|
||||||
|
Auto Fuel
Efficiency Explained My lofty Goals with this
project
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
Auto Fuel Efficiency Auto
Fuel Efficiency is one of my projects. In the simple form it’s
“Getting better gas mileage” or maybe eventually “Uses no
Gas!” There are no gimmicks here. This is about
using sound technological theories and empirical results to create more
efficient internal combustion. What makes me think I can do it better than
the brilliant engineers at the big motor companies? ·
I have different
objectives. Motor companies cannot use science that is not completely
understood because it could not be explained by academia. A product
“failure” in that marketplace could lead to a complete financial
meltdown for them. It would just be too risky. ·
I have no trade secrets to secure my
investment. I am one among many who are having great results experimenting in
this field. In the auto manufacturing world, trade secrets are the only way
to set one another apart. ·
I have no
corporate bureaucracy to negotiate, just good ‘ol garage mechanic
ingenuity. ·
I have an open
mind in terms of the current understanding of physics and the explanation of
energy and matter. In the realm of academics and corporations, “That
which cannot be explained simply does not exist.” This phenomenon
isn’t new. Nikola Tesla was shamed by his professors for his idea of
alternating current which would later supply power to the entire world. They
called it a “Perpetual motion scheme.” (This is still a pat
answer among skeptics in physics when the math doesn’t add up to an
observation – it must have been a wrong calculation or a wrong
observation.) For more information on MY understanding, read this
abstract: David Pressler's Theory of Unity . I have read his book, having received it in
person, but I don’t know where to purchase one. It is, in my opinion,
some of the most brilliant conceptual thought since Einstein. (Even Einstein
had problems with his own theories that David has helped shed new light on.)
Many thanks to David Pressler. ·
I do not need
to know that academia has an explanation for an observed and re-creatable
observation for it to have meaning. ·
I have a skill
set that includes logic, computers, applying technology to solve problems,
mechanics (I’m still a motorhead, even though I CAN program a
microcontroller,) and an ability to explain things. ·
I have no ties
with government or oil profits. ·
I am personally
fueled by disgust of corporate America (or other capitalist countries for
that matter) and the blatant disregard for the environment in favor of
profits or politics. I feel the same way about our government. ·
I have had a
weird passion for this since I was a kid. A solution: (Notice I didn’t say THE solution. We can’t even imagine what is in our future
if we keep an open mind.) Before discussing solving a problem, we
have to define the problem and that entails speaking a bit on the process of
internal combustion and its pitfalls. So, here we go. I’ll start with
some FACTS that may be expounded upon later: ·
The only thing
that “combusts” in an engine is fuel VAPOR. An explosion of gasoline inside an engine
requires gasoline to evaporate, mix with Oxygen under pressure, and then get
the process started with a spark (a bit of energy to start a very quick thermo-chemical
reaction.) The rest is about the critical timing of these events to push the
pistons down in order. If you light a barrel of gasoline on fire, only the
very top, where the gas is evaporating, is actually burning. Underneath,
it’s just liquid fuel waiting it’s turn to mix with Oxygen in the
air. Meanwhile, the whole thing is heating up, speeding up the process,
evaporating quicker, and creating a giant plume of smoke with a giant flame,
but the fact is still that the only thing to burn is the fuel vapor on top. ·
It is the
expansion of hot gases that pushes the piston to create power. (Although that
may seem elementary, it is often overlooked in the energy “math”
of engines by physicists and chemists.) For example, the speed of a flame
from a particular fuel has a big impact on the end result of the process of
pushing down a piston with force. It affects the speed of the force. I have
not seen, to this date, any calculations taking this into account when
comparing gasoline or Propane to Hydrogen. Seems like a serious math error to
me. Force is directly related to the SQUARE of the velocity of expansion. In
short, the amount of energy in Hydrogen may be static, but it’s ability
to change the form of energy to motion (Kinetic energy) is more efficient due
to the velocity of the flame. ·
Gasoline (well,
anything combustible) takes time to combust. Although it happens very fast to
us, it is still just a chemical/thermal reaction. ·
We must start
the reaction before the piston reaches the top of it’s travel so that
the full expansion effect is taking place when the piston is at the top. (Top
Dead Center.) This is what “timing” an engine is about and
depends on the type of fuel being “burned.” ·
That flame, or
expansion of hot gasses must be out (stopped accelerating) by about 25
degrees after the piston is at it’s top dead center (on it’s way
down being pushed by gases.) Why? Because if the flame is still burning and
expanding, the valves that open to let exhaust out will be burned up. The
flame needs to be OUT. ·
Here is what
most people don’t know. The flame doesn’t go out because all the
fuel is used up! It is extinguished (by design) because the Air/Fuel mixture
becomes too RICH to burn anymore. In other words, there is not enough Oxygen
and there is too much fuel vapor. The reaction stops. THAT’S A GOOD
THING! Except for one thing…we just wasted a bunch of fuel. It does
this because while the vapor is combusting and creating heat at the beginning
of the process, more evaporation starts happening of the liquid fuel,
creating more fuel vapor. But THAT vapor is no longer useful for pushing the
piston because it’s too late! The piston is already pushed down and the
valves are starting to open up to let the gas out. This process all happens
in terms of milliseconds. However, that vapor DOES do a very good job of
extinguishing the flame and that really is a good thing considering the
alternative (a broken engine.) ·
While it may
seem logical to put in less fuel so that it all evens out in the end and all
of the vapor is used up, it doesn’t work. For one, when we lean the
mixture, the temperature of the reaction increases. It gets hotter. (Because
there is not as much evaporation of liquid fuel.) Aside from other issues why
this may be an obstacle, the biggest reason this can’t happen is that
it creates MORE POLLUTION. Huh? Well, air is mostly Nitrogen, so when the
engine sucks in air to burn Oxygen, it also breathes in mostly Nitrogen.
Oxides of Nitrogen are the pollutants that make city air look orange.
It’s nasty. And it’s created because in the world of chemistry
and physics, when the temperature is above 2000 degrees F, it HAPPENS.
That’s for another discussion and there is a lot of info on the
Internet about how to create Oxides of Nitrogen. We want to NOT create them for
the sake of our future generations. And so do the car manufacturers (well,
probably not for the reason I stated but because cutting emissions cuts in to
profits. Regardless of what they say, big corporations DO NOT have a
conscience about our future generations. They do it because it is government
mandated. Once again, we see that they and I have different motives.) For the
second reason, we’re just reducing the whole process we described,
choking our engine power. Even if we put less gas in, it still takes a while
to evaporate and combust (expand.) ·
This process
can’t happen too fast however, or we experience
“detonation.” By many people, combustion and detonation are one
and the same, but they are not. There is a wave of energy in front of the
expansion of gasses during detonation. And it breaks things in gasoline
engines. ·
Perfect
combustion of gasoline with Oxygen would create emissions of water and carbon
dioxide (CO2.) Perfect combustion does not exist. Even if it did, we would
still create CO2, which is the main cause of global warming. ·
Heat created in
an automobile engine is just wasted energy. (Other than warming your toes on
a cold day.) ·
Perfect
combustion of Hydrogen and Oxygen would create nothing but water and heat. ·
When we move
closer to perfect combustion, we become more efficient. ·
Being efficient
means getting the same power out of less fuel. It can also be looked at as
getting more power out of the same amount of fuel. So this whole mission can
also be looked at from a performance point of view. So,
what does all this say? What are we shooting for here? To improve the efficiency of the internal
combustion engine, we need to look for ways of doing the following: ·
Evaporate
liquid fuel as much as possible. Because it’s the only thing that combusts. ·
Combust
completely (or start moving closer to it,) without increasing temperature. ·
Reduce the
temperature of the process, which
will decrease Nitrogen emissions and inherently be more efficient. (Notice I
said the “process” – making a bigger cooling system
isn’t what I’m talking about here. I mean not creating the heat
in the first place.) ·
Reduce the
amount of carbon in the process – it creates CO2. ·
Stop using fuel
to extinguish the flame. It has worked for a hundred years but it’s
wasteful. ·
Find or develop
new fuels. Power our cars with the sun or wind if we can. (We can! If I built
or bought a proper windmill and a large solar panel array, along with the new
“Tesla Roadster,” I
could go zero to 60 in 4 seconds up to 130MPH without directly paying a cent
for fuel. I’d lose all sorts of energy getting the raw power of sun and
wind to the wheels of the car…but it would be emission free (as in
ZERO.). Hats off to Tesla Motors! ·
Finding out
more of the things we DON’T YET KNOW. More of my thoughts on energy, HERE.
Technical Research and Consulting |
|
||||
