Reply With Quote
http://www.not2fast.com/NACA/naca-report-531.pdf I think this is the right pdf? The right amount of water speeds up the CO oxidation. My pdf reader not working.Originally Posted by Pinhead
Quick thread hijack.
VW are seriously looking at producing a 282mpg car in a couple of years.
Laugh at High Gas Prices With a 282-MPG VW | Autopia from Wired.com
Garage Sweeper
http://www.not2fast.com/NACA/naca-report-531.pdf I think this is the right pdf? The right amount of water speeds up the CO oxidation. My pdf reader not working.
Oil Changer
Awards:
Very interesting. From that PDF,
CONCLUSIONS
1. Throughout the entire range of these measurements an increase in the mole fraction of water vapor is accompanied by an increase in the linear rate of propagation of flame in space for equivalent mixtures of CO and O2 at constant initial pressure.
2. This rate of increase of speed with the mole fraction of H2O becomes greater as the pressure of reactants is raised.
3. Despite some experimental evidence to indicate that the presence of water vapor is not essential for the production of CO2 by the reaction of CO and O2, there can be little doubt that the water is an essential factor in the attainment of complete equilibrium during their explosive combination.
4. The effect of water vapor is of sufficient magnitude to make essential the accurate control and specification of water-vapor content in any study involving the measurement of flame speed in the explosive oxidation of CO.
5. Experiments by the soap-bubble method cannot be expected to yield precise results unless the concentration of water vapor is very carefully controlled.
Garage Sweeper
They used superheated steam to do the tests. No real energy transfer back to combustion in that test. If I was in a dyno room. You would see amazing things. Of coarse I'd have control over all of the test parameters. Hint.. Hint..
Hello David,
My name is Chris. I will take you up on your offer but I would like to speak with you on the phone before we proceed. Please don't infer by my statement, that I would like to speak with you for the purpose of restricting your testing or preventing you from getting truly unbiased results; quite the contrary... I invite you to test my unit in any way you feel necessary. The purpose of my speaking with you would be to cover some very important points surrounding the device that I will send you. I believe that the unit (when you see it) will speak for itself on the points of safety and sound engineering principles that you mention.
I have spent the last 6 years developing what I believe to be a truly solid "automotive grade" electrolyzer. This is nothing even close to the crap out there on ebay. You are correct in your assumption that many of these devices are scams. In sharp contrast to their sales tactics, I will not even attempt to tell you or predict what kind of performance increase, if any, that you will get. I can assure you sir that my v6 Electrolyzer is no scam, but I am still in the very early stages of vehicle testing my unit. As such it is against my principal to speculate, even in a small way, on any results that you may get from it. You can spend days on my website reading my experiments and my work. I am never afraid to report the failures right along with the success. -But in this case... you've just caught me too early in the process for me to have any results of my own. If that is OK with you, it's OK with me.If I think it is based on sound engineering principles I will go one step further and, at their expense but with no strings attached, test said product under strict test conditions.
One last thing: your sentence "at their expense" is a bit open-ended. If by that you mean I pay the shipping to send you my device, then we are fine. But if you are expecting me to pay for all sorts of laboratory testing then we may have a problem. I do all of my work on my very small personal budget. -My wife and I give ourselves 100 per week "allowance" from our family budget. From my 100 each week I fund all of my research. So I am putting nearly all of my money right now into building up my workshop and developing my prototypes. Expensive testing at your facility would unfortunately be out of my reach at this point. So hopefully you meant nothing more than the expense of my shipping the unit to you. I guess we'll just have to see how you respond.
It's late right now and I need to get to bed for work tomorrow. If you want to PM me with a number that I can contact you, I will call you tomorrow evening after I get home from work. If you prefer I can PM you with my phone number so that you can call me. If you would like to see pictures of the unit I am speaking of, just go to my website and look near the top for my Version 6 Electrolyzer project.
Tire Changer
MPGMike, about what the Seimens engineer told you on keeping the cat at operating temperature:
It seems to me that the standard exhaust system upstream from the cat must be dissipating a lot of heat, especially when a compact factory cast-iron manifold is replaced with steel tube street headers. Cold winter air, and rainwater splashed on the exhaust pipe must add to the problem of getting exhaust gases delivered piping-hot to the cat.How effective would exhaust header and pipe coatings such as Jet Hot be in keeping the exhaust gases hot enough to keep the cat working even in a lean-burn situation? How about the combination of a coating plus thermal wrappings?
Eliminating the EGR system should(?) add a little heat to the exhaust gasses getting to the cat, since the point of EGR is to reduce peak burn temperature. But what about water injection? You want to use water as a peak burn temp depressor to avoid detonation in a high-compression (high fuel efficiency) engine. Does the exhaust gas temperature increase from high compression roughly cancel out the cooling effect of the water mist? I'm trying to guess the effect of these things on the operation of the cat. The cat is one of the emissions devices I accept, and I want to keep it fully functional.
Tire Changer
Bilzilla, I LIKE THAT VEE-DUB!!!! For comparison to what smart factory engineers can do, check out this amateur effort, and his enthusiastic claims:
95 mpg civic:
Aerocivic - how to drop your Cd from 0.34 to 0.17 - Fuel Economy, Hypermiling, EcoModding News and Forum - EcoModder.com
Last edited by seattle smitty; 07-21-2008 at 03:45 PM.
Chris,
Well someone has the courage to step up to the plate. Good for you. GFN is willing to do all the testing for free but that does not include instalation. I have a stock Chevy Blazer (1997) in near as new condition mechanically and a 2005 2.0L Ford Focus. would either of these be good candidates??
DV
When I did the fuel economy tests for the 'Around America Economy Drive' we tested for fuel economy on the dyno after having established a road load power requirement curve. What ths meant was the we would pull a certain rpm and torque such that we had dulicated what the engine would do at a give speed. This road load curve was established fro 20 mph to 80 mph in 10 mph increments.
Fuel measurement was done by a very accurate means. What we did was to have a very tall but skinny burette which fed fuel to the engine. This started off with 100 cc of fuel and the engine would draw from this once the road load was established. At this point a solonoid was opened and an electronic stop whatch triggered. After a prescibed amount of fuel had been deliverd the system was stopped. What we had then was a precise amount of fuel flow for a precise time. This gave us part throttle BSFC figures and, knowing the gearing, we could compute the mileage. Our dyno results were within 2% of the real world figures measured by an independant test body at the Motor Industry Research Center test track at Lindley UK.
DV
Thanks for the vote of confidence here.
DV
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks