THE VLB SYSTEM

Please note that this article is not intended to be a technical description, so much as an overall examination (an "argument in favour", if you like) of both the VLB engine technology and its use of an hydraulic transmission system (HTS). You must also accept there are certain features and aspects of the design which we are not yet in a position to include in a public document.

The VLB engine has, by far, the highest flywheel speed of any practical engine. The higher the range, the more "gears" are required in order to take the most efficient advantage. As with any complex machine, the VLB engine also has its own set of inter-component compromises – "weak points", if you like. The downside of these compromises can be most effectively minimised by using an HTS.

With an HTS, the number of available ratios between the lowest and highest can be almost 'infinite', offering an overall efficiency gain which can become quite significant under certain driving conditions, such as are found in cities, in hilly country and high winds, and on road circuit racetracks. Marry this to the fact that the VLB engine control system is finely tuned to "real" engine load determination, and the overall efficiency is bound to be extremely high.

The VLB engine and an HTS combined can produce "engine braking" so effective that it could be argued that it would be reasonably safe to drive the vehicle without any conventional brakes at all! To put that into perspective: The driver hits the brake pedal and it hits the floor - the ECU instantly detects that the brakes have failed. If the intention was just to slow the car, the driver leaves his foot on, or reapplies it to, the throttle. Otherwise, with no throttle demand and no brakes, the ECU assumes an emergency stop procedure. This means that it holds the VECTIS air inlet fully open, shuts off the fuel supply, and leaves the exhaust valves closed. The wheels become motors and the load becomes a high power four-cylinder air pump with maximum loading. Believe it – the vehicle will stop in an impressively short distance! With cadence breaking and traction loss management (aided by the ECU's independent control of the exhaust valves) all built into this emergency procedure, one is probably safer than in an average conventional vehicle, with a functional braking system. As a "side effect" safety feature alone, this makes an HTS start to look decidedly attractive.

The 'engine braking' effect is not only called upon for emergency stopping, of course. In an optional "full protection" mode, it is used to assist the regular brakes and so minimises brake wear, not to mention saving fuel.

NOTE (For anyone not familiar with the VLB engine technology.) Stemming from the results of a serious "driver" research programme, the VLB ECU system has a number of "on-the-fly" driver programmable options. These include niceties such as cruise control and speed warning indication, and a number of more complex options. The most significant of these allows overall performance to be set anywhere between maximum fuel economy and maximum performance. Another, dubbed "motorway mode" (the one which is most pertinent to this report) makes the throttle pedal a more direct road speed controller. When selected, if one lifts right off the throttle, the car will slow significantly more rapidly than is normal (by using its enhanced engine braking effect). On the other hand, if one simply eases the throttle back, it will slow as any conventional vehicle would. Anywhere in between, and the braking effect will respond accordingly. Unless the vehicle actually comes to a halt, erratic traffic flow does not call upon the brakes at all. The same option automatically compensates for erratic wind effects and road undulation. The overall result is that the driver has less to do and the engine uses less fuel.

Traction control by means of cutting the spark is so crude that it's embarrassing. It is also bad for the engine and the environment. Being able to cut the fuel supply, and also to provide fine control over exhaust escape, at least brings traction control into the Twenty-First Century. At least as important, the ECU's ability to effect controlled engine braking, coupled with the ease with which hydraulic fluid can be flow-regulated, would make these not only truly 'cost free', but as near to perfect as they could ever be hoped to be.

Even when the regular breaking system is in perfect order (we do not suggest that regular brakes are not essential) the power and wherewithal to effect anti-lock with auto-cadence breaking effects is in plentiful supply and just where it needs to be. Again, the additional cost of such niceties is so small (with an HTS) that they would surely become standard on all vehicles.

The VLB engine has been designed to maximise control over a number of engine and vehicle components, several of which we are unable to reveal at this time. An HTS would provide the motive force for practically all of these components, making the overall vehicle more efficient. Of course, there is power steering, power assisted suspension, and power assisted brakes. All could be simplified and cost reduced if the energy could be tapped from the HTS.

Although we haven't closely investigated the possibility, an hydraulics expert has suggested that there is also an opportunity to capture some of the (otherwise wasted) energy (as compressed air) during "over-run" by diverting fuel free exhaust. A small tank need not add undue weight and such an energy supply could be a very useful commodity. Amongst the suggestions that might be explored are:

1. A means for starting the engine with a low or dead battery.
2. A means for re-inflating tyres.
3. A built-in pneumatic jacking system.
4. A power assisted wheel-nut remover.
5. An ultra-rapid interior heating system.
6. Window, seat, and sunroof adjustments.

With a little imagination, a whole new range of vehicle accessories could be born.

Sure, the basic idea of capturing an effectively free and renewable source of energy from the "over-run" is not new, nor has it not already been exploited to good effect. But with an HTS such as we are suggesting, "capital cost", the arch-enemy of many a good idea, is set to lose the battle – for a change.

The VLB "crankshaft" (it's not exactly a correct name – but we have to call it something) is perfectly suited to the task of pumping hydraulic fluid. There is little point in going into technical detail at this point, but take our word for it, we are assured by an hydraulics expert that John couldn't have arrived at a better configuration. Power for power, the VLB engine is significantly lighter than are conventional vehicle engines. With cars, this also translates to a reduction in chassis weight. An HTS could also further reduce the overall vehicle weight, particularly with four wheel drive systems.

NOTE: We believe that 'four wheel drive' will become the standard, in any case. Apart from the improved traction, which is obvious, the improved stress distribution allows vehicle designers to effect safer vehicles by re-distributing, rather than adding to, stress and impact protection components. Vehicle safety is already emerging as the vehicle designer's main battleground and it's only a matter of time before we see major improvements. Essential to such development is the distribution of stress. The next step is bound to be "active" impact management. An HTS could be the least expensive and most effective way of achieving this. Just think of all that power, suddenly no longer required to propel the vehicle, instantly available for impact management.

Hydraulic technology as the power transmitter for rotating components such as the (VLB) 'crank' and vehicle road wheels, has reached the point where its efficiency can be shown to equal that of a new, clean, and properly balanced "chain" (as in bicycle). That the chain is more efficient than the shaft is not up for discussion – there are many who would take up that argument. That it is also "on a par" with an expertly assembled, straight-cut component, new and clean, gearbox, is also a reasonable claim to make. That it can be maintained in relatively perfect condition, far, far longer than can the other transmission systems, has to be accepted, even by the most stalwart of "hydraulic opponents".

Of course, it is not only the "over-run" energy surplus during straight line braking which is available - there is also such a supply during cornering! We need only to remind you that a surplus supply of hydraulic pressure would automatically be available to aid suspension components. Now, whether your concerns are focussed on public vehicle safety, or winning Le Mans, if the idea of weight-free, cost free, surplus to requirements, hydraulic pressure during cornering, does not make your hair stand on end, there is surely something wrong with your soul.

We are aware that hydraulic transmissions are not new. Let's face it, practically every automatic gearbox employs the principle. But don't let the established fact that a non-locking automatic gearbox inevitably means less miles per gallon, persuade you that an HTS is therefore inherently less efficient. There is a world of difference between the "direct displacement" efficiency of an HTS and the "Wouldn't it be easier to come along with me?" technology of the old auto-transmission systems. (Sorry, shouldn't be facetious – but it did make the point). Ultra-low friction pipes and fluids, and no-loss compressors and motors are a very different proposition.

An HTS obviates the need for a clutch. Say that again? With an HTS, clutch systems are redundant. By-pass valves, and an interlocked brake system, allow stationary vehicle engine tick-over (and even revving – if you must) and there are no power transmitting moving parts involved in the gearing. So what would the vehicle do with a clutch?

No gearbox, no clutch, super-high flywheel speeds, and a whole host of valuable by-products. So can we say, "Yes!" to hydraulic transmission?