When reading some topics on engines here I realised there is a lot of expertise here. Could some of you shed some light on the idea on this site?
http://www.scuderigroup.com/

How it Works

The base Scuderi Engine is a split-cycle design that divides the four strokes of a conventional combustion cycle over two paired cylinders: one intake/compression cylinder and one power/exhaust cylinder. By firing after top-dead center, it produces highly efficient, cleaner combustion with one cylinder and compressed air in the other. Unlike conventional engines that require two crankshaft revolutions to complete a single combustion cycle, the Scuderi Engine only requires one. Besides the improvements in efficiency and emissions, studies show that the Scuderi Engine is capable of producing more torque than conventional gasoline and diesel engines.

Although it produces one power stroke per revolution (2 stroke cycle) it requires 2 pistons to do it, so no advantage there.

More torque/BMEP. They are careful not to claim more power as there seem to be some limitations on RPM imposed by mechanical and breathing complexity.

With 180 deg of power stroke and 180 deg of exhaust, the power cylinder would be highly thermally stressed - even more than a conventional 2 stroke. It will be interesting to see what technologies they use to overcome that.

There are some benefits claimed in the area of replacing throttling with computer controlled valve actuation, which of course will also be highly beneficial on Otto engines as this technology becomes viable.

Those things aside, there are some genuine benefits in the design - particularly the control of heat release and compression/combustion pressures and temperatures.

The architecture of the basic engine has been used many times, and has never been shown to be more efficient than conventional alternatives.

Basically you have a lot of thermodynamic losses associated with the unnecessary recompression of the intake, and pumping losses and heat transfer in the transfer port, and heat loss in the first cylinder.

A google search on the Scuderi family will reveal further reasons to steer clear of this bit of investor bait. Note that this has nothing to do with the Australian Split Cycle Technology engine. Ahem.

Whichever Split Cycle attracts you, your copy of Heywood, and a tight grasp on your wallet, are recommended.

Actually not funny, I know an older guy who had great belief in the Split Cycle, Oz version, felt sorry for the poor bugger everytime I raced MotoX out at Cunangra and saw the 2 Lambo's parked on the CEO's multi million dollar property. Something like $50mill investment and one running engine, yeah right.

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?wo=2000026505

http://www.cadinfo.net/editorial/splitcycle.htm


At least this split cycle is realistic and when the inventor claims 'only' a 15% improvement rather than saving the entire world from itself you know theres probably some basis of truth.

http://www.automotto.org/entry/zajac-motor...l-fuel-economy/

QUOTE (Greg Locock @ May 12 2009, 19:46)
A google search on the Scuderi family will reveal further reasons to steer clear of this bit of investor bait. Note that this has nothing to do with the Australian Split Cycle Technology engine. Ahem.

Whichever Split Cycle attracts you, your copy of Heywood, and a tight grasp on your wallet, are recommended.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE cheapracer

Actually not funny, I know an older guy who had great belief in the Split Cycle, Oz version, felt sorry for the poor bugger everytime I raced MotoX out at Cunangra and saw the 2 Lambo's parked on the CEO's multi million dollar property. Something like $50mill investment and one running engine, yeah right.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I concur and completely agree.

malbeare

"...the split-cycle engine's revolutionary concept of firing after top dead centre..." -from the Scuderi website. That particular feature is not at all revolutionary, Sabathe used it almost 100 years ago. If I had the time, I would examine all the other details, but just from that one claim I wonder if it is a hodge-podge of recycled ideas designed to separate investors from their funds, or if there is, perhaps only coincidentally, some merit to the design.

The claim that the Scuderi engine fires after top dead centre is misleading anyway. Sure, the power cylinder is ATDC but the compression cylinder is still BTDC and the transfer passage between the two is open at this point. So the ignition point is still occuring before the minimum volume point which is the true TDC.

Well, FWIW, Scuderi has released some new video of a running prototype.

Jalopnik doesn't seem as skeptical as I thought they might be. Nice to see it running, though.

http://jalopnik.com/5375270/exclusive-vide...-engine-running

Yaaaaawn! More suckers' . . . . whoops investors' dollars in action.

Yeehah. Somebody managed to make a 50 year old bit of technology work again. Who said innovation was dead?

I think we are all excited to see any 'odd' engine concept come to life but it's a bit bitter sweet as this just puts them in better situation to seek 'investors' and to keep current investors excited.

I want them to explain away the pumping and friction losses of 2 cylinders for 1 to me.

And another split cycle also with firing after TDC......

http://www.tourengine.com/cms/index.php

Running prototype here.....
http://www.tourengine.com/cms/index.php?op...9&Itemid=58

I have listened to a lot of engines in my life and I can hear when one is struggling. Doesn't look like he had the nous to let the crankcases breathe to save pumping losses.

Must have cost him $3000 to stick 2 Honda industrial motors together for this prototype, so why does he need $3 million for his 2nd? - note the 'Opportunity & News' link is your first choice, surprise surprise.

Even if either of these teams were to actually have something worthwhile, they blow their entire credibility out of the water with bogus claims like "firing after TDC" and outrageous efficiency and specific power.