to the dimples and the airs ability to go from a pressure positive to exhausting the gasses.
@@sirseven3 physics may argue with your description…
I would need to see some trustworthy sources test these magical pistons to see if the stunning gains in efficiency you promise are real.
u forgot to mention 100% of car manufacturers have not - nor will ever use golf ball pistons.
@@randykubickThese would probably only be used on performance engines.
They also showed THC being released at 1:40 lol
check their website. independent testing results available
european cars have those piston, i goy a diesel Seat , and hasimilar pistons
Technology like this will help us back the EPA off diesel emissions restrictions.
Yes
The golf ball dent thing always leaves out the fact that the ball is spinning through the air
It's relative motion between the dimples and the air.
The pistons are moving up and down and the intake charge is swirling and compressing. = relative motion
@@hotrodray6802 its not relative motion. The direction and spin are relevant to a golf ball but doing this to a piston would not have the same effect given that you only get the effect with air rushing past the dimples not air hitting the dimples directly. Other companies have tried using the golf ball dimples but the aerodynamic increase was barely anything and in this case it could be a failure point and it just doesn't apply here
@ryanmattson: yes, the spin is important otherwise aircraft would have dimples all over them.
@@robbsharp9014 put some spinners on the top of the pistons that way you increase efficiency and also have ballin pistons /s
@@robbsharp9014 There are 7 grooves at the edge of the Combustion Chamber that work to fragment the Flame Front. The pressure is coming from the Squish Band as the piston is traveling past TDC. The following is a test of a single cylinder Diesel engine. The difference between RGP 6 and RGP 9 is the amount of piston grooves at the edge of the combustion chamber. I added a link in a second reply bc YT might not allow the outside link.
CONCLUSION
The following conclusions are drawn based on
the present investigation.
• The maximum increase in brake thermal
efficiency for RGP 9, RGP 6 compared to
normal piston was found to be 21.00%,
20.07% respectively.
• The reduction in the brake specific fuel
consumption for RGP6, RGP 9 compared
to normal piston was found to be 16.28%,
20.01% respectively.
• The maximum increase in Volumetric
efficiency for RGP 9, RGP 6 compared to
normal piston was found to be 32.48%,
17.49% respectively.
• The exhaust gas temperatures are
minimized for RGP 9, RGP 6 as compared
to normal piston was found to be 12.12%,
8.13% respectively.
• The carbon monoxide emissions for RGP
9, RGP 6 are found to be reduced by 30%,
20% respectively.
From the above conclusions, the RGP 9
piston configuration can be suggested on
diesel engine compared with the other piston
configurations.
REFERENCE
what happens if they carbon up where the dimples don,t work or are not visible?
If an engine is running properly you don't get significant carbon build up.
@@Obamaistoast2012when you take not everyone looks after their investment 😢 it's honestly and makes no sense why buy something so expensive and not look after it
My thoughts exactly
Fuel consumpion reduced almost 50% in some constant speed machinery? I doubt that.
So let me get this straight, burn a half of fuel and still stock performance? What's the thermal efficiency of that kind of engine? Almost 100%? Really?
I'd believe when I see it.
Me thinks that you have a math problem. Rethink your numbers.
Perfect question.
Funny how fuel consumption in their test 5.9 cummins resulted in 3.2% fuel savings, but they claim 50% savings on "constant speed machinery". Wouldn't you lead citing that test over the measly 3.2% savings.
the emissions reductions are profound. as thats always an issue in diesel engines.. however, honda made a diesel engine that gets 70mpg and doesn't need eurea injection to meet emisions standards.. not available in N.A. markets..
european cars have those pistons, they are 10% more efficient
these are huge numbers to be claiming from a few holes in the piston jeez
Exactly, so why are t these put in production now ? ? These so called improvements seem way to exaggerated. Pie in the sky ? ? Talk is cheap , walk the walk & put these in production for the average consumer. WTF 👍🤛⚾️
@@bobmariano3731 Nice round numbers like 20%, 40%, 50% are always signs of marketing lies.
This video doesn't talk about all the pieces. Pistons are also ceramic coated and a gapless 2nd ring is used. I would thing that half of these benefits are from that alone.
Did no-one notice at 1:37, Diesel Engines💭 THC😂😂❤
it had me tripping
yea got me too its smokng weed and doing nitro hits and pm cold meds that one hell of a engine
Snoop's always loved diesels!
Saw it
Total HydroCarbons
Real or not, R&D for something seemingly as simple as this is awesome. Taking technology from other sources and applying it to something new is fundamental.
More improvements that are been made to ICE engines the better the future for them
Now I can die in peace. You just taught me why those craters are put on the golf balls.
These would only seem to work well with diesel. A Heron head gasoline motor with the dish in the piston and a high squish I could see cause detonation issues from hot spots on the dimples when the mixture is compressed, it could get squished into the dimples and not towards the inner part of the chamber for ignition. Engines with the combustion chamber in the piston do interest me though, it's very interesting and I think a lot more could be done with that design.
Thats why a beat up engine runs the smoothest right before it blows up.
What do you mean
All numbers are too high imo. But diesels should profit from it to a degree. Swirl is very positive for diesels and hotspots dont really matter with no knock chance.
Would this piston concept operate in an Achates opposed-piston Diesel engine? The combustion space in an opposed piston engine is contained between the tops of two pistons, so it would seem that this combustion control would strongly affect the efficiency of an opposed piston Diesel.
The answer is yes…the Germans had a very similar design in WW2 for their opposed piston aviation engines …this concept is nothing new and it only has applications in sleeve valve or opposed piston engines
Sounds too good to be true so it probably is.
Dimples like that would possibly be beneficial, in having an effectively larger surface area to the piston head, and might help somewhat for the turbulation and scavenging. However the inlet/outlet geometries are still the truly deciding factors when it comes to that, and I think I can foresee some problems with compression and manufacturing from that head design. So yeah. And the moment they were like "up to 80%" I was... yeah.
Here's a smarter solution which might give something of the same advantages, but without the same engineering problems; Spherical chambering, from a spheroid formed by both the cylinder top and the piston head; You make the piston conical outside of the concaved-out center so that it gives a very definitive compression squeeze, to account for the concaveness. Would make for a far more idealized combustion volume than a flat disc, for both explosion/burn consistency, better pressure dispersion and temperature dispersal.
Lel. Now have fun trying to design a valve setup that works with that.
@@retiredbore378 True, on the one technical end; On the other end, if consequently you improve heat dissipation and homologation throughout the actual metal, and you can more ideally match detonation and propagation, then you win all of that back and then some through being able to use closer tolerances and better explosion matching.
@@SakhmeovSARZHERFLURGERFLARRBZHSHAR???
I wouldn't mind trying these out on my 2500 sprinter.
We all know the most efficient diesel engine is the opposed piston variety. Something like the Fairbanks Morris or the Junkers Jumo. Would be stellar all around for a Hybrid diesel drive train. To bad their is not a radioactive catalyst that simply makes tons of gaseous hydrogen or some other from of Methane/ Natural gas etc.
Giving us a link to the source
@@flodurpups9846 . . . look up Deltic Diesel.
The NAVY ORM - S0RMM - Fairbanks [NAV PUB ] Morris @@flodurpups9846
Doxford weren't very reliable
They should dimple the cylinder walls too the help with swirling the air.
ITS JUST A JOKE 😅
LoL... 😂
Lay down a wicked cross-hatch !!
european diesel cars have those pistons they are 10 % more efficient
but they dont use thsoe nonsese dimples.
To everyone here calling “bs”, you are wrong.
It is possible, but you are missing something he didn’t mention in this video because he didn’t recognize it’s importance. Watch the video again and note the rings. They are Total Seal Gapless. Those alone keep the oil clean, improve efficiency and power.
If I had a worn out diesel, I'd try them out
If those numbers are real then the cost of those pistons should be very pricey! It's hard to imagine that this change makes such significant improvements in all areas. 50% better fuel economy? Come on.
2:06 They said 20 %?
3:07 50%
2% not even that. Maybe 0,5%
They are 4,000 dollars, Stock pistons are 600.
@@russellaustin4988 WOW! youd have to keep and drive the thing for a long time to get that money back!
It would nice to see this new type of piston tested in a gasoline engine.
That's my shit too!
They have been - no improvement.
@@Motor-City-Mike If I was making a guess as to why this is true, Id say these wouldn't help a gas engine because gasoline is pretty much already maxed out with its btu's, but diesel fuel has a lot more power in the fuel and this piston design simply extracts more of the fuels potential instead of it going out the exhaust.
Been done for 40 years.
Engine masters guys have used them as well as used the Singh Grooves.
If they didn't think they helped torque they wouldn't have used them, right?
@@hotrodray6802 hey we justa buncha key board punchers, them guys are way more advanced than us!
It's not just the dimples, the geometry of the face of the piston is completely different, this geometry would create vortices inside the cylinder, probably better air fuel mixture hence more efficient combustion.
i hope that they test it on tractors soon
I call BS. Dimpled pistons have been tried before, and they just collect carbon in the holes, and pre-detonate because of the nature of the sharp facets at the top of the dimples to be way above the flash point of the fuel.
Engineering solutions turn into engineering problems eventually
Most of the time: fix one problem, create two more.
Gear head mantra: if it ain’t broke fix it till it is!
It’s trying to help the quench. Builders been doing this is drag cars for a long time. Not really a diesel only thing it’s about better mix and reduces the ping from to large gab.
I agree with most of the comments on this.
I believe a flat top piston, with a very shallow combustion area, produces a better twin swirl combustion chamber, by the angle and flow of the intake ports.
Let me overlap my camshafts, for better scavenging effects.
And I can show you a higher performance on the stock engine.
But if we're talking about diesels. They're over-sexed 2-stroke engines.(Same idea)
Just saying...........
Excellent Information
Well, then will dimples be an advantage to flight? Planes n other flying machines or props? 😊
Please post the piston companies websites and information. Wouldn't it be worthwhile on a old cummins to install new pistons and zero gap rings. How much more power Would it make?
1:25 they talk about a fuel air mixture but diesels don't mix the fuel like gasoline. Diesel is direct injection and injects fuel after the piston has compressed the air. No fuel enters the combustion chamber with the air when intake valves are open.
It still must get proper complete mixing to combust evenly, hence the need for swirl
1:40 what is THC doing in the air?
Snoop drove by!
Watched from Old Harbour Jamaica, very interesting.
Whatever happened to Sandia Lab's ducted injectors? That was some interesting diesel tech.
Doesn't this just mean that the turbulence at the piston head is lessened?
The whole piston is still making a vacuum in its chamber with every return, so turbulence doesn't feel like a major factor. Unless the turbulence is continuously fighting the gas intake, this won't do anything.
0:12 that's exactly what drag racers have been doing for 50+ years, porting it so the air goes straight in, knowing most of it goes towards the back of the valve.
Gas ported pistons for top ring only
Very short ring life and engines torn down usually under a hundred passes at 1/4 mile. There have been ported heads with dimpling and it was a failure. Fueled puddled and wrecked atomization and caused detonation through lean outs and destroys the engine. If the dimples carbon up how can they still work? Worth the testing only way to find out long term
@christopherduggan9227 where in the fuck did you hear that bud? We've bench tested ported and dimpled vs ported and polished head and atomization and air flow was significantly better on the dimpled heads. I'm talking over 90hp better on the engine dyno.
@@christopherduggan9227 Not so at all. Dimpling ports *PREVENTS* fuel puddling, that's the whole point.
@@christopherduggan9227 . . . says " If the dimples carbon up" . . . . In the intake runners ?? Have you ever looked inside an engine ??
Love those THC molecules in the animation 🤣
They were high as a kite when they made that
Ludicrous claims for an efficiency increase from minor machine work. And the price is high as well.
Damn hotter ignition coils or better plug wires are a joke.
They enough problems with the newer skinny skirt type pistons they're using in modern diesels. As a workshop mechanic I can honestly say I've never seen so many engines with split pistons as I do today.
hmm imma no diesel head but with these pistons would a modern diesel comply wif emissions w/o EGR, DPF n just DEF perhaps?
At around $650 a piston this doesn't work for most people. If all the numbers work out this would only be viable for fleet vehicles. This video also doesn't mention that they are ceramic coated and use a gapless 2nd ring. That ring probably makes the biggest difference on some of those numbers by reducing blow. That alone keeps the oil cleaner, more fuel in the combustion chamber.
08/07/2023 Hello Look Auto. Does this manufacturer offer these pistons for gasoline engines? I have watched other videos about diesel engine remanufacturing using whatever they are called deep cone like pistons without the demples. I would like more mathematical engineering data. I would think that this type of piston would not have the factory spec compression ratios. I have seen some data or bragging about the use in racing engines. I do not know about the authentic source of other videos. Thanks for the video. Don
The dimples will fill with carbon over time and pre-ignition/knock will destroy the surface.
You really don't want a rough surface with grooves and such when we talking about internal combustion engines. We see carbon build up in the most expensive perfectly fine materials with catastrophic effects on high performance engines.
This would work on areas that air is clean ( throttle bodies ,intake manifolds and cylinder head porting)
It makes a huge improvement on golf balls. I could see it having potential to work here.
We need to look into fuel-injected two-stroke engines.
A power stroke per crankshaft revolution is where the torque is generated, particularly since manufacturer are making smaller displacement engines.
No valvetrain enertia.
Crankcase gases burned next power cycle, PCV system basically maintenance free.
Go back to heatsinks around cylinder heads, no poisonous radiator fluid to kill your doggos.
Magneto ignition electonically advanced and retard.
.....
I mean we can I like the two stroke idea but we really need to bring back the Detroit 71 series and do some refining on it but those things would grab and go and they sound great when they scream.
Turbulent flow is known to improve air fuel mixture but not to this extent. The depression on the cylinder creates more volume in the chamber. But...
If these dimples would reduce fuel consumption by 50 %, every car manufacturer would have them already. They have been researching how to make an economical engine a lot longer than these guys and have probably simulated or tested just about every "piston shape" under the sun.
If it seems too good to be true, it is!
For those that can't believe it's possible.
Many people have made higher efficiency engines over the years.
Gas or diesel.
In gasoline especially with computers today it doesn't burn efficiently.
Actually it's made to waste, just to keep the catalytic working all the time.
So just that waste, not to mention why they do the intentional waste.
Because it wasn't burning off all the fuel to begin with.
So they waste more to get the catalytic to burn it off so there is cleaner emissions.
Check out the world record Ford opal.
That's an actual Guinness book of world record.
Many other examples.
That one was vapor deposition.
Ok, so the actual efficiency increase was 3.2% in testing with real world diesel pickup engines. Still, with more power output, if people could get keep their foot out of it, it would further increase efficiency, i.e., less pedal for the same work.
In real world circumstance you won't notice those 3,2% fuel savings, because many people will drive more aggressively when having more torque and power.
It doesn't matter. Look at what the EPA did to VW. VW produced diesel engines that had very good fuel efficiency. And, because they used so little fuel, they were very clean. This created a HUGE problem for the EPA. People were starting to ask why we would need to switch to electric cars when diesels caused so little pollution -- less pollution than the EVs if you looked at all pollution sources throughout the life of the car. The EPA wants to do away with internal combustion engines for the plebes so that we can be easier to control. So they attacked VW (and threatened other car manufacturers who produced clean and efficient diesel cars.) That's why VW doesn't sell diesels in the US anymore -- even though people would love to buy them. And it's why this invention will never get used.
These dimples probably have a greater impact on engines with large bores and lower rpm's which explains why they chose a diesel engine to try them on.
Actually the higher the velocity the increase in effect of reduced aerodynamic drag against the swirl
Send a set of these to Garage 54 for testing . You will get an unbiased evaluation by auto experts... 😅😅😅
Watch the fuel saving the MythBusters achieved when they covered a car with dimples. They were both shocked, since it was about 10%. Think if they could do that with 18 wheelers. But the interior space would be a problem, since you couldn't make the outside wider & standard stuff would no longer fit inside a narrower interior.
Definitely something to consider for aircraft bodies...❤
The latest bugatti also uses dimples in a small part of its air scoop.
@@pauldatche8410 How are you going to create these 'dimples' in aircraft? The skins are thin and the dimple much deeper than the skin is thick which would compromise the strength or add weight...both undesirable. If these pistons actually do provide any improvements it's more from the coating and less from the dimples which have been tried on and off for 40+ years now. Mostly they're not worth the bother of creating them but for sure a thermal barrier coating on the piston does improve performance...but again it must improve things enough to be worth doing....and the fact that manufacturers who are desperate to meet emissions and efficiency targets are not flocking to use this technology should be a bit of an indication of how good it is.
May I suggest you get onto their website and look at their videos etc.
As a mechanic of more than forty years experience my impression is that these people are the real deal.
The cool part about that episode was the fact that the clay added weight to the car making it heavier and yet it still gained efficiency
My thermodynamics is a little rusty, but wouldn't "combustion occurring at a lower temperature" reduce efficiency? IIRC the efficiency of an engine is directly proportional to the difference in temperature between the inside and outsite.
That's not quite what they mean. Because the combustion is supposedly more efficient (by which they are suggesting it happens more quickly and completely) which probably means it happens faster, then less fuel is needed, so less overall heat is produced
anyone see the thc flying up around 1:35 😂
the maintenance to keep them clean tho ,( great discovery ) but i dont see this getting mass produced
I would like to see more independant test. If it's good then it's good. Truckers are being hammered with fuel prices. $ 1000.00 to fuel up is rediculous.
Natural gas engines should work good on those right
Is there some reason that gas engines wouldn't also benefit from these pistons?
i call BS.
what would be possible if you combine this piston with the Innegine and plasma igntion?
I’m working on a new design fuel system for internal combustion engines wherein an engine will run on manure from politicians.
Why would Volvo invest time money and effort into a piston when they declared on national TV that they are going all electric?
In the case of the dimples at the cylinder head inlet, for example, they do not improve the aerodynamics of the incoming air, they only serve to generate turbulence and create a more homogeneous mixture of air and fuel admitted into the cylinder... placing them on the piston does not the slightest sense! in the golf ball, it rotates in the air, and this minimizes the effects of drag... but if it were applicable to objects that don't rotate, formula 1 cars would be full of dimples, including ferraris and lamborghinis!
Dimpling is also done to intakes because if boundary layer air
Detrimental emissions 😂😂😂
Fun fact: Trees require CO2 in order to produce the oxygen we all need to survive! The real effect of a greenhouse is a rapid plant development and not a rapid plant death as all these pseudoscientists would make you believe. But I have to admit one thing, it's fun watching people going absolutely insane about non-existent world issues while simultaneously being absolutely oblivious to the real ones 😅
It's also cooler and more humid under trees compared to in a field.
Let's clear cut more land
Did i see THC in the compound graphic @ 1:35 ?
They need to put these pistons in opposed piston engines
Why are there THC molecules in the animation?
If it is too good to be true it probably is
That's remarkable, but probably overstating the resultss. It's a pity that it's too late. Still, in the swansong of IC Engines, it will provide useful improvements in efficiency and emissions.
Yeah, it’ll be the longest “swan song” in history. EVs do nothing to improve the environment and come at horrendous costs (child labor for materials, huge dumps for used hazardous materials, ya da ya da… I know, “but they’re gonna save the world, eventually). Get back to me in 20 years, my bet is that the transition will STILL be 20 years away (as always).
@@ehb403 fake news.
@@JimBronson as i said, 20 years check back here…
Fun fact some steam engines can achieve 98% thermal efficiency vs 4stroke ice 25%
@@matthewfredrickmfkrz1934 I believe it was Howard Hughes who eloquently pointed out the problem with steam using a well aimed hammer. Also, ICEs can reach much higher than 25% with proper investment (my own developments are predicted to reach about 40% but funding at the federal level is geared to battery development and other forms of transportation, like trains; I’ve applied and D.O.E. and N.S.F. won’t even review the application). Yes, the fuel efficiency of existing ICEs is too low, but that doesn’t preclude improvement (and no, I’m not going to just tell you what I’ve put 10 years of effort into). Also, there are even more pressing contributions to greenhouse gas emissions than cars but the bottom line is that EVs will NEVER contribute to the solution because they are at least as bad as ICE for lifetime carbon emissions.
Anytime you cut down a piston or the heads the compression loss means less horsepower and less torque.
Yeah I call 100% BS on the economy claims
Every little bit helps...😍🤩🥰
The explanation about the golf ball and applying that to airflow on the cylinder and related heat is wrong and backwards. Most likely lies to protect the patents.
The dimples on a golf ball promote shear using turbulence at the ball's "widest" part thru the wind, not turbulence behind the ball. This upsets laminar flow around the ball which would cause unwanted drag. 1:20 "allowing fuel-air to adhere to the cylinder wall while also reducing pressure" . . . on a Diesel . . . near the top of the compression stroke . . . where the fuel is sprayed in from the top-center . . . . !!
This would be awesome for aircraft engines...
those dimples would be a stress point and the piston head will crack
Why don't you drill the holes inside?
-50% consumption by +5% power = magic....
Power of air, seems to have a legit webdite though old, and an address in Vegas. Maybe?
Source?
Then, if i open my old aspirated vw 1.6 diesel 1gen, take the pistons out, make light rounded holes with a drill on surface top of cylinder, my car thats do 18~20km/L will go all way to 30km/L? XD
What about gas engines? Sorry not to sound like a hater but if these numbers were true every company that builds engines would make their own, one way or another
please for subtitles in Czech language
Show a Dyno chart. 15% in power is a decent increase. Building race engines things like that dnt gain a lot of any power. So to make that in an engine that's not that dnt have as high a cylinder pressure dnt sound accurate. Just some more internet yadda yadda
Between ducted injectors, opposed cylinder 2 strokes and these dimpled pistons, may extend the life of piston engines. Electric vehicles have their place. But an electric drive, piston powered generator vehicle is likely to be the preferred drivetrain in the near future.
*This piston will be used in F1 cars*
If this was true that this pistons really make more fuel efficient than they wouldn't allow us to know about this because of greed gets in the way. I have to literally install these in my truck or car to see if this is actually accurate
Is this true? If so, can you buy them for your engine? Which engines?
lol golf ball dents won’t change 30% heat loss thru cylinder walls or 30% loss thru exhaust or 20% mechanical loss. Turbulence and complete combustion is not the main efficiency issue.
Game changing would be complete vaporization of the fuel before it enters the combustion chamber. Even if you could do so, the difference between ICE & electric is no comparison. Electric is so much more efficient that it makes ICE obsolete.
What a load bollocks. Just one question. Where about’s is the piston when the fuel and air ignite. At the bottom or the top.
Why these improvements haven’t been put in place before ? They didn’t give a fuck about efficiency and fuel cost ! Now that they see they are about to loose they are desperate. Electrics motors are so efficient compare to combustion engines and they have less moving parts therefore fewer risk of breaking.
This is nice
Cool story