|
When would this device be available ? And what would it cost ?
|
What color can I get it in? :rolleyes:
|
Going through pressure drops?
Uhm, when is fuel ever compressed enough that you could actually drop the pressure? What this sounds like is just a fuel compressor that atomizes fuel/air outside of the combustion chamber, and then decompresses it before entering the combustion cycle reducing the temp and expanding the fuel once again. Questions that I don't expect to be answered from this viel of mystery and hype: Where does the excess heat go from pressure drop? Where does the excess pressure go? How can all that be possible in a stadard duty cycle? And finally... Why hasn't KDR even applied for a patent yet on the design? They don't have to worry about information black outs if they have a patent pending. If they have running devices they have what they need to APPLY for a patent.... And perhaps the most burning question on my mind right now: If this device actually works, how much more life insurance can I get? If it works that well on stock turbos, I'm thinking a huge single turbo running a hojillion psi on 87 octane is in my future! |
It sounds like the "tornado" thats always doing infomercials on the Speed Channel haha j/k
Sould be interesting though to see how this all evolves in the up coming months. Very interesting indead. I wonder where it mounts up at. STEPHEN |
Originally posted by SPOautos It sounds like the "tornado" thats always doing infomercials on the Speed Channel STEPHEN You are right, thats what it sounds like. I think J C Whitney has several versions too. Also, the fuel magnets and ionizers. Each increases your gas mileage 25%. If you install all 5, your car will make gasoline while you drive ! :rlaugh: |
My only concern, is leaner A:F = running hotter (duh).
O-Ring failure seems to be just as big of a wallet emptier as an apex seal (judging by the lumpy idle/low vac vs Coolant disappearing threads). I'd want to see long term o-ring effects before I'd run my motor hotter than it already runs. yes, maybe I'm too paranoid about heat under the hood... |
Originally posted by dubulup yes, maybe I'm too paranoid about heat under the hood... Perhaps our upgraded radiators would suffice. Hell, mount it vertically, since the IC can go now... just kidding... |
johnchabin, meet Zerobanger. He's getting ird of his IC ;)
|
How about 170 pages of information:
http://www.startube.com/STSThesis.pdf Notice page 30: "Several concepts were postulated and built but failed to reduce detonation. Most of these not only failed, but made detonation worse." From this paper it is obvious repeated trial and error was used to solve a detonation for a very specific setup, a 10.21 CR Chevy 350. How is KDR verifying their design? From the paper above it seems reasonable that the design would need to change for different Air and injector flow rates. How will that be handled. Also, I know nothing about patent law, but shouldn't Dr. Gilles De Lisle, StarTube and Dr. Dean Hill own the patent. The research was not specific to aviation. |
Originally posted by cymrex How about 170 pages of information: http://www.startube.com/STSThesis.pdf Notice page 30: "Several concepts were postulated and built but failed to reduce detonation. Most of these not only failed, but made detonation worse." From this paper it is obvious repeated trial and error was used to solve a detonation for a very specific setup, a 10.21 CR Chevy 350. How is KDR verifying their design? From the paper above it seems reasonable that the design would need to change for different Air and injector flow rates. How will that be handled. Also, I know nothing about patent law, but shouldn't Dr. Gilles De Lisle, StarTube and Dr. Dean Hill own the patent. The research was not specific to aviation. |
Re: Anti-Detonation device explained...........
Doing a little bit of plagiarizing, are we? For those of you who haven't checked out the Star Tube thesis, go to page 29.
Here is a direct quote from this document (http://www.startube.com/STSThesis.pdf) All information concerning the Star Tube System is proprietary. The project was privately funded and developed. Basic concepts of its function will be discussed and test results will be presented but no specific details can be revealed. Explicit characteristics of the fluid flow and actual dimensions will not be discussed. The Star Tube System was developed to aid in the thorough mixing of fuel and air before it enters the combustion chamber. Air is added to the fuel stream and subjected to multiple pressure drops. This is accomplished using a series of sections, similar to orifice plates, which restrict the air/fuel mixture. The combination of several pressure differentials and swirl induced by each orifice within the system aids in the atomization of the mixture. The greater the atomization of the mixture, the closer it is to being a homogeneous flow which will enhance the evaporation of the flow. Fuel is first injected into the system by means of a fuel injector. Air is drawn into the system from radial holes aligned parallel to the flow of the fuel. Once the fuel and air have been mixed initially, the mixture travels through a series of orifices. The pressure differential created by the orifice is similar to that seen through the single venturi of a carburetor. A combination of multiple orifices, which produce pressure drops and an increase in turbulence throughout the mixture, contribute to better mixing and fuel droplet size reduction than is possible with carburetors or injectors alone. Originally posted by BATMAN Modern engines are capable of utilizing slightyl higher compression ratios than in the past because ECUs are capable of sensing the onset of detonation and can retard the spark to eliminate detonation. Unfortuently, a drastic loss in power results from retrading the spark. Detonation usually ossurs while an engine is under load. For years, folks have tinkered with engines to optimize performance for racing. Stock engines are manufactured to optimize performance for pump gas. For the most part the higher the octane the less liekly it will detonate granted that the respective mods are constant. Furthermore, better burning fuel eliminate detonation allowing for optimal performance. The "anti-detonation device" (ADD) is a fuel processing system consisting of several sections that are capable of mixing fuel and air into a more homogeneous state than is possible with standard fuel injection or carbs. The A/F mixture can be mixed into a more homogeneous state because the mixture particle size is reduced. This increase in homogeneity results in a much better burning mixture. The fuel particles are mixed in a way such that, when injected into a high compression or turbo'd combustion chamber, detonation is not present. The optimal A/F ratio is about the same as 1bar of atmospheric pressure 14.7:1. Most of us run more fuel to reduce the drain from our bank accounts. Basic concepts of its fucntion will be discussed but with no specific details can be revealed (don't harrass me with PM's and emails like a bunch of hungry puppies begging their mom for the daily vomit meal). Explicit characteristics of the fluid flow and actual dimensions will not be discussed. The ADD was developed to aid in the thorough mixing of the A/F before it enters the combustion chamber. Air is added tot he fuel stream and subjected to multiple pressure drops. This is accomplished using a series of sections, similar orfices plates, shich restrict the A/F mixture. The combination of several pressure differentials and swirl induced by each orfice within the system aids in the atomization of the mixture. The greater the atomization of the mixture, the closer it is to being a homogenous flow which will enhance the evaporation of the flow. Fuel is first injected inti the system by means of a fuel injector. Air is drawn into the system from radial holes aligned parallel to the flow of the fuel. Once the fuel and air have been mixed initially, the mixture travels through a series of orfices. The pressure differential created by the orfice is similar to that seen through the single venturi of a carburetor. A combination of multiple orfices, which produce pressure drops and an increase in turbulence throughout the mixture, contribute to better mixing and fuel droplet size reduction than is possible with injectors alone........ BTW, this should also add to fuel economy when ur just cruising. |
^ :hahaha:
|
Why doesn't someone find out if a patent from KDR is imminent and and if not Batman can Open Up His Bellfrey !
:D Since we all know bats in the bellfrey aren't healthy ! :rofl: |
Re: Re: Anti-Detonation device explained...........
Originally posted by paw140 Doing a little bit of plagiarizing, are we? For those of you who haven't checked out the Star Tube thesis, go to page 29. Here is a direct quote from this document (http://www.startube.com/STSThesis.pdf) And here is a quote from Batman. And he added the final fuel economy comment out of his own vast knowledge of this technology. You are a complete sham. I have lost all credibility that I ever had for your comments. |
Good work folks........... I knew that there was some decent detectives out there.
Congrats............ here is a cookie for taking the bait. |
Yeah, I think I'm do do an internet search and find some obscure journal with a cool-sounding technology. Then I'm going to come on here, switch a few of the words around to make it sound like my own writing to make myself seem reasonably intelligent, and talk about how it can apply to a rotary engine. That should get everyone stirred up, and make me seem pretty dang awesome! Schweet! :)
|
Yep....... :)
|
lololol....this whole thing has turned into a joke..
beware 911gt...youve been had. the comments about increased detonation were interesting....no way in hell am i guinie pigging some tinker toy on my car. j |
BTW, it has been pointed to me that some of the angry folks in this thread are folks that have competing interests against KDR.
Gee I wonder why....... very suspect ain't it? |
Originally posted by artguy lololol....this whole thing has turned into a joke. People should know better. And this information that I got was sent to me by another forum member that was afraid to use his name to post this shit. So I took it and made a joke outta it. I love a participating audience.......... - Court Jester :p: |
artguy,
U and a few folks have done ur share of testing new shit. It's time for some other men to pony up and put faith in the lord and place their bared nekkid balls on the stump..... |
|
good going, you figured it out?
NOT ! circle gets the square
|
Re: Re: Re: Anti-Detonation device explained...........
Originally posted by Kento No one never said detonation was the result of fuel droplets being too large-- but it is true that with a much more atomized fuel/air mixture (smaller fuel droplets), you get a more controlled "burn", which helps to prevent detonation or pre-ignition. Detonation in a descriptive sense with regards to internal combustion engines is kind of misleading; it's not so much an "explosion", it's more of an uncontrolled burn of the fuel/air mixture in the combustion chamber. The whole idea behind running richer fuel mixtures to prevent detonation is to control the burn in the combustion chamber, whether through keeping combustion chamber temps under control (like you referred to) so "hotspots" aren't created that will pre-ignite the mixture, or to make the mixture rich enough so that the flame front (as the mixture burns) is slowed, since the fuel octane isn't sufficient to control the flame front. The whole idea behind octane is to slow the speed of the mixture's burn rate in the combustion chamber. But if you make the atomization of the fuel/air mixture fine enough, you can control the burn just as well (or better, depending on circumstances) as if you had a much higher octane rated fuel. That is the principal behind this "StarTube" device. That being said, I want to add some other stuff to your statements: 1. very fine fuel particle size can be achieved in fuel injection and quantified using the Sauter Mean Diameter analysis. It is done routinely for emission purpose.; 2. Fine particle size will not always get you controlled burn. An analogy can be seen with grain silos explosion. They are caused by fine dust particle in the air and an inadvertent spark. That's why you also add aluminum flakes to explosive to increase its power. 3. Direct injection doesn't have to be in conjunction with compressed air. That's Orbital tech. Mitsu, Audi run direct injection with a preburn chamber at very lean mixture. |
Originally posted by artguy beware 911gt...youve been had. Why would KDR talk about this product, tune cars with it, sell cars with it, and have it turn out to be a scam? Don't even dare say that they'd do it to get their name out there, because do you honestly think that thats the kind of publicity they want, scammers? My limited knowledge of all things mechanical aside, I still think that it's possible to do. We know why detonation occurs, whats to say we can't stop it from happening? 200 years ago, people knew gravity kept them on the earth. But they knew that somehow, birds flew. No one believed it until they saw it, but people can fly too. Same story here. We know that somehow, piston engines aren't nearly as suscesptible to detonation. Whats to say we can't build a rotary, or build something onto a rotary that will make it just as immune? |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:42 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands