Derek:
50-75 miles per gallon in a sunbeam tiger! Well, that SORT of relates it...
Back in 1980 when I was in college, I attended a lecture by a Hungarian
gentleman named Gaylord Mandy who claimed just such milege on a '67
full-sized pickup (I think it was a Ford--a further possible Tiger
relationship :-) ).
His fuel vaporization system channeled the fuel directly into the bottom
pan of the automobile's air cleaner (okay, that wouldn't work with a
typical Tiger air cleaner). Hot water from the radiator ran through a
coil of copper tubing in the bottom of the air cleaner (I believe it was
submerged in the gasoline in the bottom of the air cleaner)and back to
the rad.
The copper tubing heated the gas to, well, a gas. Vaporized it.
Whereupon it was sucked through the air filter into the carb. To prevent
backfires through the carburetor from igniting the vapor and blowing the
car into the next county, steel wool was packed around the air filter as
a spark arrestor.
I remember some engineering students who had tried the system, but I
don't recall what their successes (if any) were.
An agricultural engineering professor (who taught courses in Ag
machinery design) was asked by the local newspaper to inspect the
system. He pointed out that "when the efficiency of the engine
increases, the nitrous oxide emissions increase tremendously" and that
the vaporization system as designed above would have trouble meeting the
air pollution standards in effect in California at that time.
Other than that, I can't find any specific comments on problems that
might be encountered with such a system. I'm not sure if Mandy used a
different carb than stock, though I have a sense it might've been
something other than a 4-barrel.
I know that I've got some notes somewhere, but darned if I can find them.
Of course, I've also got a set of plans (somewhere) purchased from the
Mother Earth News for creating a hybrid gasoline-electric vehicle out
of, say, an old subaru. It's now twenty years later, and you can go
down to your local Honda dealer and buy one off the showroom floor.
Funny how life works (Okay, now THAT wasn't Tiger related :-) )
Regards
David Sosna
Derek White wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am doing some research for a local inventor who has some fuel vaporisation
> patents. Do any of you know about this technology? I especially want to know
> why it has not been adopted commercially (despite many patents being owned
> by car companies.) My friend here, Dr. Kulasinghe, has retrofitted his flash
> vaporisers to many petrol cars and diesel generators here with great results
> (about 40% les fuel) but there must be a catch. I don't believe the big
> conspiracy theory that kept coming up on web searches. Any ideas? Please
> reply directly as this is not tiger related.
>
> Thanks for any help, Derek
>
> Derek White
> 37/2 Buller's Lane
> Colombo 7
> Sri Lanka
> Tel: 94 1 581175
> Cell: 94 777 475955
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-tigers@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-tigers@autox.team.net]On
> Behalf Of bmelusky@netscape.net
> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 5:59 PM
> To: Steve Laifman
> Cc: tigers@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: Surfire way to tell a 289 HP block
>
>
> Steve Laifman <SLaifman@SoCal.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>>few small dimples on it from the tests. Much like a fine point, spring
>>loaded center punch. Of course it was a much more sophisticated piece of
>>equipment, but the depth of penetration with a preset impact is what the
>>criteria is for hardness, which equates to the crank tensile strength
>>
>>from heat treat.
>
>>Steve
>>
>>
> A Brinell test uses a fixed load (in this case 3000 kg) and a 10 mm ball.
> The surface is ground primarily to give a clean edge to the impression, but
> it is also desireable to remove any decarb (metal that had the surface
> carbon depleted) that would skew the results. The impression is measured by
> a small 10X scope with a reticle. The size of the impression determines the
> hardness. This is the preferred method for high nodular cast iron (or
> ductile iron) such as used in the Hipo crank. Nodular iron is made by
> pouring the material over magnesium to create spherical graphite instead of
> long flakes typical of gray iron. For those that are curious here are some
> microstructures: http://www.metallography.com/technotes/iron/nodular.htm
>
> As you can see from the photomicrographs, the material is not homogeneous,
> so a large ball is desireable to get a representative reading. Ductile iron
> is superior in strength and can take higher loads over gray iron. It is
> rated by the number of nodules, and the precentage of ferrite (weak) versus
> pearlite structure(desireable for strength).
>
> A Rockwell type test would be a small prick punch impression. Harder
> material would require a diamond indentor and softer material would
> generally use a 1/16 inch ball penetrator, although I have seen special
> penetrators up to 3/4 for some coatings. A small indent is generally not
> suitable for cast iron, given its varied structure. Rocwells measure depth
> of penetration and neither test uses impact, as impact can cause work
> hardening and change the results. For both tests the rate of load
> application and duration are important parameters to assure repeatability
>
> Probably more than most want to know, but there it is.
>
> Melusky
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now!
> http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/download.jsp
|