In this project we are turning back time,and going to see just how long ago water could have been to increase efficiencies of the ICE. We are not talking %5,10% or even 20%,we are talking 50% plus increases in efficiency by adding water-->and we are going to make it even harder by using a very old stationary engine that i picked up today. We will also be switching over to a diesel engine after we have completed this first project.
This first video is just showing the engine we will be using for the project. It is a sundial type B. It was manufactured in the 1940"s,and is a 2HP engine.
But first we must get it running.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OE6xBjwq_kI
Looking forward to this topic.
Thanks for sharing mate
Luc
Quote from: tinman on March 28, 2015, 01:34:54 AM
In this project we are turning back time,and going to see just how long ago water could have been to increase efficiencies of the ICE. We are not talking %5,10% or even 20%,we are talking 50% plus increases in efficiency by adding water-->and we are going to make it even harder by using a very old stationary engine that i picked up today. We will also be switching over to a diesel engine after we have completed this first project.
This first video is just showing the engine we will be using for the project. It is a sundial type B. It was manufactured in the 1940"s,and is a 2HP engine.
But first we must get it running.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OE6xBjwq_kI
Water tends to help with higher compression ratios. Isn't that engine 9:1 or less?
Quote from: MarkE on March 28, 2015, 03:10:55 AM
QuoteIsn't that engine 9:1 or less?
Yes-much less. The compression ratio of these old girls is 5:1. It has a 4" slug,and a 4 1/4" stroke-so it is a slightly over square engine. So even with the low compression ratio,it is a handfull to start.
QuoteWater tends to help with higher compression ratios.
The water will not be used to reduce or stop detonation due to high compression ratio's. With these experiments we will be mixing the water with the fuel by way of a catalyst. We will then be adding a high energy ignition system that produces a continual arc(thanks to jaycar) rather than a single spark-as can be seen in the next video.
What do you mean when you say that you intend to mix the water with the gasoline using a catalyst? Are you trying to react the water with the fuel to create a different product? Or are you trying to create an emulsion of gasoline and water? A stirring or injection mechanism should be enough to do that.
Quote from: MarkE on March 28, 2015, 07:27:24 AM
What do you mean when you say that you intend to mix the water with the gasoline using a catalyst? Are you trying to react the water with the fuel to create a different product? Or are you trying to create an emulsion of gasoline and water? A stirring or injection mechanism should be enough to do that.
I have teamed up with a friend of mine that is an industrial chemist. We have developed a catalyst that allows us to use water to enhance fuel economy up to 50% per volume of fuel. The fuel,catalyst,water ratio will be lifted to 40% fuel,10% catalyst,and 50% water. The catalyst cost about $1.00 a ltr to produce,and only a 10% volume need be used per total volume of liquid fuel.
Here is the second video in the many to come. Seems we had a problem with the magneto,but all fixed now. The adition of a couple of neo's gave it some extra life lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCcIZDGFvAE
SOoo
a low compression motor running with 50 % water .. with the same power output .
WOW !!
Quote from: ramset on March 28, 2015, 09:25:11 AM
SOoo
a low compression motor running with 50 % water .. with the same power output .
WOW !!
That is what we hope to achieve chet ;)
Also being discussed here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20077-water-enhanced-fuel-systems-50-water.html
Quote from: tinman on March 28, 2015, 07:41:08 AM
I have teamed up with a friend of mine that is an industrial chemist. We have developed a catalyst that allows us to use water to enhance fuel economy up to 50% per volume of fuel. The fuel,catalyst,water ratio will be lifted to 40% fuel,10% catalyst,and 50% water. The catalyst cost about $1.00 a ltr to produce,and only a 10% volume need be used per total volume of liquid fuel.
OK so you want to perform some chemical reaction betwee the water and the gasoline.
From my viewpoint there may be ways to save fuel using water injection to form steam that reduces the effective volume of the fuel-air charge. That would theoretically allow reduced fuel charge under typical load while still maintaining a stoichiometric ratio high enough to burn. But I think realizing that would be mechanically quite complicated. The other thing that water injection could do is increase the thermal mass removed each cycle thus keeping the engine cooler at the start of each power stroke and thereby increasing the Carnot limit for the engine. Neither of those ideas involve trying to react water with the gasoline. Other ideas that have been tried have been to try and reform some of the gasoline into syngas prior to ignition. H
2 and CO both support leaner burns that pentane. An initially promising reformer a few years ago got dropped when trial testing ended up with a lot of soot.
Do you have access to a dynamometer to evaluate your results?
Quote from: MarkE on March 28, 2015, 01:28:31 PM
Do you have access to a dynamometer to evaluate your results?
I think the "starter generator" would serve well as a dynamometer. First start the engine on gasoline only and connect a fixed resistive load to the generator and calculate how many cc of gasoline is consumed in 30 minutes, then repeat the test with the gasoline water mixture using the same load and time. If there is less gasoline used in the gasoline water mix, that should represents the % of savings. It not need to be anymore complicated then that.
Luc
Quote from: gotoluc on March 28, 2015, 01:44:49 PM
I think the "starter generator" would serve well as a dynamometer. First start the engine on gasoline only and connect a fixed resistive load to the generator and calculate how many cc of gasoline is consumed in 30 minutes, then repeat the test with the gasoline water mixture using the same load and time. If there is less gasoline used in the gasoline water mix, that should represents the % of savings. It not need to be anymore complicated then that.
Luc
One would need an adjustable or multiple resistor loads in order to find out whether improvements were reached only under a single condition. Then that performance can be compared to the specific fuel consumption for commonly available gen sets. You don't want to fall in the trap of making a one-off incrementally more efficient under some condition and then conclude that the changes lead to something better than you can already buy. The starter/generator is OK if it is an efficient unit, or at least if the efficiency is known accurately. If it is inefficient and the efficiency is not known then the test results will look artificially worse than they really are.
Hmmm
if we were talking standard industry advances in ICE efficiency .000001 etc
I could see a problem ,
here the claim is sooo great that it could effectively be vetted with everything Brad has in the Video.[a motor driving a "loaded" generator and a clock]
he is quite familiar with these test methods.
Have the engine running,but have a couple of problems-one maybe major.
1st-when i fill the water jacket with water,it gets sucked into the cylinder.
2nd-the governing system broke while running-can be fixed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxR0tZ2s6tM
Well, I hope you find or are able to fabricate a new fork.
Quote from: MarkE on March 29, 2015, 08:21:40 AM
Well, I hope you find or are able to fabricate a new fork.
The fork is not the problem,it's the ring guide that the fork go's into thats the problem-->not because it's hard to make,but because i have to get the flywheel off,and it's been on there for over 70 years.
The bigger problem is the water getting from the water jacket into the cylinder. Now i know we will be using water in our fuel,but not this much lol. Im hoping that it's the oil feed tube to the cylinder that is rotten,and not the cylinder it self.
Quote from: tinman on March 29, 2015, 08:32:51 AM
The fork is not the problem,it's the ring guide that the fork go's into thats the problem-->not because it's hard to make,but because i have to get the flywheel off,and it's been on there for over 70 years.
They looked like part of one casting to me. Anyway, I hope you don't have too much difficulty with the repairs.
Quote
The bigger problem is the water getting from the water jacket into the cylinder. Now i know we will be using water in our fuel,but not this much lol. Im hoping that it's the oil feed tube to the cylinder that is rotten,and not the cylinder it self.
I suppose you could pull the piston again and fill that water jacket successively to higher and higher levels to find the leaks wherever they might be. I am sure that you will get it sorted out one way or another.