1980s tech can keep gas powered cars on the road

Read enough automotive-related articles on the internet and you will be convinced the internal-combustion engine is being hunted with a fervor typically reserved for villains in Liam Neeson movies. Okay, that conclusion may be extreme—but it holds some truth. Regulations regarding emissions and engine efficiency grow stricter with each passing year and manufacturers are faced with an impossible task: Take a centuries-old design and make it endlessly better—faster, cleaner, stronger, ad infinitum. At some point, progress will plateau, and the cost of ICE experimentation will simply outweigh the incremental gains in efficiency and power. The good news? The internal-combustion engine might have one more trick up its cylinder sleeve.

Fuel, air, and spark—the three things an engine needs to run. Air is one ingredient that it makes sense to leave alone. Fuel type is essentially decided by contemporary infrastructure. (Synthetic fuels are in the works, but we’re thinking of large-scale changes in the ICE design that would extend far beyond the top echelons of motorsport to the everyman (and woman) on the street.) That leaves spark as the low-hanging fruit in this equation. If a different type of ignition could more completely burn the fuel and air mixture, it would not only reduce emissions but also increase efficiency.

Enter plasma ignition.

This is what plasma looks like compared to the sharp spark of a traditional ignition system. Transient Plasma Systems, Inc

Traditional spark ignition is very simple.

A coil transforms the 12 volts from the car’s charging system into thousands of volts that discharge quickly to jump between the electrode and the ground strap of a spark plug. This forms a sharp but small zap that lights off the chemical chain-reaction that expands the air and fuel mixture to push the piston down and thus rotate the crankshaft. In order for the fuel-and-air mixture to be lit by this type of ignition system, it needs to be fairly close to a stoichiometric mixture; right around 14.7 to 1. That ratio—14.7 grams of air to one gram of fuel—puts a ceiling on efficiency. But here’s where things get interesting.

If we were able to lean out the mixture by adding air but still getting the same in-chamber expansion, and the corresponding force exerted on the piston, efficiency would increase dramatically. A lean mixture is much harder to ignite, though. So hard that you’d need transient plasma to make it happen in any reliable fashion. Technically, the spark on a standard spark plug does create plasma when it ionizes the gasses between the electrode and ground strap; transient plasma takes that small arc and dials it up to 11. If a spark plug is a zap in the chamber, plasma ignition is a TIG welder mounted in a cylinder head.

difference between spark ignition and plasma
Ionfire Ignition

This much more violent mode of ignition can regularly and predictably ignite extremely lean air/fuel mixtures. One of transient plasma’s most obvious advantages, besides a higher-efficiency combustion cycle, is that relatively low amounts of energy are used to perform a lot of electronic “work.” (The difference between energy and power, for those of you who enjoy recalling high school chemistry class.) The spark itself is not lighting a fire to burn the fuel; rather, a rapid-fire sequence of low-range electronic pulses generates a highly potent electric arc, which then breaks the bonds holding the oxygen molecules together and allows the electrons to shoot out, essentially attacking the hydrocarbons (fuel) and creating combustion. This means we are not waiting on a flame to consume the fuel and, in the amount of time between combustion and exhaust strokes, we get a more complete burn.

The most fascinating part? This technology is not new.

We traced the basic concept to patents from the 1980s, but technology has obviously come a long way since then. Outfits like Transient Plasma Systems, Inc. and Ionfire Ignition are reviving the concept and the reintroduction is timed quite nicely. (If you’ll forgive the pun.) TPS ignition systems have been tested and show a 20 percent increase in efficiency while also decreasing harmful emissions like NOx by 50 percent. Numbers like that aren’t a silver bullet in the ICE gun, but plasma ignition could keep our beloved internal combustion engines on the road longer than we’d expected. TPS claims it is working with manufacturers to integrate its ignition tech into production engines, but we are still a few years away from seeing the fruit of that collaboration.

The internal-combustion engine has undergone constant evolution for centuries, and at this point we’re extracting incremental gains. Plasma ignition could be one of the last significant improvements to be found in the ICE story. Here’s hoping that this ’80s tech, refined for the 21st century’s needs, makes its way onto the streets. This article by Kyle Smith first appeared via friends at Hagerty.com

Comments

One response to “1980s tech can keep gas powered cars on the road”

  1. Comments from post at Hagerty Avatar
    Comments from post at Hagerty

    hyperv6

    Automakers have spent Billions in ways to make ICE live on but sadly none of this is going to do it.

    The best shot was Homogenous Charge Compression Ignition. This was cleaner and 15% more efficient but even with the billions GM and Mazda spent it just was not enough. High compression will be much cleaner and adds power but just not enough to keep meeting the new regulations.

    If this deal here would work it would be already in production.

    kls2021
    In response to hyperv6
    Right.

    geemy
    In response to hyperv6

    free valve sounds very promising. it opens up so many possibilities like cylinder deactivation, different cycles like Atkinson, variable valve timing/lift/compression with zero additional hardware and just software. you can virtually optimize efficiency, emissions, reliability, and/or performance, in a completely dynamic way. I know there are reasons why it has been in the pipe for years and hardly making its way to production in 300 cars years after being revealed to the public. I guess cost, mass production and reliability are the main concerns, but I hope we’ll see it trickle down to mass production before EV put the nail in the coffin of ICE development. the ECU tuning
    and super/turbocharging potential would be crazy as shown by the gemera’s out of this world 300hp/l and 38bar beep, while keeping the fuel economy and drivability of a economy/comfort oriented engine

    Kpirello
    In response to hyperv6

    You know that Honda had a system, the CVCC. Not a civic, but Compound Vortex Controlled Combustion. It used a 3 barrel carburetor. The 2 barrel section fed a super lean mixture to the cylinders. The 3rd tiny barrel fed a richer mixture to the spark plug chambers that lived lived above the main combustion chambers in a thimble sized, perforated stainless steel cup that was fed a rich enough mixture to ignite with spark, sending flame into the lean, larger, main combustion chamber for ignition. If you put a Webber or aftermarket carb on it, the staged, original design defeated, you had an overly rich, gas guzzling, cylinders washed down, oil contaminated with excess fuel, bad running, short lived POS engine. It was a design that was misunderstood by many. It came to mind after reading the aim of plasma ignition for a super lean mixture… I wonder about it firing accurately and separately at 100 cycles per second. 7,000 rpm.

    JeffK
    When the CEO declares “zero emissions” as the future of the company, no change in ignition systems is going to be adopted and certainly no funding will be directed towards research. Stubborn attitudes are the real issue and the real reason why the system is not already in production.

    Gary_Bechtold

    This seems to have a better chance in the aftermarket. I don’t think any OEM is going to do it as many are seemingly shutting down any further ICE development. The aftermarket modders looking for power though would likely be the best candidates for this.

    audiobycarmine
    In response to Gary_Bechtold

    I was thinking this myself.
    The article doesn’t say anything about use in existing/non-modded cars.
    Does anyone know about this?

    Crazysato
    In response to audiobycarmine

    I did read another article on TPS that their system retrofitted into existing cars vehicles without need for engine redesign. Maybe it is wishful thinking on my part, but the article read “Such systems can be installed in existing engines with a little modification. For example, the system developed by TPS consists of an electronics module that is powered directly from the vehicle’s main battery.”
    Hopefully, it is not just another glorified Pulse Spark plug.

    Snarf

    Creating a super hot spark system while leaning out the mix would increase the operating temp. greatly,no? We worked with Yamaha snowmobile engines,very hot spark and lean mixture would melt pistons even spark plugs.

    hyperv6

    Here is the deal. Just look at the numbers we have and the numbers that need to be met.

    Then look at all the stuff they are doing today to get better mpg. Cutting cylinders, smaller engines, smaller cars, more expensive fuel systems, more expensive turbo systems. More expensive materials.

    They have gone as far as cutting down the size of bolts on the Cadillacs to reduce weight. Any extra thread is engineered out. They have gone from looking for a mpg per gallon to looking for a 16th of a gallon

    We have a number of Rube Goldberg items now competing for goverment credits just to meet emissions numbers now.

    All this has drive development cost to where it is never ending while prices in EV parts are getting cheaper like the motors and batteries.

    We all need to understand there is no special surprise development around the corner to save ICE.

    Then there has always been the snake oil like Fish Carbs and Spitfire plugs. No the oil industry never bought up these 100 mile carbs.

    johnvance

    Mazda has finally put their long-awaited “SPCCI”, Spark Controlled Compression Ignition, into production in the 2.0L Skyactive X engine. It’s only been out about a year, and only in Europe.

    Compression ratio is over 16:1, running a very lean mixture. Hwy mpg is reportedly improved by 20% – 30%, which is a big jump. It’s relatively simple/cheap, but can’t compete with hybrids for City mpg. There is talk of introducing it here in the 2.5L. Mazda needs to up their game in the U.S.; good cars but a new RAV4 Hybrid is rated 40/38 City/Hwy, and that’s a 3700 lb vehicle.

    https://insidemazda.mazdausa.com/

    Ironman

    That plasma sounds good. My Dad, who was electrician in the mines, told me in 1966 that “they could put a capacitor in a spark plug and it would burn the gas better and be more power, but they’ll never do it”. He was right until 1989 when it got started. I bought a set of Pulstar plugs in 2009 and got 4.7 more mpg. But the granddaddy was Ray Covey who vaporized ALL the gas with exhaust heat and got 79.9 MPG out of a 400(6.5 L) cu.in. Chrysler motor. No plasma needed, just good ol exhaust heat….work on that!!!!

    Inline8OD

    I’m sure many thinking owners with barouches using the usual 14mm spark plugs would welcome a set. But so would those of us with late ’30s, ’40s Buicks, Cadillacs, LaSalles, Chevrolets and Packards which all use 10mm plugs. Lot of us out here with cars using both sizes, so an opportunity for any manufacturer paying attention.

    Thanks again!

    bfsid3485

    With all thats being challenged about the ICE engine in our cars and trucks I want to point out my pet peeve… aviation. Example: a 747 burns 1 gallon of kerosene per second while in flight, and averages using 3600 gallons per flight. It would take me 10 yrs to come close to burning up that much fuel in my cleaner burning ICE car! Now trying to consider all the fuel used and burned by aviation in just a single day with all that dirty exhaust going directly high in the atmosphere and you will begin to see my peeve. I celebrate every time I here the words “flights cancelled”!

    I remember in the early 80’s Hillman and moody in Charlotte NC built a Ford that got 75 plus mpg and later read that the EPA has stated it didn’t pass emissions. Seriously? Something that lean, I truly believe fuel companies paid them off and tore up those plans.. what about this new deal?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.