Extracting energy from our used motor oil

[dosco]

Originally Posted by OfficeLinebacker

Lately, with my focus on MPG, I have been researching water injection, mostly so I can run 87 in my Camry which calls for 89 without activating the knock sensor. Of course around here there are only 87, 91, and 93 and I hate to pay more for what I don't need, and I am not going to try to do two separate transactions to get just what I need.

Reread the OP, sorry I missed the bolded bit.

Have you used 87 and noted anything?

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

Originally Posted by R.I.D.E.

It might also be a means of driving a HHO generator, that would work better than using the alternator since the exhaust heat is a total waste after it passes through the converters.

Working on that one here. Not finding good design info for the types of turbines and electrical generators I want to use though, think I'm going to have to knock together a prototype on gut feelings.

[R.I.D.E.]

Road Warrior;

Google "animated engines gnome". The WW1 era rotary aircraft engine is the only design that was actually built in significant quantities, that had a piston moving up and down in a cylinder BUT WAS NOT A RECIPROCATING ENGINE.

Reverse the pistons and cylinders, eliminate the connecting rod, and use ports in an enlarged journal where the cylinders rotate around that journal and uncover two ports that allow pressure to enter the cylinders from 0-180 degrees, then exhaust the residual pressure from 180-360 degrees.

Now you have a rotary pump or motor that has no reciprocation losses, high torque at low speeds (the originals ran at only 1300 RPM).

Try to not get too distracted by the negative aspects of the original design, high fuel and oil consumption, mixing fuel and oil, centrifugal forces. In the context of the time those engines were developed they were miracles of efficiency, but they were also nightmares to produce. Each cylinder started out as a 96 pound steel slug that had to be machined (by hand) to a final weight of 6 pounds. The engine cost 1000 pounds to produce, more than the cost of a nice home in that era. Modern computer manufacturing advances could do the same with virtually no human effort.

That is what I have been working on for 6 years, and this fall Virginia Tech will be working with my designs to produce a prototype and do efficiency calculations as well as CAD drawings.

One of the basic claims in my first patent was to separate the support bearings for the rotating engine block from the crank journal. The non rotating crankshaft is positioned in an offset bored through the support bearing housing, which allows the journal position to be adjusted while the engine-pump-motor is spinning, which allows the stroke to be adjusted from a positive position to a zero position and even a reverse position.

In an IC engine this allows you to vary the stroke and compression, as well as eliminate all stroke, which transforms the engine into a free spinning flywheel. Now you have an engine that can use IC to run itself up to a speed then almost instantaneously transform itself into a free spinning flywheel.
Much of my research involves eliminating all of the various energy robbing forces inherent in a normal IC engine. I wont get into the details yet but , a lot of time has been spent in this area.

The most basic part or the concept is to have an engine that transforms itself into a large mechanical capacitor using the spinning mass of the engine to accomplish things like regenerative braking, as well as pulse and glide type of operation using a continuously variable transmission, where the engine can accelerate itself to a speed of 4-5000 RPM then shut off the fuel eliminate the stroke and allow the engines mass as a flywheel to continue to provide power to the vehicle to maintain a constant speed while the transmission changes its "gear" ratios (remember cvt can do this) and keep the vehicle at a constant speed while the engine and transmission do the pulse and glide, with no driver imput required. When the energy level of the engine has been depleted at some point below 1000 rpm, then the stroke is reapplied and fuel is injected and the engine repeats the cycle.

Another configuration is to use the same basic configuration as an in wheel hydraulic drive, which when combined with an accumulator for hydraulic pressure, would give you a single burst of energy for acceleration in a vehicle, with no engine imput whatsoever. Like the catapult on an aircraft carrier, but this design allows you to recharge the accumulator with the same energy you would normally loose in friction braking. Call it hydraulic regenerative braking. Now the vehicle could do a 0-70, stop, 0-63, stop, 0-56, stop, 0-50, stop, etc, etc, still with no engine imput. the engine only has to restore the energy reserves and can be run at its ideal state of highest power for least fuel. The engine would never idle, it would only consume fuel when it is recharging the accumulator.

According the Charles Gray of the EPA the hydraulic hybrid will be as revolutionary to the future development of transportation as the assembly line was early in the last century.

regards
gary

[GasSavers_SD26]

Originally Posted by R.I.D.E.

Road Warrior;

Google "animated engines gnome".

Finally did that. I get it.

[8307c4]

For more than a few years now I've been buying wd-40 by the gallon, I then mix this 50-50 with used motor oil, works right nice (thou I do run synthetic oil).

Now it doesn't run in cars, but as a lubricant it works as well as straight wd-40 and as such stretches my dollar. Of course it doesn't exactly recycle ALL of my used motor oil, in fact only a small percent of it is recycled this way, but it helps.

And yes I use a considerable amount of wd-40, probably at least a gallon a year.
Just one idea.

[theholycow]

As a lubricant, WD-40 is pretty awful, so mixing with motor oil should help. WD-40 is great for cleaning stuff but it only lubricates for a short time before the important parts evaporate. It's mainly a solvent, not a lubricant.

Depending on what you're lubricating, I'd suggest using straight motor oil.

[dosco]

Originally Posted by R.I.D.E.

Google "animated engines gnome". The WW1 era rotary aircraft engine is the only design that was actually built in significant quantities, that had a piston moving up and down in a cylinder BUT WAS NOT A RECIPROCATING ENGINE.

I'm curious, why do you contend a rotary is "not a reciprocating engine?"

[R.I.D.E.]

dosco:

watch the animation carefully.

The con rods rotate around the journal, in a conventional engine the con rods never rotate around the journal.

With a fixed crankshaft the rotating rods are not converting reciprocating motion into rotary motion. Instead the pressure created in combustion is actually pushing the cylinder heads away from the piston, just the opposite of any reciprocating engine.

It would be the same if you bolted the crankshaft to your car (as the original rotary crank was bolted to the plane, and let the engine rotate around the fixrf crank. It's not easy to visualize, but it is clearly demonstrated in the animation.

In reciprcating engines the piston, piston pin, and a portion of the mass of the upper portion of the connecting rod are reciprocating components. Their mass must be accelerated from TDC to 90 degrees, then decelerated to 180, reaccelerated to 270, and decelerated again to 360. This process must be repeated twice in an Otto cycle engine before you get a single combustion pulse to provide your power.

In 1913 the best auto engine was the Mercedes grand prix engine which produced 200 horsepower at 2200 RPM. It displaced about 1400 cubic inches and burned a quart of oil every 25 miles.

The same year a rotary engine powered a Deperdussein clipped wing monoplane to an average speed of 121 MPh over a closed course, producing 160 HP at 1300 RPM at half the displacement of the Benz engine. That 75% of the power with half the displacement at just over 50 % of the RPM, comparing the best to the best.

Every negative aspect of the original rotary engine is solveable, in the same way they were solved by the evolution of the Benz GP engine. The rotary fell out of favor at the end of WW1 because of design limitations and exorbitant production costs.

The most crucial improvement is reversing the pistons and cylinders and eliminating the connecting rod. I have a model that demonstrates this configuration. The reason for this configuration is oil control, and the fact that centrifugal forces serve to force oil away from the combustion chamber when the configuration is reversed. In the originals the oil was forced into the combustion chambers by centrifugal force.

Another major advantage of the development I have been engaged in is a closed loop lubrication system, unlike the originals where oil was mixed with the fuel. A third advantage is all intake and exhaust gasses will pass through a single intake and exhaust port, and only one fuel injector is necessary to provide all the fuel for combustion. This concentrates the exhause heat in a single port where it can be transferred to the incoming air-fuel charge to enhance complete distribution of the fuel air mix. It's called HCCI (homogenous charge compression ignition) and increases efficiency by 25% over normal fuel delivery, while eliminating the ignition system.

This is not a high speed design, it operates more like a large truck diesel engine. Combined with the ability to eliminate stroke completely which transforms the engine into a free spinning flywheel, you have an engine that never idles, only operates at peak efficiency, regardless of vehicle speed, and provides storage for regeneration, without any electric motor or battery.

In every hybrid system losses occur in every stage of energy conversion, which places electric hybrids at a serious disadvantage, because only a fraction of the energy availabel for regeneration is actually reapplied to the wheels for power.

The in wheel pump directly connected to an accumulator is the shortest pathway possible to highest efficiency regeneration. The problem with hybrids is the different combative philosophies about which is the best future path. This design allows for any non reversible power source to be installed in the position of proividing power to replensih reserves in the accumulator. The configuration is also much less complex than any other system with about 25% fewer manufactured components per vehicle, and requires no battery or electric motor (although it could be configured with one, or a combination of two or more power sources to satisfy any desired power configuration.

regards
gary

[GasSavers_Erik]

RIDE- very interesting. I can see that it would have lots of FE potential, especially with its ability to freewheel without using any fuel.

What about the bearings to support this large rotating mass? Are they roller bearing that are lubed with grease from the outside (via zerks) or are they pressure lubed insert bearings lubed by the same oil that lubes the cylinders/rings?

What is the total rpm range of your design- ie- what is the minimum speed that it can keep running and what is the maximum speed that it can spin?

Without an ignition system, would you have to preheat the fuel in order to cold start this engine?

[dosco]

Originally Posted by R.I.D.E.

With a fixed crankshaft the rotating rods are not converting reciprocating motion into rotary motion. Instead the pressure created in combustion is actually pushing the cylinder heads away from the piston, just the opposite of any reciprocating engine.

Oh, I see what you're getting at.

Without seeing your model, I'm not sure I understand what your changes are to the "classic" rotary design.

Not sure I agree with your reasons for why the rotary fell out of favor - do you have a citation or source?