Fuel Warmer and Fuel magnet?

[tangomar]

use this babies: 1 lot of 10 neodymium strong hdd magnet d6 d9 - eBay (item 310178720789 end time Nov-30-09 21:15:11 PST)

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by cfg83

Christ -

Oooooooooh, neato :



I guess the only concern would be the KISS factor, or the alien universe hordes.

Who makes gated throttles?

CarloSW2

The iris would suffer the vena contrata entry loss as there is absolutely no entry radius of curvature.Very high drag.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Christ

Phil -

I've not ventured to actually see or attempt to reproduce/test any of the patents, but could [at least some of] the gains claimed in those designs been more a matter of airflow profiling? Just as [in high air velocity applications] a single large barrel is far more efficient than multiple smaller barrels, I believe that airflow through the older carbs was a very neglected feature of efficiency gains, and these people may have looked at that as well as vaporization and other enhancements to be able to make those claims, with even an ounce of legitimacy.

I guess I'm asking if it was really snake oil they were cooking up, or if someone just didn't read the recipe correctly?

I've got Wallace's book in front of me.
All the carbs either have a standard butterfly throttle,or their system is in series with,and ahead of the standard carb,with its throttle.
Here's a very important consideration.One gallon of gasoline,at stoichiometric ratio has the energy of 10 sticks of trinitrotuluene(TNT).
One backfire through the carburetor could conceivably explode the front end off the car.

[Christ]

Nice little tidbit, there... the TNT thing. Good thing I've never had that happen...

[Mustang Dave]

Originally Posted by aerohead

... Here's a very important consideration.One gallon of gasoline,at stoichiometric ratio has the energy of 10 sticks of trinitrotuluene(TNT).

According to This Article, A gallon of gasoline (6.6 pounds) has the energy of 99 pounds of TNT.

[LoveLearn]

"One backfire through the carburetor could conceivably explode the front end off the car."

Do you also feel that natural-gas-fueled domestic stoves are similarly likely to explode home kitchens? After all, as you must know if you've ever bothered to study how these external gasification systems are configured, they generate pure gaseous fuel which is NOT premixed with oxygen any more than Compressed Natural Gas or externally-vaporized Liquid Petroleum gas fueling systems are premixed with oxygen.

Some early exhaust-heated gasoline vaporizing promoters made silly unsupportable claims. But their silliness does not justify piling on with unfair and unsupportable suppostional attacks.

Partial fumigation with either Compressed Natural Gas feeds or LPG gas feeds quickens post-ignition combustion development and quickens combustion completion. The faster flame propagation speed enabled by partial fumigation generates higher average piston pressure through the decompression power stroke even when total fuel BTUs are the same. So why would partial fumigation with vaporized gasoline not also quicken combustion? Liquid gasoline droplets CAN NOT burn. Only after their delayed evaporation and subsequent mixing with oxygen can fuel delivered as liquid droplets burn and start developing piston pressure. These exhaust-system-heated vaporization systems eliminate those droplet phase-changing delays within combustion chambers.

It's way too easy to take pot shots at this design strategy based on some obviously silly claims. It would not surprise me at all if well-configured exhaust-heated gasoline-to-gas generators can improve typical highway cruising MPG compared to typical fuel injection systems. Only if actual testing by at least a dozen well-experienced fueling system innovators produces no examples where these systems fail to improve MPG can justify dismissing these systems.

Let them stand or fall on their own merits. Piling on dismissive comments based on poorly-considered speculations and decades-old silly advertising exaggerations is also unjustified.

Just my opinions.
John

[Frank Lee]

Your opinion and $1 might get you a cup of coffee.

[LoveLearn]

"One gallon of gasoline,at stoichiometric ratio has the energy of 10 sticks of trinitrotuluene(TNT)."

Let's consider a typical modern vehicle which burns liquid-phase-changed gaseous fuel at 30 MPG while touring at 60 mph. Each hour it burns 2 gallons to go those 60 miles. One gallon is 128 fluid ounces. During each hour it burns 256 fluid ounces. Or we can convert that to usage per minute as 256/60 = 4.27 fluid ounces per minute. Exhaust-heated gasoline vaporizers flash-boil only as much liquid fuel as it is needed as it about to be inducted. Many of those system only provide about 50% of the engine's fuel and fuel the rest with liquid-injection systems. So at any specific moment, only a tiny vaporized gasoline volume is present in the generator. Yet even that volume is NOT yet mixed with oxygen from the air. You could fire a spark plug all day inside that 100%-fuel 0%-oxygen environment trying to get it to burn. But your attempt would fail just as a child trying to blow up a city by trying to send a flame down their parent's home gas stove feed pipe can't produce a flame front. Both would fail because there's no significant free oxygen within either of those fuel supplies.

Why write these irrelevant "boogeyman" stories? Who do you think would be foolish enough to think you are describing relevant dangers? It seems a little insulting to other readers. Why do you think other site readers would be so poorly informed as to think this comparison with TNT should be considered?

If you only intended it as a joke, I apologize for failing to understand that intent.
John

[Frank Lee]

What are you going on about?

[sc2dave]

Originally Posted by LostCause

Modern engines are generally very efficient at burning all the fuel available, but very inefficient at extracting useful energy.
- LostCause

But what if you have a carbed engine? I wouldn't consider them "very efficient"