Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 23:04:55 -0400
Reply-To: Wil Haslup <wil@CHARMFX.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Wil Haslup <wil@CHARMFX.COM>
Subject: Re: alternative carburetion of FI 2.0 Liter vanagon engine???
In-Reply-To: <6da579340509081644665b8c1d@mail.gmail.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
John Bange wrote:
> A 10-20% gain would be considered incredibly good and, were it to be had by
> implementing easy patent devices, would have been adopted long ago. There
> are plenty of ways of getting 15% or so-- the Miller cycle engine comes to
> mind-- but they're not in the form of a "turbonator" plate you bolt on to
> your throttle body.
I found two patents related to a carburetor called the Dresserator which
both Holley Carb and Ford signed agreements to manufacture in 1974
...this carburetor promised 18% improved fuel efficiency, a 22:1 fuel to
air mixture (typical schemes manage 15:1) and
ease in passing pollution standards. It has yet to see the market.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=Dresserator%0D%0A&d=pall
This design seems to rely on a very precise fuel metering system.
snip...
> Economy comes at the price of inflexibility. You can't really "throttle" a
> Stirling engine-- they pretty much run within a narrow optimal RPM band.
> Great if you're using it to spin a large generator (sub), not so great
> operating a direct mechanical drive (car).
sure but my point was that there are options that might be more
appropriate to marry to a hybrid than a gas engine including Stirlings
or turbines...neither of which like running at variable rates but both
might be even more efficient for charging batteries and capacitance cells.
> neither really exploiting the promise offered by either the vapor
>
>>induction or extremely precise fuel metering systems mentioned in the
>>legends of such devices....but they do work and other than injectors and
>>jets getting clogged aren't problematic.
>>
>>An idea I've toyed with is finding a mechanism to limit the time the
>>injector is open and increase dispersion out of the injector effectively
>>reducing the amount of fuel but increasing the surface area of the
>>amount injected. In computer controlled injection a method for
>>adjusting the mixture from the specification would be needed since these
>>settings and those controlling air are in the EPROM.
>>
>>I've seen custom computer control setups to replace factory vehicle
>>computers...they provide the ability to make such adjustments.
>
>
>
> Thing is, there's not all that much room for improvement on such a stock
> engine in the arena of fuel dispersion. So much of that is dependent upon
> injector design and combustion chamber geometry during the compression
> "squish" that twiddling with injection firing timing is really little more
> than doorknob polish.
I've seen mentions that improvements of 5%-10% can be gained by moving
injector placement towards the center of the manifold rather than over
the intake valves in engines that use this type of set up. By doing
this the fuel has to travel further to the valve and benefits from
shearing forces to disburse it further. This creates a problem of fuel
pooling at idle when air movement is less but it doesn't deny that it
can be done...it only presents you with another problem to solve.
> What I have noted is that when you mention these legendary devices often
>
>>folks point to the debunking web sites and say they are all shams.
> 'cause they are.
If everyone assumes that big companies and government have all the
answers no one would ever look for anything. It seems to me that in the
past 10 days we've seen that kind of thinking can be terribly wrong and
will probably continue to impact lots more folks as winter heating oil
prices are impacted.
> I personally remember seeing 2 guys testifying before Congress on C-Span
>
>>in the late 70's when they had gas/efficiency hearings about a tweaked
>>diesel they put into a Pinto body that they got 98 mpg out of. Their
>>testimony was interrupted by a phone call from a representative of a
>>major manufacturer and I never saw the story on any other media.
> Sounds unlikely. Not so much the tweaked car part, because you could easily
> make a super-efficient lightweight vehicle that gets 98 mpg, part of the
> trick being that it doesn't go over 30mph or so and takes 3 minutes to
> accelerate;
demo film showed it running normally with normal acceleration....not
scientific but persuasive considering the context of where they were
speaking.
> but the part about the manufacturing rep calling to interrupt a
> congressional hearing and them announcing that on CSPAN! A congressman
> taking aphone call during a hearing on TV?
...not how it happened. someone whispered in the guy's ear while he was
speaking (lawyers and assistants often do this to comment on protocol,
legal points and to help keep testimony on track if you watch this sort
of thing much)
He was then asked by the panel what was up and he told them.
I'm uncertain of the state of Congressional minutes as far as conversion
to digital transcripts but I think I'll try to find it....can I say,
needle in a haystack?
> Being that such a thing happening during a congressional hearing would be
> unprecedented and CERTAINLY not ignored by the media,
amazing things often get overshadowed by other events. What happened to
all the really important news stories that are still developing since
last Tuesday?
> I think you're maybe
> confusing several different things: the congressional hearings on fuel
> economy,
this was part of that.
> and hearings on the safety of the Pinto, both in '74 (six years
> before CSPAN existed);
didn't watch much of anything on the Pinto and only remember mentions of
exploding gas tanks on the news. In '74 I was 14 and rarely watched
news....this was later after I moved to an area where everyone had cable
(back then the majority of folks didn't).
> true stories about people like Tony Capanna, who
> converted Darts and Pintos to diesel in the 70's, getting up to 50mpg on the
> Pinto;
sure
> and the apocryphal tales of 300mpg carburetors that are
> "accidentally" sold, then "mysteriously" turn back into 15mpg carburetors
> after the first dealer servicing.
haven't heard these
> Information has a habit of "escaping". One way or another, be it through
> leaks or through independent rediscovery, there's no possible way to keep
> tremendous breakthroughs secret.
> I understand the desire to believe
> conspiracies. It's just human nature. We are uncomfortable with the idea of
> problems without solid solutions.
one method is disinformation...and yes, that would imply a
conspiracy...or just a small number of folks acting with similar motives.
> Other things, like Ford refusing to spend the
> $11 necessary to put a rubber liner in the Pinto gas tank to keep it from
> burning people alive in accidents because it was cheaper to pay off the
> deaths than recall all those Pintos, didn't help their image either.
There does seem to be a sustained resistance to make changes that
increase costs by marginal amounts even when lives depend on it for fear
of admitting liability and being exposed to law suits.
> These
> things, though, are the extreme cases of blatant mustache-twirling
> dastardliness and outright pigheaded cost-benefit analysis. But the fuel
> economy thing? There's just no sense to it. A car manufacturer that had sole
> rights to the 300mpg carb? They could RULE THE INDUSTRY.
> Really, it all comes down to simple physics. The VW Lupo 3L wrings about
> 75mpg, but it's a tiny lightweight car with a sophisticated 3 cylinder TDI
> engine. This is the way you get economy. There's no silver bullet. There's
> no easy way out. Just hard work.
I agree this topic has lots of potential for scams and taking advantage
of folks but I'm unwilling to refuse to consider possibilities.
History does have examples of technologies evolving that improve
efficiency or productivity by orders of magnitude.
It also includes statements by intelligent people saying things about
potentials in their own field of study subsequently found not only wrong
but very wrong. Human beings are routinely unreliable in their capacity
to accept the dominant technology or commonly accepted premises. ( I
collect notable quotes for my signature file.)
Examples include:
"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
(Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895)
"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
(Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, US Office of Patents, 1899)
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
(Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943)
"But what ... is it good for?"
Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968,
commenting on the microchip.
"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better
than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible."
A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper
proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found
Federal Express Corp.)
"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The
literature was full of examples that said you can't do this."
Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M
"Post-It" Notepads.
"So we went to Atari and said, 'Hey, we've got this amazing thing, even
built with some of your parts, and what do you think about funding us?
Or we'll give it to you. We just want to do it. Pay our salary, we'll
come work for you.' And they said, 'No.' So then we went to
Hewlett-Packard, and they said, 'Hey, we don't need you. You haven't got
through college yet.'"
Apple Computer Inc. founder Steve Jobs on attempts to get Atari and H-P
interested in his and Steve Wozniak's personal computer.
"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction".
Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse, 1872.
"640K ought to be enough for anyone."
(Bill Gates, 1981)
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
(Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp.
(DEC), 1977)
"What use could this company make of an electrical toy?
Western Union president William Orton, rejecting A.G. Bole's offer to
sell his struggling telephone company to Western Union for $100,000
(date unknown).
I just don't see lots of value in saying things can't be done. I'm not
planning on investing large amounts of $ in someone else's
device....just asking around for personal experiences and planning on
investing a little time...maybe start with a lawn mower and see what
happens.
--
Wil
-- http://www.charmfx.com/
"Soylent green is people."
