JSM Posted July 17, 2008 Share Posted July 17, 2008 My kids and I were messing around making bottle rockets mixing vinegar and Baking soda. Would there be any potential to inject two chemicals into a combustion chamber and let the reaction of the mixture move the piston up and down? One thought was increased speed. Would mixing occur fast enough to create the desired reaction? The other thought was mileage? How much chemical would be needed for a desirable trip? Also, the waste left behind, is it env. safe? What other chemical may be viable? On a positive side, I would think the weight of the motor could be reduced significantly. Just a random thought, bash away! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Challenger Posted July 17, 2008 Share Posted July 17, 2008 Think of the gas tanks it would need. Dont want to be mixing the two fuels in a reck or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naviathan Posted July 17, 2008 Share Posted July 17, 2008 Think of the gas tanks it would need. Dont want to be mixing the two fuels in a reck or something. Good point...That would suck to get rear ended and suddenly both cars rocketing away from each other or in pieces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSM Posted July 17, 2008 Author Share Posted July 17, 2008 Think of the gas tanks it would need. Dont want to be mixing the two fuels in a reck or something. I wouldn't see that as a problem. It would be messy yes, but it would need to be compressed to see anything really volital. Like poring baking soda on your battery terminals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Challenger Posted July 17, 2008 Share Posted July 17, 2008 If you need highly reactive chemicals to combust with a lot of force inside the engine, they would do the same outside of the engine. So when the two tanks mix= big explosion unless they only ignite at high temperatures. Thats where some kind of heating device comes in to heat before they enter the motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted July 17, 2008 Share Posted July 17, 2008 Already been done, but you don't need pistons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-1_%28rocket_engine%29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwi303 Posted July 17, 2008 Share Posted July 17, 2008 google T-stoff and C-stoff find a crossflow engine with 2 direct injectors, and equal sized intake and exhaust ports, plug the spark plug hole, and run a custom cam on the intake to turn it into an exhaust. sounds more trouble than it's worth, even ignoring the crash explosion dangers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proxlamus© Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 damn John beat me to it... lol Rocket fuel anyone?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Challenger Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 google T-stoff and C-stoff find a crossflow engine with 2 direct injectors, and equal sized intake and exhaust ports, plug the spark plug hole, and run a custom cam on the intake to turn it into an exhaust. sounds more trouble than it's worth, even ignoring the crash explosion dangers. So you have two intakes..... genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cygnusx1 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 Thrust (sea level): 1,500,000 lbf (6.67 MN) 1,500,000lbf/(2600lbZ+20,096lbEngine) = 66:1 thrust to weight ratio with ZERO traction problems in a straight line! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwi303 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 So you have two intakes..... genius. No... Twin exhausts, C-stoff and T-stoff are german WWII rocket fuels used in the little rocket interceptor. There would be no need for intakes as it's a chemical recation wih the oxizising material part of the dual fuel, Air independant. So the intake can be turned into an exhaust, doubling the available exhaust gas extraction capability. as I said: "and run a custom cam on the intake to turn it into an exhaust" so both the exhaust and the former intake open on the exhaust stroke, and remain closed on the intake/power stroke, there would be no compression stroke as the twin fuels react on mixing, so effectively a 2 stroke engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Challenger Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 Ahh I must be lexdystic, I read make both intakes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwi303 Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 LOL, I've had brain fart moments like that too I wonder if an engine like that would have double the power of an equivalent 4 stroke motor? seeing as it would have double the power strokes with no compression stoke, 2 strokes tend to be rated for more power than similiar cc 4 strokes after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 Can you imagine the damage to the engine internals from corrosion and oxidation when you dump any of these chemicals into the combustion chambers and let them ignite? I think the aluminum pistons themselves would react with the oxidizer, not to mention the intake manifold. There's a big reason why oxidizer tanks are made out of non-reactive metals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSM Posted July 18, 2008 Author Share Posted July 18, 2008 Can you imagine the damage to the engine internals from corrosion and oxidation when you dump any of these chemicals into the combustion chambers and let them ignite? I think the aluminum pistons themselves would react with the oxidizer, not to mention the intake manifold. There's a big reason why oxidizer tanks are made out of non-reactive metals. I was thinking some sort of plastic motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSM Posted July 18, 2008 Author Share Posted July 18, 2008 Rocket motor aside, my thought was a mechanically driven type motor w/ no ignition of the two chemicals, other than just the reaction of the chemicals themselves. I seriously doubt enough power could be made this way w/ the chemicals and the amount that would need to be carried. It was just a random thought when playing with the kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalifaThugz Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 Get to work on it! You can figure something out. I think I understand what you mean, instead of a combustion chamber you want a reaction chamber. That would be pretty sweet. No need for radiator and all that jazz. Less lines to worry about. To me it would seem like once you get what chemicals can react fast enough it would be a simple design. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(goldfish) Posted July 18, 2008 Share Posted July 18, 2008 A couple of things to thinks about. The piston engine is pretty inefficient, changing linear motion to rotational and all that jazz. If you're going to redesign it for new fuels, you might as well make a different style of motor. Lots of chemical reactions happen alot faster under pressure. Gunpowder would be a good one. Watching a pound of black powder burn when poured on the sidewalk is exciting. Roll it up into a heavy cardboard tube and I'm out of there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSM Posted July 18, 2008 Author Share Posted July 18, 2008 Gunpowder would be a good one. Watching a pound of black powder burn when poured on the sidewalk is exciting. Roll it up into a heavy cardboard tube and I'm out of there. I was hoping someone would chime in on what would make a suitable mix for such a concept. Any chemist out there? Gunpowder would produce way to much emission problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbk240z Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 I hear nitro glycerin is pretty powerful. Just kidding guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.