Good morning Brad.
The HHOP idea makes a very simple water pump, just one moving part ( non return valve ) and a low input energy level.
You wrote 1 Joule? I don't think so, the cell was using 6W and took approximately 45 seconds between each cycle. This would be 270 Joules to lift 50 ML of water per cycle.
What sets HHOP apart from other water pumps is that same 6 W or 6 Jules can be used to lift the water much greater distances! It would depend upon the physical construction of the cell as to how high you could go.
Onto my little engine....
Built around the late 1890/1900 period it is a simple " expansion " ( non compression ) cycle principle. It would have used " Town gas " as the fuel. From TDC the piston draws in fuel and air and at half the stroke opens a port in the side of the cylinder, the ignition port. A pilot flame would have then ignited the charge and the remaining " power? " stroke would continue to BDC. From BDC the whole of the return stroke is exhaust. Returning to TDC for the next cycle. We replaced the pilot flame with a modified sparkplug and used a contact maker to drive the PWM to provide electrical HT ignition. In essence a two stroke/cycle non compression engine.
Obviously, very different to the engine that you're currently using! The ignition timing being set by the port.
You may recall a former member of OUR, Matt Watts? He built a very expensive high output HHO unit that he fitted to his very large Diesel engine'd pickup truck. In conversation he said that rather than his fuel consumption going down, quite the reverse! The power consumption of the multi plate cell was directly added to the overall consumption of the truck. He mentioned the term " many Benjamin's " spent, a term lost to this Welshman!
I will be following your progress with great interest Brad, rest assured!
Cheers Grum.
You wrote 1 Joule? I don't think so,
I was stating the required energy to achieve the feat.
50ml of water at 2 meters has a potential energy of 1 joule,which means that it only takes the same amount to raise the same mass 2 meters.
That is a most interesting engine,and i did not know it operated that way.
So no compression,which would mean no loss in power trying to compress the gasses.
But it also means a bigger loss in the power stroke,as compressed gasses are more volatile.
It would seem that with this type of engine,there would have to be some sort of valve closing off the inlet when the gasses ignite--perhaps just some form of vacuum operated valve?
You may have already stated how it work's,but seems i missed that bit somewhere.
I would so love to have a small desktop engine like that to experiment with.
I wonder if you could drive some form of pump/supercharger just big enough to pump a small volume of gas into the cylinder from TDC to 80* ATDC,and then fire the mix ?.
I bet that little motor would run like a gem with just a gasoline vapour system.
I recon i could build me one of those type engines out of bits and pieces from the scrap pile.
In fact,you could convert a 4 stroke engine to run this way.
Just change the 2:1 came ratio out for a 1:1 ratio,double the duration on the exhaust lobe,and place a spark plug into the bore half way down. So now it will exhaust for a full upward stroke,intake would open at TDC,and close at 90*,then the spark plug would fire. We could grind and decrease the inlet lobe on the cam,so as it closed at say just 70* from TDC,and that would give us a longer power stroke
So we now have a 2 stroke that dose not need oil mixed in with the fuel for lubrication,as it would retain the 4 stroke lubrication method.
Imagine that,a very clean 2 stroke engine
Wow,i think i just talked myself into it
Brad
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.