Quake3World

Any of you are into mechanic?
Or gas industries R&D?
Physician?

After looking, studying the Carnot Cycle.
http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virgi ... carnot.htm
It made me think about…What would be the effect of warming the gas before it is injected onto the pistons chamber? Warming it would give it more volume thus we would need less gas for the same action? May be even facilitate the spark.
Any idea if this is plausible?

no
no
no

not sure
idk
not really, no.

pete wrote:Any of you are into mechanic?
Or gas industries R&D?
Physician?

After looking, studying the Carnot Cycle.
http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virgi ... carnot.htm
It made me think about…What would be the effect of warming the gas before it is injected onto the pistons chamber? Warming it would give it more volume thus we would need less gas for the same action? May be even facilitate the spark.
Any idea if this is plausible?

Have you ever warmed up gasoline pete?

Kracus wrote:

pete wrote:Any of you are into mechanic?
Or gas industries R&D?
Physician?

After looking, studying the Carnot Cycle.
http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virgi ... carnot.htm
It made me think about…What would be the effect of warming the gas before it is injected onto the pistons chamber? Warming it would give it more volume thus we would need less gas for the same action? May be even facilitate the spark.
Any idea if this is plausible?

Have you ever warmed up gasoline pete?

I know were you want to get to.
I wrote warm it, not boiling it.

Oh I don't think boiling gasoline is really something that's gonna happen anyway. Well you would need to figure a few things out pete.

First, CAN you warm up gas?

Second, if you CAN how much does the volume change?

Third If you take the same ammount at different temperatures is there any increase in performance?

Fourth would it be cost effective?

There's a start for ya. Make sure to give me credit if you make it big.

Kracus wrote:Oh I don't think boiling gasoline is really something that's gonna happen anyway. Well you would need to figure a few things out pete.

First, CAN you warm up gas?

Second, if you CAN how much does the volume change?

Third If you take the same ammount at different temperatures is there any increase in performance?

Fourth would it be cost effective?

There's a start for ya. Make sure to give me credit if you make it big.

That's why I asked the Pros in that field if it is feasible.
I can't answer to these questions since they where what I was asking for in the first place. Can't answer to myself.

Why can't you? I just gave you the steps to awnser your own question do you think we go around warming up our gas?

Kracus wrote:Why can't you? I just gave you the steps to awnser your own question do you think we go around warming up our gas?

I'm not Pratt & Whitney with all the logistics, testing chambers and all.

Well I guess that's something else you'll need to figure out but at least you're on the right track, lemme know how you make out!

Kracus wrote:Well I guess that's something else you'll need to figure out but at least you're on the right track, lemme know how you make out!

sure

Someone needs to take Thermodynamics.

Foo wrote:

Kracus wrote:Well I guess that's something else you'll need to figure out but at least you're on the right track, lemme know how you make out!

sure

Shhhhh he's gonna blow himself up!

Alternatively don't buy an American gas-guzzler.

And if you want to save the most money buy a Diesel, or convert your petrol car to LPG, but I don't know how available both of those are there.

there was a long thread about the carnot cycle long ago...if i remember correctly.

tnf wrote:there was a long thread about the carnot cycle long ago...if i remember correctly.

Don't know but Whiskey7 posted that site
http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virgi ... s/home.htm That's were I found it and it made me think about that gas saving thing idea.
What do you think about it though? I am pretty sure you know more than me in that area, well, I'm sure.
And BTW how is it tonight? You are still a mod in here even though you ''restart'' teaching class.

Last night I was in bed, 3AM thinking about my gas saving thing idea and I thought...Since the vapor of gas are much more ''volatile'' inflammable
than the liquid gas itself, why not use only the vapor of the gas instead of the whole liquid form ( not formaldehyde that is ).
And after a research on the subject, I found this http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/Sha ... pher.shtml
What do you think?

pete wrote:Last night I was in bed, 3AM thinking about my gas saving thing idea and I thought...Since the vapor of gas are much more ''volatile'' inflammable
than the liquid gas itself, why not use only the vapor of the gas instead of the whole liquid form ( not formaldehyde that is ).
And after a research on the subject, I found this http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/Sha ... pher.shtml
What do you think?

Since I didn't get any reply from this one, I just wanted to repost it.
So, really, what do you thinK?

The severely retard old man

I think you smelled too many fumes.

Kracus wrote:I think you smelled too many fumes.

Are you doing projection now?

The whole process that powers a gas engine is that the gas expands when it ignites, thereby causing the engine to turn over. If you expand the gasoline before you inject it, less will enter the cylinder, which will lead to less power to turn the engine over.

But even beyond that, gas isn't directly injected into the cylinders to begin with. It is mixed with air first, so it is already a thin mist when it reaches the cylinder. AFAIK, you can't really expand it much more than it already is by the time it gets to the combustion chamber/cylinder.

R00k wrote:The whole process that powers a gas engine is that the gas expands when it ignites, thereby causing the engine to turn over. If you expand the gasoline before you inject it, less will enter the cylinder, which will lead to less power to turn the engine over.

But even beyond that, gas isn't directly injected into the cylinders to begin with. It is mixed with air first, so it is already a thin mist when it reaches the cylinder. AFAIK, you can't really expand it much more than it already is by the time it gets to the combustion chamber/cylinder.

That's true with the common engine but what if we build one that only need the vapors of gas almost without the air mixture, since gas vapor are more volatile than the liquid gas itself?

Pete, what really needs to be done with combustion engines is an increase in efficiency of the transfer of energy. I don't thnk that the delivery of the fuel is an issue. What goes on afterwards is where the true problem lies.

rotary engine...

I thought of an idea the other day for a jet powered engine.

The idea is that instead of pistons that move because of an explosion the pistons actualy move because it's actualy a minijet that shoots off when it's supposed to in short bursts. I just wonder what's more powerful, an explosion or the force of a small jet in a confined area?

Canidae wrote:rotary engine...

I can't understand why they don't use this technology more often. You'd think Mazda would use it in all their cars. Surely it can't cost that much more to build and if it is becomes more common it wont cost much to repair either.