godlameroso wrote: ↑Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:45 pmRight, and the reason why is because the turbine in design is the inversion of the compressor. The part that shoots out gas on the compressor is used as the inlet on the turbine, and the part that would be the inlet is also inverted, so the effect is the turbine works inverse to the compressor. It is fed compressed air and reduces the pressure of the gas at the exhaust, thus extracting torque.gruntguru wrote: ↑Mon May 31, 2021 11:15 pmI was only commenting on whether the existing turbine could be used as a pump to electrically evacuate the exhaust manifold (it can't). If it was for example a positive displacement device (piston or rootes expander) it could be motored to pump exhaust gas out of the engine.godlameroso wrote: ↑Mon May 31, 2021 9:09 pm
As in using 2 compressors instead of a compressor and turbine? Then you're routing the exhaust gases into the compressor inlet, and the outlets become the wastegate(s)? Well I realize how foolish the idea is. Constructive criticism is much appreciated.
Just wondering what it would be like if you had a way to maintain manifold pressure independent of the compressor, like with an air tank or something.
If the turbine design would be inverted, then the inlet of this type of turbine would be the same as the compressor. That is the inlet would would be at the front of this device. The exhaust pulses would not be diffused but rather compressed further, and likely causing flow reversion. You would still have backpressure but it would be outside of the system, and the internal resistance of the exhaust gases being further compressed, and rebounding compression waves. Would the combustion engine even be capable of powering such a device? "Twin compressor engine"
IF you could think of any advantages of having such a system, the aforementioned exhaust scavenging, along with a prodigious amount of exhaust volume?