Gasoline/Vapor Injection!

[LargeCarManX2]

Have you ever been to the gas pumps and saw that thick/clear vapor rising into the air frin the nozzle as you pump gas into your tank?

I was listening to a talk radio station and they were interviewing a man whom claims he has a vapor injection system. This design takes the gasoline in the fuel tank and injects it into a tank that creates vapor and injects the vapor into the combustion chamber of the engine creating a 100% burned fuel. The miles per gallon are claimed to be in the 60's...yes, SIXTY miles per gallon.

 

[Chris142]

I think this is then same idea.

http://www.thunderproducts.com/dial_a_jet.htm

 

[oilyriser]

You suffer power loss, because it's harder to stuff so many grams of fuel through the intake valves as a gas than it is as droplets. Add a turbocharger. Then you have to worry about detonation. So you add a lot of EGR. The vaporizer will need to be cleaned out every so often because the heavy ends of the fuel will form black goo after exposure to heat for so long. It's doable.

Using wet ethanol in this system would be better. There's nothing left after it evaporates, and it's a great octane booster so you can do away with the big EGR.

this might be useful
http://www.pnl.gov/microcats/aboutus/publications/microchemical/CMFV-Marco-rev.pdf

 

[Quest]

Originally Posted By: LargeCarManX2
Have you ever been to the gas pumps and saw that thick/clear vapor rising into the air frin the nozzle as you pump gas into your tank?

I was listening to a talk radio station and they were interviewing a man whom claims he has a vapor injection system. This design takes the gasoline in the fuel tank and injects it into a tank that creates vapor and injects the vapor into the combustion chamber of the engine creating a 100% burned fuel. The miles per gallon are claimed to be in the 60's...yes, SIXTY miles per gallon.



IMHO this guy is either an armchair inventor, or a [censored]'er. Either way, I wouldn't bet on gasoline vapour injector system due to the inherent dangers(hard to control/contain/confine gasoline in gaseous state than in liquid state). Yes, it is true that mixing gas with gas *may* achieve 100% mixing efficiency, but don't forget that our fuel injection systems currently deployed in mass-production vehicles already achieving 08% efficiency, so how can that extra 2% instantly boost a typically computer-controlled EFI vehicle up to 60+ mpg.

No, the mathematics doesn't add up.

My 2c's worth.
Q.

 

[Quest]

correction:

*current EFI systems is 98% efficient in creating air+fuel mixture...* (typo, not "08%").

Q.

 

[Rabbler]

If your talking direct injection 'maybe'
I would be surprised if any port injection system is anywhere near that.

 

[oilyriser]

the existence of soot particles in all used oil is a sign the fuel is not 100% vaporized.

 

[Quest]

Guys,

Read on:

http://fuelsaving.info/vaporate.htm

oilyriser, this one is for you-

http://fuelsaving.info/unburnt_fuel.htm

Q.

 

[oilyriser]

I had some more thoughts about combustion efficiency. When you measure exhaust at the tailpipe, on a car without a catalyst, you probably get numbers that say 98% of the combustion reaction was completed. But how much of that actually occurs before and at the beginning of the power stroke? What if only 80% of the combustion reaction completes inside the combustion chamber, and the rest occurs during the exhaust stroke, and in the exhaust manifold.

 

[Steve S]

The car mfgs would have that device in their cars/Suvs yesterday if it worked well . Would you buy a 40 mpg SUV? I would bet the factorys would be running 24 hours to keep up on the demand.