Re: [TCML] most corona possible from a car battery?

[Chris <snotblossom66@xxxxxxxxx>]

 I am also an old school mechanic, and have built my share of race motors. Nitrous works because under heat and pressure, the nitrogen seperates from the oxygen, allowing more fuel to be burned in the same displacement cylinder. Of course, this also causes more cylinder pressure, more heat, and more rapid ignition. Timing has to be retarded, and nitrous should not be run ll the time as it will burn the engine up very quickly. It's only to be used under full throttle acceleration, for relatively short bursts.
  Now, as for ozone, I am not sure how that would react in a situation where it's intruduced to the combustion equation. Will it seperate onto O2 and an O ion, allowing it to combine with another ion for a second O2 molecule, or will it more freely combine with the C in the fuel for more fire, or will it combine with something else and be detrimental to the objective? This is one thing that will have to be studied before even attempting. Certain things added to the combustion cycle can have deadly effects (freon from a leaking A/C unit sucked into the engine produces phosgene which is a deadly nerve gas. Just one example). These things are way beyond the scope of this mailing list.
  But just assuming ozone works as desired, the big deal is as mentioned earlier-producing enough to make any real difference. What I would suggest is a generator, a collector, and a compressor to store it is a pressurized tank. Then have a solenoid like on a nitrous system open under full throttle conditions. Experiments would have to be done with a gas analyzer to test combustion efficiency. Don't worry about timing changes under 50 horse boost, but faster that, it's 2 degrees retarded for each 50 horse bumped up. Don't forget, add more oxygen, you have to add more fuel to compensate. This is usually done with another solenoid the to a tee in the fuel supply pressure side, and into a sized jet ported into the engine manifold. 
  Actually, a newer computer controlled engine is ideal for this with under maybe 100 to 125 horse boost because the O2 sensor will sense the lean condition, and richen the fuel to compensate. Also, timing is adjusted by the engine knock sensor when under boost conditions, and automatically retards the timing. Just be sure to use the highest octane fuel you can get. I was running a 125 horse nitrous kit on my camaro SS, and it worked great! 
  Good luck, and hope you liked "Nitrous 101" class!

Brandon Garretson <garretsontech@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Too many delicate commonly grounded electronic devices in a modern
>automobile to make VDG generator usage safe.
>Beyond that, having a solid background in the auto-mechanical field, the
>shear volume of O3 required to affect combustion efficiency is a massive
>hurdle to overcome besides a whole bunch of other factors.
>Im not sure what byproducts would result from large quantities of O3 being
>introduced into the air/fuel mixture but Im willing to bet they could wreak
>havoc on the O2 sensors that are located immediately after the exhaust
>manifold causing the ECU to produce an environment either too rich or too
>lean resulting in a drop in efficiency completely negating the whole point
>of the experiment.
>Modern engines are designed to function within very specific environmental
>parameters, changing the air that they breath generally requires changing
>how they breath it as well in order to see any gain in performance.
>Perhaps such an experiment would be best conducted using a mid 70s
>naturally aspirated car.
>In no way do I mean to sound discouraging, I just wish to point out factors
>that you may be unaware of.
>I say go for it, run an ozone generating device off the alternator of an
>older carbed car.
>Theres usually lots more space under the hood and it would be a lot easier
>to fabricate an intake plenum to run straight into the air cleaner. I bet
>you could find everything you need at Home Depot.
>Dyno test it with and without the generator activated, I would be very
>interested in seeing the results.
>
>On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:29 PM, dave pierson <dave_p@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> At the risk of speaking heresy, one wonders if a small
>> van de Graff or a Tesla Coil would prove most handy?
>>
>> And, i rather suspect a test with tanked Ozone to
>> evaluate the concept might be more practical than
>> fabbing a wizard Ozone Machine?
>>
>> best
>>
>> dwp
>>  _______________________________________________
>> Tesla mailing list
>> Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Tesla mailing list
>Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
>http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla

_______________________________________________
Tesla mailing list
Tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.pupman.com/mailman/listinfo/tesla