|
Re: Fuel injection; Thu Apr 5, 2012 9:02 pm
Gergely,
You are one of those who have asked me to explain what I mean by, (quote from
my post):
"It seems that none of you realize that IF you are to use HydrOxy ONLY
for ANY engine, you are dealing with Gas! Exclusively! Period.
May I also point out that all your existing injectors are made for liquid
fuel.
They are NOT suitable for gas!
That is why there are injectors made for gas.
They are very different from liquid fuel injectors.
Using them is a different "ball game". "
Everyone:
By reading the above quote a few times you may come to realize that the
answer is right in front of you!
Note carefully the words I have used.
Especially the word suitable.
Note also that I did NOT use the word compatible.
OK.
Here we go:
First, ask yourselves one question: Why are Gas Injectors manufactured? ??
The answer is simple and it is not even "motor trade" specific,
just general physics.
It is fuel VOLUME delivering capacity!
You all know that liquid fuel is highly "concentrated" (for the
lack of a better word) as far as energy goes.
You also know (or should know!) that the same fuel (meaning: containing the
same energy) in VAPOR form occupies a space which is ENORMOUS, compared to its
liquid VOLUME!
Since we are dealing with water as a fuel here, perhaps we can use water as
an example here, for the purpose of illustrating my point.
So, let's say we have 1 liter of water. It contains a certain amount of
energy.
(whatever it is, it is not important for this explanation)
Now we "condition" this 1 liter of water to be in GAS form (HydrOxy).
Its VOLUME???
Ordinarily, it will be around 1860 2000 liters.
Should you be so clever (or `lucky') to make 100% mono atomic gases, its
VOLUME would be close to 4000 liters!!!
Enter the INJECTOR.
IF we could "burn" water "as is", the injector would have
to only deliver MINUSCULE amount of fine mist (still liquid).
Just like the injectors for petrol (gasoline). OK?
However, our fuel (HydrOxy) is no longer in liquid form!
Now, do any of you still believe that ordinary injectors made for liquid
fuels will be able to deliver that HUGE volume of gas to the engine???
I could `test' your knowledge further or simply `stir' you by asking if you
know the relationship between volume and the pressures required to deliver it
but considering that not a single one of you `picked up' on my statement, I
don't think I will bother.
Instead, I will give you some figures (numbers) but if you choose to argue
the point, you are on your own!
Say you wish to increase the VOLUME of fuel delivered by the injector.
You want to DOUBLE the volume. What is the required pressure to do that?
Double?
NO.
It is 4 times.
Do you want 3 times the original volume?
The pressure is now 9 times!
Do you want to go to 4 times of the original volume?
The pressure is now 16 times of what you started with!
Should you want 10 times more fuel injected, the pressure you need will be
100 times the original pressure!!
As you can see, mathematically, the pressure required is the volume increase
squared.
To be even more specific, let's put some practical numbers in.
One of the generators I have has a 420cc engine. (rated output is 7 kW,
continuous)
For the ease of calculations, let's say it needs 12 L/min. of HydrOxy to run.
Dividing 12 liters by 60 (seconds), we get 0.2 L/second.
However, since the fuel INTAKE is only Ό of the engine's work cycle, that
0.2 L gas
must be injected in Ό of a second!!
In reality, this means that the poor injector would have to deliver that 0.2
L gas at the rate of 0.8 L/second!
You are welcome to try it and please come back to report your results,
particularly the PRESSURE you had to use!
Needless to say, all that fuel is injected in many cycles, depending on
engine RPM.
(An engine running at 3600 RPM has 1800 work cycles per minute.
That is 30 injections/ignition s per second.)
But that will not change what I have stated above.
Do you still feel like using fuel injectors made for liquid fuel for HydrOxy
injection under ENORMOUS pressure?
Do you REALLY understand the SAFETY implications of this?
You may be forgetting that this ENORMOUS pressure also means ENORMOUS
dangers!
IMO, such a set-up would be bordering on INSANITY! No kidding!
I, for one, would NOT want to be around such a set up!
One slight mishap and you are DEAD! Period.
If you have ever experimented with `blowing up' HydrOxy, you will have an
idea of the POWER in that gas.
Otherwise, you really don't have a clue of what you are dealing with!!
Remember, I DID NOT SAY that injectors made for liquid fuel can not inject
gas.
Indeed they can and will (shortly) describe a delightful little experiment I
made all those years ago!
All I said was (and I repeat it): "They are NOT suitable for gas!"
I urge you all to pick up an injector for liquid fuel and one made for gas.
Have a good, hard look at them.
What do you see?
One has a TINY (like a `pin hole') "spray" orifice and the other
has an opening of several millimeters diameter!!
As an example of a gas injector, I have a `JET 21', made by Poliauto in
Italy.
Its output port ID is 5.8mm!!
But its typical working pressure is rated at only 70 kPa rel. (10.15 PSI) and
the maximum is 120 kPa rel. (17.4 PSI).
As for the various types of injection used in car engines, I will not enter
the discussion or arguments.
At present, virtually all generators are equipped with conventional,
carbureted engines.
Gergely, you wrote, quote:
" After the bubbler then you'll have a rail with set pressure filled
with hydroxy.
At the end of the rail attach a stock injector controlled by the ECU or for
testing, a simple PWM."
NO.
My choice is to remove the carburetor, make a simple air intake manifold (if
necessary) and fit the gas injector to the manifold, as close to the cylinder
inlet as practical.
Thus, the gas is injected into the intake manifold when the intake valve is
open and by the time it closes at the end of the intake stroke, it is all sucked
into the cylinder, together with the air so there is NO gas left in the manifold
during the other Ύ of the cycle.
I consider this to be important because IF there is a backfire, there is NO
gas to explode in the inlet manifold!
You also mentioned ECU control.
Sure.
I too named my control unit ECU, however, as you know, I don't use
microprocessors!
Remember, with HydrOxy ONLY, there are only TWO parameters to be controlled:
1. Ignition timing
2. Injection
Hell, I don't need a microprocessor for that!
Just to refresh everyone's memories, here is what I wrote in my article
Ignition system for small engines 2 :
"It needs to be pointed out that the ignition system for HydrOxy ONLY
(not just a booster) will be very different from ignition systems for
hydrocarbon fuels.
It will be significantly simpler.
There will be NO "speed mapping", NO "load mapping", NO
retard/advance change with engine RPM, NO rich/lean mixture setting, NO cold
start setting, NO "knock sensor", NO fuel/air temperature sensor, NO
Oxygen sensor, etc., etc.,
("modern" engines are full of all that rubbish!)
There will be NO need for high energy sparks, multiple sparks, etc.
Further, there will be NO such thing as UNBURNED fuel remaining in the
cylinders!!
In short; when we get to the larger engines (cars), the first thing we have
to do is to rip out the "computer" and install our own system,
incorporating electronic injection as well.
(Perhaps another option could be to completely re-program the `computer',
provided that one could obtain the original programming software from the
manufacturer, which, I would say, is HIGHLY unlikely!)
I am in favor of electronic injection (but ONLY for HydrOxy) for three
reasons:
1. I reason that if we allow HydrOxy to flow continuously, some of it may
disappear during the other Ύ of the engine's work cycle. (the intake stroke is
only Ό cycle)
2. If HydrOxy is ALWAYS present in the intake manifold, we may risk a
damaging back fire.
3. Electronic Fuel Injection (EFI) makes RPM control possible.
Now to that experiment with the liquid fuel injector I mentioned earlier:
Briefly, here is how that experiment came about.
One day my son (Karl) came home from work with a 'faulty' fuel injector.
One of his friends at work had a problem with his car and the mechanic traced
the problem to one of the injectors and replaced it.
Karl asked if he could have the faulty one and the friend said yes so he
brought it home.
To be honest, this was the first time I ever saw an injector `at close
range'!
As it turned out, the injector itself was not faulty at all but there was a
pin hole in the short rubber hose which was permanently attached to it.
Anyway, I thought, what can I do with this injector?
I replaced the leaking hose and attached it to the gas output of the
electrolyzer I had at the time.
However, I needed to control the gas input to it and then ignite the gas
coming out.
So I quickly set up an old spark plug, ignition coil and a `transistor'
electronic ignition.
I also set up an electronic injection control an a `bread board'.
[I just found the old, hand drawn diagram the other day.
The ignition was set to approx. 1.3 Hz 18.5 Hz.
Injection pulse width was adjustable from about 100 ΅s to 2.1 ms. There was
also an adjustable delay (few milliseconds) stage to allow the injector to close
before the spark arrived]
I simply placed the injector flat on the bench top and also the spark plug,
facing the output orifice of the injector. The distance between them was about
30 mm.
I also placed a plastic "spaghetti" (about 15 mm diameter) between
the injector and the spark plug. That was to prevent the gas rising (and
disappearing! ) too quickly!
Thus, what I had was effectively an open ended `cylinder'.
One end had the injector and the other end the spark plug, both entering the
"spaghetti" openings slightly.
I turned on the electrolyzer, built up the pressure to 15 PSI and then turned
the power off.
First, I set the `speed' control to minimum, powered up the
injection/ignition electronics and the show started!!
I tell you. It was MUSIC to my ears!
It started firing about once a second and as I was turning up the `speed', it
was like rapidly repeating miniature EXPLOSIONS!
It sounded like a miniature "lawn mower"!!
I truly enjoyed playing with it and demonstrated it to many who were
interested!
After a couple weeks I got the idea to have it in a CLOSED (aluminium)
cylinder, so I made one on the lathe.
Fitted the injector, screwed in the spark plug and turned the power on.
At the VERY FIRST firing, it ruined the injector!
To cut the story short, I learned many lessons about injectors and injection
methods.
Apart from the TINY volume of gas delivery, probably the most important
lesson was that DI (Direct Injection) requires special, VERY robust injectors
made for that purpose!
Once again, keep in mind that I did all these "weird" things about
16-17 years ago!
Nowadays, my designs (both electronics and mechanical) are more refined and
work much better.
I dare say that once you know HOW, it is no big deal to run engines on water
alone!
Cheers,
Les Banki
In closing, just so you have someone else's opinion on this subject (not just
mine), I paste here a series of posts by `bolt' at overunity.com:
Pay special attention to his last post in red text! (my emphasis)
Re: Selfrunning HHO system with 400 Watts additional output <http://www.overunity.com/...>
« Reply #107 on: December 27, 2010, 08:53:29 PM »
Yes its a OU system! The energy we put in is less then that provided by other
sources. Radiant Energy or water who cares. The excess is enough where its
looped. If the energy transformed only from water it doesn't explain how the TPU
and Kapanadze works when they don't need water. Better a common factor of
Radiant Energy powers all three devices.
Its funny when you show people a COP>1 system they say "its a
measurement error its not COP>1 if it is then you should be able to loop
it" Guess what? This is a looped OU device!
400 watts DC yields about COP 3 without resonance via the energy contained
within the HHO mix as its recombined within a spark. See Atomic Hydrogen Torches
and as much as COP 12 with 3 phase resonance systems. So 3 * 400 = 1200 watts
nett effective including RE. There are two things we know are instant energy
debts here. The lamp 400 watts I think = 1200 - 400 = 800 watts and also the
cell need 400 watts so I have 400 watts to run the engine and cover the
alternator losses. The alternator is going to lose perhaps 150 watts from
mechanical to electrical so I got 250 watts left to keep the motor itself
turning. Will it loop? YES! PS if the lamp is larger then its taken from this
250 watts.
The 250 watts is left within the system and keeps the motor and generator
running overcoming the friction losses of the bearings, piston friction and
valve gear to maintain about 3000 rpm.
The system is scalable the French did this years ago on 25kw genset it runs
on pure water and provides like 10KW OU.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2010, 09:17:50 PM by bolt » Re:
Selfrunning HHO system with 400 Watts additional output <http://www.overunity.com/...>
« Reply #358 on: March 10, 2011, 03:00:47 PM »
<http://www.overunity.com/...>
When HHO is ignited under great pressure like 150-200 PSI with ICE the power
is greatly magnified. Like when you trap HHO in a container then ignite it the
explosion almost takes your roof off! Anyone that tries to store any amount of
HHO in containers at pressures over 7 PSI has just made a lethal weapon
particularly where its raised to pressure like 100 PSI its highly unstable and
will try at any time to convert all that energy back to water.
HHO recombination is an electron migration process where water is used as a
Zero Point Energy proxy. So the water is not actually the fuel even though it
will consume water. For all practical purpose who cares it uses water? As HHO
burns thru metals and raises to thousands of degrees the process has been
measured as OU as electrons are accelerated at huge speeds form kinetic energy
bombards the adjacent molecules in the material being heated and the temperature
is raised several magnitudes hotter than the HHO flame itself. The process is
improved higher by high voltage spark at flame point as within Atomic Welding.
High voltage spark adds abundance of free electrons. See early 1900's books
already recognised this process as OU.
For HHO heaters use rock ore materials with high crystal content not metal.
As crystal excited by extreme heat the crystals are energised release more and
more high speed electrons as piezoelectric effect into adjacent material heating
>3000 degrees. The process goes OU. Special cut rock is then built up around
the heat chamber to make a HHO core reactor. Then conventional fire bricks cover
the stack to make a 300 degree IR radiant heater. Several patents on this
already.
Typically the HHO yields a COP 3 within ICE when all the other parameters
have been perfected for engine timing etc.
So if you put 1000 watts into your cell you have 3000 watts of energy within
the engine. Take off 1000 you need to give back to keep the cell going plus
engine losses, friction and alternator conversion loss etc so total you need to
give back 2000 watts of this energy. Now you have 1000 watts OU available to run
a load. You can see by making engine super efficient you have 1000 watts here
which can be recovered rather then giving it back as losses so as the process is
refined you get over 1000 watts OU.
Now you can see without any PWM driving and special tuning already the
process has a COP 3. By using PWM high frequency drives, ultrasonic water fog
injection, resonance tuned alternator, the COP can easily exceed 5 even higher.
So if you perfected everything and used PWM etc reaching a COP of 10 within a
car engine is not impossible in fact its very achievable as others have done
this already. You need a 5kW cell to get 50kW out the engine running only HHO
and nothing else. Perfect for a small car.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 03:38:05 PM by bolt »
Re: Selfrunning HHO system with 400 Watts additional output <http://www.overunity.com/...>
« Reply #348 on: February 21, 2011, 12:02:45 AM »
<http://www.overunity.com/...>
I find it VERY strange how one of the most exciting disclosures of recent
times witnessing a gasoline engine running on water and generating 400w has the
quietest thread? Maybe its a mental block or a spell cast over mankind where
there are more thrills within under unity 1 watt TOYS or perhaps Sports TV in HD
has been good lately? Re: Selfrunning HHO system with 400 Watts additional
output <http://www.overunity.com/...>
« Reply #375 on: March 11, 2011, 12:18:57 AM »
<http://www.overunity.com/...>
You don't have to make advanced PWM's to test this engine. DC is good enough
already COP 3 via ICE so if you tune everything correctly it will work from the
get go. Even if you are very sloppy and use all of the COP 3 to keep the engine
running with nothing left for a load it makes a nice OU water powered heater:)
While Les has covered all the dots and crossed the t's IMO is terribly
complex for DIY replication. It looks like a 1980's TV circuit LOL
You can do everything required using an AVR micro which only cost about 15
bucks. Then you add a hall sensor to pin 2, one power fet to pin 5 via a driver
and a car ignition coil and you are good to go. Re: Selfrunning HHO system with
400 Watts additional output <http://www.overunity.com/...
> « Reply #386 on: March 13, 2011, 06:07:43
PM »
<http://www.overunity.com/...>
True this is not anything fancy like a bob Boyce system. HHO production
tweaks can be done later but already the system has a COP 3 with basic DC
control of the cell.
The logic here is just like a car engine ECU which controls the start
sequence and sets the correct timing. While it can be done using gears and cogs
its not very elegant and still has no control over engine speed so might as well
do everything at the same time using a processor. Once you have proper control
over gas production and the timing you got proper control over the engine.
Re: Selfrunning HHO system with 400 Watts additional output <http://www.overunity.com/...>
« Reply #383 on: March 12, 2011, 05:16:21 PM »
<http://www.overunity.com/...>
Quote
Bolt, are you planning on raising the compression ratio on your motor?
No its unnecessary and risk of engine damage.
Quote
On the Woodpecker video a flashback device is very close to the motor inlet
and the HHO is piped straight in. http://www.youtube.com/user/woodpecker1311#p/a/u/1/kTFVW8w8bjI Also on that video when the HHO is
removed the engine continues to run and surge. I suspect there is still some
hydrocarbon vapors remaining?
You wont get rid of carbon vapours its a 4 stroke engine and therefore it is
lubricated by oil and will show very tiny amounts in exhaust BUT its not the
source of fuel.
Quote
On the Scarecrow videos from 2008 a 3.5 hp generator is shown running on HHO
with many flashback booms during start up. On the final and postmortem videos he
mentions 6 LPM @ 1000 watts was required for idle and 9 LPM @ 2000 watts was
required to run at full speed with a small load. He did not make any timing or
compression changes. http://www.youtube.com/user/SmartScarecrow#p/c/C547458B2E914426/1/APpGvV\WsZZ8
I hope you are wearing ear protection in your tests. From watching the
available videos it looks like starting the engine on gasoline to get the engine
temperature up quickly could make for a smoother transition.
Best of luck, RD
if you don't change the timing the engine runs like a pig, back fires, can
bend valves and can burn hole in piston. Plus it requires a HUGE amount of gas
just to barely run. When properly tuned and blank spark sorted all these issues
vanish. Thanks for your input!
« Last Edit: March 12, 2011, 05:52:49 PM by bolt »
--- In watercarTWO@ yahoogroups. com, "g3rg3ly"
<gergely.domolki@ ...> wrote:
>
> What if... you have a cell wich is controlled by a pressure switch,
just like Les designed his system. After the bubbler then you'll have a
rail with set pressure filled with hydroxy. At the end of the rail
attach a stock injector controlled by the ECU or for testing, a simple
PWM.
> What would happen? Good monoatomic Hydrogen recombines to H2
immidiately as the nozzle releasing the gas or what?
> Or something else happens?
> At the moment this construction seems to be the simplest possible.
> What is wrong with it I did not realize so far?
>
> Gergely
|
Feed