34:1 Afr?!

[maxc]

Originally Posted by automotivebreath

Imagine what this picture would look like if the plug were
indexed 90 degrees clockwise.

Two spark kernals?

[Pinhead]

Seems to me, that if it were indexed 90° clockwise, the blowing spark would hit the ground electrode and not stretch nearly as far. Either that, or the electrode would split it into two sparks/flames, like maxc said.

[nitro2]

Originally Posted by Devious

In fact, the CEI system mentioned in the article above is CDI.

According to the table at CEI > CEI Lean Burn Ignition the spark duration is 1-2.5 msec which would put it into the category of a long spark duration, despite being CDI.

1 msec at 6000 rpm is 36 degrees.

[LEAN BURN]

Thank you Mark for introducing me to Go Fast News, and to such a group of smart people. Our car industry would be far better off if it was represented by such people.
I should point out that in the Design News article of 11.3.97 “Rebirth of lean-burn technology”, I received many calls from racers who understood the relevance of flow-coupling. The subtitle of the article was “Flow-enhanced spark breathes new life into an old technology, improving performance and fuel economy”.
Understand we had to reinvent the field of ignition; and converted the simple, two-valve engine into a dual squish-land, two spark plug engine to achieve the lean burn results that we did. The developments for lean burn are equally important to high speed racing. We have an inductive ignition system – with a small, 90% efficient, 42 volt power supply and a coil that makes other coils like they are sleep-walking -- with a rise-time faster than a CDI system and with an energy density five+ times greater -- at a size you won’t believe. The ability to burn lean also translates also to the ability to handle rich-to-lean transition, i.e. 13 to 18 to one AFR, without “lean surges” or “stumbling”. Part of the benefit of the system is a “halo-disc” plug which took me thirty years to develop. The hardest thing was to have to discard good designs that simply did not cut it, to arrive at a essentially perfect plug -- and hopefully you will agree that is has all the advantages and benefits of an ideal plug. Radical innovations take decades to develop – and are not the result of epiphany -- but of blood, sweat and tears. I will answer your questions, except for the rich-to-lean transitions which I mentioned already.
Yes, MadBill, the biggest problem with lean burn is NOx. The catalyst does not reduce NOx under lean conditions (Oxygen rich), and one has the operate over 25 to 1 to get engine-out NOx low enough. For power, incidentally, one goes to stoich with EGR (external or internal). EGR + stoich give very low NOx with a cat.
David, I think it is a good idea to check out carb suppliers, e.g. Edelbrock.
Devious, Bolt and Harrington of Exxon (then Esso), SAE paper 670467, Fig. 12, claim that the effect of flow on spark is to break it up, and to reduce the spark’s igniting ability with flow. But they used a low-current, glow discharge spark (under 200 ma) which breaks up at low flow (4 m/sec). We used a low arc discharge, e.g. 350 ma which behaves the opposite (can sustain itself up to 20 m/sec). Ziegler et al, I Mech E, C47/83 and Hattori and Goto, I Mech E, June 1979, have results consistent with our findings.
nitro2 , I completely agree with you. We supply 150 mJ at 350 ma in ½ to 1 msec in very strong flow, with two plugs to achieve 30+ to 1 AFR. Most engines shroud the spark to protect it at very high speeds and flow. They use a glow-discharge spark of 50 to 100 ma which easily gets blown out at very high speeds (high flow rate). Our ignition does the right thing with a hard-to-believe capability. But you have to remember is took us decades to get there. Again, you are to be congratulated for the wisdom you showed.
automotivebreath. Again, what wisdom (8 & 9). The halo-disc plug is circularly symmetric and does not need to be indexed. The CEI ignition is a quasi-inductive system with 5+ energy density (remember we are not so smart but are persistent, dedicated and honest), with a very fast, CD type rise time (few usecs). We had our system tested for two years in a multi-billion company, and even though they refused to use our plug and did other idiotic things, they nonetheless tried but failed to kill it. It is remarkable that they survive despite efforts to kill anything useful.
MAP, I agree we should be able to go from 13 to 1 to 17 to 1 (or 18 or 19). AEM has a wideband UEGO controller that in principle goes from 11 to 1 to 19 to 1. We hope that our ignition will be available for racing and performance next year. It seems that someone in the carb business should be able to design a carburetor, with the AFR controller and ignition, to accomplish this goal, i.e. to quickly go from 13 to 1 to 18 to 1 AFR, and back.
automotivebreath, (#15), good points, but our development can solve the problem.
Devious, (#16), we have developed and built, as prototypes, what we consider to be the best CDI system (patent 6,584,965, 2003) and by far the best 42 volt, inductive system (patent 7,178,513, 2007, patent 7,182,077, 2007, patent 6,142,130, 2000).

[CREW CHIEF]

Originally Posted by LEAN BURN

Thank you Mark for introducing me to Go Fast News, and to such a group of smart people. Our car industry would be far better off if it was represented by such people.
I should point out that in the Design News article of 11.3.97 “Rebirth of lean-burn technology”, I received many calls from racers who understood the relevance of flow-coupling. The subtitle of the article was “Flow-enhanced spark breathes new life into an old technology, improving performance and fuel economy”.
Understand we had to reinvent the field of ignition; and converted the simple, two-valve engine into a dual squish-land, two spark plug engine to achieve the lean burn results that we did. The developments for lean burn are equally important to high speed racing. We have an inductive ignition system – with a small, 90% efficient, 42 volt power supply and a coil that makes other coils like they are sleep-walking -- with a rise-time faster than a CDI system and with an energy density five+ times greater -- at a size you won’t believe. The ability to burn lean also translates also to the ability to handle rich-to-lean transition, i.e. 13 to 18 to one AFR, without “lean surges” or “stumbling”. Part of the benefit of the system is a “halo-disc” plug which took me thirty years to develop. The hardest thing was to have to discard good designs that simply did not cut it, to arrive at a essentially perfect plug -- and hopefully you will agree that is has all the advantages and benefits of an ideal plug. Radical innovations take decades to develop – and are not the result of epiphany -- but of blood, sweat and tears. I will answer your questions, except for the rich-to-lean transitions which I mentioned already.
Yes, MadBill, the biggest problem with lean burn is NOx. The catalyst does not reduce NOx under lean conditions (Oxygen rich), and one has the operate over 25 to 1 to get engine-out NOx low enough. For power, incidentally, one goes to stoich with EGR (external or internal). EGR + stoich give very low NOx with a cat.
David, I think it is a good idea to check out carb suppliers, e.g. Edelbrock.
Devious, Bolt and Harrington of Exxon (then Esso), SAE paper 670467, Fig. 12, claim that the effect of flow on spark is to break it up, and to reduce the spark’s igniting ability with flow. But they used a low-current, glow discharge spark (under 200 ma) which breaks up at low flow (4 m/sec). We used a low arc discharge, e.g. 350 ma which behaves the opposite (can sustain itself up to 20 m/sec). Ziegler et al, I Mech E, C47/83 and Hattori and Goto, I Mech E, June 1979, have results consistent with our findings.
nitro2 , I completely agree with you. We supply 150 mJ at 350 ma in ½ to 1 msec in very strong flow, with two plugs to achieve 30+ to 1 AFR. Most engines shroud the spark to protect it at very high speeds and flow. They use a glow-discharge spark of 50 to 100 ma which easily gets blown out at very high speeds (high flow rate). Our ignition does the right thing with a hard-to-believe capability. But you have to remember is took us decades to get there. Again, you are to be congratulated for the wisdom you showed.
automotivebreath. Again, what wisdom (8 & 9). The halo-disc plug is circularly symmetric and does not need to be indexed. The CEI ignition is a quasi-inductive system with 5+ energy density (remember we are not so smart but are persistent, dedicated and honest), with a very fast, CD type rise time (few usecs). We had our system tested for two years in a multi-billion company, and even though they refused to use our plug and did other idiotic things, they nonetheless tried but failed to kill it. It is remarkable that they survive despite efforts to kill anything useful.
MAP, I agree we should be able to go from 13 to 1 to 17 to 1 (or 18 or 19). AEM has a wideband UEGO controller that in principle goes from 11 to 1 to 19 to 1. We hope that our ignition will be available for racing and performance next year. It seems that someone in the carb business should be able to design a carburetor, with the AFR controller and ignition, to accomplish this goal, i.e. to quickly go from 13 to 1 to 18 to 1 AFR, and back.
automotivebreath, (#15), good points, but our development can solve the problem.
Devious, (#16), we have developed and built, as prototypes, what we consider to be the best CDI system (patent 6,584,965, 2003) and by far the best 42 volt, inductive system (patent 7,178,513, 2007, patent 7,182,077, 2007, patent 6,142,130, 2000).

Welcome,Could you please list some engine builders that have dyno tested your product on either a SBC or BBC in a street/strip application.


Thank You.

[Cammer]

The CEI website posts much dialog but no test results from the major OEM's CEI quotes as testing their technology.

I do not know of any emissions legal, street licensed passenger vehicle capable of posting a 34 to 1 AFR over a normal engine operating range. I stand ready to be corrected!

No disrespect intended.

[MrWOT]

Very interesting. Have you tested in a turbocharged application? It would seem the ideal environment.

[maxc]

I've heard from a pretty reliable source that someone tested some new plugs in a 4.6 ford. With some computer mod's and just a new type of spark plug can fire a 30 to 1 afr at full throttle. With 200 RWHP stock, when too 300 RWHP So I figure 25 to 50 HP with retune. and 50 with more with plugs? But is the NOX low?

[Devious]

I think it would be an understatement to say many here would like to know more about this technology, and see any test results you can provide - especially as it pertains to current engine designs.

I understand that CEI's work is still in its early stages, and that it may be a good while before the technology reaches production. But it is mentioned in one of the papers provided that the ignition technology is not much more expensive than current production ignition systems. Is this at current costs to build the units, or based on projected drops in cost as a result of larger scale production?

Is there a plan to work with any forms of racing or offer to this technology in an aftermarket form?

Thank you for your time,
-DVS

[Cammer]

Please be prepared to present more than conjecture when posting about new ideas and products.