||Available in HTML @: www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2003/2003_08.php
EAGLE-RESEARCH NEWSLETTER: August, 2003
WHAT'S NEW Issue Feature: Air Powered Vehicles Fuel Saver news Free Energy Comments Brown's Gas news Reader Comments Coming Up Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead -
WHAT'S NEW (top) There was no June issue of this newsletter. It was skipped because we were extremely busy on several time sensitive projects. The Eagle-Research Chats are postponed until winter, because no one has the time to participate during the summer. The May Chat was skipped.
Issue Feature: AIR POWERED VEHICLES (top)
Previous issue that discussed air powered cars: http://www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2003_02.php In the previous article I point out an easy method to make a MAJOR difference in air car practicality. Use atmospheric heat to double or triple the driving range of a compressed air powered vehicle. I wouldn't even consider buying an air powered vehicle if it couldn't take advantage of this technique. Here's an article on a vehicle designed to use the technique: http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/wo_harney091902.asp?p=0 "By John Harney September 19, 2002 Guy Negre, an engineer from the little town of Carros, France, discovered a breath of fresh air, both literally and figuratively. During his career designing formula one engines he became familiar with isotherm dynamics, a process that creates power by expanding air at an almost constant temperature. Negre theorized that by heating and expanding super-cooled compressed air he could power a nonpolluting car. Six years and four prototypes later, it would appear he's done it." George Wiseman NOTE: Energy to compress: You still need energy to compress the air and that energy is always more than the useful energy you get back out when you use the compressed air; particularly because of an 'overheating' effect. Air already has a certain amount of heat in it, so when you compress it, you concentrate the heat and the resulting mixture goes to a higher temperature. This higher temperature creates pressure that resists the compressor piston and causes it to have to do more work. There is a way to prevent this. There is a way to compress air at near constant temperature, so it would take considerably less energy to compress. This can almost be thought of as the opposite of the efficiency technique I outlined above; we want to take heat OUT of the air as we compress it. The technique to do this is discussed in some detail in my 'HEAT Technology Book 3/Wise Cycle Report'. The general idea is to build a special compressor that has a liquid injected as a fine mist into the air before it is compressed. The liquid is of sufficient volume that it will 'suck up' the excess heat without vaporizing. The slightly heated liquid gets ejected from the cylinder on the 'compression' stroke, then separated from the air and cooled to be ready for injection again. This technique does require a compressor that has the 'head' on the bottom of the cylinder so that the piston moves down during the compression stroke. This prevents cylinder lockup that would be caused by 'hydraulicing'. It is very important to use something like this to take the heat out of the compressing air, because that energy is lost to you anyway. When an air tank is compressed, it raises temperature with the concentrated heat energy. That heat energy then leaves the tank as the tank cools back to ambient temperature. This is an extreme inefficiency in the design of compressing systems. So far, I see lots of technology to improve air cars and very little to improve the compressors that 'fuel' the cars. There is enough technology in place to make air vehicles practical for short drives. They should compete very well with electric vehicles. Another way to extend the range of air cars is to actually heat the air after it has had a chance to warm up using ambient temperatures. Again, this increases the vehicle's range. I would use 'bio-fuels' to create the heat, so that dependence on fossil-fuels could be reduced or eliminated. Here is a company attempting to make commercial versions of air cars. http://www.theaircar.com/ "It´s already looking like the MDI Air Car will be one of the major technological discoveries of the new century. Inventor Guy Négre has developed a car capable of a top speed of 110 km/h, 300 kilometers on one tank of fuel and at a cost of just a penny per kilometer. All of this at "zero pollution". In fact the car cleans the air it uses! The automobile is fundamental to our lifestyle, but city pollution is seriously damaging our standard of living. According to Spanish national newspaper "El Periódico", 1/9/2000: "The pollution produced by automobile traffic causes tens of thousands of deaths in Europe..." This information came from a web search. http://cooltech.iafrica.com/technews/archive/February/203167.htm http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_988000/988265.stm http://www.howstuffworks.com/air-car.htm http://www.howstuffworks.com/news-item106.htm http://www.globalstewards.org/aircar.htm SEPTEMBER 30. First unveiled at the Johannesburg Auto Expo in 2000, the e.Volution car appears ready to go into production. The car runs on compressed air. It was invented by Guy Negre, a retired French Formula One racing driver. The small vehicle is for urban driving. Its top speed is 100 km/hour. It can run 120 miles on one tank of air. It's predicted that the owner of an e.Volution will be able to drive 120 miles at a cost of 30 cents. The manufacturer, Motor Development International, will produce the car in South Africa, under the corporate name Zero Pollution Motors. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/science/DyeHard/dye15.php Abe Hertzberg, professor emeritus of aeronautics and astronautics at the University of Washington, and one of his students pose with the LN2000, the nitrogen-powered vehicle they have developed (University of Washington) Here is the 'Lee Rogers' story: http://www.keelynet.com/energy/airmotor.htm I clipped this information from a post on the 'Free Energy' egroup. "In 1931, Roy J. Meyers of Los Angeles built an air-powered car (air has been used for years to power localized underground mine engines). Myers, an engineer, built a 114-lb., 6-cylinder radial air engine that produced over 180 hp. Newspaper articles at the time reported that the vehicle could cruise several hundred miles at low speeds. In the 1970s, Vittorio Sorgato of Milan, Italy, also created a very impressive air-powered vehicle, using compressed air stored as a liquid. After a great deal of initial interest from Italian sources, his invention is now all but forgotten. Robert Alexander of Montebello, California, spent 45 days and around $500 to put together a car (U.S. Patent No. 3913004), using a small 7/8ths 12-volt motor to provide initial power. Once going, a hydraulic-and-air system took over and recharged the small electric energy drain. The inventor and his partner were determined that the auto industry would not bury their "super power" system. To no avail. Joseph P Troyan designed an air-powered flywheel that could propel an automobile using the principle of "ratio amplification of motion in a closed system." The Troyan motor (U.S. Patent No. 040011) was easily attached to electrical generators to create a pollution-free, variable-power system. David McClintock created a free energy device known as the McClintock Air Motor (U.S. Patent No. 2,982,26100) which is a cross between a diesel engine with three cylinders and a compression ratio of 27-to-1, and a rotary engine with solar and plenary gears. It burns no fuel, but becomes self-running by driving its own air compressor."
FUEL SAVER NEWS: (top)
Here's an interesting link on 'How Gasoline Works', enjoy. http://auto.howstuffworks.com/gasoline.htm
Next stage of Fuel Saver Technology on the Honda:
We're still in the process of building a Carburetor Enhancer, with electronic upgrade, and a HyZor system for the Honda. The man I delegated the project is no longer with us. This will seriously delay completion of the project. I am working on several projects concurrently and each one only gets a portion of my time. Before he left, we had accumulated all the components except the HyZor chamber itself and had assembled the electronic circuits on test boards, ready for debugging and adjustment. Once past that stage, we hardwire the circuit on a board and assemble everything in the car. I have completed the automatic circuit/system for the deceleration fuel shutoff and it works very well. This time I used an rpm switch instead of a vacuum switch and I find it to be much more efficient, reliable and easier to adjust so that it is 'transparent' to the driver (no performance problems). I mounted a green LED that turns on whenever the fuel is shut off; I put it beside the vacuum gauge on the dash. I put normally closed switches on the clutch and the throttle. These are 'brake' switches and I recommend the Niehoff SL31611 found on Volvo 70-92, Saab 67-75, Geo 89-91 and BMW 70-88. I added a normally closed rpm switch (this replaced the vacuum switch). I kept a manual bypass switch for when I want to shut off the system; it is handy to test before and after and to adjust OEM settings without interference from this enhancement. I also discovered that I needed to add a 'cold start' bypass switch as well. So that the system would not turn on until the engine choke was warm. This is because the 'cold' idle setting was higher than my fuel shutoff rpm. For this car, since I had a choke light that was activated by a grounding switch when the choke was pulled out, I tapped into that and solved the problem. In most vehicles, a simple temperature switch (adjustable) will suffice. All switches go to ground, which keeps a p-channel mosfet turned on; keeping power going to the fuel shutoff coil; keeping the fuel flowing. If the engine is warm, my foot is off the throttle and clutch and the rpm is greater than my setpoint (1000 rpm) then the fuel is shut off. As soon as the rpm drops or I touch the throttle or clutch (ground any switch), the fuel turns back on. With a little fine adjustment I get maximum savings and the system is totally invisible to my driving (no performance problems). More important, it is totally invisible to anyones driving. This system works better than the 'old' vacuum switch technique because it will cut off the fuel in situations where you are in true deceleration but are not at an extremely high vacuum. It also turns the fuel back on a fraction faster than the vacuum switch can, resulting in less performance issues. To get maximum savings I needed to change my driving habits a bit. Keeping the engine in gear longer and taking my foot off the gas to decelerate; taking it out of gear only when the engine rpm had dropped below my setpoint. This is much easier on my brakes; I seldom have to touch them except to come to a complete stop. The LED on the dash really helps me as I modify my habits. On the highway, different grades will determine your speed during deceleration. If you are willing to accept less speed, you can find many more opportunities to go distances using no fuel. I call this 'gravity powered' :) I do not know the extra savings yet. My cash out-of-pocket was about $150 because I used new components. The cost if I'd used surplus resources and eBay would have been about $30. It took me about 8 hours to build this automatic system; most of the time was spent in fabrication. Instead of using my own design of rpm switch, I used a product called ' MSD Ignition RPM activated switch Kit #8950 with the 'adjustable rpm module #8677'(the 'module' allows adjustment from 150-3000 rpm). I did this in an attempt to use 'off the shelf' components instead of having people building electronic circuits. I found that the #8950 switch is not 'snap action' . It uses Pulse Width Modulation to switch over a range of about 200 rpm. This causes the shutoff valve to flicker on and off in that rpm range. In an ordinary Electronic Carburetor Enhancer, that would be OK, because I recommend valves that can cycle that fast continuously and because it would allow the carburetor to be turning 'on' a little quicker, to help prevent stalling on stops. In this Honda, I'm using the 'anti-dieseling' fuel shutoff valves built into the carburetor. These valves are not meant to cycle in and out many times a minute and so I had to build electronics to compensate (to turn the PWM signal into a snap action signal). In the end, I could have saved myself $70 if I'd just built the rpm switch as per my own schematic in 'Reverse Your Electric Meter'. Note: As with any project, as I build and test them, I find ways to improve them. I have simplified and updated the deceleration fuel shutoff circuit. For one thing, simply taking a signal from the coil (negative) to count rpm and then eliminating unneeded circuit components. By next issue of this newsletter I will have full pictures and schematics of this project posted to this website. I am currently doing a little bodywork because we expect to keep this car for at least another 100,000 kilometers. It is currently approaching 300,000 kilometers. So far, we have: Total time invested to date: 10 hours Total money invested to date: actual cost $270 (least cost = $150) Technology installed: fuel filter, fuel pressure regulator, vacuum gauge, automatic fuel shutoff circuit with manual bypass. EPA highway mileage (US gallon) 34 mpg, current mileage 40 mpg.
See archived newsletters for previous stages.
www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2001/2001_10.php www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2001/2001_12.php www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2002/2002_02.php www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2002/2002_04.php www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2003/2003_02.php
FREE ENERGY COMMENTS (top)
Dear Readers, I previously proposed to use BG in a possible free energy technique. http://www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/archive/2001_10.php The idea won't work. To make a long story short: Remember the concept of turning water into hydrogen and oxygen, allowing it to raise to a high level, then turn it back into water (using a device that recovers some of the electrical energy) and then let the water fall back to the electrolyzer through a pelton wheel? Well, it is impractical because: At 2000 feet head we have 866 psi. 494 gal/min (29640 gal/hr) through a 3/4" nozzle makes 249.5 hp using a pelton wheel. 249.5 hp = 186 Kw. Our electrolysis takes 3 watthours to make a liter of gas. 1 liter of water makes 1866 liters of BG. It takes 5.6 Kwh to turn 1 liter of water into BG. 186 Kwh converts 33.21 liters (8.7 US gal) of water to BG. 8.7 gallons/hour is far short of the 29640 gallons/hour needed to make the 186 Kwh; so this idea is unworkable.
I also have had a chance to complete my gravity wheel project. It was well designed and functioned great but it didn't produce excess work. The 'holder rods' functioned great but did not do what I expected. I learned a lot as I spent many hours experimenting with the wheel. The first thing I learned is that the wheel 'knows' where the weights are. Holder rods do not 'fool' it. They acted as 'levers' and put the weight where I didn't want it. Second, it DOES NOT MATTER how high or low the weights are (in relation to the center of rotation). They will balance when they are equal distance (vertically) from the center of rotation. I think this is the key to designing a working wheel. I am now designing using a computer (vector based program) where I can measure the total inches on the left and compare with the total inches on the right. If I can keep the total inches (of all weights) on the left less that the right at every degree of wheel rotation, I will have a 'self-turning' wheel. Third, I think that a 'working' design will function with a 'balancing' set of only two weights (no need to make eight weights). The wheel needs to 'reset' itself every 180 degrees. In my first experiment I'm about 25 degrees short of 'reset'. I think I know how to redesign to get more than 25 degrees.
BROWN'S GAS NEWS (top)
Dear readers, We have now sold ER1200 WaterTorches around the world, the list of countries is impressive. And to date, every single ER1200 'out there' is still functional. Our customers are very happy, particularly if they'd had experience with BG machines made by some 'other' manufacturers. Our machines significantly outperform the competition in every way. As our customers have been using the ER1200 WaterTorches, they have been giving us feedback of several different kinds. First, the results of their experimentation in many applications, which has been very impressive and we will discuss in future issues. The information needs to be independently verified before we can openly talk about it. Second, machine enhancements that they would like to have to make the ER1200 even more impressive. We are in the process of developing several options that will make the ER1200 Watertorches even more 'user-friendly' in specific applications. I will report on these options in a future newsletter.
READER COMMENTS (top)
Here is an email that is indicative of the 'rumors' that I often see. I do not know if it is true or not. If you decide to participate I advise getting independent testing done before putting out your money. Any legitimate working device would be able to be tested without having to explain or show 'why' it works, just that it DOES work. >Hello George, >In times past you said you would be willing to put a notice in your >newsletter or website as long as I was willing to include my own contact >info. Well, I now can say that we can use this email address for such >contact firstname.lastname@example.org >Hoping to hear from you. >Regards, >Del > >My "announcement" is that an on-demand hydrogen system is now ready for >licensing. It is a chemical/catalyst system. The catalyst lasts forever. >The chemical which comes in a canister does get "used" up being able to >produce so much H2 fuel. When that happens the canister is sent back to >the factory for recharging. The spent material is not waste but is actually >more valuable than it was before. The cost for the canisters will be only >a fraction of what the original fuel costs were. > >Any water source can be used including sea water. The conversion is very >simple as well. A new injector is screwed into the original spark-plug >port and connected to the tube from the water/fuel tank. That`s it. The >engine will produce substantially more HP as well with this system. > >At present any spark-ignited engine can be converted from the smallest >single cylinder up to 4 cylinder. > >Licensees are being sought for specific categories for the retrofit market. >Preferably, these should be entities that are presently in business and >that can do a large volume of retrofitting per annum. They must also >have the financial ability to pay the initial license fee. These licenses >will be non-exclusive. Any interested party may write to: email@example.com ---------------- >Free Energy Accumulator > >Hi, George 5.6.03 > >How many of your (FEA) can be build to have a power output of 12 volt >steadily, constantly, and indefinitely. As I am not an electronics expert, >Could you build the device for me with the above power output, and to >which price? >Hope to here from you soon. >Edward Edward, I've haven't yet tried to build more than 'toys' as proof of concept. Here's something of interest: John Hutchison has done a good job of developing 'self-charging' technology using special capacitors. His 'Barium Titanate crystal converter' charges to significant potentials. One has been working in Japan, nonstop since 1997, producing 2V at 0.25 amp. He can build them to produce 3 amps. Put them in series to get any voltage you desire. He has built units that have peaked over 5,000 volts. He sells tiny units to the public. John Hutchison 727 5th Ave., #305, New Westminster, British Columbia Canada V3M 1X8. Phone/Fax 604-524-4875. firstname.lastname@example.org
COMING UP (top)
April/2004 will feature Extreme Mileage June/2004 will feature Gravity Wheels
If you know someone whom you believe would like to be subscribed to this unique newsletter; invite them to view: www.eagle-research.com/newsletter/newsletter.php emails to: < email@example.com > are automatically bounced except if a subscribe or unsubscribe because all those emails are automatically routed to a robot program with no one reading them, so you'd get no answer. We wouldn't even know you'd written. To email Eagle-Research: <