Forget Hydrogen

This is the place for any magazine-related discussions that don't fit in any of the column discussion boards below.
Robert Reed
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Robert Reed » Fri Sep 02, 2005 3:03 pm

The turbine will increase back pressure, making the engine less efficient. Turbo chargers increase horsepower by increasing intake manifold "boost ' pressure, thereby imparting more horse power to the same engine, by increasing aspiration. More air flow -yes , but also more fuel flow.
Definately more power created but I don't know if efficiency would be increased.

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Chris Smith » Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:36 pm

Turbine back pressure has never been a issue. <p>The waste gate can manipulate the transfer of power, when its most appropiate. <p>In fact one of the first jet engines was designed around a Turbine from a gas motor, and it wasn’t used to drive the intake of that motor. <p>The back pressure is negligible and it can also be partially re-routed to make up for any negligible loss by boosting the intake as well as driving the generator. <p>This system [the exhust] is a 100% loss , and if you capture 50% of that loss your ahead. <p>Now all we have to do is attach sterling engines to the radiator for another gain.

Newz2000
Posts: 507
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 1:01 am
Location: Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Newz2000 » Fri Sep 02, 2005 7:06 pm

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Chris Smith:
Turbine back pressure has never been a issue.<hr></blockquote>
That's not acurate. Engine's and exhaust systems need to be modified to put a turbo on a car. Additionally, turbos add mucho complexity to a system and are very prone to mechanical failure if not properly maintained.<p>Here's a few quotes from the wikipedia entry for engine turbines:
<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Wikipedia:
However, there are some parasitic losses due to heat and exhaust backpressure from the turbine...
A disadvantage in gasoline engines is that the compression ratio should be lowered (so as not to exceed maximum compression pressure and to prevent engine knocking) which lowers engine efficiency when operating at low power...
<hr></blockquote><p>Don't get me wrong, turbos rock. I had a turbo Volvo and loved it, but when that turbo kicks in your gas milage tanks (pun intended). It's not free power.

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Chris Smith » Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:52 pm

Matt,...I guess you have never worked on turbos?<p>I used to install them on foreign cars, and no, there is no major modification of design other than the plumbing into and out of the exhaust, and tricking the computer to go rich at the right time. <p>The standard exhaust manifold can be used in many cases, and then this goes into a “turbo manifold on the pump” which then goes out to the exhaust. <p>This in turn goes into the plumbing called the intake, which allows the pressurized air to be incorporated into existing system.<p> The bigger difference, is physical plumbing, and that is done to get new stuff to fit into the old.<p>That’s like changing your pipes in your house to go left instead of right. <p> There are no special modifications in the exhaust other than design to fit.<p> Some manufactures bend the curve better than the original manufacture, or increase the size for a better flow, but other than that, there are no major changes. <p>It all physical, meaning that you need to add in where there was nothing before,... IF your vehicle didn’t come with a turbo. <p>To manufacture turbos at the factory, and incorporate them into a charging unit, would be like adding any new product for ford or GM, get it into production and do it quick if your want to make money.

Robert Reed
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Robert Reed » Fri Sep 02, 2005 9:40 pm

"Turbine back pressure has never been a issue."<p>Chris
We ran a jet drive 17 foot BAJA boat for about a year. This was powered by a twin turbo charged 462 C.I.D. Lincoln V8.
Speed was exillerating (76 mph), gas was atrocsios.
Exaust manifold gaskets blew out monthly.A careful examination of this area never revealed anything. We couuld only attribute the problem to increased back pressure .
For us-back pressure was an issue.

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Chris Smith » Fri Sep 02, 2005 11:13 pm

Robert <p>I think your confusing your back pressure after the turbo kicks in, V.S. back pressure with out a turbo. <p>Lead and lag will blow any gasket, but any waste gate can regulate that. Also increased exhust diamater can take care of most resistance in the pipes. <p>The back pressure is not attributed to the turbine blades obstruction, but rather the increased flow after the fact, combined with standard pipes and a turbine spinning at a rate before the boost kicks in. Lead and lag. Its only in the way for a moment til the turbing catches up, and any by-pass gate can take care of that. <p>We used to blow head gaskets left and right, but never before the boost from the turbo. <p>A turbine can be inserted in any exhaust, and when the motor is brought up to speed, the waste gate bypasses the exhaust into a turbine for the spin.<p> No noticeable horse power loss is attributed, even if the waste gate properly brings the blades up to speed, incrementally. <p>Once you dump the effect of the turbo into the engine, everything is increased, including the quantitative exhust flow, and the cylinder gasket, all the way to the tail pipe is at risk, if not accounted for in some manner. <p>This does not mean that a turbo cant be inserted into any exhaust, properly, with out a affecting HP. [incrementally ]<p>“Your” increase in HP, directly affects the exhaust pressure because the waste gate is not a regulator, it’s a decision to commit. If your exhaust is not ready for this it will blow.

If you instantly insert the turbine blades into any exhaust, yes you have resistance.<p> If you insert it proportionally, you don’t have a major loss or major resistance. <p>IF you boost the Exhaust out put, and the initial turbine back pressure is not accounted for,...[no waste gate bypass] , bang goes the exhaust. Lots of turbo kits have this anyway, for this exact reason.<p>But any proportional waste gate can “Regulate” this especially if turning a generator is the object of the lesson. <p>My bet is your exhaust pipes were closer to standard flow, and the turbine was at its max, and the out gassing was not met by your diameter and flow of your exhaust pipes, mufflers, or the water injected into your exhaust like so many boats? And they will conspire. <p>Any gasket or manifold failures are due to poor planing of numbers, as in quantitative gas flow /pressure numbers.<p>[ September 02, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

Robert Reed
Posts: 2276
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:01 am
Location: ASHTABULA,OHIO
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Robert Reed » Sat Sep 03, 2005 9:38 am

These engines are always developed by after market compantys (as opposed to OEM). Pipes were 3" dia.,Exaust manifolds,although large compared to automotive equivalents,did not seem any larger than standard marine manifolds. Don't know how well systems were engineered or what the companys track record was. However they had no answer for our problem, which was very dissapointing.

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Chris Smith » Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:52 am

Robert
They make pressure relief valves in the form of Waste gates for this exact reason. The initial inrush of exhaust hits a wall called the turbine blades which are not spinning fast enough at the exact moment. <p>Its catch 22. As it goes faster, it needs to go even faster to get out of the way. <p>Inertia has a different plan, and lag and lead come into play but only for a moment. <p>By using a "blow off gate" in the form of a waste gate, when the pressure exceeds a limit it redirect the exhaust back into the tail pipe instead of building up head pressure. <p>This save the head and manifold from becoming a mortar and going straight up and sideways. <p>When your pushing for performance, too many people short cut the safety devices or just don’t install them at all. Its all about raw power, and taking risks. <p>Ever see a Supercharger go ballistic, snapping the bolts right off and sending the charger into the air ten feet or more, and that’s just intake pressure having now where to go,...fast. <p>The motor cant keep up with the instant change, and nitro fuel self detonating before getting into the cylinder.. <p>A lot of modern turbos have a “Boost management system” that senses intake pressure and limits this and well as exhaust pressure, and regulates it into a steady increase instead of a sharp “ all right now” type of scenario. <p>When you bring a turbo up to speed, it has little effect on drag to the exhaust because as the exhaust gas exits the exhaust valve, its is still increasing in volume and pressure which drives a turbine at its best. There is a whole new propulsion effect happening right after the exhaust valve closes. The stick of dynamite is only half exploded at this point and has lots of energy to still impart. <p> The exhaust valve dumps a hot potato like a lit stick of dynamite into the exhaust and slams the door behind it, and the gasses hardly have had time to expand. This is what drives the turbo so well with little loss or restriction to the flow when its all balanced, with out lead or lag involved. And that can be controlled by a proportional exhaust waste gate management system.

peter-f
Posts: 114
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 1:01 am
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by peter-f » Wed Sep 07, 2005 5:18 am

<blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jolly Roger:

... I wish I could be proven wrong about some of these "inventions". There were nay sayers for the telephone, airplane, desktop computers, and hundreds of other items in common use today. If someone COULD invent a working model of a free energy device that I could examine and replicate (or minimally understand the real science of how it operates), I'd be more than willing to admit I was wrong. I don't plan on eating crow anytime soon.<p>[ August 13, 2005: Message edited by: Jolly Roger ]
<hr></blockquote><p>I, too, delight in the discovery that - from time to time - what I hold as inviolate is indeed wrong... I love inventions that I long ago discarded as not possible!<p>As for the carburetor... I find it intriguing that the contraption was designed and refined for a century or more by engineers who couldn't properly draw it! It's complex in its shapes and its workings, and although its task is simple to describe, it does a fair job, at best... fuel injection being so much better!

Will
Posts: 310
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 1:01 am
Location: Katy Texas
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Will » Wed Sep 07, 2005 11:00 am

Thats' interesting ! - Is it established without question that fuel injection is more efficient than carburation - I believed (Richtly or wrongly ?) that establishing the correct stochastic fuel/air ratio for efficient combustion was a fairly simple matter of choice and that all improvements in carburetor design could achieve would be an improvement in either the rate or distribution of vaporisation. Does the injector achieve that more efficiently ?
BB

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Chris Smith » Wed Sep 07, 2005 11:19 am

Fuel Injection is superior to any carburetor, even the best carburetor. FI has instant feed back to ensure the right mixture for every correct scenario. It has barometric sensors for load conditions, It has speed sensors, it has a oxygen sensor to sense for rich or lean gas conditions in the exhaust, It has temperature sensors to judge the density of the air coming into the motor, it has timing sensors to not only adjust the fuel for the spark setting but to also adjust the spark to match the fuel ratio until they can find a balance. <p>As cars improve electronic timing and control will control everything including the cam to ensure the motor is performing at its very best. The best carburetor on their best day, can only mix the perfect ratio across less than 50% of the RPM spectrum and get it right. At all other times, they will and do waste precious gas trying to fit every scenario but cant keep up especially for todays motors and performance curves. Any carburetor can be almost as efficient as FI if the motor is a stationary motor with out a varying speed or load.<p>[ September 07, 2005: Message edited by: Chris Smith ]</p>

terri
Posts: 404
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:01 am
Location: colorado
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by terri » Fri Sep 09, 2005 5:19 pm

How about one of the earliest: The Brush carburetor.<p>This gem had a rotating brush partly immersed in a pool of fuel, and then the brush ran against a sharp edge to create the spray in the intake air stream. Circa 1905-1920 or so. I wish I still had the book I saw this one in. <p>
This same old book spoke of replacing the leathers in the clutch. It also desribed the "linear magneto," where a rod operating off a cam broke the points and lifted a part of the magneto core away from the rest of it to generate a spark.<p>
A far cry from injecting pure cold hydrogen into the cylinders, eh? <p>
I wonder what the compression ratio would have to be to ignite hydrogen by the diesel effect.<p>[ September 09, 2005: Message edited by: terri ]</p>
terri wd0edw

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Chris Smith » Fri Sep 09, 2005 6:03 pm

The cigar lighter was invented before the match, and that cigar lighter led to the diesel engine.<p>Compressing air quick gets it hot, fast, and anything can be ignited by this action.<p>Anything above 15:1 gets hot but the question with hydrogen is does it burn or detonate.<p> Detonation is a effect that is contradictive to a good engines performance because the explosion [not a clean slow burn] happens before the TDC, and thus fights the piston on the up stroke. <p>It also creates a shock wave from the detonation that is destructive to the bearings. <p>And it creates pollutants from the high pressures even with a hydrogen motor, because the AIR has pollutants in it that combine to form other poisons and polutants.

terri
Posts: 404
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 1:01 am
Location: colorado
Contact:

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by terri » Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:43 am

Yeah, I've got an ancient Feinwerkebau cal .177 air rifle which, if you oil it a little too much, "diesels" on firing. This one was built in the days when men were men and air rifle springs were air rifle springs.<p>Takes a lot more effort to cock the thing than any modern air rifle... which look exactly the same as my ancient one.<p>The oil vapor/spray created by the piston movement ignites from the compression and results in a rather louder "crack" when it's fired, and an increase in muzzle velocity. And it smells just like a diesel truck engine when this happens. It very nearly punches through the back plate of a Beeman pellet trap on these occasions.<p>There actually were a couple of firearms based on this principle, I am told by the experts.<p>However, in the case of the Feinwerkebau, I am also told that this is not good for the seals, etc., when it "diesels," and to take steps to avoid putting too much oil in it. There is also an issue with carbon deposition inside the cylinder and barrel from this "dieseling."<p>The 15:1 ratio seems like a good start, but I thought actual diesel engine compression ratios were more like 20 or 22 to 1. And, of course, it should probably be higher here at Colorado's altitude. Is your 15:1 figured with a sustaining glow plug, or just the heat of compression of the raw fuel/air mixture?<p>And can any "detonation" in a proposed "hydrogen diesel engine" be moderated by water injection in the fuel/air mixture, I wonder?<p>[ September 10, 2005: Message edited by: terri ]</p>
terri wd0edw

User avatar
Chris Smith
Posts: 4325
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Bieber Ca.

Re: Forget Hydrogen

Post by Chris Smith » Sat Sep 10, 2005 12:07 pm

I bought the pistol, what a disappointment. <p>I really wanted the rifle because I heard that the feather of the pellet melted going down the barrel from so much heat, and it moved faster than a standard 22.<p>You were supposed to use peanut oil because it wouldn’t diesel on its own. <p>15:1 is the "starting point" where the air starts to get superheated. The original Cigar lighter was a tube and plunger, and it had a tuff of cotton the end of it soaked in a naphtha like solution. When the plunger was quickly forced in the heat generated made the naphtha smolder and then light upon exposure to the air.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests