Will cars ever run on pressurized air?
-
positronicle
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:01 am
- Contact:
Will cars ever run on pressurized air?
--Edited by Positronicle--
-
Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
A few yards at a time.
It cant compare to the exothermic value of a combustible like alcohol, gasoline, or even the low powered hydrogen.
Takes way too much engineering to design a turbine capable of utilizing the raw Air pressure, way too big of a tank to cover any real milage other than short commutes that are already in the city with the set up already to go, costs you 66 percent more energy loss [33 in 33 out] than the energy you put into each tank in the form of waste, not including wear and tear or the engineering cost of producing such vehicles, then you have the air stations and the cost of its set up, and dozens of other well know and old factors to over come.
Liquid Air still is your limit per volume tank and its still small compared to most exothermic reactive liquids.
Gasoline will provide you with 17,000 BTUs per pound.
Alcohol will provide you with about 66,000 BTUs per pound
And liquid Hydrogen is at the bottom of the list and still its way above the air tank per pound of energy.
A tank of Liquid Oxygen isn’t even close, pound for pound.
Cheaper to grow straw and burn it, you get more pay back any day.
Bottom line is the BTU value of a compressed air tank just wont suffice for any real distances.
But then this is all really old, from memory,.... from some of the first days of class.
And that was a life time ago.
It cant compare to the exothermic value of a combustible like alcohol, gasoline, or even the low powered hydrogen.
Takes way too much engineering to design a turbine capable of utilizing the raw Air pressure, way too big of a tank to cover any real milage other than short commutes that are already in the city with the set up already to go, costs you 66 percent more energy loss [33 in 33 out] than the energy you put into each tank in the form of waste, not including wear and tear or the engineering cost of producing such vehicles, then you have the air stations and the cost of its set up, and dozens of other well know and old factors to over come.
Liquid Air still is your limit per volume tank and its still small compared to most exothermic reactive liquids.
Gasoline will provide you with 17,000 BTUs per pound.
Alcohol will provide you with about 66,000 BTUs per pound
And liquid Hydrogen is at the bottom of the list and still its way above the air tank per pound of energy.
A tank of Liquid Oxygen isn’t even close, pound for pound.
Cheaper to grow straw and burn it, you get more pay back any day.
Bottom line is the BTU value of a compressed air tank just wont suffice for any real distances.
But then this is all really old, from memory,.... from some of the first days of class.
And that was a life time ago.
-
positronicle
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:01 am
- Contact:
-
positronicle
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:01 am
- Contact:
-
Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
Keep fantasizing, it keeps you away from the real math.
Im sure its your sleeping pill.
Don’t break out into a sweat any time soon, the math will always be here for you to crunch, even if your kid has to do it for you.
Because LOX contains the most amount of volume and pressure per gallon that can be achieved by oxygen or other gasses........
How much does LOX weigh per gallon?
If a tank is ½ foot by 5 feet long.....
How much does the tank weigh?
How many gallons is its volume?
What is the total weight?
Multiple this time the LOX and what does it weigh?
What is the expansion value of LOX? [Equal to room pressure of 14.7#]
Multiply this times its expansion value?
How much volume is required to spin a 100 CF engine for one minute at 5,000 rpms?
What pressure is involved in the cylinder head at combustion to achieve the usual 100 hp for such an engine?
Dividing room pressure, by the needed pressure to produce the normal HP, how much units [piston VU] are left to spin the engine, and for how long?
So before you ask your kid for the answer, is ten gallons worth of LOX any where near worth driving a car for any real time worth mention,... and are these minutes worth even pumping LOX in the first place?
AND how many BTUs did it take to fill up the air tank?
Mile VS Millimeter,
Gas VS Air,
......get real.
Im sure its your sleeping pill.
Don’t break out into a sweat any time soon, the math will always be here for you to crunch, even if your kid has to do it for you.
Because LOX contains the most amount of volume and pressure per gallon that can be achieved by oxygen or other gasses........
How much does LOX weigh per gallon?
If a tank is ½ foot by 5 feet long.....
How much does the tank weigh?
How many gallons is its volume?
What is the total weight?
Multiple this time the LOX and what does it weigh?
What is the expansion value of LOX? [Equal to room pressure of 14.7#]
Multiply this times its expansion value?
How much volume is required to spin a 100 CF engine for one minute at 5,000 rpms?
What pressure is involved in the cylinder head at combustion to achieve the usual 100 hp for such an engine?
Dividing room pressure, by the needed pressure to produce the normal HP, how much units [piston VU] are left to spin the engine, and for how long?
So before you ask your kid for the answer, is ten gallons worth of LOX any where near worth driving a car for any real time worth mention,... and are these minutes worth even pumping LOX in the first place?
AND how many BTUs did it take to fill up the air tank?
Mile VS Millimeter,
Gas VS Air,
......get real.
be careful...
- the car weighs about 600 kgs
- 20 HP or so are enough (!)
- action radius about 100 kms in normal use
check this out : http://www.mdi.lu
and then comment back....
fripster
- the car weighs about 600 kgs
- 20 HP or so are enough (!)
- action radius about 100 kms in normal use
check this out : http://www.mdi.lu
and then comment back....
fripster
Once a WireHead, Always a WireHead
-
positronicle
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:01 am
- Contact:
-
Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
Liquid air and oxygen have the similar long lasting capacities.
The most you can gain out of a bottle.
Arguing these points means your not serious as usual, and desire to stay clear of the math that makes you dizzy.
The pretend world of compressed air is your pipe dream as long as you dont have to act responsible like a scientist, engineer, a mechanic, technician, or worse, you have to do the math.
You should be a politician or a florist, your only real selling point is manure.
The most you can gain out of a bottle.
Arguing these points means your not serious as usual, and desire to stay clear of the math that makes you dizzy.
The pretend world of compressed air is your pipe dream as long as you dont have to act responsible like a scientist, engineer, a mechanic, technician, or worse, you have to do the math.
You should be a politician or a florist, your only real selling point is manure.
-
positronicle
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:01 am
- Contact:
-
Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
And gee, another one passes you up.
You start with AIR, then you compress it into a mostly a liquid.
Nitrogen is 75% of the air you breath, and when its pressurized it becomes liquid.
Weather you filter out the other constituents is irrelevant as long as the nitrogen is mostly liquid.
Its also called liquid AIR.
If you need to separate things into their pure states you go through further processes to make the oxygen separated out, the nitrogen, the argon, and all the other standard elements that make up air.
If your using crude liquid air to freeze, compress a motion, or for any other industrial use, you simply compress it til the bottle is mostly full of what ever gasses you obtain from the atmosphere.
You start with AIR, then you compress it into a mostly a liquid.
Nitrogen is 75% of the air you breath, and when its pressurized it becomes liquid.
Weather you filter out the other constituents is irrelevant as long as the nitrogen is mostly liquid.
Its also called liquid AIR.
If you need to separate things into their pure states you go through further processes to make the oxygen separated out, the nitrogen, the argon, and all the other standard elements that make up air.
If your using crude liquid air to freeze, compress a motion, or for any other industrial use, you simply compress it til the bottle is mostly full of what ever gasses you obtain from the atmosphere.
Chris, here's what I don't get.
When we had a "discussion" about solar panels I said the current technology wasn't cost effective. You screamed and ranted about how America could do anything if the politicians would put their minds to it.
You said "they said the Hoover dam couldn't be built", you said anything was possible.
Why does this reasoning not hold true for the compressed air engine?
.
When we had a "discussion" about solar panels I said the current technology wasn't cost effective. You screamed and ranted about how America could do anything if the politicians would put their minds to it.
You said "they said the Hoover dam couldn't be built", you said anything was possible.
Why does this reasoning not hold true for the compressed air engine?
.
-
positronicle
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 1:01 am
- Contact:
-
Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
Instead of wasting time Ian, try doing the math.
Its not about what can be achieved, its about trying to dress up a lemon and call it caviar.
The waste of time involved in a full liquid tank of air, especially for the weight and the energy needed to fill it wont return your investment any where near efficient. Its a lemon.
Yes you can drive a vehicle, but for how far at what cost?
When you compress a air tank 33% of the energy needed to put the air in the tank is lost due to things like entropy [cooling down] , machine heat and wear, inefficiency, engine losses and compressor losses, then when you turn around you lose another 33% of the left over energy trying to convert it back to energy to move a car.
And this doesn’t even account for other losses or the money to set up the infrastructure, and for what, a lemon, a loser.
At least with Gasoline that 25% used is pure energy [17,000 BTUs per pound] in return and its attractive for the weight.
No 100 pound bottles to carry around 100 pounds of Liquids that cost you 400 gallons to make into energy for 100 pounds of liquid.
So why do you want to pee in the ear and convince them its raining when there are real ways to store energy, produce energy, and use energy.
What’s is the fantasy behind Air, its clean?
Sure its clean and a total waste of energy trying to make the pretty and clean stuff go to work.
Id rather hire a bum to push my car, its cheaper and more reliable than compressed air.
Learn the basic rules behind physics before you start to make false claims about a product that is a waste of time, before you go into salesman mode.
Burn saw grass and run a steam boiler if you really want to make a vehicle move semi efficiently.
Make a compressed air car only if you want to waste lots and lots of energy before the vehicle even move an inch, and for what?
Get off this lemon craze, their just isn’t enough energy that you can stuff into a tank that doesn’t need a trailer to drag around to get you up and running like any resemblance of normality.
Yes you can make special turbine engines to utilize as much of the energy as possible rather than a waste full piston engine but the cost and the milage are still impractical for the same reasons mentioned above.
Its not about what can be achieved, its about trying to dress up a lemon and call it caviar.
The waste of time involved in a full liquid tank of air, especially for the weight and the energy needed to fill it wont return your investment any where near efficient. Its a lemon.
Yes you can drive a vehicle, but for how far at what cost?
When you compress a air tank 33% of the energy needed to put the air in the tank is lost due to things like entropy [cooling down] , machine heat and wear, inefficiency, engine losses and compressor losses, then when you turn around you lose another 33% of the left over energy trying to convert it back to energy to move a car.
And this doesn’t even account for other losses or the money to set up the infrastructure, and for what, a lemon, a loser.
At least with Gasoline that 25% used is pure energy [17,000 BTUs per pound] in return and its attractive for the weight.
No 100 pound bottles to carry around 100 pounds of Liquids that cost you 400 gallons to make into energy for 100 pounds of liquid.
So why do you want to pee in the ear and convince them its raining when there are real ways to store energy, produce energy, and use energy.
What’s is the fantasy behind Air, its clean?
Sure its clean and a total waste of energy trying to make the pretty and clean stuff go to work.
Id rather hire a bum to push my car, its cheaper and more reliable than compressed air.
Learn the basic rules behind physics before you start to make false claims about a product that is a waste of time, before you go into salesman mode.
Burn saw grass and run a steam boiler if you really want to make a vehicle move semi efficiently.
Make a compressed air car only if you want to waste lots and lots of energy before the vehicle even move an inch, and for what?
Get off this lemon craze, their just isn’t enough energy that you can stuff into a tank that doesn’t need a trailer to drag around to get you up and running like any resemblance of normality.
Yes you can make special turbine engines to utilize as much of the energy as possible rather than a waste full piston engine but the cost and the milage are still impractical for the same reasons mentioned above.
LOL, of course its possible, I posted a link to a video of an actual working model and an interview with a company spokesperson who was less hype than the reporters.
In any case Mr Smith has a habit of not viewing lenghthy links like streaming video and graphics intensive websites due to his slow ISP. Have you even looked at these these Chris?
In any case Mr Smith has a habit of not viewing lenghthy links like streaming video and graphics intensive websites due to his slow ISP. Have you even looked at these these Chris?
-
Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
The web is free to look at and buy into.
Often around here is it your bible.
Physics is a little harder to swallow, and no one has the huevos to ask any way.
And all the real facts much like physics isn’t pleasant and Im sure in the case of the web, its been left out on purpose.
You posted the very old, while its theory and reality has been known since the dawn of time, and its still it’s the same as it was from day one only a little more efficient on the engineering side.
I remember well the magnet on the fuel line too, and it was all hot air as well.
Like I said before, its not that it cant be done, its what is the cost and is it cost effective and the answer will always remain the same, you cant squeeze blood out of a turnip.
And it helps to have that education to spot what they don’t want you to know.
If its on the web there is a sucker born every day just waiting to invest his life's savings into it.
Get a spam filter, its cheaper.
Often around here is it your bible.
Physics is a little harder to swallow, and no one has the huevos to ask any way.
And all the real facts much like physics isn’t pleasant and Im sure in the case of the web, its been left out on purpose.
You posted the very old, while its theory and reality has been known since the dawn of time, and its still it’s the same as it was from day one only a little more efficient on the engineering side.
I remember well the magnet on the fuel line too, and it was all hot air as well.
Like I said before, its not that it cant be done, its what is the cost and is it cost effective and the answer will always remain the same, you cant squeeze blood out of a turnip.
And it helps to have that education to spot what they don’t want you to know.
If its on the web there is a sucker born every day just waiting to invest his life's savings into it.
Get a spam filter, its cheaper.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 55 guests