Re: STEAM CAR AUCTION
Posted by:
Caleb Ramsby (IP Logged)
Date: August 19, 2004 06:33PM
<HTML>Chuck,
I too am an advocate of a driver controled car. Not a computer controled nightmare.
I think that the modern car systems are MUCH harder to fiddle with and fix. The old systems, like carbs and points, could be fixed with a few hand tools and a mechanicaly minded person.
I have always worked on my own vehicles and will never stop. When my brother began a rather large project with his car(which was only a lower intake manifold gasket change, quoted at $1,600 from all shops, it took him and I around 35 to 40 hours to do), late 90's, it was a nightmare. His project came up at his job and many people said that they would LOVE to be able to work on their car. However, with computer sensors all over telling you that one thing MIGHT be wrong and the sensor that is sensing what is wrong could be wrong, it is all nuts. Not to mention the need for a very long armed midget to even get to the nuts and bolts.
Look, although the percentage of people that would take the time to actually know how their conveyance operates, and be willing to fix it and maintain it themselves is small, mabey 25% to 5% depending on region, with over SIX BILLION people in the world and around 300,000,000 in America that "small" percentage is a whole lot of people. Not to mention that after studying steam power a mechanic would be able to fix a well designed steamer in a much short time than a modern car. If the computers are working right(good luck) the mechanic can find the problem rather fast but replacing the part even takes them forever.
Look around the web for sites where people are asking questions about how to fix a part of their conveyance. There are a lot of willing people out there, seaching for an option to a modern day nightmare car.
There are cars now that if you cut the wires to the cigar lighter the engine won't start! ! ! Talk about nightmare!
To me the most important things for a conveyances system are, durability, longevity of operation, flexibility of aplication, simplicity of design and the ability to actually get to and fix the parts.
My idea for a system is a combination of all of these things.
The steam generator would be of the LaMont style, with a rectangular firebox surounded with the evaporator tubes, having a sheet metal shell between the tube and the fire where the fire would impinge on the tubes and open where it wouldn't. The exhaust gases would then go into another rectangular housing where it would meet the forced circulation tube again, with the superheater mixed in the radiant and convection section to give a consistant superheat. A economizer would be the end of the exhaust gas line.
Two seperator drums, one for water level and steam and the other for just steam(smaller) or a very good seperator that wouldn't allow water to make it to the steam outlet would hold the reserve water and steam. I think that the dual drum system would be required for off road vehicles. Water level would be controled by an independant direct acting Waterman type pump, with a small line coming from the water standpipe at the desired water lever with a needle valve to shutoff and control the rate of pump action for tuning or modification.
There would be an auxiliary engine which would be a single piston double acting type with a mechanical brake system to stop the crank off of center and a centrifugal type governer with moveable weights via a lever or hand wheel. This would allow one to control the speed of the auxiliary engine from the cab, from say 60 to 300 rpm. There would be a single acting plunger fuel pump, two stage single acting air pump or double acting, electric generator, provision for A/C pump attachment as with power steering and power brakes and the circulation pump for the boiler. The A/C pump, generator and circulation pump would all be geared to a higher speed than the crank.
The circulation pump would use an electric motor for firing up. There would be a sliding spline which would disengage the circulation pump from the auxiliary engine and engage it with the small electric motor on the other side. If desperate one could also fire up the boiler with a very low fire and not use the circulation pump, this of course would depend on how well the water flowed with natural circulation in the forced circulation tubes.
There would be a tank for the compressed air of adequate size and an accumulator of the baffle type for the fuel.
The burner system would be very simple and reliable. An air accelerator would use the compressed air to produce the air flow into the boiler, the air would be shot into a venturi attached to the boiler housing for an increased air flow for a given compressed air usage. The accelerator and venturi would be encased in a tube extending to an adequate place to for combustion air feeding. The fuel would be pumped into a ring of holes through the accelerator body and become atomized and mixed to a good extent. The air and fuel would strike a cone shape of steel upon entering the end of the boiler casing, then be straightened by a coresponding bell shape. The cone and bell would be rather close to each other. These would heat up very rapidly and vaporize the fuel on contact.
The fire would be an on/off type control via a diaphram with live steam, this would open and close the air and fuel lines going to the burner assembly.
With the pilot off and no steam, one would first move the lever to engage the circulation pump to the electric motor and turn it on, then pull a lever which would open the fuel and air line while at the same moment, it would use a small chain pulled be a grab hook, wraped around two small gears one of which spins a flint type of sparker, to start the fire. The sparker would be placed to throw it's sparks at the point of the cone. Thus ignition!
The pilot would be on a moving lever assembly which would allow it to be moved into the stream of the flame in the boiler and then back out of the way. A lever in the cab would move it into the path of the flame for heating the evaporation coil(a vaporizing pilot). When it was hot one would turn the hand wheel in the cab to allow fuel to go to the pilot(this would be used off of the main tank if proper fuel is used or a secondary tank such as the Stanleys). Then pull the pilot back into it's hiding place, from where it would throw it's flame at the point of the cone and ignite the main burner during operation. The evaporator coil of the pilot would be a wound coil above the single nozzle for the vaporized fuel. There would be a nicrome wire above the nozzle and bellow the coil to help keep the flame going. The coil would be very easy to detach with flared ends and having two or three of these with the exteras soaking in kerosene or such to clean them would allow for fast replacement.
The size of the fire would be controled by yet another lever assembly in the cab, this would move a needle valve in both the air and fuel line going to the burner. One handle to move both valves, this would allow for a small fire or a large one. At high altitudes, one would simply change the position of one valve to the other, with sliding bolted attachments to the main lever. Thus changing the air/fuel ratio.
The reason for the ability to change the speed of the auxiliary engine from the cab would be that at the engines low speed 60 rpm, the fuel pump, air pump and circulation pump would be designed to provide enough fuel and air for around 10 to 40 continues horsepower, with the proper recirculaation rate. This would be for stop and go in town traffic, the reserve steam would allow for the horsepower needed for acceleration and since staying at 30 to 45 mph takes hardly any horsepower one could use a very low flame level. Inceasing the speed of the auxiliary engine would increase the amount of air, fuel supplied and the rate of circulaition. Note that the dynamics of the pumps would not always be in proportion and allowances would be required in the design and proportion for the pumps for the min and max output rates and speeds. So if you have a trailer and come to a big long hill, just adjust the speed of the auxiliary engine for the proper power supply and push the burner lever ahead for a bigger fire. The air pump and fuel pump would use automatic bypass valves to maintain a consistant pressure in the tanks. The air tank would be of a rather high pressure so that one would have enough air for firing up from cold.
The reserve of the standpipe would allow for any immediate and short need for power without needing the system to be adjusted.
The engine should be directly connected to the differential. With a sliding spline engaging and disengaging the gear on the crank from the crank.
Independent suspension would be great and it would keep the engine out of the way.
Two cylinder double acting counterflow engines with the Stephenson or Joy valve gears are the minimum required for a prime mover and can be of simple construction. With an eight rod frame and a built up crank the engine could use sealed ball, roller and needle bearings at all points including mains. The crosshead would be the only one with oil or grease required. I think grease with a grease cup which is operated by a ratchet from the crosshead would give one adequate lubrication of the crossheads.
The cutoff would be controled by a hand lever which would lock at either set points such as a marine engine or with a curved rack and a gear with a spring loaded vertical sliding locking bar which would be pulled up with a hand grasp on the end of the lever and let down by letting go of the hand grasp at the desired point of cutoff. The latter would give one a more finite control of cutoff.
During 95% of the vehicles operation the only controls that would reguire manipulation would be the throttle, brake and cutoff. The cutoff only being used during stop and go and times when higher power are wanted.
For four wheel drive, two engines, one on the front axle and one on the rear, both of about half size of a two wheel drive system would work great. It would also give one greater economy while running only one engine, such as on the interstate and the ability to double the power and traction with the second engine. A spline disengagement would be required to keep the unused engine from spinning.
Leave the boiler on all of the time, via pilot. If one garages their car, the addition in the garage of a venting tube that can connect the exhaust from the boiler to the out of doors is a very simple and effective thing.
To me some of those who would benefit the most from such a system would be delivery and maintance people. Their profession is in their vehicle and they often need to drive it stop and go tens to hundreds of times a day. I.C. engines don't like being turned on ran hard and then turned off all day long. With enough mass in the engine and proper insulation along with a live steam block heater system that maintains a good temperature in the block. The steam engine could be ready at all times for severe operation.
For real production in a car, using a modern chasis is going to demand too many conpromises.
Teaming up with some kit car body makers, a few frame makers and some machine shops for the engine, differential and boiler systems would make a real good product.
For imediate use and testing, a big buggy frame with the steam system installed would be an excellent test vehicle.
One aspect of the steam system that I believe to be often ignored is the longevity of which it operates nearly as well as new. Take a 10 year old I.C. car and run it on a dyno with a exhaust gas analysis and compare it with what it did when new. It won't be very good. In areas where the vehicles are tested every year to check for good emissions standards there is usually a rush to get the car in the right shape. With a design such as mine there isn't much that would be able to effect the operation of the flame. Except for improper adjustment of the proportion of the air and fuel valves.
Good grief, I have to stop. I know that I am leaving out a lot of details, but, good grief.
Caleb Ramsby</HTML>