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.

 

The future of free energy is here Now!

page: 5
80
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by StargateSG7
 


----

One more high-tech way to get the MAXIMUM energy out of fuel
of any sort on piston engines is to RESHAPE the heads and cylinders.

Using EGG-shaped heads (i.e. oblong or ovaloid) allows one to
SHAPE the explosive detonation cycle so that maximum pressure
is exerted on the pistons. Of course this means you need to have
CYROGENICALLY HARDENED heads and liners (or ceramic versions)
which is an expensive thing to do as an average consumer!

On a full race engine with ceramic inserts and heads or cyrogenically
hardened heads and cylinders you can get 1500 HP at the shaft on a V8
with oblong/ovaloid-hemisphere heads. The block is still aluminum but
everything else is hardened and lined to take the ultra-high pressure!

I am still surprised such technology hasn't drifted down to the
consumer level since this is 20 year old technology!

with Modern milling and CNC machines, it's a piece of cake to
do an oblong head and the horsepower increase on consumer-level
engines would be in the 20% to 30% range with a fuel efficiency rating
increase of an ESTIMATED 5% to 10% on 4-cylinders used typically
in something like a Ford Focus, Toyota Corolla or Chevy Spark.
For a big car company like Ford, Toyota or GM, it would probably
cost an extra $50 to $100 to do on such cars, so I say it's DEFINITELY
worth the money for the extra HP and fuel efficiency.
edit on 2013/8/2 by StargateSG7 because: sp.




posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Interesting but remember the atmospheric composition is not pure combustible oxygen so the actual efficiency on even the best injection system is compromised and the exhaust gas includes un burned vaporised gas that is wasted due to this inefficiency, kind of reminds me of Hotol for some reason, a theoretical horizontal take of and landing vehicle designed by another British inventor but once again the thick powers that be working to there own pointless drone like agenda ignored the possibility's and He ended up selling to the Japanese government.
The basic premise was that a shuttle like craft could take off like a plane without boosters and using atmospheric gas separate out the oxygen in flight and store it to use with a secondary rocket engine when the altitude was too high for the atmospheric engine and therefore enable it to deliver payloads into orbit before returning and landing like a plane.
A similar idea though it would likely require a very different technique due to the impractability of a ram scoop on a car and the cars lower speed being insufficient to produce enough pressure to condense the gas would prevent a similar method from working yet a nano filter that could selectively filter the oxygen may be a practical method if such Nano filters that have been demonstrated in the laboratory could be made reliable and efficient enough, or a chemical catalyser may also work though it would obviously be less efficient.
Another possibility is if you were to create a semi hybrid vehicle and use the spare energy to power a cracking process extracting pure O2 from water and using half the hydrogen in the fuel mix dispelling or storing the rest for later use (Probably make a very difficult engine to make safe in practical terms and I am sure someone somewhere has already tried this but since I am rather lapsed in my chemical knowledge weather the mixture of components even if gasoline was replaced with methanol would produce an efficient reaction and what ratios would be necessary well my chemistry is somewhat rusty to say the least.)?.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 05:56 PM
link   
According to some folks, this stuff just isn't happening

Except it is, because people who simply believe they can, do.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 

To clarify....do you classify that as free energy? Or cheap, even?
Other than efficiency, how is it different from simply using PV for electrolysis? Or do you consider that to be free energy as well?

Here's another system of getting H2 out of water.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 8/2/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I class it as progress


The tech there will eventually lead to cheaper - or possibly free - energy.

But my main bug bear is those who cannot see past oil, and who constantly rubbish alternatives and who - in doing so - suppress innovation and expression that can lead to progress.

I look at objects, like my HTC One X Smartphone, and marvel over how such things have evolved in such a short space of time, and the reason is demand. People want them, so companies make them, and the demand pushes the tech to get smaller, lighter, faster, more efficient and more useful.

The reason that the world is stuck in an energy rut is because people are too used to fossil fuels, and actually believe that they can't be replaced with other methods because they buy into the BS hype that its "too expensive" or "too complicated" to use other methods. Its not - but people just blindly believe it because others say it is.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


I class it as progress
I agree.


But my main bug bear is those who cannot see past oil, and who constantly rubbish alternatives and who - in doing so - suppress innovation and expression that can lead to progress.
I don't see a lot of "rubbishing" of alternatives but until those alternatives are cheaper than fossil fuels they won't replace them nor will appropriate effort (money) be put into their development. Oil, coal, and gas are just still too cheap in comparison. That will change. People, as a whole, don't tend to change anything until it becomes absolutely necessary (my house needs painting but it's too hot outside now). But that's not really a conspiracy. It's human nature.

Ever read Heinlein's story, Let There be Light? Casts a different light on the "suppression" thing.


edit on 8/2/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by VoidHawk

It's been proven that adding water can indeed increase mileage per gallon. I'd explain but...

Here you go:

By atomizing water into vapor, it evaporates almost immediately upon contact with the air/fuel mixture, decreasing the temperature and increasing the density of the mixture. A denser air/fuel mixture tends to ignite more easily and exhibit a more stable burn, increasing the power transmission from the oxidation process to mechanical energy.

We used this back in the 80s hot-rodding old muscle cars.


Thank you

Back in my younger days when Triumphs and BSA's were *THE* motorbike to have, it was very noticeable on those thick foggy nights how much better they ran. Apart from the reasons you list above, I think it made the air/fuel mixture harder to compress and hence raised the compression leading to more power.

And as you also stated, more power = greater mileage.

I still ride bikes, and I notice modern engines are not affected by the fog, or maybe their power output is so much greater its just not noticable.

Personally I think some of those inventors may have genuinely achieved what they claimed.

VoidHawk.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


----

Look at what some pretty high-end manufacturers have been up to in terms of
really high performance engines that run on standard fuels but also incorporate
modern methods including water injection and composite blocks:

New-Technology Adiabatic Diesel Engines:
pixellete.com...

Cummins Advanced Adiabatic Engine (this is from 1983!):
www.researchgate.net...

Fully Ceramic Engine:
www.google.ca... ctivities%2Fpdf%2F06_07.pdf&ei=fl78UcrmD-iUjAKRs4GQDw&usg=AFQjCNGICqtRqW0KrPRLBndGAzJGg5nRkQ&bvm=bv.50165853,d.cGE


Smokey Yunick's adiabatic engine:
www.eng-tips.com...

The above is 1978 technology which wasn't ready in those days but NOW
can EASILY be done with ceramic and metal composites for super small
(i.e. less than 2 litre) high-output engine (greater than 200 HP!) at MPG's
greater than 40 Miles per gallon!

Fully Enclosed Adiabatic Processes:
en.wikipedia.org...

Heat Engine:
en.wikipedia.org...




edit on 2013/8/2 by StargateSG7 because: asp.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I have been tinkering on a redneck free energy generator for a while.


It is just a small generator which I feed hydrogen to instead of gas. It has a few problems but it works for a while before over heating.

Oh the free part well that's redneck free. We have a stainless steel container that was once used for milking cows but now we throw our beer cans in there with a potassium hydroxide water mix, cap it off and WAA LAA we have hydrogen until the cans dissolve. Sux cleaning it though.

edit on 2-8-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 

Uh oh. Running low.
Quick! Drink 2 more cases!

Works for me.


Sux cleaning it though.
What d'ya do with it. Dump it in the crick?
edit on 8/2/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I have been tinkering on a redneck free energy generator for a while.


It is just a small generator which I feed hydrogen to instead of gas. It has a few problems but it works for a while before over heating.

Oh the free part well that's redneck free. We have a stainless steel container that was once used for milking cows but now we throw our beer cans in there with a potassium hydroxide water mix, cap it off and WAA LAA we have hydrogen until the cans dissolve. Sux cleaning it though.

edit on 2-8-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)


Wow!! I hope you dont smoke



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Nah I forget the name of the byproduct but they look like little beads of aluminum after they stop producing H2 which I put in the recyclables when they build up.

The Potassium slurry can be reused until it neutralizes the part that is a real mess is what’s left over from the labeling on the cans it just turns to muck which I take down to the same place you can dispose of old paint or antifreeze it is county run.

Hey it’s a fun to tinker with that's about it. I have thought about adding it to a truck I have to improve the economy that way I can pass everything on the road but the bar.


Oh I quit smoking but yeah I was cautious about that before.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by StargateSG7
 


Interesting



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 

I was just rednecky kidding.
It sounds pretty cool. You just run the H2 straight to the carb?



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Yeah I know you were joking but I was having fun.
Besides that kind of happened when I was showing it off while we were drinking one night.

Basically yes you run it strait to the carb I do let it suck in some air because it is strait H2 and I had to advance the timing otherwise it backfired (scary kind) and that is still a problem when it gets to hot. The generator is real cheap I bought it at a yard sale just to experiment with and I was originally using a dry cell having it feed back on itself.

Yeah I know the laws of thermodynamics you can never get back more than what you put in but I was bored and wanted to test out a few You Tube vids I had seen with a couple ideas of combining them together. Anyway the laws were never in any danger of being broken but I had fun and learned a lot but then I went mythbuster style on it to where I was going to make it work or destroy it in the process maybe even a combination of the two. Well I managed to get it working by adding the tank and chemical mixture I then just dumped the dry cell part so no o2.

The bad part is that Stainless steel tank you have to cap it off and let it build some pressure first and that scares the hell out of me. I am not sure what that tank is rated for but it sure as hell wasn't designed for this I have a blow by valve on it but if that ever fails I wouldn't have any way of knowing unless I was right up on it.

If I ever find a rated pressure tank that is stainless it would ease my mind a lot.



posted on Aug, 2 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur

Who is "they"? Water injection back in the 80s was an accepted method to increase horsepower without increasing fuel usage.

 

reply to post by Nevertheless

Increasing the power of an engine by injecting water does not mean an increase in power with a [constant] specific amount of power used .

I think you misunderstand my post. Energy produced refers to the horsepower output of the engine; energy used refers to the amount of chemical energy contained in a specific amount of fuel. It really boils down to an efficiency issue. How much power can you get out of a specific amount of fuel, compared to the amount of energy contained in that fuel?

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Arbitrageur

Who is "they"? Water injection back in the 80s was an accepted method to increase horsepower without increasing fuel usage.
I don't think you read the link or quote I posted, which not only answers that but also explains why it works better at higher throttle levels, which your previous post doesn't seem to acknowledge.



posted on Aug, 3 2013 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by LABTECH767
A similar idea though it would likely require a very different technique due to the impractability of a ram scoop on a car and the cars lower speed being insufficient to produce enough pressure to condense the gas would prevent a similar method from working yet a nano filter that could selectively filter the oxygen...


We can speculate all day but my comments were made regarding the use of existing technology, not the possibility of a yet undeveloped solution.



posted on Aug, 4 2013 @ 01:34 AM
link   
Heck I saw the video years ago and wondering why still not commonplace



posted on Aug, 14 2013 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 
So true, until we find a workable replacement for capitalism, and the power struggles going on in the world it can never happen. As soon as we find a new power source it will be turned into a weapon.So many things need to change at a base level before anything so wonderful as this can happen.



new topics

top topics



 
80
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join