Easy way for manufactures to get a fuel economy boost

[AZEqualizer]

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autobloggreen.com/media/2007/03/1-sg-13960.jpg

Save fuel, protect the climate:
Start-stop systems reduce consumption and emissions
Roll-out at BMW, with Bosch Start-Start Starter (http://www.bosch-presse.de/TBWebDB/en-US/PressText.cfm?CFID=2869515&CFTOKEN=7dff77aa6b9609df-2E3C5DEC-015E-9FCE-8A50D3649D10B9DC&Search=0&id=3042)

· Significant reduction in consumption and CO2 emissions in urban and stop and go traffic
· Excellent cost-benefit ratio
· Bosch with extensive systems know-how
· BMW system featuring Bosch starter to go into series production in March 2007.

Bosch has developed a start-stop system that switches off the combustion engine when the vehicle is stationary – in traffic jams or at red lights, for example. "Especially in city driving, this technology significantly reduces fuel consumption," said Dr. Volkmar Denner, member of the Bosch board of management, when explaining the benefits of the system. "This and other systems supplied by Bosch will help to reduce CO2 emissions further in the future." The technology will soon go into production at BMW: first variants of the 1-series BMW will feature it as standard equipment from March 2007. Bosch supplies the key component for this system: a starter that has been developed specifically for this application.

Increasing fuel prices, ever stricter emission limits, and the objective to reduce CO2 emissions further call for innovative solutions. One cost-effective way of conserving resources and protecting the environment is the Bosch Smart Electronic start-stop system. It switches the engine off when the vehicle is stationary, and starts it again automatically as soon as the driver wishes to move off again – an intention which can be indicated by depressing the clutch pedal, for example. The ECE15 measuring cycle, the urban component of the New European Driving Cycle (NEDC), calls for twelve 15 second stops over a distance of seven kilometers. During such a journey, the Bosch system reduces fuel consumption and CO2 emissions by as much as eight percent, depending on the vehicle. If the stops last longer, the actual saving of CO2 emissions and fuel can be significantly higher.

[rogwild]

Humm; 'March 2007"; I wonder how this thing has been 'working' or if it didn't work????

[AZEqualizer]

Bosh (http://www.bosch-presse.de/TBWebDB/en-US/Presstext.cfm?CFID=2869515&CFTOKEN=7dff77aa6b9609df-2E3C5DEC-015E-9FCE-8A50D3649D10B9DC&Search=1&id=3689) mentions in a press release dated Sept 2008: Since it was introduced as a feature in passenger cars at the beginning of 2007, Bosch has supplied more than 500,000 units. Its commercial-vehicle variant can be used in diesel engines up to three liters and gasoline engines up to four liters. Start-stop systems switch off the engine as soon as the vehicle comes to a standstill.

[ziggy951]

When did the old notion of running your vehicle for 5 minutes become less cost efficient than turning it on and off over and over again?





Z

[AZEqualizer]

Ok, you lost me Zig :confused:
The Bosh Stop-start starter switches off the combustion engine when the vehicle is stationary.

[Derwin]

Bosch has developed a start-stop system that switches off the combustion engine when the vehicle is stationary – in traffic jams or at red lights, for example.

This sounds like what I have been using on golf carts forever. If any of you are golfers, you will notice that a lot of golf carts simply turn off unless you are pressing on the gas pedal.

I know this can't be the same thing, but it sounds mighty familiar!

Derwin

[Mark Tomlinson]

What Ziggy is referring to is the old idea that STP advertises, "Starting your engine is the worst thing you can do to it". But, essentially, ICEs have gotten so well engineered that (once they are warmed up) you can stop it and start it again fairly often without damage.

Without damage to everything except the starter, that is. The strain on the starter will wear it out in no time. This is where the Bosch starter comes in. It's engineered to crank an engine to life many, many more times than a conventional starter.

So, I wonder how the batteries feel about this?

[Derwin]

What do the golf carts use that I mentioned?

Derwin

[Mark Tomlinson]

Golf carts are Electric Vehicles. They have motors that are designed for constant on and off without the high torque requirements of a starter. Starters provide a short high burst of power to turn the engine over and, uh, start it. It is a completely different demand than a golf cart motor that's pushing you and some friends over a few greens.

I'm no expert on the subject, by any means. But while poking around in some electric vehicle forums I've learned that all electric motors are by no means created equal. There's a lot of science that goes into designing the right type of electric motor for the job.

[Derwin]

Golf carts are Electric Vehicles....

Well, no. The golf carts we use at the country club I am a member at are all GAS powered golf carts, NOT electric. Also, we use them for around 4 and a half hours straight.

Derwin

[Mark Tomlinson]

Then you've got a valid question there.

[Derwin]

Thanks! o:h"we"ll1

[westonlgray]

Mark,
Although new engines are much better, most of the wear and tear on an engine still occurs at startup. The only difference is that now you don't notice it as much since the engines last much longer.

I bet that we really see a lot of engine problems on hybrids though once the miles go up. In fact, I already imagine that I see a difference on the Toyota Prius. There are a lot of them that emit a puff of smoke when they are moving along and the ICE starts. I am sure someone will do a study eventually to compare the wear and tear of the hybrid ICEs versus a similar ICE only engine.

Of course, most people that buy new vehicles these days don't drive it much more than 70-80,000 miles, so it will be the re-purchasers that really suffer.

[waboom]

As a side note, isn't there a spike in emissions when the engine is started, irrelevant of a cold start or a warm/hot start? I tried doing some searching on those interweb tubes to find some facts about this (I don't know if it's true or just a conventional myth, like the myth that turning on a lightbulb uses the same energy as keeping it lit for 10 minutes - it's actually more like 1/2 a second.) The only article I could find about it was this one at ScienceDirect (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VH3-4S5FJK3-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ee4e90cdd92fe7e2cf12f659ced69840). So would added emissions be a problem as well with start/stop engines, or not really?

[ziggy951]

I was also referring to the fuel difference used between starting an engine and keeping an engine at idle. It is a cost ratio meeting somewhere between staying at idle for 5 minutes and turning it off for 10. On off cycles for 10 minutes, where it is turned on and off 5 times each, wont save any fuel. It will probably use more. Like I said, somewhere in the middle is where it will save fuel.

Engineering of today's engines isnt all that better, or different, than the ones during the muscle car era or before. The oil you put into them is what gives them the decreased wear and high mileage. That is the main contributing factor to newer engines being better and lasting longer. I know, it sounds like a Mobil 1 comercial but its the truth. The basic design of the internal combustion engine, and ALL of the major wear points, are the same and have been for quite some time. If you disagree, take apart a 57 Chevy block and compare it to a Honda 1.8L or an Audi 2.0T. The piston rings wear on the cylinder wall, the crank bearings wear on the crank/bottom end, the valves wear on the head and cams in all engines. Ok ok, the heads are a bit different on the Chevy but the wear points are pretty similar.



Z


Dogone it!..I did it again! Y'all just got :threadjacked:

[ziggy951]

As a side note, isn't there a spike in emissions when the engine is started, irrelevant of a cold start or a warm/hot start? I tried doing some searching on those interweb tubes to find some facts about this (I don't know if it's true or just a conventional myth, like the myth that turning on a lightbulb uses the same energy as keeping it lit for 10 minutes - it's actually more like 1/2 a second.) The only article I could find about it was this one at ScienceDirect (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VH3-4S5FJK3-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ee4e90cdd92fe7e2cf12f659ced69840). So would added emissions be a problem as well with start/stop engines, or not really?


The short answer to this is yes. The long one depends on the engine it is used in. Considering this is for a new vehicle I think it would be a problem but not a big one compared to using it on an older, say 1980's vehicle with a Bosch fuel injection system.

But yes during a start, mostly the cold ones, not all of the fuel is used in the combustion process, hence my original rhetorical question. This is wasted fuel, even on brand new engines with fancy emission and computer controlled injection systems. The direct port injection systems do reduce this so if it were integrated into a system like that you could minimize the waste.


Z

[Mark Tomlinson]

I don't think this thread is hijacked. It's about a starter that allows us to stop and start and engine repeatedly. We're talking about whether that's a good idea or not.

Valid points to everyone! Honestly, regardless of who does it, BMW or Toyota or GM, stopping a gas engine for a moment and then restarting it just sounds like a bad idea. Like a desperate attempt at retrofitting 100 year old technology to make it more fuel efficient. How much will they gain from it? I wager its more about marketing than real engineering.

[Mike kZ]

What about on cold mornings when you want to run the engine awhile to warm it up? I hope there is a way of turning the starter off when you want.

[WarpedOne]

I'd hope it does that automatically.

But the real problems are of engineering and manufacturing type. Durability, reliability and such. I bet the whole price (including repairs and replacement parts) is higher than the cost of fuel it saves through the vehicle lifetime.

Engines used to last up to 500.000 miles without any major overhaul. Modern turbo and super charged gizmos last up to 100.000 at most before turbo gives up. Add this gizmo and life-expectancy drops some more.

[RAN]

Honestly, regardless of who does it, BMW or Toyota or GM, stopping a gas engine for a moment and then restarting it just sounds like a bad idea. Like a desperate attempt at retrofitting 100 year old technology to make it more fuel efficient. How much will they gain from it? I wager its more about marketing than real engineering.

agr:1