Former Ford engineer, Jim Clarke, has filed a patent for the installation of an individual turbocharger for each cylinder of an internal combustion engine. Yes, going by this concept, that’s one turbo per cylinder, which means a typical four-banger will get four turbochargers.
This setup would require two throttle bodies and smaller turbos, which spool much faster. The small packaging also means that it can be installed very closely to the exhaust valves, thereby providing near instant boost. Clarke also went as far as to say that this setup could potentially eliminate turbo lag.
According to Car and Driver, Clarke’s turbocharged engine design remains theoretical at this point, as there has not been a prototype built. During his tenure at Ford, Clarke was responsible for developing the modular V8 and Duratec V6. He also partnered with Dick Fotsch, who was the former engine divisions president of Navistar and Kohler.
This, along with Koenigsegg’s camless engine and Mazda’s Skyactiv-X venture, could be proof that the days of the internal combustion engine is far from over.
Looking to sell your car? Sell it with Carro.
How about, one turbo, one throttle body for each cylinder..
sure will make a lot of paaawaaarrr..
Law of diminishing returns applicable.
Hopefully this does not drink a lot of petrol. How 12 cylinders?
The world has enough oil to last us few hundred years. No need for hybrid or EV. After all EV batteries cause more pollution
and after that, what? or do you think the world won’t last beyond the next few hundred years? Kiamat?
Individual throttle bodies are used to improve throttle response, not increase horsepower. To increase horsepower, larger diameter throttle body is used but a throttle body that is too large will reduce horsepower as well.
How does a bigger throttle body reduce horsepower? How large is too much?
Besides, now with electroactuated valves, we dont even need throttle bodies anymore.
Turbo Bocor OCH > All
You mean civic ketam?
long live gasoline engine…
will be interesting to see how they balance the 4 turbos
There is no need to balance them if the intake ports to each cylinder are isolated from one another as well.. in which case, the rate at which each turbine feeds its host cylinder is directly determined by the exhaust flow rate of that cylinder.
Just my opinion..
That will not gonna work..
exhaust gas not flow out at the same time intake stroke.. not enough power to compress air,..
the beauty of electronics my friend.
A typical automotive turbo under normal engine operation spins in the tens of thousands RPM, and up to an astonishing 250,000 RPM is possible. The high rotational energy (spinning momentum) of the turbine means it is able to keep spinnning between exhaust gas pulses.
the law of physics says – the bigger the turbo, the more power but more lag, smaller means less power but less lag.
however in these era of modern technology turbo lag is almost non existence with the use of variable valve timing, more gear ratios (including CVT) which means final drive ratio can be altered to allow car to take off even though at low rpm (when there is lag and low torque) and also variable geometry turbo. cars with twin turbos like Jaguar utilises 1 small turbo for low rpm and the second big one kicks in as sped increases.
lets agree, the smaller turbos spins faster and giving better response compare to 1 big one. hoping someone will step in to fund this project (since he has patented it)
You can’t alter the final drive ratio. You’ll need a gearbox with a wide ratio spread so that you have a very short gearing for takeoff, but very tall gearing for highway cruising. The final drive stays fixed, but with a wide-ratio gearbox e.g. CVT with auxiliary transfer case or 8-10 speed torque converter automatics, you can have a “normal” ratio for the final drive and yet get good startup torque due to high underdrive for 1st gear, but tall overdrive for top gear for low-RPMs at highway speeds
Well, there have been gearboxes done before with more than 1 final drive. The 1980 mitsubishi colt is such a car.
However i think this is too complicated for what it intends to do. With cars now getting equipped with hybrid systems, its not too far fetched to equip an engine with an electrical centrifugal supercharger with the traditional turbocharger. Seems far more simpler
come on Kong, dont tell me the car manufacturers cannot change the final drive ratio during engineering stage?? it is just changing a set of gears namely input and output. pls do not deceived the others of your own misjudgement.
Variable speed electric turbo better la. Simple machanism and piping. Controllable spiining speed.
You should try looking at the numbers… electric turbos aren’t Tamiya toy cars. Just look at a typical Electric Ducted Fan that doesn’t even flow as much as a typical turbo.. something that can provide 0.3 bar of boost to a low-capacity (1.3-1.5 liter engine).. such an EDF would need almost 100 amps with 12 volts. That’s pretty much more than what the alternator of a small-capacity car can crank out.
With a 48V system, the figure becomes more tolerable but again, due to the non-linear increase in airflow vs input power, you will need to have twice the amount of power going into the EDF to get around 50-60% more boost.
If electric motors can move an entire car, truck or bus, surely they can be made to power a compressor?
there are electric superchargers designed for internal combustion engine, but its not as reliable as neither a turbocharger, a gear driven or even belt-driven supercharger.
If exhaust gasses aren’t used to power the device, I don’t think resulting unit qualifies as a “turbo”. Supercharger is the term used when a “turbo” is not exhaust gas driven. These are mechanically driven, generally by the engine via belts or gears, but using an electric motor is certainly feasible.
Reliability, overheating and stress issue. Also putting more weight onto the engine…
Toyota still producing old tech dinosaur low powered engine. No one buys underpowered Toyota these days.
Said the proton laggards.
Why dragged in p1 here?
Hello, the subject are Ford, cylinder & turbo. If U cannot contribute something, can U just be quiet ?!
“Clarke’s turbocharged engine design remains theoretical at this point, as there has not been a prototype built.” <– No one going to point this out??
It's just some idea some dude had, he didn't even bother trying it out. It's just a money grab to try for a patent.
# Jim Clarke said the setup of 1 cylinder/1 turbo “could” potentially eliminate turbo lag.
# He further said this turbocharged engine design remains “theoretical” at this point, as there has not been a prototype built.
If it’s “only” theoretical & NO prototype built, can we comment on a non existence engine or is Mr Clark fishing for ideas ??!
One power-sapping limitation obvious immediately – inlet and exhaust ports squeezed onto one side of the engine. Engines moved away from this configuration over 40 years ago.
More moving parts, more failure, more maintenance so more money coming. Indeed long live internal combustion engine manufacturer!
no point using extraordinary turbo-engine but then it uses dry clutch gear trans
No need so many turbo. Electric motor(s) will save the day. Emission free, and instant torque….
No need to waste time. Burning fossil fuel to produce motion is very crude and old fashion way. So many mechanical parts and so much effort just to produce so little energy. EV is the way forward, if we are able to produce Infinite Electric Energy Loop all these combustion engines just throw them in the bin.
Just look at how effortless an EV leave a Lambo behind in a drag race, usage of combustion engines will disappear very fast. When the EU big four gets serious in EV production, electrification starts, battery tech and energy regeneration improves, combustion engines will end up in the junkyard.
According to World Bank figures, about two-thirds of the world’s electricity is generated by fossil fuel combustion (burning of coal, gas and oil). So replacing fossil fuel burning vehicles with electric vehicles, with the existing infrastructure of electricity generation does fully address the big picture. EVs do however quite successfully MOVE emissions from cities to wherever-the-power-station-is.
p.s. You are watching the wrong type of “informative” YouTube videos if you believe in the Infinite Electric Energy Loop.