Torque converter (car)

[Totalacedude]

Hi guys.

I have had a radical idea, I want to build a diesel bike but want to try something different.

The idea I have had is to use a torque converter from a small car ie pug 106 etc. and place the converter Inside the back wheel. And driving what would normally be be output as the input etc.

My question is...
A torque converter case is normally mounted to flywheel and the output shaft goes to gearbox...
What I want to do is bolt the case of converter to inside the wheel and drive it arse about face.

Will this work? And if so will efficiency be same etc.

I only ask cos looking at how they work it's just vanes as a pump on 1 side a stator and vanes on other side to output shaft.
If I drive the thing other way will it still pump???
So is this viable to use?

Cheers guys ian

[coachgeo]

course you got to orient the converter in the rear wheel in a way that its vanes are moving fluid most efficently. Other wise.... sorry dont have enough knowledge to be of any help tooz ya. Sounds interesting. Responces will be a good educational read.

[Totalacedude]

Thanks.
The more I look into it all the ones I've seen have been the wrong way for what I want to do so looks a bit tougher than I 1st thought. There must be a type out there that the main input is the shaft and the output is the main case

Looking at YouTube the vanes on the output are different to the drive side so they won't just 'work in reverse'
Well not as efficient if they work at all.....

Any1 know anything about these??

[DieselFly]

Interesting idea but you will have to cool the fluid. Maybe fins added to the outside of the case

[gilburton]

slightly different to a torque converter but perhaps something along these lines??
I see there are quite a few hydraulic motors on ebay but I don't know anything about them eg size power output suitability etc.
Anyone out there who knows if they would be suitable for bike use??
I was thinking mounted behind a fore and aft car engine with either chain drive to rear wheel or direct to rear wheel via hoses.
What components would be required??
Might be a good answer for limited space compared with a conventional gearbox or cvt??

[coachgeo]

another example of hydrostatic


Racoon 2wd mini bike. Similar in concept to Rokon (2wd work horse/tractor..ish minibike on steroids)
http://www.hydraulicinnovations.com/for ... f5c5c&t=18

Same company, Diesel hydrostatic chopper, This video gives a good bit of details (least the opening of the vid says it does)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6G_YrGugug

Others from Hydraulic Innovations
http://www.hydraulicinnovations.com/for ... ht=chopper
http://www.hydraulicinnovations.com/for ... ht=chopper
http://www.hydraulicinnovations.com/for ... ht=chopper
http://www.hydraulicinnovations.com/for ... ht=chopper

[tappy]

A torque converter essentially a pump and a turbine in one unit. The blades (vanes) in both the pump and turbine will have been designed to give the least losses at the intended operating speeds and loads. Running it in reverse may work to an extent, but it'll be inefficient, and the greater losses will be realised as heat which will cook the transmission fluid, and possibly your rear tyre.
Even if it's running at 85% efficient (unlikely), if you were putting 30hp though it (22.5KW) you'd be losing 3.35KW in heat. A normal internal combustion engine loses WAY more heat than that, but it gets pretty hot.
The hydrostatic transmission does a similar job, but using axial piston pump and motor it will tend to have better torque tranmission characteristics over its entire speed range, and because the units are separate to the wheel you can put a heat exchanger in etc.

[Blunt Eversmoke]

Another thing to consider is that torque converters and the hydraulic oil therein usually also serve as (part of?) engine flywheel mass. Meaning: Having a torque converter at the rear wheel could, during accelerating and deceleration, put a great strain on the drive, and possibly the engine. Of course, you get a spacially very elegant solution and a great looking bike, but...

[gearhead1951]

why not use one in its intended orientation (attached to the crankshaft and diving the rear wheel)

a torque converter only or a modified two speed powerglide might just work !

[Blunt Eversmoke]

why not use one in its intended orientation (attached to the crankshaft and diving the rear wheel)

a torque converter only or a modified two speed powerglide might just work !

^
Well, a torque converter inside the rear wheel would INDEED make for a beutiful machine - transversally mounted engine, wide belt or robust chain (or even shaft?! A shaft would be insanely genius...) to the rear, creating an agriculturally primitive yet clear style.

But verily, try to run the 'verter in the intended orientation, or you'll waste horsepower. Also make sure the chain or belt is really ROBUST.

[gearhead1951]

Try this idea , Transverse engine chain or belt to a stock bike clutch mounted on the end of a jackshaft . The other end of the jackshaft chain or belt to a torque converter over driven by 1.5 to 2 times engine speed then chain or belt to the rear wheel !

The reason for the over drive is because the engine that the torque converter came from would most likely be a gas engine that redlines at 7000 rpm and you would be useing it on a deisel that tops out at 4000 rpm and you would need the clutch so as not to have to stay on the brake at stoplights or while starting the bike !!