|
|
本帖最后由 寂静回声 于 2025-12-11 21:44 编辑
关于汽油压燃的优势，gpt-5给我科普一番，但是被我发现了软肋。
你说的这些优点跟没有一样，热效率潜力高，为什么不直接使用柴油机？
至于颗粒物排放，那本身就是一个阴谋，根本没有任何存在的必要。
说噪声更是笑话，需要柴油机动力的会在乎噪声吗？
Gpt-5继续回答
Good pushback — you’re hitting the core question: if diesel already gives very high thermal efficiency, why bother with any gasoline-compression-ignition (GCI) schemes at all? Short answer: diesel is excellent for many uses, but it isn’t strictly *universally* better — there are real technical, economic and regulatory reasons why engineers still explore gasoline CI. I’ll walk through the practical reasons (and briefly rebut the “particulates = conspiracy / noise doesn’t matter” points).
### 1) Where diesel *wins* (and why people pick it)
* **High thermodynamic efficiency at medium–high loads.** Diesel combustion and high compression ratios are naturally efficient under steady, high-load operation (long-haul trucks, generators, heavy equipment).
* **Excellent low-end torque and durability.** Diesel engines are built for torque and long life in heavy-duty duty cycles.
* **Mature supply chain and service network.** Worldwide manufacturing, fueling and servicing ecosystems are optimized for diesel in many segments.
So if your application is a heavy truck or a stationary generator, diesel is often the right, practical choice.
### 2) Why diesel is *not* automatically the best choice everywhere
* **Vehicle class and packaging:** passenger cars have stricter weight, size and NVH targets. Diesel hardware (robust blocks, heavy injectors, high compression) tends to be heavier and bulkier. That hurts handling, fuel economy in stop–start urban driving, and packaging in small cars.
* **Transient response and drivability:** diesel’s combustion and torque characteristics are great for steady loads but harder to tune for the very quick throttle response and quiet refinement most car buyers expect.
* **Cost and complexity of aftertreatment:** to meet modern NOx and particulate regulations, diesels require complex systems (EGR, SCR catalysts, diesel particulate filters). Those add cost, complexity, maintenance and sometimes reliability headaches.
* **Regulations & market restrictions:** many cities and countries restrict older diesel vehicles (low-emission zones), increasing resale/operational risk for diesel fleets — that changes the business case.
* **Fuel & tax differences by market:** gasoline is dominant for light vehicles in many markets; fuel-tax schemes, availability, and consumer preferences vary regionally.
* **Long-term strategy:** OEMs balancing electrification and downsizing may prefer gasoline platforms that can be more easily hybridized or electrified than heavy diesel platforms.
### 3) About particulates — not a conspiracy
Particulate matter (soot) is a real physical byproduct of incomplete combustion. It’s not a political talking point — it’s something that engineers measure, filter (DPFs), and regulate because it affects human health (respiratory problems, etc.) and because regulators set limits that manufacturers must meet.
Modern diesel tech *does* reduce PM a lot (DPFs work very well), but that comes with the costs I mentioned (regeneration, extra hardware, periodic maintenance). Gasoline CI aims to reduce PM formation more inherently by getting a more homogeneous mixture, which is why it’s attractive — but it has its own control and NOx trade-offs.
### 4) About noise — it does matter (depending on the use)
* For **heavy industrial** uses some extra noise is tolerable, but not always: night deliveries, urban operation, driver fatigue, and community noise ordinances make noise relevant for trucks too.
* For **passenger cars**, low noise and vibration (NVH) are *huge* parts of perceived quality and market acceptance. If a car is efficient but rattly and loud, many buyers reject it.
* Noise also correlates with harsh, fast pressure rise in combustion; that’s a durability and comfort issue, not just a nicety.
So when people talk about “noise,” they’re talking about regulatory compliance, human comfort, perceived quality, and mechanical stress — all meaningful.
### 5) Bottom line — it’s about trade-offs, not one-size-fits-all
* If you need maximum steady-state efficiency and torque with existing diesel infrastructure (long-haul trucks, heavy machinery), diesel is usually the better practical choice.
* If you want diesel-like efficiency in a light-duty vehicle **but** need lower particulate output, lighter packaging, or compatibility with gasoline supply and hybrid architectures, then gasoline CI (or hybrid gasoline solutions) can be attractive despite extra control complexity.
* Regulations, total cost of ownership, customer expectations, and fuel/logistics realities often determine the right path — not a single metric.
最后还是豆包AI说出了汽油压燃技术的四大应用场合。 高速公路超车、山区丘陵道路连续爬坡、赛道驾驶与驾驶乐趣、紧急避险瞬间爆发力。 这四条一看就是给赛车赛事做准备的，大众生活谁用这玩意儿啊。 Gpt-5的解释难怪总觉得没说到位，因为汽油压燃确实没什么实际需求。
|
|
|小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|机械荟萃山庄
( 辽ICP备16011317号-1 )
发表于 
发表于 
发表于