Henry Yunicks Red Hot Vapor Engine Re-Creation

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.

DeltaV":t9vbyqtq said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

DeltaV":niqumylr said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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/

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.

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

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?

A lean mixture is difficult to light with a conventional spark, but I know that diesel engines can operate when idling with AFR's as high as 1000 to one. The extremely high compression ratio's of this engine lends me to believe that a spark will still get the engine going and once it warms up the spark plugs will be superfluous at that time. A dual spark plug system plus a glow plug between the spark plugs ought to get the job done! I really like your idea of a single massive capacitor for all spark plugs.

For a turbocharger system obviously it would need to be custom built to create massive boost pressures. The Bourke though extremely thermodynamically efficient has very high exhaust gas velocity's despite the super low temperatures. Also because of the way the slide valves work and the bottom side of the piston being a reservoir for the charge with a transfer chamber between the underside of the piston and the combustion chamber it acts like a one way check valve. Of course with a turbocharger even with the check valve operation of the transfer port not all exhaust gas will exit. This will however prevent blowby and help raise combustion chamber temperatures for a super lean burn to make firing easier. Like a 5 stroke in 2 strokes. Below is a GIF of the operation.

My only concerns for injection is getting the timing just right as if the timing is off on one cylinder the engine will destroy itself and a possible lack of charge homogenization which even if timing is perfect will detriment efficiency and may result in non-even firing or even worse, standing waves.
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/21/a6/b5 ... fe8153.gif

When you say "slide valve" do you mean the piston sliding back and forth as a valve or is there something else I'm not seeing?

Direct injection would begin just after the exhaust port closed.
Right now the piston head is designed to create swirl during transfer which would help homogenize the mixture.
Since this is a detonation pulse engine, injection timing has little to do with pulse timing.

Thats a good point that injection timing wouldn't matter. I didn't consider that. Most people that recommend injection want atomized droplets, and thats a no-go. But vapor injection would work. The injectors would have to be able to handle extremely hot gases and would have to be able to tune it to inject the perfect amount of fuel to control engine RPM as there is no throttle plate. I was wanting to use a turbo's compressor to homogenize the intake charge like Henry Yunick.

I'm not too worried about blow-by out the exhuast. Especially with the back-pressure of a turbo. Even the naturally aspirated Bourke has less than 80 PPM of unburned hydrogen.

This will apply to the Ford 300 six as well as the Bourke engine.
We want to look at a constant flow (not fuel injected) dry fuel system which would be simple in design.
Both of these two engines will operate without a throttle plate.

Without a throttle plate the engine torque is controlled only by the amount of fuel entering the intake system and will have an air fuel ratio range from very lean up to the stoichiometric ratio.
In these two engines no further torque is produced with a mixture richer than stoich and a richer mixture results in unburned fuel and lower engine efficiency.

In a standard wet fuel constant flow system the fuel pump is engine driven making fuel availability linear with engine rpm. A barrel valve meters the fuel from idle up to max flow for the given rpm. Tuning adjustments are made with bypass valves.

In this dry fuel system there needs to be a way to vary the max fuel flow so the air fuel ratio at any rpm and at full load does not exceed stoich.
Example: If the engine has enough fuel flow to keep the a/f ratio just above stoich at full load (foot to the floor board) at 6000 rpm, at 3000 rpm the fuel flow needs to be cut in half to stay above stoich at full load.

I had some concern with the amount of air that the dry fuel displaces in the induction system which would lower power however the charts only show a 4% drop in VE for Propane as opposed to 1.6% for gasoline.
The addition of a turbocharger will certainly compensate.
On a Ford 300 six the cylinder head is responsible for a greater VE drop and I don't know what a two stroke Bourke engine has for a VE versus rpm graph.

Once a turbocharger is added to the system the only way to know what the airflow is through the engine so the fuel can be limited to keep above stoich is to somehow use a MAF sensor and monitor the exhaust O2.

Thoughts?

I agree 100% with your assessment. My thinking on limiting AFR to never go above stoich was to use a positive stop to prevent the valve from opening any further once stoich is reached, however you're correct in pointing out that max opening would constantly have to change as RPM changes. I was thinking of using a needle valve instead of a barrel valve, but either would work.

For now my solution could be just to have foot pedal discipline and accelerate and decelerate slowly and responsibly. It's going in a 1966 F350 with a hydraulic flat/dump bed so its a work truck and daily driver to me, not a racecar. A long term solution might be a belt powered balls in/out system like the old steam engines that would mechanically alter the "bottomed out" position of the accelerator cable proportionate to RPM, but I'm just spitballing here.

I have no idea what the VE is of a Bourke engine but it would be damned interesting and nice to know. The only way to find out will be when I purchase a lathe, build one, and test the shit out of it. I already have a bridgeport. If I had a lathe I'd be making a Bourke engine right now.

May I suggest installing an O2 sensor and let it show you how far to depress the accelerator pedal.

It will also help you adjust the metering system.
If at peak power the fuel flow doesn't let you get near stoich then you know the system needs to deliver more fuel.
If it gets to stoich before your foot gets to the floor board then the metering system needs to be backed off.

The turbocharger creates a very non-linear relationship between airflow and rpm so you will need something other than an rpm based method to control fuel flow when you refine the system.

That makes sense! Perhaps I'll just use the o2 sensor in the same way one would use a tachometer and boost pressure gauge and adjust my driving accordingly after I set the adjustments for optimization of fuel flow. An o2 sensor the more I think about it, is a good idea.

I can't thank you enough for your wisdom and insight and taking time from your day to give me your expert opinion on these matters. The block I purchased is a EFI block from a mid 90's pickup. I'll have to replace some parts for it to get to my liking. I'll be damned if I use a plastic/nylon timing gear! The slightly lower compression ratio's should make it an excellent contender for safe maximum boost and experimentation.

Thank you for your appreciation and I also appreciate you sharing this project with me.
It is an exploration and an adventure. As previously mentioned, too many of these old treasures are waiting to resurface and be refined using new technology.

Is the engine build as previously discused with anodized forged pistons, better connecting rods, ported head with hard exhasut valve seats... ect?

I'm thinking about doing a quick and affordable rebuild on the 300efi head, naturally aspirated, to get familiar with the engine and also to build, test, and hookup a more affordable marketable product I have in mind. Which is a large aluminum pot float bowl within a larger chamber that hot radiator coolant flows through and there's insulation around that. Then an electric arc inside the chamber will break down any liquid fuel, even crude oil, into methane gas and the hot coolant reduces the dielectric breakdown of the oil/gasoline/fuel. This product could be made for less than $1,000 and installed on any engine in a single day. A standard Impco propane carburetor could be used to control fuel and air OR a special valve system to eliminate the throttle plate. This makes the job for a common person much easier and could be attached to virtually any vehicle in one day's time. Mound the fuel vaporizer, re-route the engines coolant coming out of the thermostat to the vaporizer and then back to the radiator, attach the terminals for the arc to the alternator (a high amp alternator may need to be installed, depending on the situation) with a toggle switch to turn on the arc and open a selonoid valve to let the vaporized and thermally cracked fuel from the last time the vehicle was ran into the carb thus giving the operator a fast startup. There would be 3 walls to the vaporizer, a steel or aluminum inner wall to contain the fuel, an outer shell which hot coolant flows around, and a fancy stainless steel outer shell which is packed with insulation. The top would be made of stainless steel and would unscrew from the aluminum fuel reservoir for easy maintenance. Fuel would be kept at a specific level via a giant custom made float bowl I already have designed. This allows engines with either cam driven mechanical pump or electric pumps to be used with complete indifference. If vapor lock proves to be a problem a small centrifugal fan will be attached to the gas out supply of the vaporizer to continually induce a vacuum on the chamber.

I know this makes me seem like a spastic with a bunch of grandiose idea's that never gets anything done, but I do intend to build an engine as we discussed earlier this year. Ceramic coating piston face, head, and coated hardened valves, RF85 metal treatment amd cryogenic tempering of all iron components, nickisil wall coating, gapless top rings, forged anodized pistons, and if I need to get custom pistons made I'll have a shop design them with a heightened wrist pin for use with 240 connecting rods, low overlap cam grind for monster low end torque, standard 300 crankshaft (don't have the budget for a billet crank, unfortunately) the Borg Warner turbocharger you recommended, high pressure thermal catalytic cracking system, eliminating the throttle plate, and a ceramic coated outer finish of all external surfaces to top everything off. This engine build will run me about 15k to 20k but I believe that MPG's as high as 200 MPG may be possible. With the single pot system I suspect that MPG's between 30 and 70 are possible.

A Bourke engine coupled to the high pressure thermal cracker I believe MPG's as high as 500 or more are possible. Out of a full size 1 ton dump truck rocking dually's. Of course when I build this super custom 300i6 for my 66 F350 its staying in there even after I build my Bourke engine. I'm going to put a bourke engine in my fathers 1969 C10 for drag racing on account of it being able to spool to 30k RPM safely and restomod it for the drag strip. Its rusted out to hell and back but the frame and all mechanical components are still good. It has factory trailing arms AND a factory shortbed making it a perfect hot rod candidate. A 200 CID bourke would produce 1,100 horsepower naturally aspirated. A 400 CID (still smaller than a 454 BBC) would produce about 2,200 HP naturally aspirated. I shutter to think of what it would do with a large turbo or blower.

When I build the super 300i6 for my 66 F350 and wear out the tires off it I'll pull off the old Dana 70 axle and build a Dana 80 with a detroit locker to put on the 1966 and use the Dana 70 and rebuild it with a locker for the 1969 C10, which the C10 also be converter to 4 wheel drive for better take off on the drags trip and off road handling.

Do you think an electric arc fuel gasifier that lets any gas engine run on any fuel and increase MPG would sell well? My father has been telling me for a year I should make a marketable product first instead of this super crazy efficient system to pull in some money, establish a reputation, and prove the concept. It would only take me a couple weeks to build a prototype electric arc fuel gasifier.

So far the discussions have centered around Smokey's concept of recovering otherwise lost thermal energy to make a highly efficient engine.
As soon as you add an electric arc you are using energy that has already been generated and it is seen as a loss.
So it depends on how much energy the arc consumes.

Does the arc require a voltage higher than the 14 volt electrical system?

The second question would be; How much arc energy would be needed to produce 200 to 300 HP worth of fuel in Real Time and can it be done in a small enough chamber to fit onboard a pickup truck?

A feasibility model would be needed to answer these questions. I'm sure you have some feel for what is required.