The air car

[Cloxxki]

User Cloudseeder over on the supposedly more serious FE forum webiste, has proposed an engine where in a chamber (cilinder) a drop cooled liquid air/oxygen would be exposed to extra hot steam, to result in a violent implosion. The implosion would such in steam on the other side of the piston I supposed, for it all to repeat itself. First you need supercool air and superheated steam though.

Tommey's setup (seen before on Youtube) seems to be the best lifeline pure compressed air will ever get for kinetic work application.

Tommey, have you ever made a formula to express how much kinetic energy you could extract from a V volume unit of compressed air, at P pressure? That might offer us insight how it would perform compared to typical petrol cars and bikes.
I granted the budget, I'd design a vehicle with the gas cilinders as integral part of the chassic. Silly to regard it as add-on only.

BUT, how efficient is current technology in turning "green" electricity or even direct wind power, into compressed air as storage medium?

[Tommey Reed]

Yes, I do know how much air at 3200 psi in a scuba tank could run the Ratchet engine, and hp.

(3200 x .44)/14.7 = 95.78 cu/ft in a basic scuba tank or 96 cu/ft
(3200 x .44cu/ft)/ 120 psi =11.73 cu/ft

(10 ft/lb x 3600 rpm's)/5252=6.85hp using (12x3600)/1728=25 cu/ft in one minute,
It take about 20 minutes at 5hp to fill 96cu/ft scuba tank, no free lunch...
But, the compressor could make 120 psi constant with less time and energy...
You could store at 240psi and using Charles law,Gas laws. The heat will increase pressure tank using solar heating


Hope this helps...

Tom

[AlanA]

@ Tommey

I am very surpriced that you claim that your air engine is 99 % efficient.

You have written:
(10 ft/lb x 3600 rpm's)/5252=6.85hp using (12x3600)/1728=25 cu/ft in one minute,
This means to me that a scuba tank (96 cu/ft) is empty in less than 4 minutes.

Your have written:
It take about 20 minutes at 5hp to fill 96cu/ft scuba tank.

Please can you explain how this air engine is 99 % efficient?

Alana

[Cloxxki]

Thanks Tommey. Although emperial does remain a head scratcher for an old worlder.

Almost 7hp for almost 4 minutes? That would be enough to power a typical go-cart (5.5hp?) pm a winding course for about a 10-minute stint (braking and coasting, even some re-pressurizing).
Or, when using it all, in a straight line, aerodynamically enclosed mini-car on bike-like wheels, it might reach speeds well above highway legal, getting like ~10km out of it, when allowing it to roll out for a another minute.
On an aerodynamic record recumbent bike, speeds would be surely lethal, or at moderate speeds, give like an hour or more at 60mph. At merely 400W, those babies roll 50mph, you know.
That would all be not bad AL ALL, comparing to allowing a person to breath for an hour or so.
If that's what you get by taking inefficiency out of the equasion : wow!

While heat can increase pressure, can it increase vehicle mileage, when the actual work is done at 120psi? I would think that having more air mass stored at lower pressure would bring greater mileage?

I bet that while Tommey's rotary piston engine designs do seem plausibly 99% efficient, seeing his video's, perhaps the actual compressor at hand isn't, at least not yet :-)
Or DID you manage to reverse the engine, Tommey?

[Tommey Reed]

When I talk about efficient air engine, I mean that the heat that runs most  engine shows a lost. if you have a basic piston engine running off of air, it's still no different then if it was gas powered.
The most efficiency is about 20%-25% or 75% wasted energy of energy.
The ratchet or the rotary piston engine are basicly the same, one is linear and the other rotational. Each offers instant torque at TDC, unlike  the basic piston and crank engine.

This is my web site for more information of both engines.

http://overunitynow.com/

Tom.