A fresh look at the Clem motor

[aussiebattler]

smokey
I hope you get somewhere with all your thoeries.
As for me I just looked at what Clem did and said "yep I could do that" ( with the help of a 3d printer. cnc machining and laser cutting  of course). I also paid particular attention to details like spiralling csa depleting channels jn a closed system and a heat exchanger to restore ambient.

ab

[TommeyReed]

Just to show that  nobody read the Rex Research on the cone theory.

http://www.rexresearch.com/clemengn/clemeng.htm

So I'll just add this false claim on the cone theory and the inventor!

When I first read about the Clem Motor I found it odd that a deal had been made with a coal company. Was there a connection with the pump? After finding the Conical Drag Pump patent, I wanted to contact the inventor Walter D. Haentjens of Barrett, Haentjens & Co., Hazleton, Pennsylvania. Otto Haentjens founded Barrett Haentjens & Co., in 1916. The business began in the coalmines of Pennsylvania with Otto Haentjens original patent on the balanced opposed impeller multi-stage volute pump. The company still supplies pumps to the coal industry. They have expanded to other markets and their pumps are installed in many industries worldwide. It's now known as Hazleton Pumps Inc., after its acquisition by The Weir Group.

I contacted Peter Haentjens, the VP/General Manager of Hazleton Pumps, by e-mail to find out if this pump had ever been put into production. He replied that they had not done anything with the patent:

One reason this is not a good pump, is the amount of thrust bearing being push outward due to the pressure. It acts like a piston when pressure is increased, causing it to lose fluid!
Even a screw pump will produce pressure on the thrust bearing for injection moldings, what make you think something much bigger would handle even higher pressure loads?

Tom

[onepower]

Tommy

From the rex research article...

The above account contains only what I considered to be relevant for analysis of the Clem motor. The gear pumps, typically used for asphalt spaying, do not match the description of the pump used by the city of Dallas back in 1972. There should be public records showing what equipment manufacture the asphalt sprayer was purchased from. Since the asphalt pump was patented, I searched for a pump patent that met the following criteria:

1) Patent issued on or before 1972
2) Delivered pressure equivalent to a positive displacement gear pump.
3) Cone shaped rotor with spiral channels.
4) Self-propelling action.
5) Capable of pumping a viscous fluid like asphalt.
6) Large heat transfer to pumped fluids.

As we can see the author never claimed this was the same pump only that it could be similar in there opinion.

Many people also seem to be confusing the time line. Clem stumbled onto a asphalt oil pump which kept running then started building other devices based on that device. Clem's later designs show two parts, a gear driven oil pump driving an enclosed rotating turbine of some sort.

One reason this is not a good pump, is the amount of thrust bearing being push outward due to the pressure. It acts like a piston when pressure is increased, causing it to lose fluid!

Not really, as an engineer I'm familiar with most pump engineering having designed/tested pumps and gas turbines. The outlet (big flat end of cone) has a larger surface area and higher pressure producing a large force to the left. This large force to the left should be balanced with the total pressure/area of the cone wanting to push right. As well, look at the angle of the cone, most of the pressure near the wall acts inward not to the right. So we want to balance the big cone end (pressure/area) with the (pressure/area) of the rest of the cone which acts at an angle, less angle=less force.

Another trick is to use a spring/valve regulator on the output to regulate the output pressure thus thrust force to balance the internal forces. We can also add a little wiggle room so that the pressure/thrust forces control the clearances and even allow for wear over time reducing adjustments. This is why engineers make the big bucks, they thought of all the small details most people never even notice.

AC

[TommeyReed]

Onepower,

These are the only real photos we have. The older ones are clearly hydraulic pumps and or even hydraulic motors.

Now, to produce any hydraulic flow with pressure the basic formula is gpm*psi/1714 = hp, not including loss due to efficiency.

The claim to get 350hp no mater what size it is, would need to have a phase change that of a combustion type beyond any mechanical input driven method.

A multi stage water pump can have a design to equal the pressure on the turbine to cancel out the thrust on either side of the shaft, but hydraulics is a totally different monster.

Even hydraulic axial piston pumps, being the most efficient in today's market, have problem at high pressures. I believe the key of using cooking oil was a phase change, either a combustion type or even water inject into the 300+ deg cooking oil.

I also believed it would have to be a closed loop, due to the explosive effect of super heated cooking oil, especially if water was injected.

I have tested so many design, I have one gear pump worth thousands of dollars with unbelievable 80gpm@3200 psi. But the input power need is over 150hp.

There is no free lunch pumping fluids, unless you are planning a type of phase change to create unbelievable power output.

The real questions to asked, did the Clem engine run off cooking oil as a fuel or was something added to create a different type of phase change.

hydraulic screw pump.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mY7vfOzWeU

Tom

[aussiebattler]

If experimentors wish to still use the cone shape rotor may I suggest making the inner and outer of the cone in two parts and joined so as to make an air tight joint. However my peference is a series of spiral cut discs to replace the cone. A lot easier to construct