It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Microwave Engine: Runs off Water?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Im not sure if this has been posted before, but I think the concept behind it is very cool.

Although im not convinced it would fully work.

Link




The device is an engine in which small quantitites of water are turned into
steam by the use of a magnetron (as found in microwave ovens).

Interested parties may wish to try this test: Place a few drops of water into
a clear plastic 35mm film roll holder and put the cap on the film roll holder.
Place in a microwave oven and turn the oven on. The 'pop' is the result of
the water turning suddenly into steam.

The engine I have invented is far more efficient than any other steam engine
because the efficiency of the magnetron in turning water into steam. In fact,
the water droplet 'explodes' very much like air/gasoline explodes in a
conventional internal combustion engine.


Follow the link for mechanical aspects of the creation.

What do you think?




posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   
What? THis guy expects the application of a 'medium sized' magnetron from a microwave to do what? More effecient than nuclear energy? LOL! Where are his numbers? Why is he comparing a steam engine to a combustion engine?

Too many unaswered questions in my mind for this to be effecient, and...

This quote says it all:

This engine was first tested in 1992. I am however unable to invest the
required capital to produce a more sophisticated model and therefore unable to
patent it. Even though I may not be able to profit from this technology, it
is too good to be kept to myself and I would like to spread it around so that
others may be able to use it.


What exactly will this engine be used for or is this just a concept to show how microwaves are capable of stimulating the OH bond and releasing heat through a turbine to create energy?

My suggestion is for a brave soul to try this idea. That is what ATS needs: a commitee willing to test the energy, free energy, perpetual motion ideas.

We already know that it takes 4.184 joules to raise the temperature of water from 14.5 to 15.5 degrees C. So he conveniently leaves out how fast this magnetron heats the water and at what rate does it consume electricity. Oh, how convenient. He also states to 'just buy any magnetron'. Not all magnetrons will be as powerful as the other.

If you have time, figure out the calories needed to convert water from temp of the tap to temp of the endotherm process to create steam from several magnetrons, use internet as resource. Then find electricity consumption of microwave. IF you want to go further, find out the pressure created in this engine and what pressure it will take to drive piston and time it takes to reach the pressure.

My opinion: Bad Idea.

[edit on 30-10-2005 by Frosty]



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Gotta agree with Frosty, here. You would have to have a power source to run the magnetron in the first place (if you sit the water in a microwave oven with the power off, nothing happens to the water.) I don't see anyone coming up with a 5,000 mile electric cord to plug into the car so you could create the engine.



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Steam boiler turning shaft. Nothing new there.

A single seperate steam boiler would be more efficent than trying to produce steam in each cylinder. An automotive cylinder running on steam does not need a compression stroke either. Nor does it need an intake valve, if it's turning water into steam. But then, the seperate steam boiler works better. The automotive engine itself is a huge waste to run on steam. It weighs too much for the application.

Magnetron heating the water to produce steam. How much current does that use, and what does it cost?

Steam driven cars are slow to accelerate, wasteful to stop, and don't like to go uphill.

A DC electric motor is probably more powerful, on the same amount of current, and I suspect more capable of performance on the road. And regeneration of current can be done when stopping. And it wouldn't be so hot, steam is hot. And I wouldn't have that cloud of expelled steam behind me when driving down the road.



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Ok, I was just thinking about the steam released. Run it thru the radiator, turn it back into water, and return it to a water tank, to use again. At least there will be heat for in the winter.



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Stupid idea, not very well thought out.

Unless he can power a magnotron from dick all, the this has almost zero practical application.

Can anyone provide evidence that the purchase of electricity is cheaper than the purchase of a fuel to power a generator to make the electricity to power the magnotron?

Doubt it.



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 10:48 AM
link   

INSTRUCTIONS:

1. The magnetron fits into the spark plug hole.

2. The distributor points are modified so that the contact is closed when the
piston is at the top dead center and this contact is used to activate the
aircraft strobe mechanism.

3. The high voltage from the strobe is connected to directly fire the
magnetron which in turn produces steam which moves the piston.

4. The engine turns the alternator which keeps the battery charged, which
supplies the electrical power for the magnetron.


So the battery never looses power, but the wheels keep turning..........now where have I seen that before?



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   
It isn't said to be perpetual motion really.
More like you can run the car and charge the battery to a certain extent so you can run the car untill more energy has been sapped from the battery then the system could replenish, at wich point you need to recharge.

If the system could let you drive 500 miles per recharge, I'd say the system is pritty nifty.

One thing I'm wondering though. I don't see it posible to let the steam goto a radiator to condense without there being some pumps involved, which would again use quite a bit of electrical power(very likely more then you could ever generate with a cars alternator).

So you'd better make the system so that the steam gets dumped trough an exhaust system. Which in turns would also mean you don't only have to recharge the cars battery regularly, but also would have to refill the water tank.

Next thing, what mileage would a steam system like this get on the water(forget about the battery recharge for a sec)?

If it uses quite a bit of water you'd also need a big water tank or regular refills. Big tank would mean alot of weight, which in turn means more energy needed to put the car in motion. And also, as said before, steam is great to keep something like a train in motion and at constant speeds, but a steam system becomes quite wastefull whenever you stop and slow down.

Blah, to many questions and fuel sources in this one.



posted on Oct, 30 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   
I myself dont like this example, but I liked the idea of using a magnatron / steam.

Its interesting to think of, but like many others mentioned, not very practical by any means.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join