Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Moderator: Mod Squad

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #1 by DeltaV » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:51 pm

I'll be gone for four months at Ft. Leonard Wood starting January Second, however when I get back I'll be starting a very special project that if successful will benefit everyone here.

Basically I bought a 1966 F350 dump truck. Was looking for a HD reliable truck for towing heavy loads (15k pounds up steep hills) and I wanted a 300i6 because I feel its long stroke and large volume to cylinder wall surface area ratio makes it an exceptionally efficient engine at least in theory. I also liked how the straight six makes it super easy to put a turbo under the hood.

But my plans are more than just power. I'm also looking to get incredible gas mileage. Levels that are literally legendary.

Henry Yunick experimented with vapor engine tech and received exceptional performance.
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/hrdp-100 ... or-engine/

Here's my plan: A hyper insulated stainless steel exhaust manifold coupled to a T3 turbo. Through the custom exhaust manifold I'll run high pressure stainless steel fuel line coiled INSIDE the exhaust manifold. The factory mechanical fuel pump will deliver fuel to a high pressure (1200 PSIG) fuel pump. An ultra high pressure one way check valve (over 10,000 PSIG) will be just after the 1200 PSIG pump. Excess fuel will be returned via return line to the fuel tank. As the fuel travels through the super heating process it will reach temperatures in excess of 1000 F. The high pressure line exits the exhaust manifold and couples to a pressure regulator. The pressure regulator hooks on to an insulated tube like chamber. The fuel line is kept at a minimum of 1200 PSIG while the pressure regulator keeps the tube to a low 2 to 5 PSI. the idea is that once the ultra high pressure superheated fuel goes from 1200 PSI to 2-5 PSI it will all instantly vaporize. All the alkanes from C5 through C12 will vaporize instantly. The vapor tube is removable and the ends can be unscrewed from the system. This tube will be filled with Zeolite ZSM-5, a catalyst that breaks down long chained hydrocarbons into (hopefully) nothing but pure methane, ethane, hydrogen and other super short hydrocarbons. The vapor tube hooks up to the intake pipe and flow of vapor is controlled via a needle valve with a lever welded on the head. The end of the lever is attached to the acceleration pedal via cable. Throttle plate is removed from the vehicle entirely. Engine RPM is controlled by controlling how much FUEL the engine is getting via the needle valve. This eliminates the parasitic vacuum inducing throttle plate, allowing the engine to breathe at any RPM. The pure vaporized fuel enters the intake with the air and is homogenized by the T3 turbo's compressor. A very homogeneous charge of fuel and air is the result. Aft of the turbo's compressor is a throttle body fuel injector. However, its spewing water into the intake. NOT fuel. The water will replace the liquid fuel used to quench the valves. Water when it evaporates also expands by a factor of well over 1000. Much more expansion than liquid fuel. This in effect makes the engine an internal combustion gas-steam hybrid. The expansion of the water flashing to steam scavenges waste heat normally wasted by excess quenching fuel into engine torque and pressure for the turbocharger.

Running on pure methane/ethane and some hydrogen gives me an equivalent octane rating of about 130 whilst using standard cheap pump gasoline. In effect, this will in theory allow me to get drag race performance when I want it and high efficiency when I want it, all by just adjusting how hard I press the acceleration pedal.

I plan on running 20 to 25 PSI of boost.

I plan on rebuilding the engine and porting the headers and other small things most people do.

If there are any tips on rebuilding this engine please let me know.

If its successful I'll strongly consider building a turbo kit+fuel cracker that just bolts on to a factory 300i6

Is the T3 turbo a good candidate or should I look at a different one for the application?

Also, anyone know of a good source for forged cranks, con rods, and pistons? I'm hoping to get at least 540 horsepower and at least 450 Ft. Lbs. of torque. Therefore I will need to best components to withstand the pressure and power.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #2 by pmuller9 » Fri Dec 22, 2017 3:46 pm

I've seen Smokey's Fiero at Don Garlits Museum and also remember when the engine was first introduced.

Your project is very well thought out. Nice work!
I have a few question before discussing material and component needs with you for this project.

I'm assuming that the ZSM-5 catalyst breaks the liquid Alkanes C5 - C12 into the gas Alkanes C - C4, being Methane, Ethane, Propane and Butane with some leftover Hydrogen?

At 25 psig of boost and 4000 engine rpm, the turbo compressor outlet air temps are around 325 degree F.
If you inject water immediately after, the water will vaporize before it gets to the intake ports which will cool and condense the intake mixture but it will also displace some of the fuel.
You where looking at the benefits of having liquid water entering the cylinder which would not happen in this case unless you port inject water right at the back of the intake valve.
Am I looking at this correctly?

Since there is no throttle plate will there will be a wide range of air fuel ratios as engine loads vary all of which will be leaner than Stoichiometric?
Is it correct that for the C-C4 alkanes, as the combustion air fuel ratio goes leaner than Stoic the exhaust gas temps become cooler?

What RPM range are you looking at for making power?
It will determine the size turbocharger.

What compression ratio would you like to use?

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #3 by DeltaV » Sat Dec 23, 2017 12:43 am

To answer your questions first, yes the ZSM-5 is to break the alkanes down as short as possible. Ideally I'd want nothing but methane and ethane but I don't think that's realistic. I've also been wanting to pick the brains of some petrochemical engineers and see if rearranging the saturated hydrocarbons (alkanes) into unsaturated hydrocarbons (alkenes and alkynes) and essentially breaking much of the hydrogen from the carbon and forming double and triple carbon bonded unsaturated hydrocarbons + pure hydrogen gas would yield better power per molecule or worse than the saturated alkanes? From what I've read alkenes and alkynes are more "reactive" than alkanes but that could mean anything from flammability to the ease of which it is to turn the unsaturated aliphatic hydrocarbon into aromatic hydrocarbons. I just don't know enough about chemistry to know if I should just go for short alkanes OR if I should pursue alkenes & alkynes + hydrogen. (But that's a topic for the physics forums I guess?)

I'm definitely NOT looking to cool the air or fuel. I'm looking to use the water to replace quenching fuel in the cylinder. After all, why use fuel when water can do the same thing just as well to quench the valves?

I was concerned about the water evaporated aft the turbo's compressor. I figure'd that would be a problem. I Haven't thought about port injection, thats a damned good idea! I'd probably have to use low pressure fuel injectors and time the injectors accordingly so they spray water into the cylinders at the right time. Basically fuel injection but with water. I'd really like to to that without an ECU module. I really don't trust computerized systems in an engine.

I'm looking to produce as much power as possible regardless of RPM range. However Ideally I was thinking a peak curve between 1600 and 3000 RPM's. Running without a throttle plate and controlling the engine by a needle valve that adjusts how much vapor (IE Energy) the engine gets I think solves a lot of problems in terms of the power band. I could be wrong, but I would think w/o the throttle plate the engine would be running WOT all the time therefore my power band flattens out a lot? Pardon me for the ignorance. I'm young and mathematically challenged, so to speak. (Good with chemistry, BAD at math. What a horrible combination!)

Anyway, size of turbo. Yes, maximum power is what I'm looking for. If I need torque at the low end I'll reduce my differential gearing and put in an overdrive box. Speaking of turbo's, its been brewing in my head if it was possible to take the impeller of a small turbo (which correct me if I'm wrong but I'm under the presumption than most energy required to spool up a turbo is the heavy steel impeller) and couple it to a compressor from large turbo and put them together. Then I'll just run a large wastegate thats (somehow?) regulated by intake manifold pressure that way the turbo is always spooled at its ideal RPM. As intake pressure wants to drop the wastegate shuts a little and maintains pressure, and when intake pressure wants to spike the wastegate opens a little more and maintains the ideal pressure. Therefore I would, at least in theory's, always be operating at MAXIMUM BOOST. But that's almost another project ENTIRELY of itself! However I'm almost sure other people have thought about this and its a nogo for some reason I'm unaware of.

As far as compression ratio, I'm basically going to be running fuel thats equivalent to 120 octane if I can get mostly methane. However, like you mentioned earlier I may be getting C3's an C4's in the mix which have a slightly lower octane number than methane. So perhaps I should be more conservative on the boost and run a more conservative 15 PSI. Last thing I want to do is break this engine after rebuilding it on the first run to town! I want as much compression that I can get away with, so for the sake of safety lets just assume its equivalent to propane. I already converted the truck to run on propane anyway and was thinking about starting the engine and running it on propane for a few minutes everytime to get the thermal catalytic cracker warmed up before switching the fuel via selonoid. So thats an octane rating of 104 and a compression ratio of 11:1

I was wanting to buy a custom ground camshaft to eliminate valve overlap to maximize efficiency. Is this a good idea or nah?

Please excuse the ignorance, I've never built an engine on this scale before.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #4 by pmuller9 » Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:49 am

Unless there is a lot of energy to be gained with alkenes if it involves a second cracking process I would lean towards keeping it simple and staying with alkanes. I would be interested in any additional info you might get from some petrochemical engineers.

If the only reason for water injection is for valve quenching, there are other ways to deal with it. The main concern is the valve seat.
The best valve seat insert material for dry fuels is sintered tungsten carbide (tool steel) with additives blended in that act as a high temp lubricant.
Dura-Bond 70000 series valve seat inserts fit the bill.
You would use a Inconel exhaust valve.

The only other benefit of water injection is to lower the octane requirement of the fuel by reducing cylinder temps but you are right. It is not a good practice to rely on a secondary non-intergrated system where failure would result in engine damage.
Having to inject water into a port with both timing and variable pressure control due to varying manifold pressure is complex.

The 300/4.9 cylinder head has very poor port flow in relation to the large 50 cid cylinders the ports are feeding.
Having no throttle plate and eliminating intake cycle pumping losses will help mainly during the times where part throttle would have been used for low engine loads and not so much for WOT heavy engine loads.

A ported cylinder head with larger valves would allow a camshaft profile with less duration and more lift which is a better match for turbocharging and using a custom cam with a wide Lobe Separation Angle typically 114 degrees is a good choice especially if the exhaust ports are looking at a lot of back pressure.
The ported head would extend the upper rpm range for making a lot of horsepower.
The detailed cylinder head revisions is lengthy and can be saved for a later post.

Yes spooling time is a function of wheel inertia and center section bearing friction also comes into play however spool time for a heavy truck application is not a real concern. It only becomes a consideration for lightweight vehicles where quick boost response makes a big difference in accelaration.
Turbochargers come with various size turbine diameters for the reasons you described.
They also come with a choice of turbine housing Area to Radius ratios. A/R ratio
The smaller A/R ratio housings produce higher exhaust gas velocity to drive the turbine wheel sooner but are more restrictive because of the reduced valute area resulting in restricted boost later in the power band. Conversely larger A/R ratio housings require more exhaust gas volume to spool and make much more power later.
A good in between ratio for this project would be around .83

There are internal wastegates that are attached to the turbo with a valve built into the turbine housing and external wastegates that need to be plumbed remotely between the turbine inlet and outlet.
Both wastegates can come as a single port where the valve actuator is spring loaded to a preset boost level with the diaphragm that works against the spring ported to the intake manifold pressure. Variable Boost control can be accomplished by dividing the pressure coming from the intake manifold.
There are two port external wastegates where you can add pressure to the spring chamber to increase the amount of boost needed to open the wastegate so you can control boost. You install a light spring, say for 5 psig of boost then boost control can be raised from 5 psig to whatever you want by simply adding air pressure to the spring chamber.

When using a throttle body, when it is closed during boost there is a Blow Off Valve that can be added just after the turbo compressor outlet that opens and relieves the pressure spike.

With a ported big valve head you probably would never go beyond 20 psig of boost and more realistically 16 psig.
With 20 psig of boost without an intercooler you should have at least 500lb ft of torque from 2000 to 4000 rpm and 400 hp at 5000 rpm.
With the hot intake air temps I would restrict the compression ratio to 10:1 and if the engine will see prolonged periods of heavy pulling maybe as low as 9.5
A lot of this will be determined by the camshaft profile and intake valve closing point which determines the Dynamic Compression Ratio.

With a big valve ported head the Turbo compressor inducer diameter will need to be around 57mm in order to make power out to 5000 rpm.
I recommend a Borg Warner S200SX-E 57mm, core# 12769095003 with the 0.83 A/R twin scroll turbine housing part# 177191

If you want a ceramic ball bearing center with very little bearing resistance for twice the price a Borg Warner EFR 7163-G

Discussion on crank, pistons and rods, material for exhaust system and ignition system timing later.

Since there is no throttle plate will there will be a wide range of air fuel ratios as engine loads vary all of which will be leaner than Stoichiometric?
Is it correct that for the C-C4 alkanes, as the combustion air fuel ratio goes leaner than Stoic the exhaust gas temps become cooler?

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #5 by DeltaV » Sat Dec 23, 2017 4:17 pm

Awesome tip on the tungsten carbide valveseats! I didn't even know valveseats like that existed.

Does port injection require timing or are they always on? The kits I've seen look like they just constantly spurt water into the ports. If so I feel a little bit of liquid water will help efficiency. Not excessive amounts, just a little. I'll be running extremely lean anyway. If I don't need to worry about timing then I'll run a water injection system, however if variable timing is involved then I'll consider foregoing the water injection.

Speaking of camshafts, it sounds like eliminating the valve overlap is the way to go. However, I guess the question comes down to: how much should it be and what the duration is? As you said, questions for later!

Looked at the Borg Warner EFR 7163-G and its WAY out of my budget unfortunately. Top budget for the turbo is around $500 dollars. If there's a $700 one thats really much better than a $500 one then I'll consider it but thats the approximate budget. I'm not TOO worried about bearing resistance. I can always swap the turbo's down the road when I get more money.

The no throttle plate concern about variable AFR. From my experience with running my truck on propane (with a throttle plate) it runs crazy rich and crazy lean and you can't even tell a difference! But thats just my personal experience. Right now I'm running the Impco propane system and even with the idle mixture screw completely removed VS cranked hard all the way in there's no difference at all! So light alkanes are not picky about AFR at all. Mind you thats factory compression, no turbo, very little preheating. Hope that answers your questions/concerns about variable fuel ratio's.

as far as the ignition goes, when I get back from Ft. Leonard Wood I'll buy Aaron Murakami's "Ignition Secrets" and attempt to turn iridium spark plugs into plasma plugs. Sure plug life will suffer a little but thats just the way things go. Speaking of plugs, the 300i6 doesn't have a lot of options when it comes to plugs. I was wondering if there are any good spark plug thread adapters that will give me more options? If I owned a lathe I would just make my own but right now there's no room in the shop for one. I'd like to compare Murakami's ignition system compared to Pulstar's plasma plugs. First I need to buy his book and see if his system is even compatible with breaker points. . . . . . . . again, questions for later.

As far as the exhaust system goes I'm just going to TIG together a custom stainless steel log type manifold. I do want a forged crank, forged pistons, and forged con rods. I have no idea what will happen when I fire it up so I want to give the engine the best chance to survive come worst case scenario.

It is true about exhaust temps. As the ratio gets leaner exhaust temperatures goes down. Been speaking with Roger Richard with his pulse detonation boxer style Bourke engine. His exhaust temps are running below 200 F. and he's running about 20 thousand RPM. That 30 cubic inch motor has instantly snapped HD drive belts rated for 70 horsepower. Big reason why I'm doing this project is because right now he's using a conventional carburetor and the second he hits the throttle it runs away to 20k RPM. I STRONGLY feel that Smokey Yunicks fuel system coupled with me adding thermal catalytic cracking and eliminating the throttle plate would prove to be better than direct injection while also being able to tame the incrdible pulse detonating Bourke. If I can control engine speed via fuel (energy) input then we can successfully EMBRACE engine knock in the Bourke and control/tame the energy of detonation. Throttle plates I also think put a large parasitic load on the engine and make them less efficient at anything below WOT.

Thank you so much for your help. Like I said before I'll be gone for four months starting January but when I get back I'll almost immediately start working on the project.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #6 by pmuller9 » Sat Dec 23, 2017 11:59 pm

Water injection is constant flow.
If port injecting under boost conditions the water pressure must be above the manifold pressure so you will need to have a water pump that can supply pressure above the highest boost pressure and a boost referenced pressure regulator set to keep the water pressure just above manifold pressure.

There are other reasons for a wide LSA cam profile when turbocharging aside from decreasing overlap. Will save for later.

The Borg Warner S200SX-E 57mm, core# 12769095003 with the 0.83 A/R twin scroll turbine housing part# 177191 is about $800.
There is no better turbocharger and certainly no other turbo with as wide of a compressor map for a wide rpm power band.

The reason I asked about exhaust temps is: If the exhaust temps are low during cruising with very little load and fuel flow, will there be enough exhaust heat to maintain the high fuel temps in the coil heat exchanger in the exhaust manifold? You were looking at maintaing 1000* F

Thanks for the tip on Plasma ignition. It is just a slight variation of what is presently available which makes you wonder why it isn't wide spread.
The Plasma ignition uses a very large low voltage capacitor (450 - 600 volts) that discharges across the plug gap once the initial low current high voltage spark ionizes the plug gap creating a low resistance path to conduct the lower capacitor voltage.
The current from the large low voltage cap is extremely high and creates a very long duration spark.

The plasma spark plug has a small internal capacitor that stores the voltage from the ignition coil as the voltage rises before the plug gap voltage threshold is reached and the plug fires. Once the plug fires the high voltage energy from the internal capacitor also discharges across the plug gap. The difference is the internal capacitor is small with much less energy stored than the large cap plasma ignition and the internal capacitor voltage is very high creating a very short spark duration (Microseconds).
The plasma Plug Dyno results look very reasonable with some engines showing small gains and one or two with insignificant gains.

The 1960s 240/300 distributor came with points and was later changed to magnetic pickup with vacuum advance then finally went to fixed timing hall effect trigger signal with coded PIP signal for sequential timing events.

The exhaust manifold/heat exchanger will be insulated and operating at a very high temperature.
304 stainless will not hold up to the heat. 321 stainless is recommended. Inconel is the upgrade from 321 but is very expensive.
Last edited by pmuller9 on Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #7 by DeltaV » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:33 am

I can definitely do $800 with those ceramic bearings its a no brainer! Where can I buy one? Ebay they are all over 1k.

As far as exhaust temps goes, I'm not really sure truth be told. I'll engineer the manifold to withstand high exhaust temps, but they could be as low as 800 F. at idle or even less. The Bourke engine at 20k RPM has exhaust temps under 200 F. however, my solution to this is to progressively heat the fuel first using waste heat from the coolant coming fresh from the engine block, then into the exhaust manifold, then I'll use a 1000 watt to 1500 watt electric heating element around the high pressure liquid line coming out of the exhaust manifold and the vapor tank containing the ZSM 5. This is really where I need the heat to be of all places. I'm going to Cerakote the exhaust (Cerakote has a very low thermal conductivity) and then I'll wrap the vapor tank and the high pressure liquid fuel line with the commonly used exhaust wrap to provide an electrical insulator between a 1500 watt heating element and the metal vapor tank and liquid fuel line. The vapor tank, exhaust manifold, and heated liquid fuel line will also be wrapped with a super microporous insulation (microtherm) which is slightly better than Aerogel to insulate the exhaust manifold, fuel line, and vapor tank. To protect the delicate microtherm insulation I'm going to wrap that yet again in several layers of the fiberglass exhaust wrap tape commonly used on exhaust pipes. This way I know even if the exhaust isn't hot enough all the time (or ever) then I can sacrifice a kilowatt or even about five kilowatts of my engines power to insure my thermal catalytic cracking unit is at the proper temperature all the time. Once its turboe's and boosted the engine will have a capacity of well over 350 kilowatts so whats even a maximum of 5 kilowatts in the grand scheme? A commuter cars AC system uses about that much! With my tiny vapor tank I could probably get away with 1000 watts but thats just a guess, really.

As far as plasma ignition goes, this is one of the videos I'm referencing. Whats weird is that he's connecting to low voltage positive to the high voltage positive. Thats unconventional!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOhNtRhJ5Rw
Must be heck on plug life, but if it helps MPG and power I'm all for it!

Another weird thing about this engine system I'll be using is that it very well might behoove me to NOT hookup vacuum advance and possibly retard the timing to I'm guessing no more than 10 degree's BTDC. W/O the throttle plate the vacuum advance I'm thinking won't be necessary? From what I've read that sounds like that "might" be the case and that the mechanical advancement would be better? Vacuum advance gives me 40 degree's BTDC and with these pure fuel vapors that would be detonation almost certainly, at least I would think. I very well could be wrong!

You really know what you're talking about and this ambitious rookie REALLY appreciates your time and wisdom!

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #8 by pmuller9 » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:50 am

I was adding more to my last post as you were also posting so I'm not sure what you might have missed.

The $800 Borg Warner S200SX-E turbo has journal bearings and is the reason for the lower cost.

The exhaust manifold/heat exchanger will be insulated and operating at a very high temperature.
304 stainless will not hold up to the heat. 321 stainless is recommended. Inconel is the upgrade from 321 but is very expensive.

I was at the PRI show in Indy two weeks ago and most of the high power turbo cars and diesel engines are using Header Shield.
http://headershield.com/

DeltaV wrote:As far as plasma ignition goes, this is one of the videos I'm referencing. Whats weird is that he's connecting to low voltage positive to the high voltage positive. Thats unconventional!


The postive side of the coil is not battary low voltage in a plasma igntion system.
It is connected to a capacitor that is charged to several hundred volts just like a CDI ignition system.
The capacitor in the video has a 200 volt rating so the variac was probably charging it to 100 -150 volts.
The high voltage diode that was connected between the low and high voltage side of the coil only allows current to flow in one direction and blocks any high voltage from the coil from going back to the low voltage side.
It does allow the capacitor to discharge thru the diode to the plug gap once the initial spark ionizes the air and lowers the plug gap resistance enough to conduct the lower voltage from the capacitor.

In a CDI system that capacitor can be at least 450 volts and all you would have to do to convert it to a plasma system is to add a high voltge diode. The only caution would be that if the system fired with a plug wire disconnected the voltage might go high enough to take out the diode.

I don't know enough about the timing requirements for this arrangement and type of mixed gaseous fuel.
I do know that as the boost increases the timing still needs to be retarded and the ignition system would be best triggered by a programmable ignition controller to give you the flexibility needed.

I'm retired but still consult on occasion. This is the type of stuff I enjoy working with. I attend the PRI show annually to keep up with the lastest and greatest. Three days, 8 hours non stop each day, over 1100 performance parts vendors. Worlds largest toy box.
Last edited by pmuller9 on Sun Dec 24, 2017 9:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #9 by DeltaV » Sun Dec 24, 2017 12:09 pm

Even so $800 dollars isn't bad considering the pressure map is huge. Comparable to a good supercharger!

I wasn't planning on using 304. I have a source for 310 Stainless Steel thats not too bad in price. Its good up to 2000 F. Of course the minimum order means I'll need to order quite a bit of it. If you or anyone you know wants some crazy high temp rated stainless let me know. If this can't take the heat then there is another metal I can order good up to 2,200 F. and its the same metal used on the Saturn V Rocket Nozzles that took men to the Moon. If that can't hold up to the heat then I'm doing something wrong. I also have a source for a ceramic coating that sticks to metal (ITC 213, 296A, and 100HT) thats good up to well over 3000 F. and am experimenting with that. If it works out I'll forego the cerakote and use this stuff instead. Only problem with ITC is that its a three part application coating requiring all THREE coatings, and each pint of this stuff is $100 ! ! ! ! ! Its used to coat the carbon rods and interior crucible of 3 phase electric arc furnaces and is designed for direct contact with white hot molten steel!

I'll look into headershield. I'll still use the microtherm because I have a lot of it unused from a previous experiment (they had a minimum order) and a 1/4" layer of microtherm is comparable to about 1" inch of foam and it retains its insulating property's even as temperatures rise tremendously.
https://image.slidesharecdn.com/microth ... 1306230125

However its incredibly delicate so I'll still need to wrap it in another more durable insulation. Headershield looks like it would work well!

You really know your stuff about ignition systems. I'd rather keep delicate electronics off of the vehicle. I own a business making wood stove's and a lot of the high voltage machinery and equipment likes to fry computer components. (Ask me how I know. . . . .) Sure I could try and shield and ground it but for safety's sake I'd rather just forego it entirely that way I know it can't fry. When (If) I build a drag racer I'll probably go with the best ECU I can find. But thats a long ways off, when (If) I do get around to that I'll make a 100% custom 2 stroke pulse detonation engine from solid steel (not a casting). I don't even know what the NHRA rules are on that but its a long ways off so I'm not worried about it.

As far as timing requirements thats just something I'll have to experiment with. There is virtually no information on fully vaporized fuels properties. I've ordered a couple of books to read before I begin taking apart my engine, one of Henry Yunicks "Power Secrets" and I've also ordered "Fuel Economy of the Gasoline Engine" and with any luck the later will give me some good insight. Been reading through a poorly scanned PDF of "Fuel Economy" and there's a LOT of information in there that goes against conventional wisdom in it.

Mind you the truck is currently running on propane and I intend to start the engine and heat up the system using LPG so I should have thought about this sooner, but compression ratio's are going to be limited to what LPG can handle. I also feel that limiting the compression ratio to 11:1 is a good safe number because I have no idea what ratio/types of short alkanes are going to come from the thermal catalytic cracker HOWEVER I am still confident I'll get at least 97 Octane. Ideally the TCC would make pure methane but I know that's wishful thinking!

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #10 by pmuller9 » Mon Dec 25, 2017 11:18 pm

Before we go any further, let me give you some parts information.

The forged steel cranks came in the large trucks like the F700 and some of the industrial engines and are getting hard to find.
Back in the day when the 300 was being drag raced at very high rpm, even the forged cranks would break after 25 runs.
I suspect is had a lot to due with torsional harmonics since a tuned dampener was not available.
If the engine rpm is kept low the iron crank may survive. No one has reported a stock iron crank failure yet.
The 300 forged crank, part number C5TZ-6303-D.
The forging numbers on the crank itself are C5TE-6303-F & C6TE-6303-G

The 1969 and later stock connecting rods are forged but have a spit hole drilled in the big end that can be a point of failure.
The 1965-1968 rods do not have the spit hole and have the .912" diameter piston pin versus .975" for the later rods.
The early rods are also getting very hard to find.
The BBC small journal rod has a big end width of .992" and are made for the SBC 2.100" crank rod journal. The 300 six is .994" and 2.123" respectively.
The BBC rod has up to a .060" rod beam offset which I don't see as a problem.
A set of Molnar CH6385NTB8-A 6.385" long rods are $603 for a set of 8.
http://www.campbellenterprises.com/Chev ... s_5790.prt
The 300 rod is 6.210" in length.
Since the Molnar is a V8 rod, they only have a chamfer on one side of the big end and a chamfer will need to be cut on the other side.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/nrmpmqhc5ni5l ... e.jpg?dl=0
Also the BBC piston pin is .990" which is larger and less expensive than the Ford .975" pin.

The only other option is a set of custom rods at $200 each minimum.

The only piston for the job is a 2618 alloy forged or billet. We use Diamond Pistons but there are many other companies to choose from.
If detonation is expected at any time while experimenting with the tune-up be it fuel or timing I recommend hard anodizing the complete piston.
We tried several different piston coatings but when we had detonation the rings would weld to the piston ring groove. (BBC blown Alky)
We finally settled on hard anodizing which includes the ring grooves. Piston anodizing is .0004" thick so the ring grooves need to be machined the extra width before anodizing. DLC coated pins
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s5ilu2g5gxnn7 ... d.png?dl=0
The anodized pistons have less heat transfer so we were able to run .002" less piston to cylinder wall clearance
You can also have an accumulator groove machined in between the first and second ring groove to dampen detonation. Here is an example on one of my 300 pistons:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0a5olnskn79m1 ... 2.JPG?dl=0

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #11 by DeltaV » Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:36 am

I figured forged cranks would be hard to find. Would it be possible to get custom made forged cranks? I'd feel a LOT more comfortable doing it right with the best parts possible the first time. The conditions this engine will be subjected to are a lot of unknowns. Detonation is most definitely a possibility. I don't plan on drag racing with it. I want to get around 550 HP but certainly nowhere near the stresses in a dragster. But I definitely don't want to put all this time and money in an engine without a forged crank. I'll be willing to pay $$$ for one. If I can't find a used forged crank then where can I go to have one made?

My engine is a 1966 so it will need forged con-rods. Thanks for the source on where to get them! Cutting the chamfer shouldn't be a problem. Those con-rods look to be a near perfect match. I'll put them in then old Bridgeport, indicate it in for perfect concentricity, bore the crank rod journal out 0.023" and cut a chamfer on the other sides via boring bar. I don't know enough about engine rebuilding to even guess how the difference in length would effect the engines compression ratio and etc. As far as the .990" pin goes, correct me if wrong but I would it be possible to bore out the pistons to use a .990" pin and end up with a stronger and superior setup? I have Henry Yunicks book "Power Secrets" coming in the mail so hopefully after reading that a couple of time I'll be a little up to speed. Do you have any books you'd recommend in addition to that one?

As par as pistons goes, I know that iron/steel is bad because of reciprocating weight causing inefficiency's, but what about titanium pistons instead of aluminum? Would that be considerably stronger to merit the extra cost, or would the con-rods or crankshaft break long before the 2618 aluminum pistons?

Awesome tip on the accumulator groove! I never even heard of those before. What's your opinion on gapless rings?
http://www.totalseal.com/rings-gapless-rings.html

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #12 by pmuller9 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:50 am

The last forged crank that was available was offered by sdiesel on this website.
I was at his place just before I moved to Indiana and pick up a lot of parts I needed to complete a build.
I should have grabbed the longblock with the steel crank but I was moving and trying to minimize my inventory. Stupid me.
viewtopic.php?f=87&t=76521

The place to go to for a billet crank is Kings Crankshaft. They will need a stock crankshaft as a model.
You get to choose stroke and rod journal size. I would keep the stock stroke or round it up to 4.00" but,
I would specify a 2.200 rod journal instead of the stock 2.123". This does two things
The increased journal size increases journal overlap between the rod and main journals for additional crank strenght but more importantly it opens up the complete lineup of BBC rods to choose from.
The cost should be around $3000 for the first crank and closer to $2000 for following cranks that the rest of us can order. LOL
Don't hold that price to anyone as that was a few years ago.

If you do find a used Ford forged steel crank, as with any used crank, the rod and main journals will need to be turned undersize to clean up the wear. If you use the Molnar rod, instead of boring out the rod you turn the crank journal down to 2.100 to fit. This also gives the crank grinder an opportunity to make a generous radius between the journal and counter weight cheeks as a stress relief.

You will be ordering custom pistons where you get to specify everything including a .990" pin to fit a BBC rod.
If you use the 76cc chamber 300 pre 1987 carburetor head, a simple flat top piston without valve pockets will give you 11:1 compression ratio. The valves sit .340" deep in the head so there is never a need for valve reliefs without a piston dome.

We use a second gapless ring except they should be purchaced from the original designer with the original ZGS overlapping end design, Bruce Walker of BWE rings.
http://bwepistonrings.com/
Titanium certainly is stronger than aluminum with a lot higher melting point. Porsche used titanium pistons for some of their turbo applications.
The cost is one factor since the military seems to be hogging up most of the supply. The other factor is titanium fatigues and has limited life. 2618 alloy aluminum pistons have less than 1% silicon content and are very malleable.
We have pushed a top in little during a pre-ignition incident involving spark crossover which also concaved the titanium intake valve and messed up ring lands during detonation but never cracked or broken just a piston.

We run vintage hydroplane so our 1300 HP engine sees 30 minute run times over the weekend with extended periods at 7500 to 8000 rpm. That's where we use the anodized pistons and ZGS gapless second ring. For reliability we run a T & D steel roller rocker arm assembly which cost more than the aluminum version, steel valve spring retainers (Not titanium). The valves are Titanium and get replaced once a year and the rods are aluminum which also get replaced once a year. There is no substitute for a good old chunk of chrome-moly steel.
We have discussed Titanium rods with suppliers at the PRI trade show and by the time they added enough material to the rods to give us the long cycle time we need the rods weren't much lighter than the aluminum rods and cost 4 times as much.
We also looked at Titanium piston pins but titanium does not have good shear strength so that was out.

For general performance engine building knowlege, Reher-Morrison Championship Engine Building.
https://www.amazon.com/Reher-Morrison-C ... 0972343288
Last edited by pmuller9 on Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #13 by DeltaV » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:36 am

Good to know that I can increase stroke length to 4" (I was strongly planning on doing that anyway). That would give me the same displacement as a Ford 302 V8!

http://www.speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopi ... seal+rings
^While I'm thinking about rings, what do you think about gapless top rings followed up by two conventional second and third rings?

My engine was made in 1966 do its definitely got the pre 87 carburetor head. Pistons without valve pockets to give me an 11:1 compression ratio definitely makes my job a lot easier! Flat tops are the most efficient anyway.

Sounds like anodized aluminum pistons are the way to go. Any thoughts on steel pistons? Luring around other forums it seems like steel pistons are used on heavy diesels (and the 300i6 is a diesel with a spark plug) so even if it hurts a little on fuel economy the durability is really attractive. What are your thoughts? I definitely am building for durability and longevity first, THEN power second. I was planning on using steel rockers anyway. Its going on a small dump truck with a tow hitch I'll be using to tow heavy heavy loads, but also be small enough and efficient enough for light duty work and commuting. Weight is irrelevant!

I can't thank you enough for all your knowledge, experience, wisdom, and time. I'll be ordering that book tonight. Everyday I'm getting closer to a finalized plan for the project, down to the last detail!

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #14 by pmuller9 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 11:51 am

Most of the piston manufacturers have CNC billet piston making abilities so they can make any design needed including reduced skirt for reduced weight. A flat top piston is the lightest type and it is conceivable since a steel piston doesn't require as much material for strength as aluminum that the weight of a steel piston may be reasonable for up to 5000 rpm.

You will need to talk to Bruce at BWE for ring configuration advice. He is great to work with.

I need to add this to answer a previous question and for further info.
The longer than stock connecting rod reduces the rod angle on the piston when it is between TDC and BDC which reduces the side force it puts on the piston that pushes the piston sideways into the cylinder wall.
The longer rod length is compensated for by raising the piston pin height so things like compression ratio do not change and you don't push the piston above the block deck at TDC.
Since the piston pin position is generally kept in the center of the piston both laterally and vertically, that means as the piston pin moves up in the piston to compensate for a longer rod, the piston is made shorter and consequently lighter.
Example: I used an early 240 rod which is 6.8" long (.590" longer than the 300 rod) on the 300 crank which reduced the piston height by over an inch. stock piston and pin weighed 819 grams, shorter piston and pin 574 grams.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h5rwpzcctzeew ... 8.JPG?dl=0

However it is better in a boosted engine to keep a longer skirt piston for stability so the reason for only suggesting a slightly longer than stock connecting rod at 6.385" versus the stock 6.210"
Last edited by pmuller9 on Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #15 by DeltaV » Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:05 pm

Reducing piston sidethrust is always good. Having a slightly longer stroke (4" instead of the 3.98") and slightly longer rod while reducing sidethrust at the same time sounds like a dream come true! Sounds like steel is possibly more of a hassle than what its worth and given my boosted application longer aluminum skirts are beneficial.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #16 by pmuller9 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 12:13 pm

A custom design steel piston will come with a steep price tag.

Please keep your 1966 stock connecting rods and hold them for someone else. They have the smaller .912" pin which allows the use of a ford 302 or 351W "Off the shelf piston" and they are a slightly longer for the Ford 250 six folks. Also they Do Not have the spit hole in the big end.
Those rods have become very hard to find.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #17 by DeltaV » Tue Dec 26, 2017 1:53 pm

You think the stock connecting rods are sufficiently strong enough to go with a billet crankshaft and an 11:1 compression ratio? The spit hole, is that a major point of failure and would there be a way to weld them in perhaps? I was really looking to increase the stroke from 3.98" to 4"

Unless of course you mean just don't throw them out. Fret not about that! I won't chuck any parts. Thats for sure. I don't chuck anything! At all. I still have the factory air filter housing that I'll never used again. I have a 60 something year old sawzall with a broken gear on the rotor shaft I'll never get around to fixing but I refuse to throw it out. So whether or not I decide to keep the factory con rods if I do decide to replace the con rods I'll keep them for anyone that wants them.

Heck, I have my old kitchen sink sitting in my front yard.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #18 by pmuller9 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 2:32 pm

LOL, Yep, I meant don't use them but don't throw them out either.
Someone else here will need them.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #19 by pmuller9 » Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:44 pm

I'm not sure what you see as the first exhaust chamber that contains the heat exchanger.

It would be easy to have a large diameter tube for the chamber running parallel to the head that contains the coil of lines to heat the gasoline.
There would be six short tubes from the exhaust ports connected along the side of the chamber and an exit from the chamber to the turbocharger turbine inlet.

Is this close?

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #20 by DeltaV » Wed Dec 27, 2017 1:56 am

For the sake of simplicity I was planning on using a stainless steel log-type exhaust manifold and using a 60,000 PSI stainless steel line that would run through it. Bending the line is not an option. The fuel line will be at pressures at least 1,200 PSIG and with liquid fuels at those temps and pressure they will start to expand immensely ESPECIALLY as the alkanes start to crack into shorter molecules. Which is why even though it will be a 1,200 PSIG pump I will use at least a 10,000 PSI check valve immediately after the pump. Its in case the high pressure line starts building immense pressure due to thermal cracking and fuel expansion. But, quite simply put, bending this "fuel line" is not an option. The wall thickness is massive and I will TIG weld it through the SS exhaust manifold so the exhaust gases make direct contact with the fuel line.
https://www.swagelok.com/en/product/Tub ... 0-%20Clone
^I'm planning on using the 60,000 PSI fuel line because I don't know what the max pressure this stuff can take at high temperatures. the last thing I need is a fuel line at 1200 PSIG to break in the hyper insulated exhuast manifold of an ultra lean burning turbocharged engine to break! Talk about detonation and engine knock! The outside and the INSIDE of the manifold will be coated with ITC 213, 296A, and 100HT to prevent corrosion and burn out of the stainless steel.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a39/Bl ... ani002.jpg
^similar to this but with a straight stainless steel line running through the center of the "log" the line comes in one side and out the other, in parallel with exhaust gas flow, and is TIG welded where it comes in and out.

I just got it "Power Secrets" in the mail and I don't think the 300 Ford can really take a longer rod. I never knew increased rod length can be so critical for performance! However for the low RPM band my engine will be in (1600 to 4000 RPM) I'm not sure if its really as beneficial? Regardless, while I'm on the topic of rod length,
1: Whats the maximum length of rod I could realistically use with a 4" stroke? I'm guessing that rod length is already almost entirely maxed out because the 300 is a stroked 240.
2: This brings up another idea I had years ago that probably wouldn't work and thats unrelated to this build (I will NOT be pursuing this idea into this build) What if there was a sort of "block extension" to convert a standard 6 cylinder, be it a 292, 300, whatever, into a "tall block" the original idea was to place extremely heavy duty die springs between the factory pistons and the new pistons, bore holes in the factory pistons to allow oil to flow in and out and allow the die springs to take the load/shock of detonation. However, cooling the springs and getting oil up there would make the idea likely not viable. BUT would increase the height of a block with a sort of spuedo block extender allow people to run longer strokes and longer rods successfully? Would there be a market for this, and would it even be possible in your opinion?

Sorry for getting off topic a little. In case you haven't noticed by now I'm a young and dumb hair brained inventor that thinks outside the box.

Edit: Just got to looking on the forum here about con-rod length and apparently it doesn't really matter. Disregard. Reduced sideloading is however still very attractive.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #21 by pmuller9 » Wed Dec 27, 2017 9:25 pm

Intake and exhaust manifolds:

If you look at the 300 intake and exhaust manifolds you will notice they are held up against the head with a thick washer under a bolt that straddles both manifold tabs. It is a poor arrangement and there are times when the tabs crack or break when the bolts are tightened extra to fix an exhaust or intake leak.
Since you do not want a cold intake manifold and don't care about keeping the intake and exhaust flanges isolated from each other it would be a great improvement to have both the intake and exhaust manifolds on a common thick flange with holes for studs or bolts instead of flimsy tabs.

There is a concern about having enough heat in the exhaust manifold during light engine loads.
One of the problems with a simple log manifold is only half the heat from all six cylinders would be applied to the heat exchanger tube going through the manifold by virtue of the exhaust runner locations along the log. If the turbo is at the front, all of the exhaust from cylinder 6 runs across the tube but almost none of the exhaust from cylinder 1 and varying exposure with respect to location from cylinders 2-5
Ideally all six exhaust runners enter one side of the log and exit out the other end to the turbo.
Another advantage of having longer runners between the exhaust ports and the log is a reduction in engine pumping losses and better intake port induction.
We can talk about this in length later if you want. It is also part of the cam profile conversation.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #22 by pmuller9 » Wed Dec 27, 2017 9:49 pm

The 300 block deck is 10.00" high from the crank line center which is tall.
It can accommodate anywhere from a 6" to 7" long rod with a 4.00" stroke.
Rod length is a matter of application and there is no magic rod length to stroke ratio.

Lets look at the concept of using a secondary piston with a die spring or any other type of spring connection.
Lets say the secondary piston is very light at 500 grams.
At 4000 rpm at TDC during the end of the exhaust stroke, the upward force from the piston is 1600 lbs.
If the piston top is .039" from the cylinder head surface it would require a spring with a spring rate of 1600/.039 or 41,000 lbs/in just to keep the piston from hitting the head. Thats not counting half the spring weight into the equation.
As you can see, the mass of the secondary piston has relatively high inertia and detonation pressure spikes are quick enough where the piston inertia alone would still allow the piston to get damaged.

The second part of detonation is the resulting resonant pressure wave which occurs at 5.7 kHz for a 4" cylinder bore which also causes damage in the form of micro welding. We have piston rings and piston ring grooves for show and tell.

IMO A piston engine is not a good candidate for pulsed detonation operation and is better left to open chamber thrust engines.
(You made reference earlier about a pulsed detonation two stroke engine.)
Last edited by pmuller9 on Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #23 by DeltaV » Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:36 pm

I absolutely would love to get another perspective on routing the pipes!

Basically, the project consists of super heating the fuel under high pressure and eliminating the throttle plate. Everything else I am doing conventionally as best I can and want the best build possible. I was under the precarious presumption that temperature would more or less "equalize" in the log manifold. I was also thinking that perhaps a progressive heating of the fluid would be better. I would first heat the fuel with waste heat from the radiator, then go into the "cool" side of the exhaust on the opposite side of the turbo, and leaving the "hot" side of the exhaust just before the turbo. This way the fuel leaving the manifold was just in contact with the hottest gases and the turbo still has some heat to spool up. However, I definitely could be wrong which is why I'm consulting people like you with more wisdom and experience. However those plumbing losses do concern me. Do you think it would be better to route the exhaust going back, make a 180 degree shallow U-turn into a log with the SS line running through it there? I would think, though I could definitely be wrong, the 180 degree U-turn and extra surface area _might_ induce more drag? If I'm wrong please let me know. I probably am wrong.

The die spring idea was stupid and I chalked it up to another crazy idea that won't work in a matter of an hour. but it looks like I won't need to "extend" the block. I now realize after intensive reading that there is no magic rod/stroke ratio, HOWEVER to reduce piston sidethrust and increase dwell I'll follow Yunicks advice and run as long of a rod as I possibly can. Even if I need to get a set of custom rods made. I'll run a 4" stroke and as long of a rod as possible. If I can run a 7" rod with a 4" stroke than thats a good ratio thats a little high of average for an engine. Which is what I want. If I have to buy custom carillo rods so be it.

I had to replace my exhaust gasket and I did notice that the bolt/washer arrangement was weird and I thought kind of dumb myself. Good idea on using a monoflange for the intake/exhaust! I'll DEFINITELY be doing that, it sounds a hellova lot easier and stronger/more durable!

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #24 by pmuller9 » Wed Dec 27, 2017 11:46 pm

I know I said the 300 can use from a 6" to a 7" rod but that was "In General" without application considerations.

pmuller9 wrote:The place to go to for a billet crank is Kings Crankshaft. I would specify a 2.200 rod journal instead of the stock 2.123". it opens up the complete lineup of BBC rods to choose from.


BBC rods come in 6.135", 6.385", 6.535, 6.635", 6.660", 6.700", 6.735", 6.800", 7.00" and 7.100" rod lenghts.

While decreasing side loading and increasing dwell time may be important there are other considerations such as piston parameters.
Once again here is one of my 300 pistons for a 6.8" rod.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0a5olnskn79m1 ... 2.JPG?dl=0
Notice how the piston pin is up into the oil control ring groove where I have to use a secondary ring to bridge the gap.
Not a problem for a Naturally Aspirated engine but a piston deigned for boost has wider ring lands and I preffer to keep the piston pin out of the ring pack for long service engines.
Racing engines with frequent maintenance schedules is another thing.

That's why I was leaning towards the 6.385" long rod which is .175" longer than stock but leaves plenty of room on the piston side for generous ring lands and the ring grooves are not violated by the piston pin hole.

The other consideration is reasonably long piston skirts.
Last edited by pmuller9 on Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #25 by DeltaV » Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:57 am

Makes sense. I forgot to account for the piston rings in rod length and piston skirts. Looks like I'll have to run a little on the short side with a 1.6 rod ratio and be content with that "typical" rod ratio. Its the fuel system thats special about this build anyway, not the engine itself. I just want to rebuild it for maximum reliability, durability, and efficiency. Once I'm getting over 100 MPG the truck will become an every day driver and used to haul 15 to 25 thousand pound loads up and down steep ozark gravel roads. I'll need that supreme durability and reliability of the 300 Ford! Thats why I selected the engine. It's just lacking power for what I need it for. So I'll need it boosted and I've always wanted to try the legendary vapor fuel systems. I've purchased just about every book imaginable on the topic of vapor fuel. I'm fully confidant I can get at least 500HP from a 16 PSI boosted 300 Ford running on nothing but fuel vapor and direct port water injection. Got to thinking about water injection again the other day and since my mixture is so insanely lean AND I'm controlling engine RPM via how much fuel (and NOT air) it gets, excess water/steam displacing some of the air in this insanely lean burning engine won't hurt a damn bit!

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #26 by pmuller9 » Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:12 pm

Water Injection:
The Hot Vapor Engine worked on the principle of stabilizing the fuel combustion by raising the cylinder tempuratures above 2600 degrees F.
If you water inject you will be lowering the cylinder temps and going back to the standard mode of keeping the cylinder temps below 1800 degrees to prevent detonation.

Both systems work.
The one problem with the Hot Vapor system is getting through the detonation zone before 2600 degrees as the engine heats up from the cold start.

Not referring to this engine project.
The one possible solution is running an ultra high compression ratio that always produces a very hot combustion chamber.
This is where the two stroke Bourke engine would work since it has no poppet valves and the compression ratio can be as high as you want.
Last edited by pmuller9 on Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #27 by DeltaV » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:39 pm

I could be very wrong, but I have a few theory's. I'd rather put on direct port injection while I'm tigging it up in case I need it and shut it off if its not beneficial. However, Henry Yunick used a conventional carburetor and I suspect that he may have needed to get those temps up to fully vaporize all the longer alkanes. Longer alkanes require more heat to fully vaporize. Liquid fuels detonate much more easily because liquids propagate shockwaves much quicker than gases, which expand as the deflegration wave pushes on the gas. If a liquid droplet is consumed by a deflagration wave or it through high pressure and heat (like in an engine) auto ignites, thats when detonation occurs. To me, at least in my young and inexperienced mind, thats why he had to bring the temps up to a minimum threshold. If we're running nothing but pure vapor then logically I would think that as the temps go up the risk of detonation goes up exponentially, but with pure fuel vapor from the books I've read vaporized fuel has an equivalent octane rating of 120 to 130, depending on which source I'm looking at. Thats just my theory on why he had to get through a specific zone of detonation. Running high temps with some liquid droplets is a no-go, so he had to run even higher temps to fully vaporize the fuel.

My theory could damn well be wrong. But while I'm tigging up the manifold its far easier to put in some threaded ports on the welding table than it is under the hood. Whether or not I'll need or want it is an unknown.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #28 by pmuller9 » Fri Dec 29, 2017 10:48 pm

I agree that having bosses in place so you have the option for port water injection is a smart move.

The short discussion on stabilizing combustion at high cylinder temps seemed more focused on the state of the Hydrogen atom rather than the state of the hydrocarbon fuel.
Your explanation also has good points that appear to be valid.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #29 by DeltaV » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:06 pm

Hey really quick I want to give you a big thank you for your time and insight. This will be my last post until I get back in four months. I'll probably mock up all the externals, custom manifolds, turbo's, wires, chokes, etc. Once I prove that the fuel system is effective I'll find an old block, rebuild it, and add the same stuff, swap out the old engine and rebuild the old engine and drop it in another truck. I'll find an old truck with a bad engine and drop it in. Alternatively if its really effective I'll see if anyone here wants to buy the stuff pre-made as a sort of super turbo kit for the 300i6 since nobody to my knowledge makes a turbo kit for one.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #30 by pmuller9 » Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:10 pm

You are welcome.
Be safe and will hear back from you in 4 months.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #31 by pmuller9 » Fri Nov 02, 2018 12:38 pm

Update?

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #32 by DeltaV » Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:08 pm

Hello again and thanks for the response!
I had purchased an off road forklift for $800 for my business a few months before I left off to Ft. Leonard Wood thinking thinking all it needed was a tuneup. Well I gave it a tuneup and the engine ran, hydraulics worked well, I put it in gear and released the clutch. No power. Turns out that engine needed a rebuild with a weak 85 PSI of static compression. I took the head off the engine and sure enough the pistons were like a hot dog down a hallway! So instead of rebuilding a Ford 300i6 this summer like I wanted to I instead ended up rebuilding a Toyota 2R engine. My business was in desperate need of an off road forklift and at the time I didn't have the money to pay for a good one that was turn key ready.

Last week I purchased an old 300i6 block from a neighbor for $100 and started the teardown process however my business (rocketheater.com) is really booming and I've been short on time. Come early February I'll begin the real work of machining it and ordering all the parts and putting it back together. I've also been working a lot with Roger Richard and some other engineers on building a pulse detonation engine (a bourke engine) which is consuming a little bit of free time, and I have to finish my tire pyrolysis machine which I started on but only stopped that project because I needed a forklift to move the unit to its final resting place, a concrete pad I had poured for it a year ago thinking I would have the forklift ready for action in a few weeks (but boy was I wrong) to finish the job. Its a machine I'm rebuilding that was caught in a large fire in the 1990's that turns waste plastic and tires into synthetic diesel fuel and gasoline.

My game plan is to do a quick-n'-dirty 2k budget rebuild of the 90's 300i6 I purchased and just run it on propane for now so I can actually start using my F350 for some heavy loads for my business and once I get familiar with the engine I'll go all out on the next rebuild.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #33 by pmuller9 » Sat Nov 03, 2018 12:38 pm

On the Bourke engine, What are you doing for the connecting rod to crank connection?
Is it similar to Bourke's scotch yoke?

Will this engine be fueled with liquid gasoline?

User avatar
woodbutcher
VIP Member
Posts: 2024
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 10:14 pm
Location: LaFollette Tn.

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #34 by woodbutcher » Sat Nov 03, 2018 2:09 pm

:D Very interesting thread.Thanks for posting.I`ll saddle up and go along for the ride.Delta V.Thanks for your service.God bless ya.
Good luck.Have fun.Be safe.
Leo
"People never lie so much as after a hunt,during a war,or before an election".
Otto von Bismarck

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #35 by DeltaV » Sat Nov 03, 2018 6:26 pm

It will be a scotch yoke engine. Only difference is that I'm going to use a take-apart tunnel crank for massive load distribution and to allow me the use of solid one piece superposed triple slipper bearings (imagine bearings within bearings). The engine will run on propane and/or the vapor fuel coming from the thermal catalytic cracker and will have a small turbocharger on it. I'd still love to install a TCC unit plus a turbo onto a Ford 300i6 as an add-on aftermarket kit due to there not being a turbo kit for the Ford 300i6.

Later today I'll post again some pictures and video's of Roger Richard and his Bourke engine with some specs and numbers. Its the most impressive engine I've ever seen in my life.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #36 by pmuller9 » Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:19 pm

So I have a question. OK maybe two.

The Bourke engine operates in detonation mode with gasoline.
Since propane has over twice the auto ignition temperature point as gasoline will it work in the Bourke engine?
The same holds true that cracked fuel vapor also has a higher auto ignition point.
Can you compensate by using a much higher compression ratio?

Most turbocharger systems create more exhaust back pressure than intake manifold pressure.
I would think that the imbalance would prevent complete exhaust gas evacuation from the cylinder.

Secondly, a turbocharger relies on the waste exhaust energy from the blow-down part of the exhaust cycle on a four stroke engine to power it.
There is very little waste exhaust energy available on a Bourke engine.

Thoughts?

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #37 by DeltaV » Sat Nov 03, 2018 11:42 pm

Of course it will work. Not only will it work, you're on the right track with higher compression ratios. Now we can increase the compression ratio's to levels seldom conceived of before! I promise you 30 to one compression ratio's or higher will autodetonate and compression ignite.

As far as spark plug timing goes, because this engine can safely spool to 30k RPM and because the fuel detonates at incredible flamefront speeds we can modify a spark plug by pulling its side electrode off and eliminating all the timing mechanism's we use now. We simply install a capacitor inline to the sparkplug attached directly to a high voltage power source and when the piston comes near TDC the voltage will arc directly from the center electrode to the piston face. We can alter when the plug fires by altering the voltage, higher voltage means it will fire sooner and vice-versa. So long as it fires at or near TDC we'll be fine because all the fuel is burned before 10 ATDC and the rest of the stroke is a cryogenic cycle that scavenges heat. The scotch yoke means that the piston reaches highest velocity at 90 degree's to the crankshaft angle which greatly increases dwell.

however the spark plugs will only be there to allow the engine to fire up nice and easy. After about 3 minutes according to Roger Richard he can pull the plugs wires off and the engine continues to run as normal via homogeneous charge compression ignition.

So we have an engine here with the best of diesel and gasoline cycles, and so much more.

The Bourke Engine functions on combustion and detonation cycle principles fundamentally unlike any ICE I've ever seen. 22.5 to one average compression ratio, but the compression ratio could be variable on the fly as the engine runs due to compression ratio adjustment plug/screw. This is not to prevent detonation but rather to ensure that whatever the fuel you're using the compression ignites at the specific crank angle. Russ Bourke originally envisioned his engine as a HCSI, spark ignition. However other researchers and machinists/builders, specifically Roger Richard have made the engine with minor tweaks into an HCCI Pulse Detonation Engine. The scotch yoke mechanism ensures that the wave motion of the engine is always perfectly sinusoidal. Piston reaches maximum velocity at 90 degree's to the crank angle. The Bourke engines EGT right out of the exhaust port is around 200 F. Thats before it even goes into the exhaust manifold. This engine is about 81% efficient according to independent lab tests. However the Bourke has some flaws that need to be addressed. For one, its known for snapping crankshafts, specifically at the crank web. Roger Richard solved this problem by making his cranks from cryogenically treated CPM9V tool steel. Thats an expensive solution that isn't ideal for a production engine.
A multiple piece tunnel crank made of 4140 would be more than strong enough. Though that of course requires a slight re-engineering of most of the engine parts. The Bourke can safely spool well beyond 20k and even 30k RPM because it has no valvetrain at all. It uses slide valves on each side of the cylinder, one half for intake and the other for exhaust. Like a steam engine or if you're more familiar, more like a Detroit Diesel 2 stroke engine. Because its a PDE it has a flat torque curve similar to an electric motor. Though it would be more accurate to say it has a "variable" torque curve because torque can spike anywhere in the torque curve if you stomp the accelerator. The Bourke rule of thumb is 5.5 HP/CID on average for a naturally aspirated engine. This means that a 200 cubic inch Bourke engine would produce 1,100 horsepower naturally aspirated.

However I'd like to rebuild a Ford 300i6 with a turbo and etc. before I build a Bourke for the simple reason that I don't yet own a lathe nor have the room for one to even build an engine like the Bourke. And I want to make aftermarket turbo kits.

With my business going quite well my time has been rather strained. I have other projects I'm almost done with that I expected to be done by now but other things popped up. So I'm working hard on getting on this. I really believe I can get 200 MPG from a full size pickup truck using a Ford 300i6 coupled to a TCC unit.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #38 by pmuller9 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:21 pm

Thanks for your reply. You helped answer a few questions about the Bourke two stroke engine operation.
I would like to have a little more discussion on this subject before moving on to the 300 six if it’s OK.
I looked at write ups and online videos by Roger Richard.
None are very recent so bear with me if I go over R & D that hasn’t been posted.

A quick summary for those looking on:
The Bourke two stroke engine operates on the detonation pulse.
The detonation pulse occurs with a sharp rise and high pressure with a very short burn period making torque development independent of rpm.
If the pulse occurs too soon BTDC the piston and crank assembly will see higher stress than normal and damage may result.
If the pulse is late and the burn process continues long after TDC then the engine looses efficiency.
The Scotch Yoke assembly with linear motion connecting rods extends the dwell time at both TDC and BDC.
At TDC it allows more time to develop cylinder pressure during detonation and at BDC there is more time for both the intake charge to transfer into the cylinder and for the exhaust to evacuate.
The exhaust port roof can then be lower in the cylinder which increases the DCR which helps with creating detonation.
In comparison, the conventional engine rotating assembly has a shorter dwell time at TDC and the dwell times at TDC and BDC are different.
When the engine is cold a spark plug is required to ignite the fuel mixture early enough to raise the cylinder pressure and temperature to the point of detonation.
After the engine is warm the ignition spark can be eliminated and the fuel mixture will auto ignite by the compression alone.

Discussion:
Different fuels have different auto ignition temperature points which would require different dynamic compression ratios in order to detonate the fuel mixture however if the compression is too high the pulse will occur too soon and if the compression is low the pulse will be late or detonation will not occur at all.
This gives a short range of compression for optimum operation for each type of fuel.

Secondly, this is a two stroke engine after all and the dynamics of airflow is the same in that the Volumetric Efficiency is not constant with rpm which means the cylinder pressure is not constant and the pulse timing cannot be optimal over a wide rpm range without some type of control.
This also means this engine should not be run with a throttle controlling airflow for the same reason.
Control should be accomplished by fuel flow only.

It would be part of the development program to install both temp and pressure transducers in the head exposed to the combustion chamber to record pulse data versus crank angle at various rpm and loads on a dyno.
Then (if needed) a control method using spark or variable compression or both can be formulated and fine tuned using the same equipment.

Again this is based on the info that I found available and if I am incorrect or there is more info that would change this discussion I look forward to it.
Last edited by pmuller9 on Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #39 by DeltaV » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:38 pm

I'm totally fine with discussing the Bourke engine!

Of course the thermal catalytic cracking system we've discussed for almost a year would be coupled to the Bourke which allows the engine to run on almost any liquid fuel as whatever fuel is put into the system methane or methane like gas is produced by the TCC system. Engine RPM is controlled via needle valve, not throttle plate. Compression ratio can be adjusted via a compression adjustment screw on the side of the combustion chamber. Spark plugs could be used to make startup easier, so too could glow plugs also be used or a combination of spark/glow plugs including dual spark plugs.

If detonation timing is needed then we'd want to control it via the compression ratio adjustment plug, because as I'm sure you know its not just the ratio of compression but also the _rate_ of compression (the speed of the piston and how fast it smashes the AFR) and as RPM's increase the rate of compression increases linearly. Which means that compression ratio may have to be slightly lowered as RPM increases so that detonation occurs at TDC every time. This could be accomplished by attaching an adjustable linkage to the needle valve so that as the needle valve opens the compression adjustment plugs loosens to increase cylinder volume thus decreasing compression ratio to maintain detonation at the optimal timing. However I'm not sure if this is completely necessary because the fuel is burned so quickly whether its at TDC or close to it, I'm not sure if we'll even see a noticeable difference in performance.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #40 by pmuller9 » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:50 pm

The only reason for concern for an early pulse is parts longevity.
It would be nice to be able to verify the pulse timing versus all other variables using test equipment.
Thanks for your reply. I'm good for now.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #41 by DeltaV » Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:57 pm

Component longevity is a big issue. Busted cranks and con-rods are common. I do believe that the problem can be solved in a few different ways
1: Variable compression ratio adjustment, reducing compression ratio's as RPM's increase
2: A simpler, though less reliable and efficient, method would be to reduce compression ratio just to the point where it barely can't auto-detonate/compression ignite but still detonates when the spark fires the cylinder. Modifying the spark plug by pulling off the side electrode and eschewing spark timing mechanism's entirely by taking electric directly from the coil and when the piston reaches near TDC the gap is reduced to the point where dielectric breakdown occurs and the spark arcs directly to the piston face. This eliminates the need for a timing computer or distributor entirely as now timing would be controlled by how much voltage the spark plug is given, and amperage dictates how hot the spark is.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #42 by pmuller9 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:01 pm

DeltaV wrote:If detonation timing is needed then we'd want to control it via the compression ratio adjustment plug, because as I'm sure you know its not just the ratio of compression but also the _rate_ of compression (the speed of the piston and how fast it smashes the AFR) and as RPM's increase the rate of compression increases linearly.

What you are describing here is an isothermal compression where there is heat loss to the outside so the faster the compression takes place the less heat loss.
However once the engine comes up to operating temperature the heat exchange decreases to the point where the difference in compression temp is not significant over an rpm range and is out weighed by the change in volumetric efficiency

Side note:
Temperature increase due to compression in a closed system is a function of work (average force times distance) and has no time component so the rate of compression doen't affect the final temperature.
AFAIK None of the gas laws for a closed system have Time as part of the equation.

If compression temp was affected by piston speed with any significance then a conventional piston engine would be rpm limited by detonation and ignition timing would have to be decreased with rpm. Neither is the case.
Last edited by pmuller9 on Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #43 by DeltaV » Mon Nov 05, 2018 1:38 pm

Thats good to know! I'm glad there are people like you with more knowledge, wisdom, and experience to guide young and dumb people like me. Since rate of compression is irrelevant once the engine reaches operating temperature that makes the engine much more reliable because now we can go to HCCI with a fixed compression ratio for the given fuel the engine operates on. Adiabatic is, after all, part of the goal!

Homogeneous charge compression ignition pulse detonation adiabatic engine coupled to a thermal catalytic cracking fuel system.

Thats really good to know that rate of compression doesn't matter. Makes the job a lot easier!

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #44 by pmuller9 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 2:08 pm

First off, you are sharp and you have the opportunity to really refine the Bourke engine for use with vehicles.

It bothers me that a lot of these innovations have been around for many decades that can be upgraded with todays technology and are just sitting in the vast archives being wasted.
I can't tell you how many Skunk Works projects our engineering department got stored in the "Back Room" because of either the bean counters or marketing. OK I'm done ranting but I still don't feel better. :bang:

The cylinder pressure will still vary due to the change in Volumetric Efficiency over the rpm range of operation.

It would still be good to insert a pressure transducer in the head exposed to the combustion chamber and view the pulse timing versus crankshaft postion on a scope over a load and rpm range.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #45 by DeltaV » Mon Nov 05, 2018 2:40 pm

Yes, I can't agree with you more. I've read DR Blackmores "Fuel Economy of the Gaosline Engine" and I am confident that many of these fuel systems and technology's have been suppressed. On Page 222 of "Fuel Economy of the Gasoline Engine" a 1948 Studabaker Champion is recorded to achieve 149.95 MPG/US Gallon with the factory engine. There are other even more amazing examples. I've heard stories that John DeLorean was scheduled to meet with Henry Yunick to put his Red Hot Vapor Engine technology in the DMC-12 and literally three days before John DeLorean was scheduled for a flight to Texas he was arrested for drug related BS (which years later was dropped entirely). Then there's the legend of Tom Ogle and Charles Pogue! It seems all too suspicious and convenient. The easiest way to tell BS from truth is consistency and ALL these stories are consistent and these hyper efficient devices ALL work using the same fundamental principles!

You mentioned skunk works and I personally am fascinated by anti-gravity. Given the evidence and sheer amount of witness testimony I do strongly suspect that Faster Than Light travel technology has existed on Earth since at least the early 1950's. Mark McCandlish's account on the "Alien Reproduction Vehicle" is both fascinating and amazing because the technology requires nothing more than off the shelf components. My ultimate long term dream is to buildup my wood stove company so I can get the electric arc furnaces to start casting my hyper efficient rocket heaters. From there I'll have the money and factory tooling to start mass manufacturing Bourke Engine's for everything from weedeaters to airplanes and ships and everything in between. These engines not only are simpler and more efficient, but due to the absence of a valvetrain are much simpler, cheaper, and easier to manufacture, overhaul, and maintain. Crankcase oil is totally isolated from combustion and the scotch yoke virtually eliminates piston side thrust. Combustion chamber unbolts from the crankcase like a Harley V-twin so top end maintenance is super easy. From Bourke Engines I want to move to Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors, which is the penultimate solution to the worlds energy crisis and I can't sing the praises of ORNL's and Alvin Weinbergs miracle reactor enough. With LFTR's I'll be able to make billions if not trillions of dollars, THEN I want to build the Alien Reproduction Vehicles' capable of literal faster than light travel.

I may be crazy, I am dreaming and out of my mind perhaps. But damn if I don't try to get it done who else will?

I've done the mathematics and the Bourke engine would indeed be efficient it would be cheaper to run this engine coupled to a generator head to produce your own electricity than buy electric from the grid!

But alas I'm getting way ahead of myself. I have to finish my tire pyrolsysis machine and by 300i6 TCC build first.

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #46 by pmuller9 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:06 pm

DeltaV wrote: A simpler, though less reliable and efficient, method would be to reduce compression ratio just to the point where it barely can't auto-detonate/compression ignite but still detonates when the spark fires the cylinder. Modifying the spark plug by pulling off the side electrode and eschewing spark timing mechanism's entirely by taking electric directly from the coil and when the piston reaches near TDC the gap is reduced to the point where dielectric breakdown occurs and the spark arcs directly to the piston face. This eliminates the need for a timing computer or distributor entirely as now timing would be controlled by how much voltage the spark plug is given, and amperage dictates how hot the spark is.

It is not simpler than a conventional system and still would need a crankshaft postion marker to keep it from getting even more complex but there is some intrigue to this system as it lends itself to revisiting the plasma system.

The spark plug has to have high voltage present at the electrode as it waits for the piston to arrive for discharge.
The method to store the high voltage for a period of time is to use a high voltage capacitor that it charged by an ignition coil and is blocked from discharging back to the coil using high voltage diodes.
The interesting part of this design is that the capacitor can be sized to be charged by several hits of the ignition coil thereby holding much more energy than the conventional single spark design.

Also the voltage level of the capacitor is determined by the number of hits from the coil.

Once the piston arrives the capacitor can discharge to the piston and as the air gap is ionized the spark transforms from a high voltage low curent spark to a low voltage high current spark as the capacitor discharges. You get a partial plasma spark.

The piston strike zone would need to have a Tungsten pad to keep from making a hole.

The crank trigger would be used to tell the system when to recharge the capacitor or you have to add a detection circuit to determine when the high voltge cap has been discharged. and ready to be recharged.

You would be required to add a high resistance dishcharge resistor to the capacitor to prevent form being shocked when the engine is not running.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #47 by DeltaV » Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:39 pm

That sounds like a good idea. I was thinking of using a very large capacitor myself to stare the high voltage, and the capacitor would be charged by a magneto or coil with a diode between the coil and capacitor. This way timing is solely done by the piston getting close enough to the electrode. Of course the capacitor can be charged many many times more than a conventional system. We could even maybe couple this system to Pulstars plasma plugs which have a built in capacitor OR Smartplugs catalytic ignition capacitors. Of course at the top of the piston, dead center if using a single plug system and two spaced evenly apart of a dual spark plug system is sued, a tungsten set screw would be screwed into the piston face.

the catalytic capacitors by smartplugs are very interesting. Because we don't need to worry about advancing spark timing, just discharge at top dead center, we could use magneto's to determine the crankshaft position perhaps? It really opens up a world of possibilities for ignition.
http://smartplugs.com/

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #48 by pmuller9 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:50 pm

Dreaming big is good. Too many people in this country lose their dreams. Keep on Keeping on.

The Smart Plugs looks like a good idea but they had problems working in a cylinder with pre-heated air which is one of the basic working parameters of a hot air engine.

"The timing of ignition has *everything* to do with catalytic
surface reaction rates, which is directly related to temperature of the
catalyst. This is done with changes in igniter geometry instead of with
signals from the ECU. While they have it working pretty well for
naturally aspirated engines, turbochargers have been troublesome. The
higher mixture temperatures are causing the timing to *advance* under
boost....not what we want at all."

Dan Cordon
Mechanical Engineer
University of Idaho - Engine Research Facility

The gas can be kept at a high pressure and be direct cylinder injected then the intake air can be cool making it a better environment for Smart Plugs.
The other benefit of direct injection is if it is timed just after the exhaust port is closed, no hydrocarbons can escape.

The question is When do the Smart Plugs fire and how would they respond to a 30:1 compression ratio?

The charged capacitor in the system that we were just discussing is intended to create a Plasma Spark which eliminates the need for any other aftermarket capacitive device.

If you charge a 500 pico farad capacitor to 45K volts the discharge energy is 500mj.
Now consider that an MSD 6AL for street/strip use creates a 135mj spark or the MSD 8-Plus racing box has up to a 345mj spark.

DeltaV
Registered User
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2017 11:35 am
Contact:

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #49 by DeltaV » Mon Nov 05, 2018 10:10 pm

I agree. I don't think catalytic ignition is good for this application, I just wanted your thoughts.

I've thought about blowby, but Roger Richard is getting less than 80 PPM of HO. Also by trying to inject gas I'm worried that the charge won't be homogeneous, now we have to have complex control mechanisms, valvetrain that increases friction, etc. My solution for the very few hydrocarbons that escape via blowby is to install a small high flow catalytic converter before the impulse turbine of a turbocharger, that way any unburned hydrocarbons will help spool the turbo when they are burned by the catalytic converter. I think adding a valvetrain will just open more problems than it solves.

I agree 100% on plasma plugs with high voltage capacitors. What do you think of Pulstars plasma plugs? They have as built in capacitor to increase voltage and power.

I really think you're on to something with plasma plugs. Without the side electrode lifespan of the plugs will increase greatly. Of course the spark plugs are only for startup, after about 3 minutes they may as well be like spark plugs in a top fuel dragster engines compression igniting after a run. I think dual spark plugs will also be a good idea. If one cylinder is firing during startup and the other is not I'm afraid damage could occur. I really like your idea of plasma plugs. I think its the way to go.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w962iS-7ELQ

pmuller9
Registered User
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 12:33 am
Location: Columbus, Indiana

Re: Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

Post #50 by pmuller9 » Mon Nov 05, 2018 10:42 pm

There is another reason for direct injection but I will save that for later.

A very lean mixture is difficult to light with a conventional spark.
The Pulstar Plasma plug is worth a try but it only recoups what would be wasted energy from the coil which isn't much.
In a plasma system you can introduce as much extra energy as you want but you need to find a middle ground between extra energy and the life of the spark plug.
In our system with the piston as the grounding strap, both spark plug wires go to a single capacitor since only one plug gap is available at a time.
This also prevents a one cylinder operation. They either both get spark or not.

Most turbocharger systems create more exhaust back pressure than intake manifold pressure.
I would think that the imbalance would prevent complete exhaust gas evacuation from the cylinder.

Secondly, a turbocharger relies on the waste exhaust energy from the blow-down part of the exhaust cycle on a four stroke engine to power it.
There is very little waste exhaust energy available on a Bourke engine.

What are your thoughts on this?

One last question.
All the engine views along with several views of dissasembled engine showed piston porting for the induction system.
Is the lastest and greatest Bourke engine still a simple piston port arrangement for the induction cycle?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests