Hi all.
now i think to calculate lpm requirement for engine.

pakistan inventor run a car(1200cc) use 20 lpm of hho gas.this is from my old  thread.

meyer first run a car from water by 9 tubes alternator wfc version(about 3 lpm produce,15 psi meter).on idle,1600cc  dune buggy, idle run 500-1000 rpm.

(1)if 1600cc run 80-100 km/h ,use about 6000 rpm.but drain gas 3000 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*3000 = 4800 LPM,if use hho 1% of that(4800LPM) = 48 LPM ,if use 0.5% =24 LPM.

(2)from idle run(1600cc),if idle at 1000 rpm,but drain gas 500 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*500 = 800 LPM,if use hho 1% of that = 8 LPM ,if use 0.5% =4 LPM.

(3)from idle run(1600cc),if idle at 500 rpm,but drain gas 250 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*500 = 400 LPM,if use hho 1% of that = 4 LPM ,if use 0.5% =2 LPM.

from (2)-(3) observed,if dune buggy run idle about 500-1000 rpm.that need hho about 2-4 LPM,this is reasonable for run a car from 3 lpm(9 tubes alternator wfc) on idle.

Do you think like me?Maybe i'm wrong?

thanks
geenee

Quote from geenee on November 25th, 2012, 09:23 PM

Hi all.
now i think to calculate lpm requirement for engine.

pakistan inventor run a car(1200cc) use 20 lpm of hho gas.this is from my old  thread.

meyer first run a car from water by 9 tubes alternator wfc version(about 3 lpm produce,15 psi meter).on idle,1600cc  dune buggy, idle run 500-1000 rpm.

(1)if 1600cc run 80-100 km/h ,use about 6000 rpm.but drain gas 3000 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*3000 = 4800 LPM,if use hho 1% of that(4800LPM) = 48 LPM ,if use 0.5% =24 LPM.

(2)from idle run(1600cc),if idle at 1000 rpm,but drain gas 500 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*500 = 800 LPM,if use hho 1% of that = 8 LPM ,if use 0.5% =4 LPM.

(3)from idle run(1600cc),if idle at 500 rpm,but drain gas 250 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*500 = 400 LPM,if use hho 1% of that = 4 LPM ,if use 0.5% =2 LPM.

from (2)-(3) observed,if dune buggy run idle about 500-1000 rpm.that need hho about 2-4 LPM,this is reasonable for run a car from 3 lpm(9 tubes alternator wfc) on idle.

Do you think like me?Maybe i'm wrong?

thanks
geenee

Hy geenee,

your calculation is based on the 9 tube cell. As I know, that was a demo cell, not in the car. The tiny flame in the video shows, that this was not so much gas to drive a car. http://yt.worldtv.com/watch?v=1XadsRemkaQ
Todays drycells are able to produce more gas and larger flames with good lpm.


The video where he shows driving his car, you see a hugh container in the back (very first car of meyer). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a74uarqap2E
I think this can produce a lot more than 3lpm.  

The second one had the white WFC (11 tubes) and Injectors, the third one had only injectors.

You see that the first car, did have two electrical engine or generators in the back. One on the left side and one on the right side. But I don´t know exactly how to evaluate this. About the first car, I have known datas....Maybe it was producing gas like in the demo cell. But maybe with more power.

ciao

thanks Ciao.
 
i think first run is the same demo cell,but i didn't sure.i saw again after, first run cell is longer than demo cell.about 24 inches long but democell is 18 inches long.

in your pictures,that's a huge cell and use separated alternator.that can make more LPM,that's sure.i just thought ,how much LPM does enough to run a car(100km/h).  

thanks
geenee

It just pi**es me off everytime I get reminded of the fossile based fuel industry who killed the man out of pure greed.
Sorry for the hijack, rant over.

The stoichiometric  Air-Fuel mixture according to WIKIPEDIA is :

Fuel         By mass [4]      By volume [5]        Percent fuel by mass
Gasoline           14.7 : 1       —                    6.8%
Natural gas   17.2 : 1   9.7  : 1                   5.8%
Propane (LP)   15.67 : 1   23.9 : 1                  6.45%
Ethanol            9 : 1           —                          11.1%
Methanol           6.47 : 1     —                          15.6%
Hydrogen           34.3 : 1   2.39 : 1                  2.9%
Diesel           14.5 : 1   0.094 : 1                  6.8%

Note that : an engine can run very lean AFR with hydrogen i-e : 80:1



Simple calculations for LPM are based on air to fuel ratio: e.g:

1 Liter engine,  takes in 1/4 Liter of air per revolution(Because its 4 stroke),

so @ 1000 RPM , air=250LPM,  if Air-Fuel ratio=25:1, then Fuel=10 Lpm
                                             if Air-Fuel ratio=50:1, then Fuel=5 Lpm
                                              if Air-Fuel ratio=80:1 then Fuel=3.1 Lpm

@ 2000 Rpm , Air=500 Lpm , if Air-Fuel ratio=25:1, then Fuel=20 Lpm
                                             if Air-Fuel ratio=50:1, then Fuel=10 Lpm
                                              if Air-Fuel ration=80:1 then Fuel=6.2 Lpm

so a generic FORMULA can be:

FUEL(Lpm)= Engine Capacity/4 * RPM * AFR

then e.g: Engine capacity = 1 Liter, RPM=1000, AFR= 25:1 =1/25

then FUEL(LPM) = 1/4 * 1000 * 1/25 =   10 LPM

in case of Stan Meyer as he stated he ran car with very lean mix it can be:

if Engine capacity = 1.6L , RPM=3000, AFR =60:1
then , FUEL= 1.6/4 * 3000 * 1/60 = 20 LPM

Cheers All!!!! Now refer to this generic Formula!!!
Thanks to Geenee for starting this Post, now Forum members can refer to
these calculations for fine tuning and testing purposes in various hydrogen
as fuel Projects ;)

hy guys!i talked with someone who was experimenting with hho,and said it could idle a 1.4l engine with 3lpm....and got ot to rev up by other means:D

Quote from Amsy on November 25th, 2012, 11:20 PM

Quote from geenee on November 25th, 2012, 09:23 PM

Hi all.
now i think to calculate lpm requirement for engine.

pakistan inventor run a car(1200cc) use 20 lpm of hho gas.this is from my old  thread.

meyer first run a car from water by 9 tubes alternator wfc version(about 3 lpm produce,15 psi meter).on idle,1600cc  dune buggy, idle run 500-1000 rpm.

(1)if 1600cc run 80-100 km/h ,use about 6000 rpm.but drain gas 3000 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*3000 = 4800 LPM,if use hho 1% of that(4800LPM) = 48 LPM ,if use 0.5% =24 LPM.

(2)from idle run(1600cc),if idle at 1000 rpm,but drain gas 500 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*500 = 800 LPM,if use hho 1% of that = 8 LPM ,if use 0.5% =4 LPM.

(3)from idle run(1600cc),if idle at 500 rpm,but drain gas 250 rpm,for 4 stroke engine.
-that mean drain gas 1.6lites*500 = 400 LPM,if use hho 1% of that = 4 LPM ,if use 0.5% =2 LPM.

from (2)-(3) observed,if dune buggy run idle about 500-1000 rpm.that need hho about 2-4 LPM,this is reasonable for run a car from 3 lpm(9 tubes alternator wfc) on idle.

Do you think like me?Maybe i'm wrong?

thanks
geenee

Hy geenee,

your calculation is based on the 9 tube cell. As I know, that was a demo cell, not in the car. The tiny flame in the video shows, that this was not so much gas to drive a car. http://yt.worldtv.com/watch?v=1XadsRemkaQ
Todays drycells are able to produce more gas and larger flames with good lpm.


The video where he shows driving his car, you see a hugh container in the back (very first car of meyer). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a74uarqap2E
I think this can produce a lot more than 3lpm.  

The second one had the white WFC (11 tubes) and Injectors, the third one had only injectors.

You see that the first car, did have two electrical engine or generators in the back. One on the left side and one on the right side. But I don´t know exactly how to evaluate this. About the first car, I have known datas....Maybe it was producing gas like in the demo cell. But maybe with more power.

ciao

Hi Amsy,

You mention that the third one only had injectors.
Do you mean WFC 423 DA actually has been built on the dune buggy?
Is there any video material of this as you know of?

Cheers, Rider

Quote from geenee on November 26th, 2012, 12:16 AM

thanks Ciao.
 
i think first run is the same demo cell,but i didn't sure.i saw again after, first run cell is longer than demo cell.about 24 inches long but democell is 18 inches long.

in your pictures,that's a huge cell and use separated alternator.that can make more LPM,that's sure.i just thought ,how much LPM does enough to run a car(100km/h).  

thanks
geenee

I think the "first run" which can be found on youtube is dated after the video which I posted. He looks quite younger in this video. but there are no facts about this car with this hugh watertank/cell.

In the video you posted, this is also a hugh cell. He only ideling the engine...don´t know if it is enough to go up with the rmps, or to drive with this amount of gas.


An extrem lean mixture of Hydrogen/Oxygen, cuts down the torque of the engine normaly. Don´t know exactly the behaviour of Hydrogen engines.
My though is, that it was not only the cell driving the car. It also was the injector system and the ambient air ionizer. (Gas processor). :)

 

Quote from Rider on November 26th, 2012, 04:31 AM

Hi Amsy,

You mention that the third one only had injectors.
Do you mean WFC 423 DA actually has been built on the dune buggy?
Is there any video material of this as you know of?

Cheers, Rider

Yeah, look at the summary of 423DA... (attachment)...no WFC--> car with the RED tank.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXctY1K4wko
at about 8, , 13, 21min it starts with the third car with 423DA setup.

Quote from waqas148 on November 26th, 2012, 02:34 AM

The stoichiometric  Air-Fuel mixture according to WIKIPEDIA is :

Fuel         By mass [4]      By volume [5]        Percent fuel by mass
Gasoline           14.7 : 1       —                    6.8%
Natural gas   17.2 : 1   9.7  : 1                   5.8%
Propane (LP)   15.67 : 1   23.9 : 1                  6.45%
Ethanol            9 : 1           —                          11.1%
Methanol           6.47 : 1     —                          15.6%
Hydrogen           34.3 : 1   2.39 : 1                  2.9%
Diesel           14.5 : 1   0.094 : 1                  6.8%

Note that : an engine can run very lean AFR with hydrogen i-e : 80:1



Simple calculations for LPM are based on air to fuel ratio: e.g:

1 Liter engine,  takes in 1/4 Liter of air per revolution(Because its 4 stroke),

so @ 1000 RPM , air=250LPM,  if Air-Fuel ratio=25:1, then Fuel=10 Lpm
                                             if Air-Fuel ratio=50:1, then Fuel=5 Lpm
                                              if Air-Fuel ratio=80:1 then Fuel=3.1 Lpm

@ 2000 Rpm , Air=500 Lpm , if Air-Fuel ratio=25:1, then Fuel=20 Lpm
                                             if Air-Fuel ratio=50:1, then Fuel=10 Lpm
                                              if Air-Fuel ration=80:1 then Fuel=6.2 Lpm

so a generic FORMULA can be:

FUEL(Lpm)= Engine Capacity/4 * RPM * AFR

then e.g: Engine capacity = 1 Liter, RPM=1000, AFR= 25:1 =1/25

then FUEL(LPM) = 1/4 * 1000 * 1/25 =   10 LPM

in case of Stan Meyer as he stated he ran car with very lean mix it can be:

if Engine capacity = 1.6L , RPM=3000, AFR =60:1
then , FUEL= 1.6/4 * 3000 * 1/60 = 20 LPM

Cheers All!!!! Now refer to this generic Formula!!!
Thanks to Geenee for starting this Post, now Forum members can refer to
these calculations for fine tuning and testing purposes in various hydrogen
as fuel Projects ;)

thanks all.

from this.
1 Liter engine,  takes in 1/4 Liter of air per revolution(Because its 4 stroke).
-i think 1/2 of rpm cause 4 stroke that has 2 cycles(revolution).meter show 2X rpm but drain air X rpm.

1:80 for hydrogen
-but if HHO that must less than maybe 1:100(1%) or 0.5:100(0.5%). if include ionize air+laser intake must less than that maybe 0.1:100(0.1)% .this mean 4.8 LPM(0.1%) that enough to run 100 km/h(1600cc).



thanks
geenee

Keep in mind the A/F ratio for petroleum products is based on doped fuel molecules, most of which do not burn in the combustion chamber.  HHO is already at stochiometric ratio; when you add air which is mostly nitrogen, you have a partially lean mixture, but a mixture that has a controlled burn rate to coincide with the needed burn rate inside an internal combustion engine.  Even better is to add a plasma spark and water mist to the mixture; doing so should reduce the LpM HHO drastically to something manageable by even brute force electrolysis.  I mentioned all this to Pete but I haven't heard if he was able to get his little test car running as of yet.

Geenee, I really think it would be best to test this on a small scale with a 120cc engine and then see how it scales up.  I suspect it will scale up much better than petroleum due to volumetric efficiency which is a killer to any large gasoline engine.  I would be very surprised if you could not get a small 120cc engine to run on 2-3 LpM using plasma spark and water mist.  Once running, I would also be surprised if you could not harness enough output power to drive a brute force HHO electrolyzer.

I think Lynx has stated, "We need to build it to find out".  I'll state it again even though there is a risk in time and expenditures, doing it is the only way to know for sure.  I have plans myself to do this very thing once my budget allows for it.

Quote from geenee on November 26th, 2012, 07:37 AM

-i think 1/2 of rpm cause 4 stroke that has 2 cycles(revolution).meter show 2X rpm but drain air X rpm.

thanx geenee
 sorry my mistake, it is 1/2 of Rpm.

but still let us assume that we use

AFR 80:1                         (not very lean mixture)
Engine capacity=1600cc    (approx 40+ hp )
RPM=2500                       (approx 100km/h)

then HHO required= 1.6/2*2500*1/80=  25LPM

and using brute force , a 5mmw cell will consume approx 6.6Hp (approx 5000Watt),
still
 its running a 40+ Hp engine while consuming 6.6hp

cheers
waqas

Quote from waqas148 on November 27th, 2012, 12:42 PM

Quote from geenee on November 26th, 2012, 07:37 AM

-i think 1/2 of rpm cause 4 stroke that has 2 cycles(revolution).meter show 2X rpm but drain air X rpm.

thanx geenee
 sorry my mistake, it is 1/2 of Rpm.

but still let us assume that we use

AFR 80:1                         (not very lean mixture)
Engine capacity=1600cc    (approx 40+ hp )
RPM=2500                       (approx 100km/h)

then HHO required= 1.6/2*2500*1/80=  25LPM

and using brute force , a 5mmw cell will consume approx 6.6Hp (approx 5000Watt),
still
 its running a 40+ Hp engine while consuming 6.6hp

cheers
waqas

Hy waqas,

when you driving constant 100km/h the engine do not use its full power. The 40+hp is only the maximum power which the engine is able to produce with gasoline.

This is a quite other calculation I think. So you need for (perhaps) 15hp (don´t know exactly) 25LPM. ->think about that the buggy is a very light vehicle

Found something. It is in german, but you see the a BMW series "8" (850csi has about 1800kg). http://www.e31.net/luftwiderstand.html
for 100km/h it needs 25hp!

Quote from Dog-One on November 26th, 2012, 04:14 PM

Keep in mind the A/F ratio for petroleum products is based on doped fuel molecules, most of which do not burn in the combustion chamber.  HHO is already at stochiometric ratio; when you add air which is mostly nitrogen, you have a partially lean mixture, but a mixture that has a controlled burn rate to coincide with the needed burn rate inside an internal combustion engine.  Even better is to add a plasma spark and water mist to the mixture; doing so should reduce the LpM HHO drastically to something manageable by even brute force electrolysis.  I mentioned all this to Pete but I haven't heard if he was able to get his little test car running as of yet.

Geenee, I really think it would be best to test this on a small scale with a 120cc engine and then see how it scales up.  I suspect it will scale up much better than petroleum due to volumetric efficiency which is a killer to any large gasoline engine.  I would be very surprised if you could not get a small 120cc engine to run on 2-3 LpM using plasma spark and water mist.  Once running, I would also be surprised if you could not harness enough output power to drive a brute force HHO electrolyzer.

I think Lynx has stated, "We need to build it to find out".  I'll state it again even though there is a risk in time and expenditures, doing it is the only way to know for sure.  I have plans myself to do this very thing once my budget allows for it.

hi Dog one
- if use lower scale test,like you said.100cc 4strokes at 1000 rpm that drain air 50 lpm if AFR is 1:100.
lpm is needed 0.5 lpm.but the importance thing is burn rate ,without this cause no force or power to push a piston.

thanks for thought all
geenee

Quote from geenee on November 28th, 2012, 06:33 PM

hi Dog one
- if use lower scale test,like you said.100cc 4strokes at 1000 rpm that drain air 50 lpm if AFR is 1:100.
lpm is needed 0.5 lpm.but the importance thing is burn rate ,without this cause no force or power to push a piston.

thanks for thought all
geenee

Correct.  You do not want a massive "boom" inside the compression chamber while the piston is near TDC.  All you will accomplish is damage to the engine.  The trick is to ignite the HHO 10 degrees or so after TDC, preferably with a plasma jet ignition.  The HHO will react and attempt to expand rapidly but be somewhat absorbed by the water mist which will in-turn expand even more as it turns from liquid to gaseous form.  Together, all these interlocking events will create a very powerful and controlled push of the piston that you can harness.  If done properly, the expansion will cease just about the time the piston reaches BDC, which will allow you to collect the majority of the kinetic energy.  For power settings less than 100% the only thing you want to happen differently is that the expansion stops prior to BDC.  This would be controlled by using all the same ratios of HHO, air and water mist, just in a total lesser amount, controlled by a simple throttle plate that will maintain some vacuum in the combustion chamber during the intake stroke.

You are striving for a tuned expansion of gases, never an explosion or detonation.  Using the word "burn" is actually inaccurate for what you are attempting to accomplish.  Using the ingredients of HHO, air and water, any exhaust pushed out of the engine isn't even considered a waste product any more, so if you need to dump it to control the burn rate or motor speed, by all means do it.  Technically you could even put the throttle plate on the exhaust side of the motor and contain the previous cycle's leftovers to control the next cycle's power output.

Quote from Dog-One on November 28th, 2012, 07:14 PM

Correct.  You do not want a massive "boom" inside the compression chamber while the piston is near TDC.  All you will accomplish is damage to the engine.  The trick is to ignite the HHO 10 degrees or so after TDC, preferably with a plasma jet ignition.  The HHO will react and attempt to expand rapidly but be somewhat absorbed by the water mist which will in-turn expand even more as it turns from liquid to gaseous form.  Together, all these interlocking events will create a very powerful and controlled push of the piston that you can harness.  If done properly, the expansion will cease just about the time the piston reaches BDC, which will allow you to collect the majority of the kinetic energy.  For power settings less than 100% the only thing you want to happen differently is that the expansion stops prior to BDC.  This would be controlled by using all the same ratios of HHO, air and water mist, just in a total lesser amount, controlled by a simple throttle plate that will maintain some vacuum in the combustion chamber during the intake stroke.

You are right with all the thoughts. A little bit of water mist / steam will actually be beneficial for volume expanding.
When we look closly to Stan Meyer car, the steam resonator did this partially because this device was more or less a plate WFC (electrodes in water feeded by voltage). Also the exhaust gases comprehend "chilled" watersteam. The Injektor is IMHO compareable with the water spoark plug using discharge at high voltages to create a plasma of all that things, including some HHO to create a heat process that not only ignites the HHO but also let the steam even more expand to higher pressures since the combustion chamber is a closed system during ignition time. The only component part which will drawback is the piston performing work. :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_pressure

Quote from Amsy on November 28th, 2012, 01:58 AM

Quote from waqas148 on November 27th, 2012, 12:42 PM

Quote from geenee on November 26th, 2012, 07:37 AM

-i think 1/2 of rpm cause 4 stroke that has 2 cycles(revolution).meter show 2X rpm but drain air X rpm.

thanx geenee
 sorry my mistake, it is 1/2 of Rpm.

but still let us assume that we use

AFR 80:1                         (not very lean mixture)
Engine capacity=1600cc    (approx 40+ hp )
RPM=2500                       (approx 100km/h)

then HHO required= 1.6/2*2500*1/80=  25LPM

and using brute force , a 5mmw cell will consume approx 6.6Hp (approx 5000Watt),
still
 its running a 40+ Hp engine while consuming 6.6hp

cheers
waqas

Hy waqas,

when you driving constant 100km/h the engine do not use its full power. The 40+hp is only the maximum power which the engine is able to produce with gasoline.

This is a quite other calculation I think. So you need for (perhaps) 15hp (don´t know exactly) 25LPM. ->think about that the buggy is a very light vehicle

Found something. It is in german, but you see the a BMW series "8" (850csi has about 1800kg). http://www.e31.net/luftwiderstand.html
for 100km/h it needs 25hp!

thanx Amsy!
but let me elaborate my point :)  

E.g: if a car on gasoline going at 100km/h is using like 15hp of the engine capable of 40hp, then it has 25hp spare and not utilized while consumption of fuel is almost the same.
Thats why some HHO systems installed in such situation gives mpg improvement because the AFR can be leaned out without losing much HP.

But my point was... if an engine capable of 40hp max, and by using HHO of 25-35LPM(Nay sayers says that much is required), can achieve its max 40hp rating,
and
25-35LPM is like around 6-8Hp total,
then
it is quite convincing evidence to the Nay sayers that
such a self running system is very much possible. ;)
thanx
waqas

Quote

For fuels, the energy per unit volume is sometimes a useful parameter. Comparing, for example, the effectiveness of hydrogen fuel to gasoline, hydrogen has a higher specific energy (energy per unit mass) than gasoline does, but, even in liquid form, a much lower volumetric energy density.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

Quote from Amsy on November 29th, 2012, 12:30 AM

You are right with all the thoughts. A little bit of water mist / steam will actually be beneficial for volume expanding.
When we look closly to Stan Meyer car, the steam resonator did this partially because this device was more or less a plate WFC (electrodes in water feeded by voltage). Also the exhaust gases comprehend "chilled" watersteam. The Injektor is IMHO compareable with the water spoark plug using discharge at high voltages to create a plasma of all that things, including some HHO to create a heat process that not only ignites the HHO but also let the steam even more expand to higher pressures since the combustion chamber is a closed system during ignition time. The only component part which will drawback is the piston performing work. :D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vapor_pressure

Slight clarification.  Not steam, water mist in liquid form.  You would only want to use steam to suppress expansion, since it will not expand any more within its contained volume.  Steam will act as a filler to control burn rate.  Water mist on the other hand will expand considerably as it migrates from liquid to gas.  Something like a piezoelectric transducer would probably work quite well.

/watch?v=exH4wXEfGGM

Quote from Dog-One on November 29th, 2012, 11:00 AM

Slight clarification.  Not steam, water mist in liquid form.  You would only want to use steam to suppress expansion, since it will not expand any more within its contained volume.  Steam will act as a filler to control burn rate.  Water mist on the other hand will expand considerably as it migrates from liquid to gas.  Something like a piezoelectric transducer would probably work quite well.

/watch?v=exH4wXEfGGM

My thoughts are going to superheated steam. Look at this link:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Dampfdruck05.png&filetimestamp=20100417151055

http://www.wissenschaft-technik-ethik.de/wasser_dampfdruck.html

They are german links again, but you see here, that the water at 20° when rising to 100°C it makes a differntial pressure of 989mBar (~13psi) ...
but look to the difference from 100°C to 370,12°C the difference of the pressure is 209bar (~3031psi)....
This is measured or calculated in a closed chamber where pressure can be built up.

Of corse, the most power would be from 20°C to 370°C (68°F to 698°F).
But also from 100°C (water boiling point) to 370°C are enough to drive the psiton very good.

Imagine how high is the temperature in an arc...there are several 1000°C. Also the HHO does the rest to the vapor with burning temperatures >3000°C. :D

We also can find this results in google. Only search for "vapor pressure".

Quote from Amsy on November 29th, 2012, 11:44 AM

My thoughts are going to superheated steam. Look at this link:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Dampfdruck05.png&filetimestamp=20100417151055

http://www.wissenschaft-technik-ethik.de/wasser_dampfdruck.html

They are german links again, but you see here, that the water at 20° when rising to 100°C it makes a differntial pressure of 989mBar (~13psi) ...
but look to the difference from 100°C to 370,12°C the difference of the pressure is 209bar (~3031psi)....
This is measured or calculated in a closed chamber where pressure can be built up.

Of corse, the most power would be from 20°C to 370°C (68°F to 698°F).
But also from 100°C (water boiling point) to 370°C are enough to drive the psiton very good.

Imagine how high is the temperature in an arc...there are several 1000°C. Also the HHO does the rest to the vapor with burning temperatures >3000°C. :D

We also can find this results in google. Only search for "vapor pressure".

Water is not an ideal gas so you can't use the standard ideal gas law formula.  Water changing from liquid to solid expands and has massive force able to crush rock with ease.  Granted it doesn't expand much.

Also, if you start ignition with a plasma jet spark, you can be certain most all the HHO will recombine back to water, so now inside the combustion chamber you have a large plasma ball, water mist, steam and momentum--sounds like a pretty good combination that has worked successfully in many past and present applications.

I do plan to test this beyond theory fairly soon.  Once I have my Punch HHO cells with all their necessary back-flash suppressors and my plasma jet ignition connected to a small engine, I will find out first hand what combination makes the engine run and produce power.

Would be nice if someone outfitted a MYT engine with HHO.
http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=823

Allthough it has a much bigger flow through, it also has less mass (68Kilo) and much more HP (800) and very little friction and much less parts.

Even more better to outfit it the Papp-way losing the intakes and exhausts.

Only thing is we don't have an exact blue print of this engine, the timing mechanism for instance is brilliant and so..... not clear to me. ;)

Quote from Dog-One on November 29th, 2012, 06:40 PM

Quote from Amsy on November 29th, 2012, 11:44 AM

My thoughts are going to superheated steam. Look at this link:
http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Dampfdruck05.png&filetimestamp=20100417151055

http://www.wissenschaft-technik-ethik.de/wasser_dampfdruck.html

They are german links again, but you see here, that the water at 20° when rising to 100°C it makes a differntial pressure of 989mBar (~13psi) ...
but look to the difference from 100°C to 370,12°C the difference of the pressure is 209bar (~3031psi)....
This is measured or calculated in a closed chamber where pressure can be built up.

Of corse, the most power would be from 20°C to 370°C (68°F to 698°F).
But also from 100°C (water boiling point) to 370°C are enough to drive the psiton very good.

Imagine how high is the temperature in an arc...there are several 1000°C. Also the HHO does the rest to the vapor with burning temperatures >3000°C. :D

We also can find this results in google. Only search for "vapor pressure".

Water is not an ideal gas so you can't use the standard ideal gas law formula.  Water changing from liquid to solid expands and has massive force able to crush rock with ease.  Granted it doesn't expand much.

Also, if you start ignition with a plasma jet spark, you can be certain most all the HHO will recombine back to water, so now inside the combustion chamber you have a large plasma ball, water mist, steam and momentum--sounds like a pretty good combination that has worked successfully in many past and present applications.

I do plan to test this beyond theory fairly soon.  Once I have my Punch HHO cells with all their necessary back-flash suppressors and my plasma jet ignition connected to a small engine, I will find out first hand what combination makes the engine run and produce power.

Of course it is no ideal gas... but the diagramms of water vapor are good known and exist since the invention of the steam engine. So it is a theoretical aspect, that it makes nearly no difference to heat water from 20° to 370° or from 100° to 370°C is right and can be also seen in the diagram.
Of course every theroetical thought is different to real test on engines and the process will be everytime a litte different. And as you see there is far more behind only evaporating water. Because you have a closed system and the pressure rises the evaporation of the water is limited to this chamber. And also the pistons mechanical resistance can vary due to different loads...depending which application is used for.  
Also my thoughts are going to what happens when the injector is getting hot (>100°C) because of the plasma. Is it then possible to be sure to work with water in liquid state?
But we will see, because like you I will make and also made some test about this. The injektor is already finished and can be feeded with water or steam. So I whish good luck to us for the tests. :)

regards

Amsy,

Wow.  You are testing with an injector.  Exciting.
The gas mixture in the patent is mentioned to be; water mist, ionized air and exhaust gas.  Ionized air might do extra work in the small cavity?

Are you also working with ionized air in your tests?

Good luck with testing.

Rider

Quote from Rider on November 30th, 2012, 07:57 AM

Amsy,

Wow.  You are testing with an injector.  Exciting.
The gas mixture in the patent is mentioned to be; water mist, ionized air and exhaust gas.  Ionized air might do extra work in the small cavity?

Are you also working with ionized air in your tests?

Good luck with testing.

Rider

Hi rider,

Yeah it is realy exciting. It is a own built injector. Not 100% the one of stanley meyer. Also I´m not using only high voltage for the injector, I also amplify the plasma with a variac.
So I built up 20kV over the injector and this little arc unlooks the amperage of the variac, like in the "Water spark plug" circuits.
Now it is all in an early state of process.
But I achieved huge sparks in the injektor without watermist or steam. So in air it already works :D
So with some HHO and water it will make boom :D

Now I´m try to get a good watermist/steam source and I found a good one:
Take a pair of tubes like one of the WFC an start with 100V and destilled water elektrolyses. After a few seconds (depending on the containment) the water is cooking. Then the amperage will go down to half and less. Then you can go up with the voltage at nearly 230V-->the current will go down....the WFC is making deep sounds like a hugh transfo. So I reached with 250-300Watt a lot of steam (like from a exhaust pipe of a small car in winter) with HHO in it. I think it is a good mixture for the injector. Have to test it. I will also try the measurments of stanley meyer with the 0.5" and 0.75" cell system. Maybe this will work at best performance.  

At this time I´m not using ionized air. But maybe to become more performance of the injector I also try this maybe.

Regards

Quote from Amsy on November 30th, 2012, 10:48 AM

Quote from Rider on November 30th, 2012, 07:57 AM

Amsy,

Wow.  You are testing with an injector.  Exciting.
The gas mixture in the patent is mentioned to be; water mist, ionized air and exhaust gas.  Ionized air might do extra work in the small cavity?

Are you also working with ionized air in your tests?

Good luck with testing.

Rider

Hi rider,

Yeah it is realy exciting. It is a own built injector. Not 100% the one of stanley meyer. Also I´m not using only high voltage for the injector, I also amplify the plasma with a variac.
So I built up 20kV over the injector and this little arc unlooks the amperage of the variac, like in the "Water spark plug" circuits.
Now it is all in an early state of process.
But I achieved huge sparks in the injektor without watermist or steam. So in air it already works :D
So with some HHO and water it will make boom :D

Now I´m try to get a good watermist/steam source and I found a good one:
Take a pair of tubes like one of the WFC an start with 100V and destilled water elektrolyses. After a few seconds (depending on the containment) the water is cooking. Then the amperage will go down to half and less. Then you can go up with the voltage at nearly 230V-->the current will go down....the WFC is making deep sounds like a hugh transfo. So I reached with 250-300Watt a lot of steam (like from a exhaust pipe of a small car in winter) with HHO in it. I think it is a good mixture for the injector. Have to test it. I will also try the measurments of stanley meyer with the 0.5" and 0.75" cell system. Maybe this will work at best performance.  

At this time I´m not using ionized air. But maybe to become more performance of the injector I also try this maybe.

Regards

Hmm if you put the steam through 2 plates with a voltage difference it should produce a whole lot more of hho.

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=784&pid=9028#pid9028

Project 1 of the doable devices talks about it... :)