Lasers as Spark Plugs

Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting!
01.gif


BTW, might want to make it clear when you're quoting from the article.
wink.gif
 
Let me see if I can follow the progression

1) dollar a plug, few bucks for wires, rotor and cap
2) multi-dollar for a plug, many many dollars for multi coil-on-plug
3) gazillion-dollar for laser, trillion dollars for the ckt to drive the laser

:)
 
Detonation now a days is pretty much a thing of the past. With Computerization of the car, with OBD II and beyond, with Direct Fuel Injection amongst other "improvements" makes this "laser" theory cool, but not really needed. The Laser technology will take DEACADES to get to the price that any manufacturer would ever put it in a car. Maybe Begatti will be the first haha.

Spark Plugs are cheap, and last about as long as the car before its falling apart anyway. I don't see a real demand for this technology. BUT it is cool.

Jeff
 
Last edited:
Some american groups have been working on this for almost 10 years now. I think one of the major amercian companies is about to build a prototype for stress testing.
 
They'd have to increase efficiency by a good amount to be worthwhile. Even pocket laser pointers are $5 - $10, and these would have to be (I'm guessing) at least 1000x more powerful to initiate combustion.

Neat, but I wouldn't go buying their stock just yet.
 
Very early engines had actual flames that were admitted to the cylinder by gates to initiate combustion.

Then the flame in a tube .

No wonder the diesel was invented about that time! Forget that gas ignition nonsense!

So I see the lasers as having excellent potential.
Keeping the lens[es] clean is going to be tough!
 
Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Keeping the lens[es] clean is going to be tough!

Agreed. I would be fascinated to know what's being investigated to solve that problem.
 
there appear to be some misconceptions about lasers. I hope those that aren't familiar with them will go out and do some reading. The technology has more merit to it than just a potential efficiency increase.

For the record, "laser pointers" are not true "lasers" and should not be classified as a laser.
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc
For the record, "laser pointers" are not true "lasers" and should not be classified as a laser.

Care to explain why not?
 
Spatial and temporal coherence? Check!

What else would you call a thing that produces laser light? Just because it's not He & Ne in a glass tube doesn't mean it's not a "true laser". There's more than one way to Stimulate the Emission of that kind of Radiation.
wink.gif
 
I don't understand just how this would be very effective. Lasers have to make someTHING hot. Just because they are focused doesn't mean they have anything of any substance to make hot at the point on which they focus. Furthermore, just because they converge at a point doesn't mean the beam doesn't continue on farther in a straight line and pit your cylinder walls, piston crowns etc...

A spark is itself hot. I believe any molecules of matter in the spark are technically plasma, are they not? Quite efficient for igniting a secondary explosion and they don't require any additional material other than the gases between the contacts.
 
Careful about that 40% increase...it probably means 40% of 25%, and is optimistic at that.

My (former) steam turbines are 35-40%, and the travelling blade salesmen were offering 0.5-3.5% efficiency improvement. When asked was that absolute or relative, they made a phone call and came back, "oh relative"...0.2% to 1% improvement basically, when measuring accuracy is lucky to be 0.5%
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top