Results 1 to 1 of 1

Thread: 95% fuel saving jet engine further developments

  1. #1 95% fuel saving jet engine further developments 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    The design is now finalized except for fuel supply details. The 95% saving is certain. I wont tell you everything because knowledge is a skill not a commodity easily bought or sold. You conceive a mistake and that's good because it tells you how far wrong your thinking is, and so your reconception is better, and so on reconceiving until finished.

    There is also new thinking involved and no progress is possible without it. Hencedesign is 'learning to think'. You dont start off knowing you start off humble and not knowing: the best start.

    So knowledge is like any skill in cricket or soccer or other, and not -- strictly speaking -- to be bought and sold. When you earn it, you respect it more, but hearing about it garners little respect since not knowing what was involved in the gaining thereof.

    Stop practisiing a skill, and it cannot increase in precision -- and knowledge is like that.

    59, 51?
    More: The main problem with the design is the combustion. The fuel-air mix moves along a narrow square or round tube and slams into a wall at the end where a right-angle turn is necessary. the idea is the fuel can be ignited at the turn because the sudden de-acceleration is as good as compression in a piston engine -- true or false?
    May be not a 'problem' so much as it will work but our minds conditioned to coventional engines, will not believe it? In my opinion as long as the fuel-air is slammed hard enough at the wall it will readily burn. Ignition is therefore like a starter motor arrangement or a separate small electric engine using a vane to pull air past the corner. Is the gas not even going to hit the wall but turn the corner in a thin stream away from the wall totally?
    Not if it has enough momentum in the approach channel?
    Better then is to push the air from the front to the wall?
    Also, if the hot gas after ignition blows back and beyond the venturi intake the fuel there will not burn because no oxygen left in the gas and the flame will expire.
    The wall is an insulator and the ignition electrodes are above and below and very close to the wall. 95% is a huge saving, so were talking about a cross section of only a quarter of an inch square -- first estimate.
    Diesal can also burn this way if slammed hard enough and given enough time to burn completely: minor modification. So greenies and fuel companies all happy -- more or less.
    Why is a disk turbine better than a bladed turbine? Tesla invented a bladeless turbine.
    You can also consider a reverse-air rotation jet engine, where thrust is increased by blades with a greater angle of attack and pipes causing reverse flow at each stage. The final pipes turn the single or double disk turbine at the back -- Im not interested in this one myself.

    I only said we should share all ideas and abandon intellectual property rights because then a monopoly in production is earned, and having a monopoly on the idea is communistic and were about competition? Or since the ideas come from me, i have the right to say how they should be used.

    Where do new ideas come from? Is it extremely difficult to get new ideas?
    The engine is now looking at intake external to the main vane at the center of the thrust plates. So an electric vane forces air into a narrow pipe aimed directly at the edge of the most-central disk. Then fuel venturi intake then the ignition near the end of the 'gun barrel'. A thin wall in the center of the pipe separtes the stream into two on either side and the electrodes just before the wall create a spark that starts combustion.
    Looking at using the main vanes to possibly introduce air under some pressure at the side of the barrel. Half the main vane is not enclosed so the air from the thrust plates is drawn with more force. The front plates are far near the disk turbine and close near the engine facing forward. The rear plates are close near the disk and far at the end of the engine -- perfect bearing air-tight seal at each end.

    Last edited by Joshua Stone; August 25th, 2011 at 08:42 PM.
    I am seeking supporters for a qualitative basis of science, not quantative. Quality: precision,shape, color, pitch. Quantity: power,size,brightness,volume. A quality can be found as a ratio of quantities. Mass is a quality.
    Reply With Quote  


Similar Threads

  1. 30% and 95% fuel-saving Jet Engine design briefs.
    By Joshua Stone in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 11th, 2011, 12:44 PM
  2. Why do we try saving species near extinction?
    By Raziell in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: August 20th, 2010, 06:01 AM
  3. Daylight saving.
    By Cat1981(England) in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: April 6th, 2007, 10:09 AM
  4. Uk energy saving
    By captaincaveman in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 30th, 2006, 10:11 AM
  5. Saving energy through lighting
    By (In)Sanity in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: July 26th, 2006, 12:26 AM
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts