Hope everyone's having an excellent day! What do you all think about this style engine versus Nissan's VC Turbo? Thanks for watching and thank to Skillshare for sponsoring! First 500 to sign up get 2 free months! skl.sh/engineeringexplained2
One of the few things I noticed is that Nissan’s engine will have almost no secondary piston imbalance in an inline 4 configuration while god knows how many balance shafts will need to go into this GM variable compression motor.
@Shewasa Fosho easier said than done. Gasoline is not a single chemical. It has multiple vapor pressures. The only way to introduce it as a gas is with heat. This is dangerous and will cause back firing, knock and preignition. It will also degrade and leave a varnish buildup where you heat it up.
Looking at the 3rd example. Why don't they close the intake valve before bottom dead center? You should end up with a drop in pressure compared to a normal cycle so the compression should be less, except you're not dumping fuel and turbulent air back into the intake. Am I not understanding something or is this already being done and it's just not enough? Could even run forced induction with it.
@@sijonda your not misunderstanding. Variable valve timing does the same in a different way. This just does it without pumping air/fuel back into the intake and without the unnecessary extra motion of the piston. Edit. Reread your post. Closing the intake early is something Volkswagen does i believe. I believe EE has a video on it.
@@Director1456 And I am imagine where will the main drive shaft be placed. It moves, left and right, and sometimes, up and down. So my guess, the main drive shaft will move too? Is it a little risky to move rotating shaft in a small confined place with lots of vibration?
Pretty much it'll be EVERYWHERE for the crankshaft. Heh. In serious note though, would the crankshaft be moving left and right, or fixed at one spot like the one in the video, where it's rotated by.. an electric motor?? Also, you mean crankshaft, right, Kevin? The driveshaft is what comes after the differentials.
@@Director1456 Oh yeah.. after a bit research (googling), it is called crankshaft... Sorrym English is not my first language. I think there is a time when he explains in the video that it will be move left and right
Their cars are much better than what they used to be. Also, many of their old trucks and expensive cars(corvette, 2500, etc.) were known to be really reliable and work to this day
@@BadAssEngineering I own 20NET (B207) it has over 260 thousand km on the clock and apart from changing ignition coils at 250 tkm and regular oil service I do nothing and it runs strong. A month ago I've had the crankshaft bushings inspected and they look like new so I think I can recommend the engine :)
So based on the illustration, the compression ratio is altered by a saw blade or hairball which can be adjusted by an electric toothbrush. Fascinating...
GM already acquired a VC engine design when they bought SAAB. I really liked SAAB's SVC engine design since it moves the entire head up or down with an actuator. Unfortunately, this points to GM never bringing this to market anyway and instead using the patent to block out competitors.
Worrying about valves opening and closing with independent control wasn't bad enough...now, where exactly is our crankshaft's position...hmmm. I can't wait to throw a pressure transducer into something like this! So much to be learned. Amazing explanation man. Bring on the new tech! ~Mike
Good point, in theory with 2 cylinder pairs phased 180 degrees apart in an inline 4, vibrations should all be cancelled out, so it shouldn't need balancing shafts and can save weight. I am curious what the real world efficiency would be over a regular miller cycle engine.
@@mattlimberg5763 Wait... I forgot for a moment you can put more cylinder on engine XD The main drive shaft will move up-down-left-right, how can every piston follow the movement? Because in 1 cycle the main drive shaft will be in 4 different position, by adding 1 more piston, the shaft will be tilted by 180 degree... I still can't imagine it... Maybe I need an animation with all 4 pistons
Great video as always. One has to wonder what the reliability of this system will be as well as the out of warranty repair costs compared to the efficiency of the system. Traditional engines carry huge repair costs as it is.
God explanation - thanks. For GM though, my guess is that it is too little too late with EV's coming like a freight train. Maybe they should've put that effort into improving EV batteries, electronics or motors?
@@fidelcatsro6948 The more important metric is price per unit of generation capacity....which is already lower than coal. All efficiency does it make panels smaller...which could make panels cheaper (or it could entail more exotic materials or complicated manufacturing which give the opposite result)
What could go wrong? The impala that can deactivate pistons flopped; both versions. The North star engine was a disaster and the EcoTec engine has class actions against it. GM is on a roll!
If you want to pick on flaws ' we could do that with every manufacturer. Example Toyota tried to kill peoplr with un intended acceleration. Tundra is a sales disaster, bad transmission broken cam and flimsy chassis and V6 engine were subjects of law suit because the clogged up and broke.
I'm sure the design will be tighter with shorter linkages and all, but this thing as presented looks to be doomed to frequent catastrophic failure, or a low RPM life.
The added linkages has me worried, but I won't presume that I'm smarter than the engineers working on things like this. But at the moment it's, AFAIK, just theoretical. So until we know someone is actually working on implementing this in a production engine I'm not concerned about the possible failure modes.
I agree. I also can't imagine it making particularly large torque numbers with an offset crankshaft where the downstroke of the piston pushes a lever sideways on the crank. Transferring power directions is parasitic loss and also stress points
I am really excited to see these engines make it to mass market. Just imagine having something like this and a Cam-less engine with individually controlled Valves as well. Variable compression ratio with Forced induction and full valve control. I just get all tingly inside thinking about it.
My Mind is boggled! I had never heard of this. I was never a mechanic but I know how to bend a wrench. One of the most incredible things I had heard of a few years ago was variable valve timing. I have enormous respect for my Buick Regal Turbo engine. 260HP at 240 Ft/lbs of torque out of a two-liter bottle!
Not worth it... can be one of the best in the business... and you're worth the same value as the lower level guys... by EVERY shop out there. "The guys with the money, will always be 'smarter' than you" General overview of "the trade", from the eyes of a 20+ year double master technician. It's the same everywhere on the planet.
Any idea of the improvement in fuel efficiency and power? Also, from the engineering POV, could you point out: 1. How many moving parts are involved in the design. 2. Given the additional complexity, what are your thoughts regarding reliability and friction. Excellent video, very clear and simple to understand. Very thorough, starting from the basic piston design, to the improvements from the Atkinson design, to GM's innovation.
What most people don’t know is that Saab had a 1.6 Inline 5 with variable compression back in like 2000. The cylinder head would tilt to change the size of the chamber and go from like 8:1-14:1. It was rudimentary compared to the newer tech, but it worked.
I don't see what the benefit would be over the modern Atkinson cycle though? It just appears to be something else that could go wrong? Isn't it simply adjusting the full throw of the piston equivalent to closing the valve at around top dead centre with a load of extra complication?
Have a look at Gomecsys GoEngine VCR technology. It's (older but) a much more elegant solution (than what GM are proposing) to achieve variable compression ratio and an over-expanded engine/power cycle. Gomecsys' VCR system used ring gears set inside the big-end that rotated around the crankshaft to offset conrod-crankshaft journal centreline distances; to achieve VCR and an increased power stroke. Their system provided a 20% longer expansion stroke than the compression stroke, which yielded greater combustion force applied to the piston; which, in turn, enhances efficiency/power. Since Gomecsys' system uses ring gears that rotate around the crankshaft it avoided the clunky design issues (and vibration/losses) that are associated with multiple reciprocating levers and conrod like assemblies moving in too/fro reverse linear forms; like the GM system. Pro drive had a similar system years ago too, and (if my memory serves me well) either that or a version of the above-mentioned Gomecsys' VCR system was used in a prototype F1 car and successfully tested at extremely high crankshaft speeds and power outputs. My bet is that licensing the Gomecsys' system (or 1 like it) is simply too expensive for GM.
OK, but it still reciprocates and has a variable and minimal leverage. I have one patent granted and another pending on I.C. engines. The patent pending is for a CONSTANT VELOCITY, constant leverage, toroidal design with around 3 times the leverage of a reciprocating engine of the same bore. It employs a true Atkinson Cycle with a unique and ideal solution to the usual compromises found in toroidal engine configurations. A turbo charger may be used as needed to bring my design back out of Atkinson Cycle to effectively run Otto Cycle combustion for maximum power. I've been working on the design for around five years. I'll have it up on the net in a month or so. I can forward it to you at that time if you like. I think you'll find it very interesting. Thank you for the excellent video on this particular GM patent!
hi jayson. may i ask the pros and cons of deleting an egr system in diesel engine, theres plenty of vids out there but your explanations is the only one i trust. thank you
@@sleeptyper yeah that's a common issue on those engines I believe they were an Opal design or at least the Germans had a hand in designing the engine and GM produced it basically the oil pump was variable and at low idle it didn't deliver enough oil pressure to key parts of the engine
Haven't you wondered why crankshafts have a certain size? Haven't you wondered why they don't make the bearing surfaces of crankshafts thinner? Have you looked at the reliability of engines where they did do that? Do you think this many links is gonna last? And now take into consideration that the conrod is not making a smooth motion but its getting thrown left and right. Every link in this mechanism has it's own inertia, and every link gets pushed back and forth by the other links, the slop adds up, the banging of the conrods changing direction adds up.
I can think of a few titles for this video that would be more accurate: "GM's Next Class Action Lawsuit" "How GM is Going To Make Your Life More Expensive Than it Already is" "Another Reason Besides the Bailout to Never Buy Another GM Product" "GM: Taking Another Step Towards Their Next Bailout"
All things considered, I think it has potential to actually simplify engines in the long run. Currently we're seeing things like variable valve timing with multiple cams, solenoids, in some cases hydraulic actuators depending on design. This is required for the more modern Atkinson Cycle and helps to optimize the traditional 4 stroke design as engine speed varies. If the new GM mechanism is able to capture that excess exhaust energy and put it to the crankshaft, then there wouldn't be as much energy left over in the exhaust, so in turn you'd see less benefit from having overlap, or both intake and exhaust valves open at the same time. You'd control this overlap with the VVT design since we all know excessive overlap at idle causes the traditional choppy idle that is so often craved in hot rods but ultimately results in poor low end performance. Thus they may be able to revert to a more traditional non VVT design since the optimization would occur in the bottom end rather than the top end of the engine. All I know is this design is going to be one heck of a balancing act especially with a turbocharger. If you don't leave enough energy in the exhaust, the engine will have to work to drive the turbo as it pushes the piston back up, and hence maybe a supercharger would be just as good of an option for forced induction. Let's see if they make it to production, and I'll probably still stick with the old International 7.3 engine...
Thank you Jason! Only suggestion I have on the diagram is for the stationary pivot point fill it in so you can more easily tell the difference. I understand but it took more thought.
Very nice explanation! I just don't see the point. The atkinson advantages can be taken advantage of with just the use of VVT. GM's new technology doesnt get use any closer to CAFE standards.
A VVT Atkinson cycle effectively reduces engine displacement reducing maximum power potential. Requiring reversion to the Otto cycle to achieve maximum power, negating any efficiency gains.
the atkinson cycle is very limited in scope. this and many others will get u from 1:7.5 to 1:18. so a 1.0 liter 4 cylinder can run at 40% to 60 % throttle and be very efficient and only making 30 to 60 BHP. almost getting nock because of the high compression. then when u want power it will just dump in 2 atmo of air and the lowest compression ratio will get u close to nock. wilst making the power of a 3.0 V6. u cant get this mutch variation by just controling the intake valve. and if u combine this with a electric engine (whitch euro7 standers will allmost sertenly make nesesery, like strat stop systems for euro5 and 6) u can get the combustion just perfect to maintain hi way speed and use electric for small acceleration only. and the big power for fun times and luging a dead battery on a very long trip.
The Prius engine is valve operated Atkins cycle, but uses a blower to make up lost displacement. Go figure. (The stinker may be engine displacement taxes. ). The valve operated Atkins simple, but may have other buggers. The GM linkage looks tough to balance, lubricate, heavy, and friction. But, When alternates considered, the linkage may be superior. Here is a chewable nugget: from thermodynamics compression ratio is meaningless, the correct metric is pressure ratio. A conventional engine’s compression ratio is constant no matter the throttle; the pressure ratio changes with the throttle. So how do you conjure an engine with variable power, max efficiency over a useable speed range? Not easy.
So wouldn't the torque number be limited to how strong the teeth on that worm gear are? Also I can't imagine the crankshaft has a very large offset between the main and rod bearings, so they would need higher rpm's to compensate, but would this engine be capable of higher rpm's with so many moving parts?
Possibly but must torque should be going to the crankshaft hopefully. I don't think this engine will necessarily have to spin faster for the same amount of torque, since it will be getting a power stroke with every 360° of crank rotation per cylinder whereas a regular engine would be one every 720°.
This should be titled: Engineers trying to milk every last bit of power and efficiency out of an ICE before electric cars take over! All this insane amount of complexity and an electric motor still blows it away in terms of efficiency and simplicity!!
And how long before the simplicity of electric gets overtaken with elaborate optimizations in electrical power space... engineers will never quit pushing the boundaries... :) fortunate for us :)
The packaging at least in the model shown looks like it would work really well in a vr6 style engine. One block with side by side pistons style. Great video. Always appreciate the logical explanations!
Why so complicated? Isn't it easyer to use electrical driven intake and exhaust valves? No camshaft and no timing belt or chain and no throttle is needed. Also you can tune an engine much easyer by changing the timing in the ECU. Why don't they use it in mass production?
Could be any of a number of things, mostly economics. Having to retool facilities, acquiring sources for material to machine, reliability of technologies, etc. . . , also it has to be profitable for it to happen in the main market. I believe koenegsig has what your looking for in the free valve system tho so the technology is coming.
This is the first time I watched one of your videos from beginning to end. I usually don't because i don't like watching you just write stuff on a white board. I actually enjoyed this video and I'm going to watch a few more now 🙂
Seems tailored to OHV designs. Wouldn't it just be easier to just start with a high compression DOHC setup and 1) Use cam-phasing on the intake valves to bleed-off and control intake compression, and 2) Use cam-phasing on the exhaust valves to bleed-off and control expansion/stroke? Late intake valve closing would reduce compression, and early exhaust valve opening would reduce expansion ratio. Then you could do the opposite, and the inverse of each other both ways. Then in high RPMs, with an ignition timing change, you could even phase the intake/exhaust cams towards each other for a tighter lobe separation angle, more valve overlap, and get a huge increase in power from intake-to-exhaust scavenging. All done with cam-phasing and ignition.
In item # 3: I’m pretty sure fuel is not pushed back out the intake valve mixed with air. An engine designed like this would surely be direct injected and deliver fuel right before ignition.
Mazda introduced an engine that uses a higher compression ratio but to be able to generate more power they control knock by spraying fuel in the compressing air/fuel mixture to cooler it and finally preventing knock, those engines appear to be very efficient in fuel economy and producing good power.
@@mihailpetrovici5044 Actually the world evolves better with people like me. Point to a SINGLE thing in my statement that is false. New technology is great and all but if you only understand the good and the things you like about it and ignore the bad and the things you don't like about it you aren't evolving, you are setting yourself up for failure.
Many thanks for the video, great explanation. Have you any views on whether this added complexity will affect reliability or are you taking a 'wait and see' approach?
Great explanation. Again. And Always. Now if we can just get all these super detailed engine configurations replaced by simple electric motors, with dramatically better braking energy recovery/re-use via something like hyper capacitors ... we can save a lot of white board pens. :P
So... GM prefers to make at more complicated engine (which in my opinion is way outdated) instead of going electric... Riiight... Great explnation Jason. As always...
thats the problem with good manufacturers. they make one.mistake and people will remember it. gm and chrysler makes so much crap that people dont even bother noticing it because they are just used to it.
I've always found it very interesting in that more power comes from lower compression ratios. I was under the impression that high compression = more power potential but with the knock and timing being an issue, as well as spontaneous combustion, I can see why lowering it would be better.
@@tyranneous Not as effiecient I guess, I don't know how close it comes. But I'd think it'd be a good compromise between efficiency, complexety and maintenance cost. This is presumining you run an overcompressed engine of course.
Ooooorrrrrr.... Just make a high-power electric motor that has just one moving part, and is more efficient than any internal combustion engine could possibly be...
not only more failure points, but also more rotation mass, worse response and higher center of gravity. despite all that, I still think it is a fascinating idea
Basically its a more fancy variable displacement engine. Im wondering how more efficient this is over cylinder deactivated engines. Especially when it comes to warranty work,and the extra amount of now crank timing marks along with your valve train timing marks. This will be very intresting,and another insurance that the internal combustion is not going anywhere fast lol. Great video
Woahhh it just like a " two stroke"😍 as it process the combustion with efficiency and power, love it, yet still a little bit confusing i wish "Enginnering Explain" have some animation videos. Well a great work again😍😍
We are not going to run out of fossil fuel. Everybody knows that cave men had at least three dinosaures as pets and they had babies too. Great presentation as usual Jason.
I dont really understand the geometry behind it, but it looks like with this design a parallel "v" engine could be possible. What I'm looking at specifically is how the crankshaft is offset (vertically) from the cylinder. So it might be possible to mirror it over the crankshaft to make 2 banks. Then it would be possible to make it have a single head like VWs VR engines (but not as funky with angled pistons on the head)
Let's assume the crankshaft is rotating at steady RPM. The piston movement is almost 2 times during exhaust stroke than any other stroke in this design thus it may have some issues related to excessive wear due to piston being thrown around at various intensities.
Sorry if I am just dense, but how does all of that turn into circular motion to eventually turn the wheels? I think I understand the cycle but where is the crank shaft or some-such. I love these videos because I do learn stuff.
Good presentation, thanks. I already understood the Atkinson cycle, which helped me understand your video. A controllable and variable Atkinson cycle seems to solve many problems, the physical mechanism is another challenge. I drive a hybrid with a modern version Atkinson, hence my knowledge of the cycle, thanks for your enhancement of my knowledge.
Hope everyone's having an excellent day! What do you all think about this style engine versus Nissan's VC Turbo? Thanks for watching and thank to Skillshare for sponsoring! First 500 to sign up get 2 free months! skl.sh/engineeringexplained2
One of the few things I noticed is that Nissan’s engine will have almost no secondary piston imbalance in an inline 4 configuration while god knows how many balance shafts will need to go into this GM variable compression motor.
@M F this still will use a computer and servo to control the worm gear, so no less complicated in that aspect.
@Shewasa Fosho easier said than done. Gasoline is not a single chemical. It has multiple vapor pressures. The only way to introduce it as a gas is with heat. This is dangerous and will cause back firing, knock and preignition. It will also degrade and leave a varnish buildup where you heat it up.
Looking at the 3rd example. Why don't they close the intake valve before bottom dead center? You should end up with a drop in pressure compared to a normal cycle so the compression should be less, except you're not dumping fuel and turbulent air back into the intake. Am I not understanding something or is this already being done and it's just not enough? Could even run forced induction with it.
@@sijonda your not misunderstanding. Variable valve timing does the same in a different way. This just does it without pumping air/fuel back into the intake and without the unnecessary extra motion of the piston.
Edit. Reread your post. Closing the intake early is something Volkswagen does i believe. I believe EE has a video on it.
Dude your drawings don't get enough credit. They're so helpful, especially for visual learners
Nissan/Infinity: We have the only overly complicated variable compression engine.
GM: Hold my beer...
Still less complicated than my relationship.
how is your right hand complicated?
say goodbye
boyfriend problems eh
adopt a cat instead..
LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Great explanation. So, more parts. More points for failure. Added complication.
Was gonna say the same thing!
You want simple and powerful, go Electric!
@@allthatjazz721 Completly agree. I think ICE engines are way outdated and oldfasion...
It's what they want
@@allthatjazz721 Amazing how many man-years of engineering go into minuscule improvements in efficiency of a nearly obsolete relic of days gone by.
It must be an absolute nightmare to calculate primary and secondary balance for this engine
Can't agree more. And pretty much for GM's way of the concept, I'm not sure where would you even place the crankshaft in the first place.
@@Guy_de_Loimbard In the scrap bin, I say.
@@Director1456 And I am imagine where will the main drive shaft be placed.
It moves, left and right, and sometimes, up and down.
So my guess, the main drive shaft will move too?
Is it a little risky to move rotating shaft in a small confined place with lots of vibration?
Pretty much it'll be EVERYWHERE for the crankshaft. Heh. In serious note though, would the crankshaft be moving left and right, or fixed at one spot like the one in the video, where it's rotated by.. an electric motor??
Also, you mean crankshaft, right, Kevin? The driveshaft is what comes after the differentials.
@@Director1456 Oh yeah.. after a bit research (googling), it is called crankshaft...
Sorrym English is not my first language.
I think there is a time when he explains in the video that it will be move left and right
Every Mechanic: “Can’t wait till this breaks so I can charge them $5,000.”
The bigger Whiteboard is much better. Thanks for all your great videos.
just imagine how rod bearing failures would sound like on this....
Now I wanna hear it
Looks like GM is gonna have to make it as cheap as possible so it is easier to sell engines to customers. Its the GM way.
That’s only if they make it out of the same metals as before. Hope they use really good quality metals so it will be just as reliable as before.
@@inthebeginning6895 GM doesn't know how to make a reliable vehicle any more so I wouldn't hold my breath
@GO AWAY But the 2.8's sound great?
At least the fiero ones do.
Oh boy I like the concept but don't trust Gm quality
Their cars are much better than what they used to be. Also, many of their old trucks and expensive cars(corvette, 2500, etc.) were known to be really reliable and work to this day
@@scarea2691 All of their small engine cars have been very poor quality. But if it has a v8 its probably solid.
The LS and LT Engines are among the best and most reliable Engines in History. I dont trust GM with 4 Cyl Turbo engines tho
V8’s are good. 305’s live long.
@@BadAssEngineering I own 20NET (B207) it has over 260 thousand km on the clock and apart from changing ignition coils at 250 tkm and regular oil service I do nothing and it runs strong. A month ago I've had the crankshaft bushings inspected and they look like new so I think I can recommend the engine :)
So based on the illustration, the compression ratio is altered by a saw blade or hairball which can be adjusted by an electric toothbrush. Fascinating...
Don't be silly. GM wouldn't spend money on an electric toothbrush.
man that was funny... worm gear could have been a worm too...
GM already acquired a VC engine design when they bought SAAB. I really liked SAAB's SVC engine design since it moves the entire head up or down with an actuator. Unfortunately, this points to GM never bringing this to market anyway and instead using the patent to block out competitors.
GM wants power and efficiency. But not reliability.
Is this better than Nissan's variable compression design?
Btw whats the difference in Design. Cant remeber that Video from Jason anymore
It’s only less reliable than a simpler engine IF all other variables are the same. Like material, and metals it’s made of
No. Its not.
Nissan/Infinity's system aren't reliable anyway...and this won't be better
Nissan and GM should partner up. They basically think the same, care very little about reliability.
I dont even trust GM with a regular engine. GM doing variable compression is freightening.
Well, Saab did it back in 2000 by tilting the entire cylinder head, thus changing the volume above the piston at TDC! Kinda neat.
Yes, because people buy mazdas for their engine reliability. /s
@@TheStevenRK I can't disagree.
@@EngineeringExplained Unfortunately GM totally ruined the Saab brand, causing them to shut down for good.
@@TheStevenRK Hahaha got him there!
Worrying about valves opening and closing with independent control wasn't bad enough...now, where exactly is our crankshaft's position...hmmm. I can't wait to throw a pressure transducer into something like this! So much to be learned. Amazing explanation man. Bring on the new tech! ~Mike
It looks like a great amount of force isn't directly transfered to the crank shaft... And how about vibrations?
Good point, in theory with 2 cylinder pairs phased 180 degrees apart in an inline 4, vibrations should all be cancelled out, so it shouldn't need balancing shafts and can save weight. I am curious what the real world efficiency would be over a regular miller cycle engine.
@@mattlimberg5763 Wait... I forgot for a moment you can put more cylinder on engine XD
The main drive shaft will move up-down-left-right, how can every piston follow the movement?
Because in 1 cycle the main drive shaft will be in 4 different position, by adding 1 more piston, the shaft will be tilted by 180 degree...
I still can't imagine it... Maybe I need an animation with all 4 pistons
Yay, I finally understand everything in an Engineering Explained video, and feel like I know more than the video.
Mechanic's Dream = Consumer's Nightmare
*engineer’s dream = mechanic’s and consumer’s nightmares
mechanic suicide rates will shoot up with such designs because they are going to be difficult to repair
Mechanics only know what currently exists.
*Engineers dream = PIA for mechanics, but they make more money = consumer takes it twice.
Only difficult to repair now. Just like it was when the first gas engine was made... something new is always hard to work on.. use some common sense.
I absolutely love your videos, great job and keep up the great work
Thanks Skylar, really appreciate you watching! :)
*_Reliability has left the chat_*
Recommendation: fill in the fixed purple circles to further accentuate that they are different from the black circles.
Great video as always. One has to wonder what the reliability of this system will be as well as the out of warranty repair costs compared to the efficiency of the system.
Traditional engines carry huge repair costs as it is.
He forgot to mention the worm drive and gear will be plastic. They'll proably repurpose the blend door motors from early 2000 GMs. Its gonna go great
Lmao
God explanation - thanks. For GM though, my guess is that it is too little too late with EV's coming like a freight train. Maybe they should've put that effort into improving EV batteries, electronics or motors?
or even improving efficiency of solar
@@fidelcatsro6948 The more important metric is price per unit of generation capacity....which is already lower than coal. All efficiency does it make panels smaller...which could make panels cheaper (or it could entail more exotic materials or complicated manufacturing which give the opposite result)
@@DT-dc4br that makes sense..
What could go wrong? The impala that can deactivate pistons flopped; both versions. The North star engine was a disaster and the EcoTec engine has class actions against it. GM is on a roll!
If you want to pick on flaws ' we could do that with every manufacturer. Example Toyota tried to kill peoplr with un intended acceleration. Tundra is a sales disaster, bad transmission broken cam and flimsy chassis and V6 engine were subjects of law suit because the clogged up and broke.
I'm sure the design will be tighter with shorter linkages and all, but this thing as presented looks to be doomed to frequent catastrophic failure, or a low RPM life.
The added linkages has me worried, but I won't presume that I'm smarter than the engineers working on things like this. But at the moment it's, AFAIK, just theoretical. So until we know someone is actually working on implementing this in a production engine I'm not concerned about the possible failure modes.
I agree. I also can't imagine it making particularly large torque numbers with an offset crankshaft where the downstroke of the piston pushes a lever sideways on the crank. Transferring power directions is parasitic loss and also stress points
I am really excited to see these engines make it to mass market. Just imagine having something like this and a Cam-less engine with individually controlled Valves as well. Variable compression ratio with Forced induction and full valve control. I just get all tingly inside thinking about it.
In typical GM fashion. Runs like
A symmetric
S troke
S ystem.
My Mind is boggled! I had never heard of this. I was never a mechanic but I know how to bend a wrench. One of the most incredible things I had heard of a few years ago was variable valve timing. I have enormous respect for my Buick Regal Turbo engine. 260HP at 240 Ft/lbs of torque out of a two-liter bottle!
Wait til you hear about the GR Corolla making 300 HP from a 1.6 liter 3 cylinder
Anyone here who needs a career path.... BE A MECHANIC. These things are gonna need help.
Not worth it... can be one of the best in the business... and you're worth the same value as the lower level guys... by EVERY shop out there. "The guys with the money, will always be 'smarter' than you"
General overview of "the trade", from the eyes of a 20+ year double master technician. It's the same everywhere on the planet.
Any idea of the improvement in fuel efficiency and power?
Also, from the engineering POV, could you point out:
1. How many moving parts are involved in the design.
2. Given the additional complexity, what are your thoughts regarding reliability and friction.
Excellent video, very clear and simple to understand. Very thorough, starting from the basic piston design, to the improvements from the Atkinson design, to GM's innovation.
"GM doesn't want to compromise on power and efficiency, they want both." How about reliability though?
They have JD Powah awahds for that.
@@joblo1978 I guess, if we're the ones doing the repairs :D
Reliability is bad for business, have to find cars from before they found this out, the time they had some decency basically.
What most people don’t know is that Saab had a 1.6 Inline 5 with variable compression back in like 2000. The cylinder head would tilt to change the size of the chamber and go from like 8:1-14:1. It was rudimentary compared to the newer tech, but it worked.
I don't see what the benefit would be over the modern Atkinson cycle though? It just appears to be something else that could go wrong? Isn't it simply adjusting the full throw of the piston equivalent to closing the valve at around top dead centre with a load of extra complication?
additional moving parts links on the already traditionally stressed conrod bearings
Agreed. I'd rather have a larger displacement atkinson engine.
Have a look at Gomecsys GoEngine VCR technology.
It's (older but) a much more elegant solution (than what GM are proposing) to achieve variable compression ratio and an over-expanded engine/power cycle.
Gomecsys' VCR system used ring gears set inside the big-end that rotated around the crankshaft to offset conrod-crankshaft journal centreline distances; to achieve VCR and an increased power stroke.
Their system provided a 20% longer expansion stroke than the compression stroke, which yielded greater combustion force applied to the piston; which, in turn, enhances efficiency/power.
Since Gomecsys' system uses ring gears that rotate around the crankshaft it avoided the clunky design issues (and vibration/losses) that are associated with multiple reciprocating levers and conrod like assemblies moving in too/fro reverse linear forms; like the GM system.
Pro drive had a similar system years ago too, and (if my memory serves me well) either that or a version of the above-mentioned Gomecsys' VCR system was used in a prototype F1 car and successfully tested at extremely high crankshaft speeds and power outputs.
My bet is that licensing the Gomecsys' system (or 1 like it) is simply too expensive for GM.
More moving parts can only be a good thing for engine longevity
Colin D no
@@allthatjazz721 think he was joking
ur ass ain't safe I was!
OK, but it still reciprocates and has a variable and minimal leverage. I have one patent granted and another pending on I.C. engines. The patent pending is for a CONSTANT VELOCITY, constant leverage, toroidal design with around 3 times the leverage of a reciprocating engine of the same bore. It employs a true Atkinson Cycle with a unique and ideal solution to the usual compromises found in toroidal engine configurations. A turbo charger may be used as needed to bring my design back out of Atkinson Cycle to effectively run Otto Cycle combustion for maximum power. I've been working on the design for around five years. I'll have it up on the net in a month or so. I can forward it to you at that time if you like. I think you'll find it very interesting. Thank you for the excellent video on this particular GM patent!
I hope GM gives at least 5 years factory warranty on those new engines.
If they don't.
they don't even trust in their own design.
Thanks for video 👍
Get a 5 year warranty, pay the vehicle off in 4 years, then sell it.
hi jayson. may i ask the pros and cons of deleting an egr system in diesel engine, theres plenty of vids out there but your explanations is the only one i trust. thank you
Con: you hurt the environment and your health by releasing more nox
I think GM knows a thing or two about unintentional Variable Compression Engines if you catch my drift
Lol yes, i just took off valve cover from a 2.2 gasoline Opel Astra H. It had stretched timing chain and popped over tooth.
@@sleeptyper yeah that's a common issue on those engines I believe they were an Opal design or at least the Germans had a hand in designing the engine and GM produced it basically the oil pump was variable and at low idle it didn't deliver enough oil pressure to key parts of the engine
Not sure with whom I’m more impressed with , the GM engineers or you for explaining this so we can understand 👍 lol
You cant use "Patent Review" and not clap with your hands a couple of times
The clap also helps sync audio for independent microphones. Most people do this off camera.
Patrick Clarke he was making a reference to Pewdiepie “Meme 👏🏽Review 👏🏽”
@@surgeonso4345 yeah, I'm tracking. I was saying that Pewds could be doing it to sync audio and kept it in as a prop.
Patrick Clarke you in the military? That’s the only time I hear the term “tracking” used that way.
Haven't you wondered why crankshafts have a certain size? Haven't you wondered why they don't make the bearing surfaces of crankshafts thinner? Have you looked at the reliability of engines where they did do that? Do you think this many links is gonna last? And now take into consideration that the conrod is not making a smooth motion but its getting thrown left and right. Every link in this mechanism has it's own inertia, and every link gets pushed back and forth by the other links, the slop adds up, the banging of the conrods changing direction adds up.
I can think of a few titles for this video that would be more accurate:
"GM's Next Class Action Lawsuit"
"How GM is Going To Make Your Life More Expensive Than it Already is"
"Another Reason Besides the Bailout to Never Buy Another GM Product"
"GM: Taking Another Step Towards Their Next Bailout"
All things considered, I think it has potential to actually simplify engines in the long run. Currently we're seeing things like variable valve timing with multiple cams, solenoids, in some cases hydraulic actuators depending on design. This is required for the more modern Atkinson Cycle and helps to optimize the traditional 4 stroke design as engine speed varies. If the new GM mechanism is able to capture that excess exhaust energy and put it to the crankshaft, then there wouldn't be as much energy left over in the exhaust, so in turn you'd see less benefit from having overlap, or both intake and exhaust valves open at the same time. You'd control this overlap with the VVT design since we all know excessive overlap at idle causes the traditional choppy idle that is so often craved in hot rods but ultimately results in poor low end performance. Thus they may be able to revert to a more traditional non VVT design since the optimization would occur in the bottom end rather than the top end of the engine. All I know is this design is going to be one heck of a balancing act especially with a turbocharger. If you don't leave enough energy in the exhaust, the engine will have to work to drive the turbo as it pushes the piston back up, and hence maybe a supercharger would be just as good of an option for forced induction. Let's see if they make it to production, and I'll probably still stick with the old International 7.3 engine...
According to you which is more efficient Mazda skyactiveX or GM VCE. Looking forward to your answer
What about Infiniti variable compression engine?
Wankel engineer: there are too many parts in 4 stroke...
GM: Hold my beer
Interesting...but Nissan has already brought a Variable Compression Engine to market. It all looks pretty to similar to that to me.
thought i'd seen this before. it was with linear actuators instead of wormgears if i remember
Yeah, i think Mercedes did something similar also
@@MC-Racing Saab Had 19 years ago a working concept variable compression engine. 1.6L and 225hp. Dont know If it Gott Into production
@@Nordlicht05 Never heard of it, but cool, and shows variable compression is nothing new :-)
@@Nordlicht05
And Saab was at the time a GM brand.
This can possibly be from that RnD.
Thank you Jason! Only suggestion I have on the diagram is for the stationary pivot point fill it in so you can more easily tell the difference. I understand but it took more thought.
Very nice explanation! I just don't see the point. The atkinson advantages can be taken advantage of with just the use of VVT. GM's new technology doesnt get use any closer to CAFE standards.
A VVT Atkinson cycle effectively reduces engine displacement reducing maximum power potential. Requiring reversion to the Otto cycle to achieve maximum power, negating any efficiency gains.
the atkinson cycle is very limited in scope.
this and many others will get u from 1:7.5 to 1:18.
so a 1.0 liter 4 cylinder can run at 40% to 60 % throttle and be very efficient and only making 30 to 60 BHP.
almost getting nock because of the high compression.
then when u want power it will just dump in 2 atmo of air and the lowest compression ratio will get u close to nock.
wilst making the power of a 3.0 V6.
u cant get this mutch variation by just controling the intake valve.
and if u combine this with a electric engine (whitch euro7 standers will allmost sertenly make nesesery, like strat stop systems for euro5 and 6) u can get the combustion just perfect to maintain hi way speed and use electric for small acceleration only.
and the big power for fun times and luging a dead battery on a very long trip.
The Prius engine is valve operated Atkins cycle, but uses a blower to make up lost displacement. Go figure. (The stinker may be engine displacement taxes. ). The valve operated Atkins simple, but may have other buggers. The GM linkage looks tough to
balance, lubricate, heavy, and friction. But, When alternates considered, the linkage may be superior.
Here is a chewable nugget: from thermodynamics compression ratio is meaningless, the correct metric is pressure ratio. A conventional engine’s compression ratio is constant no matter the throttle; the pressure ratio changes with the throttle. So how do you conjure an engine with variable power, max efficiency over a useable speed range? Not easy.
Great explanation of an Atkinson cycle engine! Thanks.
So wouldn't the torque number be limited to how strong the teeth on that worm gear are? Also I can't imagine the crankshaft has a very large offset between the main and rod bearings, so they would need higher rpm's to compensate, but would this engine be capable of higher rpm's with so many moving parts?
Possibly but must torque should be going to the crankshaft hopefully. I don't think this engine will necessarily have to spin faster for the same amount of torque, since it will be getting a power stroke with every 360° of crank rotation per cylinder whereas a regular engine would be one every 720°.
You sure are a great teacher! And take it from an Engineer that just learnt something today because of you.
This should be titled: Engineers trying to milk every last bit of power and efficiency out of an ICE before electric cars take over!
All this insane amount of complexity and an electric motor still blows it away in terms of efficiency and simplicity!!
And how long before the simplicity of electric gets overtaken with elaborate optimizations in electrical power space... engineers will never quit pushing the boundaries... :) fortunate for us :)
Man you're a great teacher. Thanks for breaking this down to make it so much easier to understand.
Not expecting this anytime soon. Mazda likely thought of it and discarded the idea.
This, will never go wrong. And if it unfortunately does it will be cheap and easy to repair.
SimononCanondale SuperdooperBikerider 🤣🤣🤣
100% chance of all these engines failing if GM makes them🤣
Yup GM at its finest
Aye people were super skeptical of Nissan's engine, I wouldn't want my wallet anywhere near GM's attempt at the same technology.
...GM literally has all the records for most reliable engines, fellas.
@@evilkillerwhale7078 Their larger engines specifically v8 are good, their smaller 4 cylinders though? Not even close.
Sounds like an American-hater. There's always "better" countries for people like you.
The packaging at least in the model shown looks like it would work really well in a vr6 style engine. One block with side by side pistons style. Great video. Always appreciate the logical explanations!
Why so complicated? Isn't it easyer to use electrical driven intake and exhaust valves? No camshaft and no timing belt or chain and no throttle is needed. Also you can tune an engine much easyer by changing the timing in the ECU. Why don't they use it in mass production?
Could be any of a number of things, mostly economics. Having to retool facilities, acquiring sources for material to machine, reliability of technologies, etc. . . , also it has to be profitable for it to happen in the main market. I believe koenegsig has what your looking for in the free valve system tho so the technology is coming.
Because american car companies are the retards of the automotive world.....
It's possible (F1 engines, Koenigsegg Freevalve) but expensive to produce. GMs ethos is one of cost reduction above all other things.
This is the first time I watched one of your videos from beginning to end. I usually don't because i don't like watching you just write stuff on a white board. I actually enjoyed this video and I'm going to watch a few more now 🙂
I'm sure it will be a very reliable system by GM. LOL Good video as always anyways.
Thank youuu so much sir. These lessons are immortal, taught us mechanics, geometry and combustion together.
They should fix their quality before testing new stuff
You should educate your ignorant ass before you make comments in public.
No one even asked them for more power, we just asked for an engine that actually starts more than half the time
Seems tailored to OHV designs. Wouldn't it just be easier to just start with a high compression DOHC setup and 1) Use cam-phasing on the intake valves to bleed-off and control intake compression, and 2) Use cam-phasing on the exhaust valves to bleed-off and control expansion/stroke?
Late intake valve closing would reduce compression, and early exhaust valve opening would reduce expansion ratio. Then you could do the opposite, and the inverse of each other both ways.
Then in high RPMs, with an ignition timing change, you could even phase the intake/exhaust cams towards each other for a tighter lobe separation angle, more valve overlap, and get a huge increase in power from intake-to-exhaust scavenging. All done with cam-phasing and ignition.
In item # 3: I’m pretty sure fuel is not pushed back out the intake valve mixed with air. An engine designed like this would surely be direct injected and deliver fuel right before ignition.
I don't know about this. It seems like they're just adding more points of failure.
Mazda introduced an engine that uses a higher compression ratio but to be able to generate more power they control knock by spraying fuel in the compressing air/fuel mixture to cooler it and finally preventing knock, those engines appear to be very efficient in fuel economy and producing good power.
It's probably still patented and GM's thinking box doesn't even have windows to look out of anymore.
More moving parts, more complicated design, more points of failure, more opportunities for failure.
The word doesn t evolve with people like you
@@mihailpetrovici5044 Actually the world evolves better with people like me. Point to a SINGLE thing in my statement that is false. New technology is great and all but if you only understand the good and the things you like about it and ignore the bad and the things you don't like about it you aren't evolving, you are setting yourself up for failure.
Many thanks for the video, great explanation. Have you any views on whether this added complexity will affect reliability or are you taking a 'wait and see' approach?
Great explanation. Again. And Always.
Now if we can just get all these super detailed engine configurations replaced by simple electric motors, with dramatically better braking energy recovery/re-use via something like hyper capacitors ... we can save a lot of white board pens. :P
So... GM prefers to make at more complicated engine (which in my opinion is way outdated) instead of going electric... Riiight...
Great explnation Jason. As always...
thats a lot of bearings for a GM product. i can already see the failures 😬
That's what I was thinking 🤦♂️ not to mention that's a lot of movement and rod angles.
the problem is that gm will be building it. if it was toyota or honda i would trust it
you mean Honda with its GDI oil dilution issues?
thats the problem with good manufacturers. they make one.mistake and people will remember it. gm and chrysler makes so much crap that people dont even bother noticing it because they are just used to it.
I've always found it very interesting in that more power comes from lower compression ratios. I was under the impression that high compression = more power potential but with the knock and timing being an issue, as well as spontaneous combustion, I can see why lowering it would be better.
Why wouldn't you just use VVT instead of variable compression? less moving parts and it's simpler
Edit: With an overcompressed engine.
valve timing vs compression ratio tho...
because they want exclusive patents...
You'd use both. VVT doesn't give you efficient variable compression.
exactly the effect would be the same?
@@tyranneous Not as effiecient I guess, I don't know how close it comes. But I'd think it'd be a good compromise between efficiency, complexety and maintenance cost. This is presumining you run an overcompressed engine of course.
This is the final boss for engine rebuilds
Ooooorrrrrr.... Just make a high-power electric motor that has just one moving part, and is more efficient than any internal combustion engine could possibly be...
not only more failure points, but also more rotation mass, worse response and higher center of gravity. despite all that, I still think it is a fascinating idea
I love how these armchair engineers think they know something you don't.
The more parts especially moving parts the greater the failure rate. THIS LOOKS LIKE A NIGHTMARE
And of course it'll still have pushrods and 2 valves per cylinder because GM.
Basically its a more fancy variable displacement engine. Im wondering how more efficient this is over cylinder deactivated engines. Especially when it comes to warranty work,and the extra amount of now crank timing marks along with your valve train timing marks. This will be very intresting,and another insurance that the internal combustion is not going anywhere fast lol. Great video
Or, well, you know... electricity?
For the right application it has a place. GM’s Northstar seems to come to mind on GM’s specialty Engine Evolutions.
This is all bad.. I'm a master tech of 15 years... I quit.
If you were a master tech you wouldn't be afraid to fix an engine.
@@theunconventionaldeal3879 nope... quit. Disaster ahead
They said the same thing for vvt, hei ignition, and a dozen other pieces of tech. I will make even more money because of the quitters.
Finally old man uploaded an explain video again
...in other news, electric cars are still the future.
You continue to blow my mind all the time!
Woahhh it just like a " two stroke"😍 as it process the combustion with efficiency and power, love it, yet still a little bit confusing i wish "Enginnering Explain" have some animation videos. Well a great work again😍😍
We are not going to run out of fossil fuel. Everybody knows that cave men had at least three dinosaures as pets and they had babies too. Great presentation as usual Jason.
I dont really understand the geometry behind it, but it looks like with this design a parallel "v" engine could be possible. What I'm looking at specifically is how the crankshaft is offset (vertically) from the cylinder.
So it might be possible to mirror it over the crankshaft to make 2 banks. Then it would be possible to make it have a single head like VWs VR engines (but not as funky with angled pistons on the head)
Let's assume the crankshaft is rotating at steady RPM. The piston movement is almost 2 times during exhaust stroke than any other stroke in this design thus it may have some issues related to excessive wear due to piston being thrown around at various intensities.
Your diagrams are so very clear!
Sorry if I am just dense, but how does all of that turn into circular motion to eventually turn the wheels? I think I understand the cycle but where is the crank shaft or some-such. I love these videos because I do learn stuff.
Good presentation, thanks. I already understood the Atkinson cycle, which helped me understand your video. A controllable and variable Atkinson cycle seems to solve many problems, the physical mechanism is another challenge.
I drive a hybrid with a modern version Atkinson, hence my knowledge of the cycle, thanks for your enhancement of my knowledge.
Great simplified description. I think I learned something. Keep up the great videos.
Back to the white board :) Can the next Ione be about the history of 4WS, from the way it was mechanically done, to today's SH-AWS and Porsche 4WS?
Jason for how complicated this is you explain this really well👍 Nice job man always love your video!!!
Would this create some agitation on the cylinder sidewalls and cause a blow by problem?
2:34 feeling when you say " Engineers are very clever"🤣