A fresh look at the Clem motor

[sm0ky2]

It is important to go back to the beginning.
Set aside (for a moment) the replications of people attempting to understand it.


Look at what was given to us by the inventor.


Look at the description of the device
And what we know about its' characteristics.


The laws of convection dictate there are areas of hot and areas of less hot
contained in the stream of hot gasses from the burner.


The vortices separate these into a temperature (and subsequent pressure) differential.


This thermal potential is then converted into further rotational force,
simultaneously accelerating the process (to a system maximum) and also
lowering the (average) temperature of the gasses by converting heat to work.


The most interesting aspect of this device (to me) is not what it does or how it converts the heat to rotation, these things are trivial and mostly well understood.


The point of interest i find most intriguing is not even being mentioned here::
most arguments concern the output of the rotor.
But most seem to miss the point that the exhaust gasses (though colder than at the burner) are still well above ambient. If the claim of OU stops at the rotor!?! Where does that put the remaining thermal energy of the exhaust?


I suppose many engines are suspect in this area, have you ever compared the total energy consumed by your car, in terms of the mobility, recharging the electrical systems, and then try to add in all the heat output?
It is estimated (by Carnot) that 50% of your fuel is converted directly to heat losses.
Where does this heat go? Can we recover it? (Seebeck Exhaust Generators used to be a thing)


Exhaust from the Clem engine could possibly boil water after it leaves the machine.
i think if we are measuring efficiency or energy in and out, this should be done with respect to the thermal differential between the gas coming out of the burner, and the temperature of the exhaust.


It has been considered that the Rank/Hilsch device does not follow Carnot Law

[sm0ky2]

We can test this:


By running hot water through a mechanical rotary sprinkler
(the pure rotary ones, not an oscillating sprinkler)


The output water is 2 streams one inside the other.
One very hot, the other very cold.
I'm sure it does this with cold water to a lesser degree though i have not measured that.

[aussiebattler]

What astounds me the most is that commentators on the Clem fail to explain where the energy that gives us 350 hp to drive the car and produces a bunch of heat as well (that we need to do away with ) comes from. Well of course we have heard about the breakdown of the cooking oil but this does not fit with Clem's dialouge.

[TommeyReed]

Hi aussiebattler,

Ok, now you have a very good question.

Lets look at the claim of 350hp, 1800 rpms, cooking oild and temperature over 300deg.

350hp*(5252/1800) = 1021.2 ft/lb of torque is needed at a constant.

This is a lot of thrust and depending on the size, flow rate  and other factors. If it's 24" diameter  spinning at 1800 rpms the velocity needed would be greater then 188.4ft/sec. In fact it would need double that due to load. 188.4 just gets you up to speed, put a load on it and it will slow down to balance out.

So  to be safe, 376.8ft/sec just for the total velocity of the jets.

To generate the thrust and keep the velocity would be calculated by the size of the jets and number of them. This also will deal with how much fluid flow rate is needed gpm and psi.

These are big numbers to deal with, if all starts with what size you plan to build.

I have a hydraulic pump that produce 80gpm@2000 psi/1714 = 93.34 hp needed to move that amount of fluid and pressure.

I still believe that it was a type of diesel effect with the cooking oil to get this much power out of it.

Tom

[aussiebattler]

Tommy
By your explanation it is not so incredible how the motor works but rather how much energy you can get out of a few bottles of cooking oil (even enough to pump it to high pressure as well)
ab