S-Tronic? FSI? Audi publishes glossary of efficiency technology terms
There have been a lot of new technologies introduced in recent years to help improve efficiency of vehicles. While we spend a lot of time here at ABG trying to explain how these technologies work, Audi is stepping up to try and help as well with a new glossary that explains technologies like direct injection, clean diesel, and brake energy regeneration. Audi, of course, uses its own branding for these technologies but the basic information applies generically to most applications. For example, FSI is Audi's name for gasoline direct injection, while S-Tronic is the automaker's branding for a dual clutch transmission. Regardless of what you call the stuff, there are some nice illustrations and the descriptions are generally pretty concise making this a handy reference guide. Download the guide as a PDF.
[Source: Audi]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
KM 8:49AM (7/25/2009)
Right, the ICE gets more and more complex eking out ever smaller efficiency improvements in a desperate attempt to stay relevant. Some of the newest cars out have so many systems and subsystems and such high manufacturing tolerances that they are fragile and ridiculously expensive to diagnose and repair.
Part of the reason I like diesels is that they seem to be manufactured for much greater longevity, but nowadays even diesels are getting over complicated.
Having witnessed the beautiful simplicity that is an electric powerplant I can't wait for the battery tech to drive these overly complex ICEs into obsolescence.
Reply
wisi 10:11AM (7/25/2009)
well, that is true... if you are talking about the lead-acid conversion of a pick-up truck that lasts you 30miles ;-)
Or can you tell me an accurate algorithm for SOC assessment, that will not require a quad core CPU breathing 500W precious watts?
Or do you know how power electronics work without neglecting the 3rd and 5th harmonic of your average synchronous drive?
Have you seen the transmission free of backlash to not disturb your 4 corner electric stabilization control without sacrificing efficiency?
Nobody bragging about how they solve challenges that come with EVs doesn't mean there is no Problems. It rather means nobody solved them yet ;-)
greets, Wisi
KM 11:01AM (7/26/2009)
Well, although your comment is enlightening, I was more referring to the fact that on my first car repairs and maintenance were simple, easy and cheap (30 min to replace a fuel costing $20) and today you have to remove a motor mount, push aside a tranny, and pay $300 dollars for the part.
So, although there are technical obstacles in bringing a EV to market (I have never seen the HVAC system installed in an EV and wonder how it works), what I HAVE seen is that the assortment of parts - and their required maintenance - is significantly lower.
For example, replacing a battery tray may indeed be expensive, but diagnosing and replacing such a thing appears simple and straightforward even for someone with significant experience in automotive maintenance.
Some of the systems, subsystems, and sub-sub-subsystems on modern cars are ludicrous to diagnose, repair or pay for. This is sorta what my comment was trying to get at.
LFP 10:24AM (7/25/2009)
can I point out that all these complexities would yield huge improvements in efficiency if they were used on smaller engines on smaller cars.
The main issue is that a 2.0 litre direct injected turbo is equivalent to a V6, which is dandy on small trucks and would be a nice improvement (less weight too, which means greater towing capacity) If cars were skinnied down to weigh about the same weight the weighed 15-20 years ago, and were designed to produce the horsepower that they did back then, you'd see much greater gains in efficiency.
A turbo 1.2-1.5 litre with direct injection could power a mid sized sedan just fine. Turbo-diesel has long been a solution, the biggest change to diesels today is the urea injection in the exhaust.
Now, personally , I also love the simplicity of the electric motor, the batterys we have just aren't that good. The cost of anything decent (LiFEPO4, NiCad, NMHi) are insane, and the cost of the ones that are actually good (Lithium Ion) are even more insane, and some of the simlicity is removed from Lithium Ion as cooling systems are needed to keep the batteries happy.
As it stands now BEVs are at the elegant simplicity of 1800's wick-carburetor ICE cars, but also at that level of performance.
Now personally, I'd like to see two things:
Adoption of lighter, non-carbon fiber materials. Carbon fiber is just two damn expensive, and too hard to repair. The thing is most car factories are set up to build steel bodies, and really aluminum would be a better base material. Light weight blastics, if they were recyclable and the body pannels also were small and cheap enough to be easily replaced, might also work, as would some sort of plastic mebrane that could have patches "ironed on" to it (probably not with a home iron, but something a little bigger and hotter) All these improvements in lightness would help all cars, not just ICEs.
The next thing is fuel vaporization- FTV got 92 mpg with thier first, non hybrid fuel vapor car...that's pretty damn good. An experiment was run on gassavers.org (link below) where somone constructed a similar system for an old ford falcon (not exactly an efficient starting platform) and got 60mpg...I'd say it has serious potential as the next big thing.
http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Carburetors/Anthony_P_ODonnell/index.html
Reply
LFP 10:40AM (7/25/2009)
Wisi, I agree with your statement.
I get the feeling that most of the commenters on this board really aren't interested in actually engineering anything. They are just fans.
Now, that's fine, but it's not helpful, and doesn't give them any real authority on saying what is and what isn't a better technology.
As somone who screws around with ICEs as a hobby, granted, very small ICEs (like as in on mopeds) I can say I've gotten a fairly intimate knowledge of engines, and have done numerous calculations to work out experiments that I hope will eek out just a bit more performance on my scoots- Everything from HHO, pure oxygen injection, Oxy-Propane- etc... I've calculated it out, done the math and chemistry, and made decisions on whether or not to give it a go.
I really don't see any people on here talking about how to improve/cheapen batteries- I will put forth that I know next to nothing about batteries beyond the basic concept, but if you guys like them so much, do some research on the basic chemistry of what makes a berry work, and what factors improve it's energy density, power output, ect... and think about what materials and building techniques could maximize that.
Me, that's not my specialty, I do that with engines. I could be working on a dying breed, I could end up with my experiments coming up with a cheap way to implement some of the better innovations, and I could just end up eaking out slight performance gains. But without people trying we have no shot at saving the environment.
If you think ICEs are dead, prove it. Do some research, build some battery cells at home, make an electric bike (relatively cheap and simple) to familiarize yourself with the field, and show us all the results, for better or for worse. You will get headaches, you will get frustrated, you will have fun, and your brain will grow from the process- and you might get a nifty little EV out of it too- you can't know without pulling out a wrench and messing around in the garage.
The more smart people we have doing science and engineering both professionally and on a hobby level, the better.
Reply
B 11:26AM (7/25/2009)
Stroke engines are well familiar but they doesn't look like best options available. Take the microturbines for an example - they are compact, have very high power densities, offers efficiencies up to 35% (as now) and seems much more practical for REEVs. But my guess is manufacturers don't want take risks and will stay what they know best. Yet how much more complicated ICE engines can get?
I guess steady improvements in batteries will be making those ICE related advances less and less relevant.
Reply
wisi 12:06PM (7/25/2009)
please give a link. I am interested in that, as I only know of turbines with some meters in diameter that can get around 40%.
gorr 11:38AM (7/25/2009)
Even with the latest high tech gadjetry like direct injection, turbo, fine mist gasoline injectors, variable cam phasing and lift, dohc, double clutch sequantial transmission operated by powerful computers, etc. Even with that newer car don't get more enjoyable because all this gadjetry is programmed for e.p.a only and not for drivability or power delivery. As soon as the engine transmission combo get some power the e.p.a system kick in and lower the power delivery and tax the engine almost to the pure lugging point so your car is vibrating and try to eat itself and don't give power and smooth running. Energy is transferred to the catalytic converter instead and fuel consumption is increased to maintain hot temperature into the converter and low energy into the cylinder.
As long as we pay for these products, ice + gasoline then as long as manufacturers and goverments and big oil will cash money for it and impede any alternative even if their public lies-relations say that they desperatelly try to market a green car. Stay away from their products. A simple used car fitted with some battery plus a gasoline small generator might be better and cheaper then a new audi 2.0 liters turbo with direct injections.
Reply