Star Rotor Engine

[vtec]

Here's another method of jet propulsion... uses compressed air and water

Oh, and with regard to the starRotor engine, I finally gave it a good mental going over, and think that it could work. As long as the compressor wheel is smaller than the turbine wheel. Still I have no idea about the efficiency of it, or how much torque or power you could expect. Good on them for trying, and hopefully it works out.
Edit: Just noticed that the compressor wheel is effectively smaller, cause the depth is much smaller than the depth of the turbine wheel. The overall diameter's are the same which is what had me wondering about their level of capability. But now my fears are put to rest. They know what they are doing.

[Wolf]

I should start trying to think more like you, but when I'm thinking of cool stuff, I never really take into account whether Joe Average Lameass will be scared by the new technology. I just think, will it work, and is it feasible. I haven't taken any ideas far enough to need to worry about the "marketability".

The other major issue with gaseous hydrogen is containment. Pressurised cylinders are bulky and heavy - you can store 2 kg of sodium borohydride in a paper bag (before you dissolve it in water for use as "fuel") If you drop it on your foot, it might hurt a bit.

If you had the gaseous hydrogen extracted from that borohydride in a container and dropped it on your foot, the container would mash your foot to a pulp.

One of the main arguments by detractors of hydrogen fueled vehicles (either combustion or fuelcell electric) was the sheer bulk and weight of containing sufficient hydrogen to have a comparable range with petroleum-fueled vehicles (and the extra weight would decrease the range and performance).

Chrysler came up with the idea of using sodium borohydride because the containment system for sufficient gaseous hydrogen would encroach heavily on the vehicle's seating and storage. Ford and others looked at extracting hydrogen on demand from Methane and other hydrogen compounds but they were bulky, inefficient and polluting (and they were looking for zero-emission solutions.)

Chrysler's solution was compact (a tank comparable in size with a standard petrol tank), light, efficient and non-polluting (extracting gaseous hydrogen from sodium borohydride using a catalyst leaves the sodium boride in solution for collection in a separate "slurry tank"). The range was fantastic compared with prototype fuelcell EVs using conventional means of containment for gaseous hydrogen.

It might be "complex" in that you have to hydrogenate borax and dissolve the resultant borohydride in water then later separate the borax from the water to rehydrogenate it, and it might be "complex" in having two tanks in the vehicle (one to store the borohydride solution to use as fuel, another to collect the borax solution) - but even that is "simple" in comparison with stopping every five minutes to fill up your heavy, sluggish vehicle.

If you like simplicity, I suspect you'd love the simplicity of an entire electric vehicle compared with that of an internal combustion engine - that's just the engine, not including the rest of the vehicle.

Even with a system like that employed by Chrysler's "Natrium", brakes, steering etc, the complexity of the whole vehicle is much less than that of a standard 4-cylinder car engine.

I have extensive files on electric vehicles and what is required to build your own (albeit battery powered) EV. Most the info is of home-made conversions of petrol-driven cars and the process is a simplification of the vehicle - removing complex systems and replacing them with simpler, more robust, more efficient and longer-lived components.

If anyone wants me to flick them a copy of the notes I've written whilst studying and comparing EVs with a view to building a battery-powered motorbike for commuting, send me a PM with your email address.

[vtec]

I like to keep the new technology's simple so that it is easier to explain to people, and so that people can possibly do their own experiments without too much expensive equipment and chemicals.

The reason why I like the idea of running a combustion hydrogen engine, is because we all know that combustion engines work, and I'm sure with R&D we could get it running powerfully, so that we could keep motoring as we know it. I personally love the combustion engine. And currently electric engines that are powerful enough to push a car fast are economically prohibitive (I think). Also, you have to have the fuel cell to go with it, which also is economically prohibitive at this point in time. I'm sure you're right, and the electric way is probably better and more efficient, but I love combustion engines. It's just a personal thing really.

Also I didn't realise that cylinder storage of Hydrogen would be too much worse than cylinder storage of say LPG, but obviously from what you have said, even under extremely high pressure, it's difficult to get much into the cylinder. I was just thinking that borohydride would add unnecessary processes to the system, but you may be right, and it may be a really efficient means of storing Hydrogen, I just don't know enough about it to fully appreciate it.

Looks like you've done some good reading. Thanks for the info. I'll be looking into this Sodium borohydride.

[Wolf]

I like to keep the new technology's simple so that it is easier to explain to people, and so that people can possibly do their own experiments without too much expensive equipment and chemicals.

Fuel cells and sodium borohydride solutions are out of the scope of the home experimenter, I admit, but I warrant that a hydrogen fueled combustion engine would possess sufficient complexity to put that outside the scope of the home experimenter, too. Hydrogen is a small, difficult-to-manage molecule compared with the lengthier molecules of LPG or CNG, the logistics of modifying an engine to function on hydrogen would be enormous and outside the scope of a home-grown project. Someone with the resources of a major engineering firm and a lot of money coming in could possibly manage it, but the average home tinkerer would not possess the tools, money and technological resources.

The reason why I like the idea of running a combustion hydrogen engine, is because we all know that combustion engines work, and I'm sure with R&D we could get it running powerfully, so that we could keep motoring as we know it. I personally love the combustion engine. And currently electric engines that are powerful enough to push a car fast are economically prohibitive (I think).

Actually, suitable electric motors (powerful enough to accelerate a cage loaded down with several very weighty deep-cycle batteries (weight of lead is directly proportional to the range of the vehicle) up to 70mph (or higher for short range drag machines) in fairly short order - comparable with a decent car, or better for drag machines) are relatively cheap, as are the electronics required to drive them and power the car's various systems.

Also, you have to have the fuel cell to go with it, which also is economically prohibitive at this point in time.

Fuel cells are too expensive at the moment but are probably cheaper than converting an internal combustion engine to hydrogen fuel. It can be costly enough converting from scratch to run on methane (and that would be relatively simple).

At the moment, the cheapest power for an EV is battery power but that limits the project to relatively short range commuting - you can still achieve 120km/h and get a reasonable range (enough to commute from several places in Auckland to central city and back).

Home grown EV commuter projects are common and there are a number of kits available.

As far as ICEs go, the cheapest and easiest conversion is for alcohol fuel.

I'm sure you're right, and the electric way is probably better and more efficient, but I love combustion engines. It's just a personal thing really.

Fair enough.

Also I didn't realise that cylinder storage of Hydrogen would be too much worse than cylinder storage of say LPG, but obviously from what you have said, even under extremely high pressure, it's difficult to get much into the cylinder.

Hydrogen is the smallest atom and therefore forms the smallest diatomic molecule. Under pressure, it is small enough to start passing into the walls of the cylinder - through the relatively large gaps between the relatively enormous atoms of the metal.

I understand there are difficulties in pressurising it up to a suitable level to hold enough in the tanks for decent range - even with modern tanks.

Therein lies the difficulty in introducing it into an ICE - squirting it into the combustion chamber with the right oxygen mix and then igniting it effectively.

I was just thinking that borohydride would add unnecessary processes to the system, but you may be right, and it may be a really efficient means of storing Hydrogen, I just don't know enough about it to fully appreciate it.

I understand that magnetic storage systems for gaseous hydrogen were mooted - how's that for complexity?

[Winston001]

All electric vehicles are very attractive. Electric motors on each wheel, few mechanical parts. The problem is conducting the electricity and storing it. I'm fearful we'll swop an oil crisis for a copper crisis. And lead.

Are there any lightweight conducters and batteries?

[Ixion]

Water vapour makes a good battery, and air is a good conductor.

[Winston001]

Water vapour makes a good battery, and air is a good conductor.

Methinks you play the fool sirrah!

[Ixion]

Nope. Ever seen lightning? Admittedly, you DO have to be working on a large scale. But it might not be as silly as it sounds, some sort of controlled capacitive discharge could work (lightning is uncontrolled capacitive discharge). and air 9or any gas) is an excellent conductor, when ionised.

[Winston001]

That's certainly a novel thought. :2thumbs: There is the small matter of mass - gases by their nature don't compress readily to obtain sufficent free electrons. In fact I'm unaware of any current use for static electricity (it's usually something to avoid) although ionised gases in lasers are useful.

[Ixion]

Well, provide a big enough electric field, or some nice radiation, and gas will ionise at low pressure.

So, combine rapid mini-lightning bolts wil a steam generator and steam engine and voila. Not quite, of course, but I suspect that any effective personal electric vehicle must wait upon some such "outside the square" discovery.

[vtec]

Yeah there might be a big breakthrough, but I don't know of any crazy ideas that will work. Mostly because they haven't come up with one yet, or maybe they have, but it hasn't been developed yet, and is outside my understanding.

I think they might be able to get Hydrogen fuel cells, working and affordable with more RnD, and mass production. That's all we need now to make an effective Electric vehicle. However then next problem is, where do we get all this power from. And then we're back where we started, coming up with energy generation ideas. I think everything is in place now, it just needs to be refined and acted upon. How much would 32km by 32 km of mirror slats in the outback cost?