not Cereal Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 O2 [i]IS[/i] a fuel. it is what launches the space shuttle; liquid oxygen. very, very flammable stuff (remember the challenger? nothing funny about that memory) because of its highly explosive nature it will never be used on a typical car. you just cant store it safely. in an "oxy-acetylene" welder you have to be VERY careful about the oxygen tank, or it can explode. when pure O2 comes into contact with petroleum it will explode, no flame neccesary. see warnings plastered on ALL O2 containers warning about this. same reason hydrogen will never be used in a car; its not safe to store it. if you crashed your car and damaged the conatiner with H or O2 in it everyone would die in the resulting explosion (again, this happened to nasa) consumer grade gasoline on the other hand is poorly flammable. it will hardly explode unless the situation is correct. sure it will [i]BURN LIKE MAD[/i] but exploding it is a fairly involved process. hence the fairly complex system of carburation / fuel injection on piston based engines. ever see a car explode in real life? i didnt think so. they just dont explode like on tv. you can tear up the gas tank and leak gas everywhere and the car will go up in flames but it doesnt [i]explode[/i]. they use bombs on tv to do that. i've seen cars go up in flames in seconds so its nothing to joke about. superchargers are what is known as a "positive displacement" pump. there are two types; roots and paxton. roots are the type that stick out of the hood and have the carb on top. paxtons are the type that are similiar to a turbo, mount to the engine like an alternator, and are known as a "centrifugal" pump. a paxton pump takes minor mods to work. timing mostly. the pumps do nothing at low speed performance wise. roots type pumps take extensive mods to the engine to work right. lower compression (around 6 to 1 or less) higher fuel flow, heavy timing adjustments, higher octane fuel, porting the intake/heads and cleaning the bowl area of the head to prevent hot spots. also a long duration camshaft is pretty much required for a roots type pump. you cannot shut off a roots pump; it is integral to the engine design. it is always on. it effectively increases the displacement of the engine, hence[i] positive displacement[/i] a 350 chevy in the example could displace anywhere from 350 to 700+ inches of air. how? the air is [i]compressed[/i] into the engine. can you put more air into a container than it will hold under no pressure? yes. open a bottle of pop on the top of a mountain and see what i mean. there is more pressure in the bottle at higher elevations due to decreased air pressure outside the container. BTW a naturally aspirated 350 will pull about 418CFM @5500 rpm. a modified 350 will pull much more than that. a highly modified (read very expensive and undrivable) 350 will pull around 611CFM @5500rpm. a supercharged 350 can pull way, way more than that. thats why roots type pumps usually have TWO carbs on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flea man Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 Coaster wrote: [quote]O2 IS a fuel. it is what launches the space shuttle; liquid oxygen. very, very flammable stuff (remember the challenger? nothing funny about that memory) [/quote] Huh? Liquid O2 is the oxidizer, liquid hydrogen is the fuel. If you hold a match in front of a tube spewing pure O2, the match will burn brighter (faster burn rate), the pure O2 will not ignite. [quote] in an "oxy-acetylene" welder you have to be VERY careful about the oxygen tank, or it can explode. when pure O2 comes into contact with petroleum it will explode, no flame necessary. see warnings plastered on ALL O2 containers warning about this. [/quote] True. When liquid O2 (oxidizer) comes in contact with a liquid fuel source (liquid gasoline, hydrogen), they will explode. No flame is necessary because of the chemical reaction. As you have just said, you need fuel (petroleum). [quote] same reason hydrogen will never be used in a car; its not safe to store it. if you crashed your car and damaged the conatiner with H or O2 in it everyone would die in the resulting explosion (again, this happened to nasa) [/quote] If you only had a pure O2 tank, you would only be hurt/killed by the shrapnel of the pressurized tank (if there is no other fuel source to ignite). Liquid hydrogen (fuel) on the other hand is dangerous as it is a lot of condensed fuel surrounded by a lot of O2 (our atmosphere!). [quote] superchargers are what is known as a "positive displacement" pump. there are two types; roots and paxton. roots are the type that stick out of the hood and have the carb on top. paxtons are the type that are similiar to a turbo, mount to the engine like an alternator, and are known as a "centrifugal" pump. a paxton pump takes minor mods to work. timing mostly. the pumps do nothing at low speed performance wise. roots type pumps take extensive mods to the engine to work right. lower compression (around 6 to 1 or less) higher fuel flow, heavy timing adjustments, higher octane fuel, porting the intake/heads and cleaning the bowl area of the head to prevent hot spots. also a long duration camshaft is pretty much required for a roots type pump. [/quote] Actually manufactures make smaller and bigger versions of each style of pumps. You can buy a small roots style blower that requires very small modifications (example: more fuel pressure) and you can buy very big paxton pumps that would only work well on a full out race engine. A long duration cam is not required for either pump. You can increase the efficiency of the engine with a blower/paxton by increasing only the duration of the exhaust valve. Since you have a blower pushing on the intake valve, you do not want to increase the intake duration the same amount as the exhaust. You should increase the exhaust duration because now more combustion gas has to escape the cylinder. Although you don't have to change the stock cam on a small blower/paxton set up. Compared to a equal sized non-blower engine, to make the same Hp you would need a much larger camshaft in the non-blower engine (and would have to rev it higher). [quote] BTW a naturally aspirated 350 will pull about 418CFM @5500 rpm. a modified 350 will pull much more than that. a highly modified (read very expensive and undrivable) 350 will pull around 611CFM @5500rpm [/quote] Probably correct about this...I was thinking of my modified 350 in my '69 Camaro. As a rule of thumb, you use a 600cfm "capable" carb for most stock engines...larger for more modified engines. A stock 350 with a 600cfm carb will not choke @ 5500 rpm from lack of airflow. But a modified 350 that makes peak power @ 6000RPM would start to be limited by a 600cfm carb. My 350 makes it's peak power at about 6000RPM and it has a 750cfm carb (a 600cfm chokes it above 5500rpm). The carb cfm rating is not what the engine actually takes in, I know. But a slightly modified 350 can take in 600cfm and still be very drivable. Flea man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip OKeefe Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 [quote]Originally posted by d gauss: [b] they had those in the 1970's (sho-bud? fender? ernie ball? i can't remember who made it...but i bet Craig will :) ) -d. gauss[/b][/quote] Morley had these too... maybe Fender did as well. [img]http://www.freakygamers.com/smilies/s2/contrib/navigator/usa.gif[/img] Phil O'Keefe Sound Sanctuary Recording Riverside CA http://www.ssrstudio.com pokeefe777@ssrstudio.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
not Cereal Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 hi flea man - you seem to know your cars. do you have a project now? i d lke to see pics of your 69 camaro. i have a 69 dodge truck. i love it. i spend more time w/truck than music these times. i need a break from the tune business. if you have pics send them to [email]davefx@excite.com[/email] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hippie Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 Thanks to you guys who commented on the '02 engine'. You know your engines way better than I do. (shame on me, being from Detroit, the 'Motorcity') Your comments made on the 'O2' idea were made in the context of already existing engines. -for this idea to work (if ever) it would be required to redesign some things on the engine, namely the valves (heads). Under 'O2 injection', no valve-opening is needed for the intake stroke, -remember we would now have to be (computer-controlled) O2 injected. That alone will 'buy' some efficiency. (there's another invention, 'computer controlled valves' -Man, I hate the whole 'clunky' cam/push-rod/valve design -it is 1830's technology) I'd like to think of the idea as a new approach altogether, not a 'bolt on' accessory. The idea is admittedly over my head, that is why I thought I'd toss it out here for you 'guru's' to look at. Superchargers & turbochargers were mentioned -yes, they are similar in nature, but they are taking the existing system and 'force-feeding' more air thru the system at a higher rate -really just forcing to fit (as a friend says)'20 lbs. of shit in a 10 lb. bag'. The turbo/super-charge system is only effective at higher RPM's. -a whole new design would be required to accomodate the o2 idea. NASA was also mentioned, -remember the horrible accident that happened during a test on the launch-pad in '67? That was caused from a spark in a pure oxygen environment. We do know now how flammable a pure O2 environment is! The accident supports the hypothesis of a greater 'power-stroke' explosion using pure o2. The idea (I think) could work in theory, but the technology to supply enough O2 for the engine to run continously (and without driving around with a refinery under your hood) is the essence of the problem. That is way beyond my knowledge. -Not to mention, as someone told me 'the car makers are so in bed with the gas companies, any modification to reduce gas consumption is a recipe to get yourself killed'. :D Anyway, thanks for looking at it & responding with excellent comments. I think I'll just stick to music and recording; I already have that subject I know nothing about. :D Matt In two days, it won't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coren Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 [quote]Originally posted by Chip McDonald: [b]I got juked on a video game parody/spoof of "Myst" called "Pyst" once... [/b][/quote] ive played that!!! :) having scene so many carbon-monoxide suicides in cars i was wondering why they dont just put a carbon monoxide detector in the car... levels get to high and it opens a "2nd exhaust" pipe thats much shorter and hidden... it wouldnt stop them if they were serious about it but hell why not just make it a little harder for them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnorman Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 i want a nuclear battery. think about it - no more power company, no more power transmission lines or miles and miles of huge power line towers marching off across the countryside, no more dams that kill our fish, no more petroleum companies holding us hostage with gasoline prices. houses, cars, everything could be independently operated without any power cords (can you imagine a 5-megawatt marshall amp?). "mr. fusion" would be a good alternate. jnorman sunridge studios salem, oregon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offramp Posted January 29, 2002 Share Posted January 29, 2002 Yeah...and the first head-on collision you have would result in a small mushroom cloud over the accident site, and since the area would be hot, no one could get in to clean up the wreckage, so you'd be buried there (if there's anything left of you.) I've upped my standards; now, up yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coren Posted January 30, 2002 Share Posted January 30, 2002 a mushroom cloud wouldnt happen unless something set of the charge, but you would have radiation leakage if the battery got cracked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meccajay Posted January 30, 2002 Share Posted January 30, 2002 My Invention choice- Instant On for computers(like a lightswitch) Mac only of course... ;) TROLL . . . ish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.