April 30, 2014

Someone attacked the computer I was using and wiped the screen and all text when I was typing this to someone online. It involves making a new type of engine that is very simple and gets at least 300 mpg just like the Volkswagen XL1. I ended up having to switch computers to complete this report, they don't want this one out there.

So I will go into ALL the bloody details now. To be clear, this design uses computer controlled temperature regulated steam and does not use anything like fuel injection, spark plugs or anything else now deemed "essential".

 

This is complex, and therefore shills will make hay with it because many people will be confused. But there is NOTHING wrong with what is stated here and I repeat the concept with many different word combinations, so if you don't understand at first, keep reading until you hit an explanation you understand (this happens after my rip on Rense.)

The system I am talking about would be a closed loop system where water would be heated to 700 farenheit which will cause it to have a steam pressure of 3000 psi and then first released into a tiny piston chamber no more than 50 cc´s. The first cylinder would have no intake valve, only the injector. The cylinder has to be small and long, the first cylinder will be operating at 3,000 psi. This first cylinder would be kept at 700 farenheit. After taking the first 1,000 psi out of the steam, the "exhaust" from cylinder 1 would then go into a second cylinder twice as large for the next pressure drop, and the second cylinder would be kept at 550 farenheit and drop the pressure by an additional 1,000 psi. This would then exhaust into the third cylinder that would again be twice as large as the preceeding cylinder and would be kept at around 300 farenheit for the next pressure drop, that would then exhaust into a condenser for recirculation. Each cylinder would drop the pressure by about 1000 psi each, as shown by the numbers in the steam table.

This would require higher than usual temperature lubricants but since the valve train can operate via piston collision, there won´t need to be a cam shaft and there will only be a total of three valves and one injector, with all output valves feeding the input into the next cylinder and the final output into the condenser. This very simple setup, in which the piston itself actuates the injector (in the first cylinder,) pulls the exhaust valve open and slams the exhaust valve shut from piston motion alone (which eliminates the cam shaft) will reduce the demand for lubrication.

The movement of the piston to full down position opens the exhaust valve into the next cylinder when the piston in the next cylinder is a few degrees past top dead center, and the up movement of the first piston will slam the steam exhaust/intake valve shut and activate the initial injection in the first cylinder, (as stated, the second two cylinders operate with the steam introduced into the first cylinder, with the subsequent two having only one valve each.) This would be a fully mechanical system that would use purely collision based pull rods rather than lifter based push rods. That´s the advantage of having a system that is 100 percent positive pressure with no vacuum / intake cycle needed. No fuel is burned in cylinder. This is vastly superior to the old fashioned steam engine and can be done because materials are so much better now.

I am sure RENSE will find a way to rip this in front of the idiots. Rense is an enemy of truth now (having ripped the bacteriophage report with no science whatsoever to back up the rip, while the bacteriophage nanobot report itself is 100 percent scientifically verifibly true. I am by no means a layman and at least consulted a doctorate of pharmacology for that report who provided 100 percent of the data so it is not bullshit. ANYWAY, I am sure Rense will back stab this engine design in one way or another, and talk about tiny microchips and flight 370 when mechanical issues are the real trouble with micro drones, not the chips.

ANYWAY, to circumvent the Rense shillage ahead of time, HERE IS THE STEAM TABLE, just look at it and THINK, I don´t ask people to just trust me but I do at least hope they will google some of the technical items I present and then realize what I am saying is always verifiably accurate whether or not I make it easy for people to verify what I am saying by linking out. Sometimes I do not link out just because I don´t want my readers to be pampered idiots, and I´d like them to think for themselves and learn how to get data for themselves. Even if Google is a DATA PERVERT (heads up, this is good) it still serves as a tool useful enough to get the basics.

 

Here are some additional pointers and a much better explanation I am adding because of all the problems I encountered posting this to begin with

Since the initial cylinder is going to be pre heated to 700 farenheit anyway, your main combustion chamber (where the steam is heated to begin with) should surround this cylinder to reduce heat loss in the system - kill two birds with one stone there. It should be possible to exceed 90 percent thermal efficiency. Use the exhaust output to pre heat the water on it's way out the exhaust pipe to reduce exhaust temperatures and capture more heat energy.

I suggest the combustion area around cylinder 1 be designed in a way similar to that of a basic calorimeter, which is designed to measure the heat energy of a combustion process, even rudimentary calorimeters capture 97 percent or more of total heat generated. This would involve having your steam which is to be injected into cylinder 1 totally surrounding the cylinder chamber before getting injected in. There would be the far outer layer, where your fuel is burned (in the form of a gas), the next layer would hold your heated water in the form of saturated steam, and the most inner layer being your 50CC cylinder and piston. The head above that piston would need to be machined with a port between the steam chamber and the piston chamber that your injector controlled, and that port would be the size of a pin hole where it entered the cylinder. This difficult part would only need to be done for cylinder 1, the other two will follow what cylinder 1 does with no injectors or outer combustion shell needed. Fiberglass insulation would do the preheating job well enough for cylinders 2 and 3. If you get this right, it will be virtually impossible to have it produce low efficiency results. Three cylinders are suggested here, to maximize efficiency.

 

BE CAREFUL IF YOU DON'T KNOW ADVANCED MATH

This will output a LOT MORE POWER THAN YOU EXPECT.

If 3000 psi saturated steam is released into a cylinder that has a piston with a top surface of only one square inch, and this piston is hooked up to a crank shaft that allows four inches of piston travel, your output will average approximately three hundred pound feet of torque with peak thrusting pressures hitting 3,000 pounds. The entire down stroke will generate thrust and be repeated with every revolution, there is no intake cycle. Furthermore, the torque won't back off towards the bottom of the piston excursion because saturated steam will maintain pressure, especially in a preheated cylinder. If you don't know how huge that possible torque output is when put in relation to a 4 cubic inch engine, (the approximate volume of cylinder 1) don't play with this.

With the extremely small cylinders able to hit higher RPM's hundreds of horsepower can be expected from a total displacement of 50 plus 100 plus 200 CC's, the sizes of the cylinders needed to maximize efficiency while still being small enough for back yard joe to do cheaply as an experiment with a harbor freight lathe and milling machine. You cannot take a moped engine and "modify" it to provide proof of concept at realistic output levels, you will just blow it up. And since diesel engines have a large piston surface area, you can't modify one of those either because there are none that can handle 10,000 or more pound feet of torque (higher output due to the larger piston surface area and longer throw).

The distance between the cylinders should be minimized, because with cylinder 1 feeding cylinder 2, and cylinder 2 feeding cylinder 3, all open space between them represents a pressure drop and efficiency loss. The ports should be small in diameter and short to alleviate pressure loss. The valve will be small, oblong and up against the cylinder wall as close as possible to minimize the distance to the neighboring cylinder, which is driven directly by it's output.

This will have to all be tried by someone with a machine shop that can make parts that are all pre calculated to handle 3,000 PSI. But that someone is out there, and if that someone pulls this off successfully it will probably produce awesome results. I strongly recommend not trying anything above 4 cubic inches (in cylinder 1) at first and make good and sure you have a super heavy load attached before firing it all up. A correct design would look really odd when compared to a normal engine. It would have super tiny pistons hooked up to robust piston rods and a beefy crank.

Remember that the temperatures quoted are farenheit, not celsius, which makes this a LOT easier to deal with than one might think. Most materials do not fall off in strength with any significance at all at 700 farenheit, which is in fact a very low temperature. And for starters, "high temperature" lubricants can be as simple as synthetic oil to get you going early on.

It is up to the reader to make sense of this concept, I am not stopping to do drawings, the right individual will just figure it out. Obviously the bottom end of the engine can be run at a low temperature, only the cylinders need to be hot.

Piston valve collision is irrelevant in this design, because the valve is not going to be held open by a rocker arm as the piston approaches it, it simply gets pulled open by the connecting rod when the back of the piston bumps it near the bottom of travel, and gets slammed shut by the top of the piston when the piston reaches the top of it's travel. This can be done with piston travel alone because there will be only one valve per cylinder, you won't need the back side activation afforded via a cam shaft for the second valve which is needed in an engine that has an intake cycle.

Obviously this will have to all be machined with care, with expansion of metals all worked into the math. I suggest putting a spring loaded area into the top of the piston itself, to provide a cushion zone when it hits the valve. If you want max efficiency, the cam shaft and valve train have to be gone. They waste power in a conventional engine. But with a single valve per cylinder design in this case, having the piston itself actuate rod movement by bumping into the rod at the very end of the down stroke to open the valve, and then having the piston itself slam the valve shut at the top of the stroke will work.

The steam injector can simply be actuated by the piston at the top of its travel as well, there is no need for any sort of complex timing adjustment with this type of system. And remember, in the three cylinder design spoken of above, only the first cylinder needs an injector, the other two pistons get their steam from the preceeding piston. Also, if I was not clear enough earlier, the injector would be direct cylinder injection of saturated steam at 3,000 psi AND the system needs no radiator to cool it, only a thermocouple based temperature controller on cylinder 1 to reduce fuel burn if it gets over 710 degrees farenheit.

There will be erosion of materials because saturated steam at 3000 psi likes to eat metals. In your final engine, have everything ceramic coated to give the engine a good life span.

UPDATE: Cylinder 2 should be balanced to match the output of cylinders 1 and 3. Because with this design, cylinders one and three will produce output simultaneously, and if cylinder 2 is not sized to match their output, the engine will lope. That would not be a death sentence, but it would be nice to have a 30 year advanced design on day one. Everyone wants things to be perfectly smooth. Either balance cylinder 2, or go to four cylinders (dont), or cut it to two (don't) because three steps really are what is needed for max efficiency. It's just the way things are and I don't want to get into explaining why, this is already a long read for most people. This would mean that cylinder 2 should actually be right around 150 CC's and cylinder 3 still at 200 CC's but operating at a lower temperature and pressure(280 farenheit or so)

I don't give a rats behind about letting this out into the wild, if someone does this and makes his million and that subsequently makes it possible for Zimbabwe to kick a banker's @ with an ultra long range prop plane that can now fly around the globe with a small amount of fuel, that would be good enough payoff for me. And no one can patent this concept now, this publishing of the concept for general public consumption is copyrighted the second I type it (Don't let that stop you from re-posting this) I only said that so this can't be legitimately mothballed. Very few people will release info this way because most only see dollar signs. I say screw that, this has been hidden for too long and the world really does need a way to shut down the elite without having a multi billion dollar budget. A cheap Harbor Freight lathe and matching Harbor Freight milling machine will do this. (God would I love to have those)

 

In closing

DO NOT use lower temperatures or higher temperatures, USE EXACTLY THE TEMPERATURES I STATE HERE. Even running 100 degrees less will cut efficiency by over half, and running hotter will provide absolutely no benefit whatsoever. Look at the steam table, that really is what you are dealing with. AND, when I say don't use a diesel that has been converted, I mean don't use the cylinders. The bottom crank end would be GREAT. And remember, you HAVE TO pre heat the cylinders to the temperatures I state above, or it won't work. It may take a little initial energy to get it all heated up, but once heated it will take little to nothing to maintain temperature.

There is no radiator in this design, only a final condensor for collection and re-circulation of your (obviously purified, distilled water you don't want to just blow out into the air.) Use a condensor to collect it and feed it back into the system. Obviously for this part you will need something similar to a rudimentary pressure washer than can push it back into the system at 3000 psi. And don't let the shills attack that one, 3000 psi water and 3000 psi saturated steam do not have anywhere near the same energy potential, you won't use more than a percent or two of your final output to force the water back into the system.

I am DEAD POSITIVE that we have had our ultra high fuel economy technology stolen from us to protect the world's top criminals from getting righteous payback from very small groups and nations. IF fuel economy was increased by 10x, which the Volkswagen XL1 proves is possible, it would change the world because little people would then be able to get even after being totally screwed by the "elite". There would no longer be ANY NEED AT ALL for an aircraft carrier or expensive military industrial complex. AND IF YOU PLAY WITH THIS, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT. DON'T GO TO THE PATENT OFFICE WITH YOUR CREATION. TWO TYPES OF PEOPLE CAN KEEP A SECRET. THOSE WHO HAVE A BRAIN, AND THOSE WHO ARE DEAD. (I have intelligently chosen risking the latter)

AND DO NOT FORGET: YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO USE A TYPE K THERMOCOUPLE AND CONTROLLER TO REGULATE THE TEMPERATURE OF CYLINDER 1 OR THERE WILL BE PROBLEMS. THIS IS CHEAP TO DO, SO DO IT. DO NOT TRY THIS MANUALLY OR MAKE GUESSES. SET IT TO 710 FARENHEIT.

http://jimstonefreelance.com/threestepengine.html