Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 00:17:59 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Ammonium Hydroxide - a path lessor traveled.
To: 'Dave Williams' 

Conventional dry gas heat engine wisdom says pack more Oxygen into charge and
burn more carbon raising heat and thereby raising power.  So we get Nitrous
Oxide and Nitro-methane releasing enormous amounts of almost uncontrollable
heat.  Ping, knock, meltdown and thermal overload means that using conventional
wisdom leads you to operating at the edge of destruction.

Neural twist.  Do not add OXYGEN - add bound hydrogen!!!  Adding O2 requires
more fuel and working fluid to avoid meltdown. (Blow torch effect)   Adding
bound hydrogen (released during combustion) adds working fluid and requires
less heating.  Remember saturated (no super heat - just wet steam) steam
pressure at 705.4 F ( Yup Seven Hundred and Five degrees)  is 3206.3 psi ( Yup
Three Thousand Two Hundred and Six  Pounds per Square Inch)  BTW, steam
pressure does not drop with increasing volume near as fast as dry gas.  Would
you like this pressure at 90 degrees ATDC?  Fries with that order sir???

Example:  Ammonium Hydroxide.  NH4OH   goes  2 NH4OH + 3 O2 => N2 + 5 H2O.

The nitrogen releases heat to partially offset the loss of heat from carbon
consumption. The very low boiling point means that little energy is lost in the
phase change - but it carries a lot of working fluid into the charge without
much vapor displacement - if injected at the port.  So we wind up making more
power with a cooler charge and a lower peak temp.

But don't stop there.  Oklahoma City Ammonium Nitrate fertilizer is water
soluble.  In fact, UNOCAL blends it with Ammonium Hydroxide to make a high
nitrogen liquid fertilizer.  Many strange, high energy fluids emerge with you
de-Carnot centric yourself.  I'm just starting to have fun with this.

Ammonia proper is NH3 - a really nice corrosive gas.  Ammonia popular is
actually Ammonium Hydroxide - Stop and Rob stuff.  Even I confuse the two.

Now go and tell Mr. Thermodynamics and crowd that you lowered the temperature
and burned less fuel and made a hell of a lot more power.  We get promoted into
the bright yellow page - right next to the pogue carburetor.  We get heretic
status - but all we have down is read a different chapter in the thermodynamics
book - the one reserved for steam power and followed the rules and laws.  No
magic, no rocket science - just antique steam engine stuff.

Quick test.  Windshield wiper pump and resivour.  Buy some "pure" ammonia from
the stop and rob.  Inject under load and check it out.  If it works as it
should, thimk about making more power from a cooler, thinner charge.




Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 10:08:20 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: Ammonium Hydroxide
To: Dave Williams 

3 ( Methanol (CH3OH)                    2 (Ammonium Hydroxide 2 (NH4OH)
+ 2 O2                                            + 3 O2
=>  CO2 + 2(H2O) )                                =>  N2 + 5(H2O)  )
___________________________     ___________________________________

6 O2 makes (from intake air)    6 O2 makes (from intake air)
6 (H2O)                            10 (H2O)
3 (CO2)                             2 (N2)

Boiling point  ~ 80 C                           ~ 37 C

Without further information, I would hazard a guess that the lower boiling 
point should have a higher latent heat of evaporation, plus that its effect 
would come into play at a lower temperature - thus being more useful at 
cooling the intake charge.  Notice also that using the same amount of oxygen 
from the intake air, it will generate 66% more water vapor in the chamber and 
less "waste product".  Note also, the waste product does not contain oxygen, 
thus leaving the oxygen to combine with carbon fuel or hydrogen to form steam. 

Next, ammonium hydroxide (household ammonia) is available everywhere,
including the stop and rob, and can be purchased in quantity at cheap prices
as a "cleaning" fluid.

I really think this would be a better "boost" fluid than methanol, water or a 
blend of both.  And I think with its low boiling temp would be useful even 
N.A. 

Also, if this is used in a cool (not reaching NOX temperature) chamber, it 
will have no detectable byproducts.  Also, even if the chamber reaches NOX, 
the cat will clean it up and have no effect whatsoever on emissions.  Plus, 
much more of the product gas is working fluid than alcohol. 

Just jogging your thoughts about cheap rocket fuel.


Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 19:23:42 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: OK - it aint gonna fit.
To: Dave Williams 


Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 12:06:05 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Early AM - N2 correction
To: Dave Williams 

( Methanol (CH3OH)                      ( Ammonium Hydroxide 4 (NH4OH)
+ 2 O2                                           + 3 O2
=>  CO2 + 2(H2O) )                               =>  2 N2 + 10 (H2O)  )
___________________________     ___________________________________

6 O2 makes (from intake air)    6 O2 makes (from intake air)
6 (H2O)                            10 (H2O)
3 (CO2)                             2 (N2)

Boiling point  ~ 80 C                           ~ 37 C

Without further information, I would hazard a guess that the lower boiling 
point should have a higher latent heat of evaporation, plus that its effect 
would come into play at a lower temperature - thus being more useful at 
cooling the intake charge.  Notice also that using the same amount of oxygen 
from the intake air, it will generate 66% more water vapor in the chamber and 
less "waste product".  Note also, the waste product does not contain oxygen, 
thus leaving the oxygen to combine with carbon fuel or hydrogen to form steam. 

Next, ammonium hydroxide (household ammonia) is available everywhere,
including the stop and rob, and can be purchased in quantity at cheap prices
as a "cleaning" fluid.

I really think this would be a better "boost" fluid than methanol, water or a 
blend of both.  And I think with its low boiling temp would be useful even 
N.A. 

Also, if this is used in a cool (not reaching NOX temperature) chamber, it 
will have no detectable byproducts.  Also, even if the chamber reaches NOX, 
the cat will clean it up and have no effect whatsoever on emissions.  Plus, 
much more of the product gas is working fluid than alcohol. 

Just jogging your thoughts about cheap rocket fuel.




Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 17:02:27 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Early AM - N2 correction - no ping - just boink
To: Dave Williams 

Further thoughts on detonation.  The decomposition of ammonium hydroxide
into ammonia and water prior to combustion releases 40% of the water working
fluid product.  This should significantly decrease the possibility of
detonation and pre-ignition.

If the carbon stew contains ring hydrocarbons such as benzene, toluene or
zylene, the excess oxygen combustion in the early stages leads to much more
complete ring combustion.  These ring hydrocarbons generally burn very smoky
and incompletely in a stoic or richer environment. By having a lean initial
burn (the hydrogen needed for stoic is not released until later in the
combustion cycle), the ring hydrocarbons are more completely combusted both
making more power and more efficiency.

By now, the understanding of the effects of the rankine steam cycle on the
dry gas Carnot cycle should be thoroughly warping everything you thought you
knew about engines.  Knowing more how it works is like opening a new window
on understanding your data and observations.  Should make everything more
predictable.  And it will add a tremendous amount of funkiness to any
discussions with dry gas Mr. Thermodynamics types.  Remember the water
injection thread and possibly you among most others didn't quite understand
where I was coming from.  The thousand yard stare can now be glacially cold
and interstellarly distant.  You will perfect it you do know, don't you?

Just starting my trek down the nitrogen/hydrogen path.  UAN 32  (Urea
Ammonia Nitrate 32% ) has some very interesting properties that I'd like to
track down.  Also, looking for liquid chemicals that have a CO radical
associated with them.  Developing some weird ideas.  And still tinkering
with massive EGR thoughts.

Bought a CD ROM that has a bunch of chemistry stuff on it - thats my light
read for tonight.  If you have glanced at the books, you understand why I
think much modern stuff is fluff.


Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 14:20:13 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Early AM - N2 correction
To: Dave Williams 

Courtesy of Bruce Hamiltons Gasoline FAQ part IV:

Date: Sat, 07 Feb 1998 14:20:13 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Early AM - N2 correction
To: Dave Williams 

Courtesy of Bruce Hamiltons Gasoline FAQ part IV:

9.8.1 Ammonia (NH3)
Anhydrous ammonia has been researched because it does not contain any
carbon,
and so would not release any CO2. The high heat of vaporization requires
a pre-vaporisation step, preferably also with high jacket temperatures
( 180C ) to assist decomposition. Power outputs of about 70% of that of
gasoline under the same conditions have been achieved [114]. Ammonia fuel
also produces copious quantities of undesirable oxides of nitrogen (NOx)
emissions.

.....

Now consider that ammonium hydroxide is made by saturating water with
anhydrous ammonia gas at a 683 to 1 volume ratio.  Somewhere above boiling
in the compression/combustion cycle, the ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) will
decompose into NH3 (anhydrous ammonia) and H2O (hydrogen hydroxide).  The
heat of combustion will then decompose the NH3 into free nitrogen and
hydrogen.  Since the nitrogen hydrogen bond is a stronger bond than the
carbon hydrogen, I suspect that the mixture will initially run lean (excess
oxygen) with free water in it, followed by the separation/combustion of the
nitrogen - hydrogen bond - resulting in a stoic mixture.  Any pre-ignition
tendencies would tend to be swamped by the first step decomposition into
free water vapor ( I think).

This slower combustion is a characteristic of nitrogen based fuels from what
I can gather and a clue as to why they make more power. If the carbon fire
lights hot and fast and the nitrogen comes into play later in the cycle, the
volume is lower (but steam pressure is probably the biggest component) but
BUT but - the lever arm is longer and the continued pressure increase occurs
later in the cycle - accompanied by lots of extra steam.

To avoid the ignition/decomposition problems and excess heat forming NOX's,
I had thought about using it in leau of and similar to water injection.  Use
the carbon fire to decompose the NH3 and pick up both power and water
injection.   Copious amounts of water is the byproduct of this combustion.
Large amounts of latent heat of vaporization is also a plus.  Power later in
the cycle (longer lever arm) don't hurt.  Just think it's better than a
methanol/water mix.  Also, I believe that using the carbon fire to generate
the heat of decomposition instead of all nitrogen will significantly reduce
the formation of power wasting NOX.  (Note that since nitrogen is stealing
oxygen from working fluid we now consider it a bad thing, not just another
thing - and we ain't even tree hugging)  Note also that we now consider
hydroxide radicals not as pre-burnt fuel, but as free sources of working
fluid that we do not have to buy the water cycle phase change energy for.
Like I said, twists the neurons in radically different ways - but without
even a touch of bending the laws of thermodynamics, chemistry and physics.
Just a different window into the data.

Test bed would be any EFI engine with a windshield washer "water injection"
system.  EFI would correct.  Any other engine with good fuel/air would work
and the result would be the same as both enriching the carbon mixture and
adding water vapor.

Dejection (my version running EGO correction at full load) would lean back
the carbon appropriately and would only need a pump and metering valve.

Might be able to add a piss dribble at "cruise" and burn more cleaning stuff
and less gasoline.

Depending on the availability of industrial quantities of ammonia cleaner
would determine the blend of gasoline/ammonia.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us]
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 1998 6:45 AM
To: bob@bobthecomputerguy.com
Subject: RE: Early AM - N2 correction

-> from the intake air, it will generate 66% more water vapor in the
-> chamber and less "waste product".  Note also, the waste product does
-> not contain oxygen

I noticed those immediately when looking at your chart.  Verrrry
interrresting, as the guy used to say on "Laugh-In."


-> I really think this would be a better "boost" fluid than methanol,
-> water or a blend of both.  And I think with its low boiling temp
-> would be useful even N.A.

The only issue I can think of is knock sensitivity.  Sounds like it
would be fairly easy to try.  Also should generate enough water vapor to
further prove the Harris Cycle.


Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 10:23:28 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: The big bang theory.
To: Dave Williams 

Caution with UAN-32

ANFO (ammonia nitrate - fuel oil) is the terrorist big bang of choice. Farmers 
use it to turn stumps into toothpicks or to make watering ponds. UAN-32 is 40 
some percent AN and gasoline is probably a close approximation to fuel oil.  
Both of which get mixed and burned at the same time. Nitromethane at a buck a 
gallon???  Would you like fries with your new bottom end sir? 


Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 13:35:00 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: The big bang theory or how sick can you get.
To: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us

Ammonium Nitrate NH4NO3

Lets see 2 (NH4NO3) => 2(N2) + 4(H2O) + O2

Molar Weights

N 14.00674  x 2   28.01348
H  1.00794  x 4  4.03176
O 15.99940  x 3 47.99982
--------------------------
80.04344

First thing to notice - this puppy is 60% oxygen by weight!!! Next thing is 
that even after reduction of all other elements, it still has 20% extra oxygen 
by weight.  This stuff is a monopropellent with an oxygen surplus!!!!  Will be 
re-learning some chemistry so that I can tell how much heat is generated by a 
reduction, but this one I know generates a bunch and changes some 40% of 
itself into steam. 

I think I like this stuff too much.


Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 20:01:03 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: Parts is Parts - right?
To: Dave Williams 


Date: Sun, 08 Feb 1998 09:51:05 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Early AM - N2 correction
To: Dave Williams 

I am very careful of Hamilton's FAQ.  In the ammonia quote, he claims that
excessive NOx is a result of the combustion on ammonia, yet as I e-mailed
you on 42(so what is the question), ammonia is injected into commercial
power plant boiler fires to CLEAN UP the combustion generated NOX.
Something about nitrogen preferring an N2 bond over an NOx bond.

UAN-32 is nitrogen 32 percent by weight.  It is a heavy liquor, weight about 
11.5 pounds per gallon, and is a solution of solid Urea CO(NH2)2 *** ( a 
single carbon monoxide and two NH2's to complete the carbon) **** and solid 
ammonia nitrate (NH4NO3) in ammonium hydroxide. This is my guess at this 
point, sure of the two solids, not quite sure of the about the dissolving 
fluid.  Both are highly hydroscopic so water is not out of the question. Urea 
content is typically from 33.5% to 36.8%, ammonia nitrate is typically from 
42.3% to 46.8% - the disolving fluid is un-named but I highly suspect it is 
H20. 

Both chemicals go to free ammonia in the soil. Looking at urea - the benign
one first, CO(NH2)2 + H2O => CO2 + 2(NH3).  Got some heat energy from carbon 
monoxide, got a real thirst for some free hydrogen and oxygen.  Since urea has 
a very long ammoniazation period (time to decompose into ammonia) in the soil, 
my guess is that it won't decompose until combustion starts and then it wants 
free oxygen and free hydrogen.  Since I believe the pre-ignition is 
uncontrolled hydrogen ignition, grabbing free hydrogen should lower the ping 
tendency of the mixture. Salts out at freezing.  Wonder if a hand full would 
"dry" out a gas tank.  Nah. 

Looking at ammonia nitrate - this is the radical puppy. NH4NO3 - still working 
this out.  Nitrogen is very unstable with a 5 bonding and wants to go to a 
stable 3 electron bonding.  The oxygen bonding is strange and unstable looking 
- two oxygen's double bonded to the nitrogen, with a third single bonded to it 
and the second nitrogen along with  four hydrogen's.  Really need to do more 
basic chemistry refreshing - but I do know that powder ammonia nitrate, when 
detonated, makes damn big bang approaching TNT or nitroglycerin.  Oklahoma 
City style. My first guess is that even blended this way, we would be twisting 
the tigers tail to burn it. Until I really grok the combustion of the ammonia 
nitrate portion, which is 40 some percent, I'd lump this stuff with 
nitromethane. 

All in all, I'm leaning to thinking of UAN-32 as the poor mans nitromethane. 
Any liquid containing 40 some percent explosive can't be all bad. Since this 
is a well standardized, commercial fertilizer blend, available in large, 
uncontrolled quantities to every farmer in the world, including India Indians, 
my guess is it is also berry beerry cheap. 

To understand the detonation characteristics of methanol - remember it 
primarily pre-ignition and it works quite well as an anti-knock, look at 
methane.  CH4.  Very high octane, no ping no knock.  The carbon hydrogen bond 
is strong and stable.  Doesn't release until late in the combustion cycle 
where it goes immediately to CO2 and H2O, leaving no free hydrogen. 

Methanol has a hydroxide radical.  Early in the combustion process, below the 
water forming temp, the hydroxide radical is freed, and the remaining 
hydrogen's are looking to combine.  They form hydroxide radicals and that is 
according to hamilton, the suspected ping agent.  All I need to know, is that 
methanol frees hydrogen before the forming temp for water, so it "burns" like 
a hydrogen combustion engine - very fast and very hot. 

The detonation mechanism for the Nitro based fuels is the same as above, early 
release of free hydrogen, PLUS the late release of intense heat (breaking the 
NO2 bond) and the the simultaneous appearance of free oxygen. 

The true beauty of nitrogen based fuel supplements is the fact that Nitrogen 
wants very badly to bond to Nitrogen.  This leaves the oxygen free to make 
working fluid. Plus the energy release from Nitrogen is significantly higher 
than from carbon and occurs later in the cycle. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us]
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 1998 9:30 PM
To: bob@bobthecomputerguy.com
Subject: RE: Early AM - N2 correction

-> This slower combustion is a characteristic of nitrogen based fuels
-> from what I can gather and a clue as to why they make more power. If
-> the carbon fire lights hot and fast and the nitrogen comes into play
-> later in the cycle, the volume is lower (but steam pressure is
-> probably the biggest component) but

Quite likely; nitrobenzine and nitromethane are notoriously lazy and
require large amounts of spark advance.  Come to think of it, both are
also quite prone to detonation, as is methanol.  Of course, the typical
fuel delivery and ignition system for cars running either fuel is a
mechanical pump with nozzle and a fixed-advance magneto; both far down
on the technological food chain.


Date: Mon, 09 Feb 1998 06:48:00 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: Back to basics
To: Dave Williams 

Will leave you with brain salad stew while you conjugate Ammonium Hydroxide,
UAN-32, and how to shrink the V-12.  Am in an animated flame exchange with
FENATIC so expect that fuckhead to erupt like a bad pimple on the list.

Back to simple ass dejection.

Electric Motor Theory.  Conventional motor control consists of varying
current or voltage.  This changes the speed BUT I2R loss's are wicked,
heating both the resistive element and the motor.   Better way is to pulse
the motor with a full voltage pulse. Back EMF limits current flow to normal
levels.  Vary speed by varying pulse width.

Plan to use one or two Bosch (depending on flow) for each engine half.
Looking for the ones that will make up to about 90+PSI.   Will pulse the
motor each time the plug fires - thus the amount of fuel will go up with
rpm.  Will vary the pulse width under dejection control.  Output will then
go to Bosch Accumulator which smooths the output and on to the dejection

Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 08:58:48 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Rings
To: Dave Williams 

RE Humpries book - pretty fair - actually not bad for 21 bucks - explains
the comprex supercharger.  Where I CONFIRMED last night the idea about
pulsing - some one did it at the turn of the century.  Book is out of print,
but will check at the store and see if one is laying about and if so, add it
to the V-12.  Since its out of print, its a nice obscure reference for the
unwashed.


The household ammonia will "steal" oxygen so it has the effect of richening
the mixture if not corrected.  Corrected, it will burn less fuel.  Note also
that it will steal oxygen from the NOx forming process because Nitrogen
desires a Nitrogen Nitrogen bond far more than a Nitrogen Oxygen bond.
Probably pretty close to a wash on an engine nearing detonation making lots
of NOx and using modest ammonia.

Everyone recommends blending water with alcohol to recover some of the heat
energy lost when water is boiled.  The NH3 combustion provides the same
effect, but makes more water and wastes no oxygen in a fuel bond.  Also, it
carries the H2O into the combustion process without the big state change
knee of pure water.  Plus it's low boiling insures a lot of latent heat of
evaporation for charge and cylinder cooling.  Caution - its very mildly
corrosive to brass and aluminum.  Probably have to plumb it with SS and use
it where its not likely to reside on the head/manifold for extended time -
but because of its low boiling point, think not a problem. Sure to be
outlawed if anyone ever finds out - something about nitrogen based fuels or
whatever.  Really fuck with the enviro-nazi's - mention how it is used to
REDUCE NOx emissions of boiler plants like the URL I sent 42 shows - and
that all you are doing is cleaning up the atmosphere - not making more power
after all.


-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us]
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 1998 6:26 AM
To: bob@bobthecomputerguy.com
Subject: Rings



-> Vizard and several other CHEVY books recommend Headland rings.  WTF -
-> never heard of them before.  Is this historical unavailablium or just
-> not mentioned to the unwashed mass's. Damn, bought another book -

Head land, Dykes... they're unobtainium as far as I know.  The only
applications I've ever seen are two stroke motorcycle engines, which use
one Dykes ring.


-> John D. Humphries book on turbos and superchargers.  More thoughts.
-> Yuck.

Never heard of it.  Is it any good?


-> So what are your thoughts on household ammonia, the pulse jet etc.
-> or I am putting you into information overload again.  The Heywoods
-> will be here next week.

The ammonia thing sounds logical.  Have you figured what it's going to
do to the air/fuel ratio?  Still thinking about the pulse stuff - have
you come across anything on the Comprex supercharger yet?


-> Start making a list of formulae the engine builder should
-> simultaneously solve - without "guessing" hp and torque curves.
-> Thinking block stuff and compression stuff, rod bore length offset
-> etc. and some graphic's output.

I used to have an old Lotus spreadsheet with that stuff, but I seldom
used it and finally misplaced it.

Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 23:19:09 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Pulse jet
To: Dave Williams 

Of course, Sendyka pulsed the intake in a ram pipe above the throttle
plate - see the book I'm sending tomorrow.  Its the principle that the
comprex started from.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 1998 8:49 AM
To: bob@bobthecomputerguy.com
Subject: Pulse jet



Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 21:46:58 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: Ford EFI Book
To: Dave Williams 

What kind of Eco-idiot wrote this book?  Will try to get some value out of
it after I get over the puking induced by his enviro-correctism.  Most
"experts" do not agree about greenhouse or whatever other drivial his type
believes.  If he believes that crap, how reliable is the rest of his data?


Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 08:05:25 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: More Pulse Jet thoughts
To: Dave Williams 

The magic number is the speed of sound in the MEDIA.  The dweebs "assume" a
fixed mixture of gasses and a fixed temp to arrive at a "velocity".  For the
intake, Standard Temperature and Pressure (STP) of 29.92 and 72 degrees is a
close enuff approximation for NA engines. For the exhaust, you just pick
your number and say "its close" but really its PFM.

On the Pulse Jet - same as the comprex.  Two gasses equalize pressure faster
than they diffuse. The Sendyka system uses an exhaust ejector to "draw" an
air charge into the pipe, then slam it back into the intake when the
pressure goes positive.  Rather than using a check valve, it uses pipe
length/volume such that the resulting positive pressure forces air into the
intake but goes negative and changes direction before contaminating the
intake charge.

A simple system would have a non collapsing hose connected to the intake
flow at a 90 - either above or below the throttle plate (shown example has
it above the plate - but that's with a carb and probably to avoid drawing
wet mixture into the pipe) so that it can effectively draw and return
without robbing from the main flow.  Then it would simply go to the exhaust
in such a manner that it can see many pulses and so that the exhaust acts as
a pump.  A 90 tap into a collector would work.

Each negative pulse draws additional air into the pipe, then the outgoing
positive pulse dumps it back into the manifold. Since more air mass is
dragged along with the negative going pulse than goes down the manifold, the
total effect is more air in the manifold.  I suspect that if a shut off
valve is used to kill this at low rpm, that the EFI would never know it
existed, just that the engine was using more air. BTW the "efficiency" of
this boost would approach 100% since no mechanical compression is involved.
The effectiveness could go way up with "pulse converters" also described in
the book.

This same use of the exhaust is the basis of the comprex, only think Gatling
Gun vs. single shot.  When the book gets there it will make sense.

For testing the ammonia, think of it like 50/50 water methanol.  Small
anti-detonant amounts simply act to SLIGHTLY richen the mixture.  Nobody
gives a fuck about it with 50/50 because 10% 50/50 doesn't do enuff to the
mixture to diddle with but kills dead most detonation.  Same with household
ammonia.  Now with UAN-32 - suspect that it winds up giving up oxygen, which
cause's the need to add fuel to make it work.  Hell, as long as its above
freezing, blend a little UAN-32 (commercial title) with the ammonia. That
will give it a liquid dynamite kick and some free oxygen (remember almost
50% by weight Oklahoma City).  Diddling with the blend makes much more power
and no futzing with the EFI or carb.  Since you can carry gallons of the
stuff, blending it with NOS means u can only use pints before refills.

Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 09:27:31 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: NH4OH thoughts
To: Dave Williams 

Got your weds am message Friday at almost midnight as I write this.

Further reading on NOx indicates that the combustion of NH3 generates a low
temperature NOx product of combustion.  This is then removed by continued
high temperatures.  Seems NOx is created by temperatures above "sensible
energy" or the disassociation temperature (strangely very closely related to
the disassociation temperature of hydrogen and oxygen - wonder if the engine
then behaves as if it were seeing a true Ideal Gas ) and destroyed by
continued temperatures above the "freezing" point of the NOx (think setting
temp - where the compound will not disassociate except by adding heat).  NO
products formed by combustion of nitrogen compounds generate this at much
lower temps.

Impact is that the nitrogen will grab an oxygen early in the combustion
process, releasing the hydrogen, richening the mixture, lowering the peak
temp, generating water early in the process, and then releasing the oxygen
later.  Looks like the combustion of N2O (NOS) to me.  The initial richening
of the mixture during early combustion then late release of the oxygen
should help detonation and power.

Course might be full of shit and the stuff detonate and ping so wildly that
nothing happens.

Refining my differences.  The Carnot cycle guys admit that above the
temperature of disassociation everything goes to shit.  No more steam -
Ideal Gas only.

The flaw in their reasoning is that all combustion products can be treated
as ideal gas. If this were true, then the power would be directly related to
the mass of the ideal gas and its temperature. We know this is not true from
observation.  Some fuels produce more power than others and temperature
stuff gets whacky off stoic.

The correction is simply to realize that steam is not an ideal gas but has
its own unique laws.  Once the percentage of combustion products that is
steam is known, the gas mass reaction can be quanticized.  A fuel that
produces more steam product will generate higher pressure than one with more
ideal gas product.  This is why alcohol generates more power that its
straight caloric content would indicate.  The simple division of the
combustion product into both its rightful components - steam and Ideal Gas -
and doing the combined math instead of hand waving trying to explain why the
Ideal Gas isn't Ideal - goes much farther into explaining what goes on.

Notice - no Dr. Weird Science stuff needed.  No redefining any basic laws of
physics - no suspension of believe.  Simply a reminder that steam is not an
ideal gas and steam is generated in significant quantities during
combustion. Correct for the steam percentage, the world is right again.


Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 23:27:00 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Flathead Obscuria
To: Dave Williams 

Part of the goal was to delay opening the exhaust till closer to BDC.  This
gives better expansion and power/economy.  Was thinking far enough down so
that the exhaust valve doesn't have to be open as early.  Say that the port
is fully open only at BDC vicinity - if it is 1/2 inch, and the stroke is
three inches, that's almost 20% of the time - more when you consider pistons
slow down near bdc.

On the flattie, why not steal a couple of Rabbit Diesel pumps and breakover
valves or maybe a cadillac V-8 setup and do direct cylinder injection -
would be a piece of cake.  21st century good shit on a 50 year old engine.

Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 09:27:31 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: NH4OH thoughts
To: Dave Williams 

Got your weds am message Friday at almost midnight as I write this.

Further reading on NOx indicates that the combustion of NH3 generates a low
temperature NOx product of combustion.  This is then removed by continued
high temperatures.  Seems NOx is created by temperatures above "sensible
energy" or the disassociation temperature (strangely very closely related to
the disassociation temperature of hydrogen and oxygen - wonder if the engine
then behaves as if it were seeing a true Ideal Gas ) and destroyed by
continued temperatures above the "freezing" point of the NOx (think setting
temp - where the compound will not disassociate except by adding heat).  NO
products formed by combustion of nitrogen compounds generate this at much
lower temps.

Impact is that the nitrogen will grab an oxygen early in the combustion
process, releasing the hydrogen, richening the mixture, lowering the peak
temp, generating water early in the process, and then releasing the oxygen
later.  Looks like the combustion of N2O (NOS) to me.  The initial richening
of the mixture during early combustion then late release of the oxygen
should help detonation and power.

Course might be full of shit and the stuff detonate and ping so wildly that
nothing happens.

Refining my differences.  The Carnot cycle guys admit that above the
temperature of disassociation everything goes to shit.  No more steam -
Ideal Gas only.

The flaw in their reasoning is that all combustion products can be treated
as ideal gas. If this were true, then the power would be directly related to
the mass of the ideal gas and its temperature. We know this is not true from
observation.  Some fuels produce more power than others and temperature
stuff gets whacky off stoic.

The correction is simply to realize that steam is not an ideal gas but has
its own unique laws.  Once the percentage of combustion products that is
steam is known, the gas mass reaction can be quanticized.  A fuel that
produces more steam product will generate higher pressure than one with more
ideal gas product.  This is why alcohol generates more power that its
straight caloric content would indicate.  The simple division of the
combustion product into both its rightful components - steam and Ideal Gas -
and doing the combined math instead of hand waving trying to explain why the
Ideal Gas isn't Ideal - goes much farther into explaining what goes on.

Notice - no Dr. Weird Science stuff needed.  No redefining any basic laws of
physics - no suspension of believe.  Simply a reminder that steam is not an
ideal gas and steam is generated in significant quantities during
combustion. Correct for the steam percentage, the world is right again.


Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 23:27:00 -0800
From: Robert Harris 
Subject: RE: Flathead Obscuria
To: Dave Williams 

Part of the goal was to delay opening the exhaust till closer to BDC.  This
gives better expansion and power/economy.  Was thinking far enough down so
that the exhaust valve doesn't have to be open as early.  Say that the port
is fully open only at BDC vicinity - if it is 1/2 inch, and the stroke is
three inches, that's almost 20% of the time - more when you consider pistons
slow down near bdc.

On the flattie, why not steal a couple of Rabbit Diesel pumps and breakover
valves or maybe a cadillac V-8 setup and do direct cylinder injection -