Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO
I disagree. I gave the benefit of my doubt early on, and the same questions continue to be posed unmodified. No technical questions, just the assumption that because patents have issued there is technical merit.
I continue to be courteous, I am sorry you do not see it that way. I do not presume to know the intimate details, but I do know that this blind stumbling and experimentation leads nowhere when enticed with fairy tales about increasing mileage by 1000%.
|
You just called his inquiry "blind stumbling and experimentation".
I do hope the OP learns about combustion. I hope he continues to question with an open mind. I hope he sees past the fairy tale scammer claims and goes out to find what is actually possible.
I did. And by the time I was 17 I had already built functioning lean burn carb engines, water injection systems and hydrogen augmented engines. At 18 I had a "vapor carburetor" working to some degree. It was at this point that I realized my understanding of the physical world was limited so I embarked on the university path. All because I bought plans from the back of Popular Mechanics for the Pogue 200 mpg carb and other wacky devices.
I can tell you with no uncertainty that hot vapor engines do work and can see gains over cold air intake engines. The engine that sees detonation is in essence running beyond its safe enthalpy limits. As Oilpan4 and pgfpro refreshed us on, the backfire and detonation can be very violent. As you approach the point of detonation, ignition timing needs to be pulled back (retarded) due to the increasing flame speed. At some point, you don't need a spark, the whole fuel mix oxidizes spontaneously (detonates). Controlled detonation is the goal of Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI) research that has been discussed here and in other venues. There is little question about the validity of the science behind the research. Unfortunately, HCCI engines are beyond the scope of the garage tinkerer. Hot vapor engines are not. Some engines don't need a lot of additional heat to enter detonation and those engines would be the most ideal to use as experimental engines. However, we cannot expect to see the 50+% thermal efficiencies of the HCCI engines. But, a few additional percentage points gained can become additional miles per gallon.
So why don't we see hot vapor engines in production? Because the engines produce prodigious amounts of NOx. As was said in these forums and in other places, emissions killed the Smokey Hot Vapor Engine. Manufacturers know about high enthalpy engines. They also know about the downfalls and have bypassed these engines for other solutions.
Again, to reiterate, vaporizing a fuel does little to increase combustion efficiency. It is the heat that is usually added to vaporize the gasoline that is the real game changer. As the conditions for detonation are approached the thermochemistry in the fuel mixture become complex and exciting.
So I chased the unicorns. And I found them full of stuffing and fluff.
But the meadows they grazed on . . .