Can it work?

Discussion in 'OT Driven' started by magi, Aug 30, 2007.

  1. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
    I was thinking.

    Now people plan to build factories to transform wood to liquid fuels.
    But why not run a motor on solid fuel.
    A diesel spread diesel to a fine particle dust so it burn faster and better.
    But you can get a explosion by sawdust.
    Is it not possible to get sawdust in to the motor?
    Does the exhaust from sawdust damage the motor?

    Is it possible to build a engine that don’t need a fast burning fuel?

    Lets say I take a gas tube and put in a sawdust burner with glow wire.
    I increase the pressure like in a engine and burn the sawdust.
    This increase the pressure and temperature.
    I isolate the tube.
    I now lead the pressure to a air engine.
    But I don’t want to let out hot air so I have a chamber between were I spray in water that turns to steam and increase pressure and lower the temperature to 120-150 degrees.
    Now I build 6-8 similar tubes that in turn give pressure to the air engine with an automatic system that remove the ashes and load a tube with sawdust.
    The air motor is connected to a generator and a compressor to give pressure to the loading of the tube.

    Can I with this system get a working cheap effective engine system that need only solid fuel like saw dust and similar?

    Can it at least work as power source to powerplants because wood has only half of the energy as petrol so fuel tank would get bigger?

    What do you think?
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2007
  2. CastorTroy

    CastorTroy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2005
    Messages:
    3,853
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Anytown, USA
    The concept of burning solid fuel/wood works in a external combustion (steam) engine. I don't think this would be feasible in an internal combustion engine, even if it did work, I'd doubt the efficiency or longevity of an engine would be greater than anything available now :dunno:
     
  3. Mr.Right

    Mr.Right N2O

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,772
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    St.Louis, MO
    i don't think solid fuels would be very effiecent for small engines.

    they should be left to rockets, and missles.
     
  4. Fabian

    Fabian Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2005
    Messages:
    26,592
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    I vote for chopping down and burning every single tree on the planet.
     
  5. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
  6. Kenny Powers

    Kenny Powers OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Messages:
    35,599
    Likes Received:
    3,536
    Location:
    TRUMP IS MY PRESIDENT
    Cant see shit batman.

    I'm not too upset though, it's a shiyy idea. Your next invention should be a wood burning time machine so you can go back two hundred years to when your ideas will be original.

    All the technology we're developing now, and you think a wood burning engine is what we need to start developing?
     
  7. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
    --------

    Well people in asia want to have 2 cars a family
    and if that happends we will all die.

    So engines need to be fueld with biomatter like wood or electricity and i
    'try' to help with an efficient engine construction.

    What do you do?

    :)
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2007
  8. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's been done before.

    Back in the day (like back when people threw away gasoline because they didn't know what to use it for), some dude developed an engine that ran on coal dust mixed with water. When the slurry hit the hot engine internals, the water evaporated instantly, and the dry coal dust was ignited using a hot platinum rod in the top of the cylinder. But shit...if you think diesel makes a lot of soot...
     
  9. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
    The oil we use is stored CO2 from the time of dinosaurs and now we are letting all that stored CO2 gas out.
    If we use wood or other bio matter then we take and give back CO2 in a ecological circle.

    This thought I poster is to think in other ways on combustion engines and
    comments like from people like you is of no help.
    My first thought was that your really have no idea what global warming is about.

    43 years

    Master of Science in Engineering Physics
     
  10. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Burning dirty fuels isn't sustainable anyway. The CO2 isn't nearly so much of an issue as are all the other pollutants. Burning wood and charcoal, in particular, causes deforestation and topsoil depletion, both of which are happening at a bad enough rate as it is.

    Electricity will ultimately be the energy source for personal transportation, like it or not, because consuming electricity is completely non-polluting, because electricity can theoretically be stored at an infinite energy density (unlike chemical fuels), and because the only natural process on Earth that also uses electricity is a thunderstorm, and we won't be depleting the Earth's supply of lightning bolts by running our cars on batteries.

    The carbon fuels are just an inheritance to get us to where we're advanced enough that we can handle running sustainable industry and transportation. We can't use them forever because they're not going to last forever.

    - - -

    EDIT: Sweden has boreal forest. You should be quite familiar with the way the boreal forest is getting chopped down for hardwood, and in some places it's even falling over because the permafrost is melting into marshland. Regardless of whether burning wood to fuel cars is a viable idea, there is absolutely no reason to make a bad problem worse.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2007
  11. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
    ------------

    if it would be possible to use only wood to cars,
    CO2 would not get bigger.

    And we can burn anything then and make pellets of it to make it
    good in weight / volume.

    I just try to see if there is an alternative way to make a engine run on biomatter.

    MSc Magi
     
  12. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your best bet is to ferment wood chips into methanol. Burning the wood itself releases too much soot.

    As for using ANY solid fuel, I already told you someone built a car that runs on coal dust a long time ago. It also released too much soot.

    AND FOR THE LAST TIME, THE CO2 IS NOT THE BIGGEST ISSUE.
     
  13. Mjolnir

    Mjolnir WHM6D > *

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    Messages:
    15,206
    Likes Received:
    0
    Excellent reasoning.

    Please tell me where I can invest in the firm that has solved all of the pollution and environmental issues surrounding hydroelectric dams, coal burning, and spent nuclear fuel.

    They are going to make a fortune when the Sierra Club gives them an endorsement for producing power that doesn't interfere with salmon spawning, create combustion by-products, or leave radiated fuel that kills living creatures on contact for 2000 years.
     
  14. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    The phrase you underlined is correct. I said nothing about the production of electricity. Solar panels in the Southwest would be ideal, seeing how the Southwest is covered with both silicate and sunlight, but that's not the issue. The point I was making is that electric cars are non-polluting in and of themselves, but if you want to get into centralized power generation then you should be aware that the nastiest coal plant on Earth still produces more usable energy per unit of pollution than any fuel car ever will.

    As for investments, I have a Paypal account if you're interested.
     
  15. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
    Hi.

    Can I get some comments on the engine system?

    http://picasaweb.google.com/magnus.ivarsson/EngEngine/photo#5113054754090447858

    Would it get more efficient?
    Would it not be able to run it on almost any fuels like liquids, gases and solids?

    If used as a power source were weight of fuel does not matter then would it not be practical to be able to have a electrical generator on it and be able to have it running on anything that burn?

    Magi
     
  16. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is the compressed air for? I thought the car would run on fuel?
     
  17. Kenny Powers

    Kenny Powers OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Messages:
    35,599
    Likes Received:
    3,536
    Location:
    TRUMP IS MY PRESIDENT
    AE check.
     
  18. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
    The compressed air tank is to fill the combustion chambers with high pressure
    so that you can put as much fuel as possible in the combustion chamber and get it all burnt.
    There must be enough air to burn the fuel.
    The high pressure burn the fuel much faster to.

    Its just like in a engine were the piston compress the fuel and air mix but
    in this system there is no piston in the combustion chamber.

    Can I get some comments on the engine system?

    http://picasaweb.google.com/magnus.ivarsson/EngEngine/photo#5113054754090447858

    Would it get more efficient?
    Would it not be able to run it on almost any fuels like liquids, gases and solids?

    If used as a power source were weight of fuel does not matter then would it not be practical to be able to have a electrical generator on it and be able to have it running on anything that burn?

    Magi
     
    Last edited: Sep 23, 2007
  19. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    You don't want to add oxygen in the fuel tank. You want to do that somewhere safe.

    If you mean that the compressed air is for use in the combustion chambers, not in the fuel tank, then it would be better to use a turbocharger to compress the intake air as it's needed, instead of carrying a heavy tank of pre-compressed air.
     
  20. magi

    magi New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2005
    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sweden, Skåne, Ängelholm
    Yes i meant combustion chamber not fuel chamber.
    sorry
    Yes, maybe turbocharger is a good alternative in a weight issue.

    But the pressure need to get high in the combustion chamber as
    in a ordinary engine and can it provide pressure that high all the time under different loads?

    Magi
     
  21. Toxicity

    Toxicity New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Messages:
    2,703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    My av is so small you can't see it!
    Dude this is obviously a dude yanking your chain.. :rofl:
    Do you think that by some crazy way of fate, a real, serious inventor came around to ask the world-famous American muscle subforum of OT what they think of his engine? :rofl::rofl:

    I cant believe you guys
     
  22. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Probably not. He's probably some kid with a big idea. Still, I'm not going to piss on his head.
     
  23. deusexaethera

    deusexaethera OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2005
    Messages:
    19,712
    Likes Received:
    0
    Turbochargers can reach any pressure under the right conditions. Even the small turbo on my car can make 1,7bar.

    Your drawing is vague; are the combustion chambers the same as in normal engines? They do have pistons and a crankshaft, right? If they do, the pressure won't be a problem because the pistons will create plenty of pressure when they push upwards.
     
  24. GlassUser

    GlassUser send an email not a pm OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    265,158
    Likes Received:
    147
    Location:
    Pearland, Texas
    You'll coke the engine to hell.
     
  25. Justintiime

    Justintiime OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    3,767
    Likes Received:
    65
    Location:
    Roanoke, VA
    :rofl::rofl:
     

Share This Page