Electric Car? How about a Compressed Air Car?

On Nov 15, 10:45 am, C J Campbell
wrote:
On 2007-11-13 19:07:50 -0800, Dave said:



Now it appears that someone has come up with the idea of running a
vehicle on compressed air.

Compressed air engines are really just variants on steam engines.
Anybody remember the Freon based solar powered steam car? The idea was
that Freon would be stored in a tank in the car and cycled up to the
roof where it would be heated into steam for powering the car. The
steam would go to the engine and from there the now cooled liquid Freon
would go back to the tank.

There were some guys who took this a step further. They would heat the
Freon with a small burner when the sun was not enough. One guy built an
MG to run this way. He also was working on a 1966 Cadillac which
weighed 5000 lbs. He was going to use an 80 hp diesel to compress Freon
and run the car. He chose Freon over compressed air because it is a
lubricant, which would save wear and tear on moving parts, and the
contracting/expanding cycle of Freon kept you from losing so much heat
energy.

William Lear had a bus and a Monte Carlo powered by a closed circuit
steam turbine engine back in the '70s. However, he never put it into
production because (he claimed) adding expected features like air
conditioning and power windows was extremely complex and more than he
wanted to deal with at the time. The real reason it was never put into
production, of course, was that it used a turbine. The fluid was
something called "Learium," which was really just Freon. It ended in
bankruptcy, but it is claimed that someone bought the hardware and
built a water steam race car with it, proving that although the concept
worked well enough to set some land speed records for steam cars,
Learium was a total fraud and turbine engines were too inefficient for
use in automobiles. Sure, the turbine works great for land speed
records, but the engine only has to run for 10 minutes, so it is easy
to carry enough water to get that much time out of it. Most people want
a car that runs longer than that.

There is supposed to be an article on a Lear designed steam piston
engine in Car & Driver in 1969. It was said to have six cylinders,
twelve pistons, and generate 500 hp at 1000 psi. Trouble is, it was
Lear who made these claims and he never allowed anyone to take a close
look at the engine.

Back in the 1940s people were experimenting with hydrogen peroxide over
a catalyst bed, sometimes injecting kerosene and water to generate even
more steam. Might be a tad dangerous for use in the family car, though,
and I would bet that the pollutants would be a serious problem.

Despite all these problems, though, I would think it would be much
easier to get a steam engine to work with actual steam than with
compressed air.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

I read somewhere about steam locomotives that operated from a pressure
tank that was filled up at a "charging station", then run until a
refill was needed. Used in mines and other circumstances where
cumbustion was not acceptable. A proven technology that works - but I
wonder about the range. Problem is, steam is a preishable commodity.
Use it without delay or lose it. Compressed air doesn't have that
problem. Air motors are a proven technology as well - but as others
have said, efficiency may leave much to be desirerd. I for one will be
interested to see if the claims made about this compressed air car
will pan out.

David Johnson

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Nov 15, 10:45 am, C J Campbell
wrote:
On 2007-11-13 19:07:50 -0800, Dave said:



Now it appears that someone has come up with the idea of running a
vehicle on compressed air.

Compressed air engines are really just variants on steam engines.
Anybody remember the Freon based solar powered steam car? The idea was
that Freon would be stored in a tank in the car and cycled up to the
roof where it would be heated into steam for powering the car. The
steam would go to the engine and from there the now cooled liquid Freon
would go back to the tank.

There were some guys who took this a step further. They would heat the
Freon with a small burner when the sun was not enough. One guy built an
MG to run this way. He also was working on a 1966 Cadillac which
weighed 5000 lbs. He was going to use an 80 hp diesel to compress Freon
and run the car. He chose Freon over compressed air because it is a
lubricant, which would save wear and tear on moving parts, and the
contracting/expanding cycle of Freon kept you from losing so much heat
energy.

William Lear had a bus and a Monte Carlo powered by a closed circuit
steam turbine engine back in the '70s. However, he never put it into
production because (he claimed) adding expected features like air
conditioning and power windows was extremely complex and more than he
wanted to deal with at the time. The real reason it was never put into
production, of course, was that it used a turbine. The fluid was
something called "Learium," which was really just Freon. It ended in
bankruptcy, but it is claimed that someone bought the hardware and
built a water steam race car with it, proving that although the concept
worked well enough to set some land speed records for steam cars,
Learium was a total fraud and turbine engines were too inefficient for
use in automobiles. Sure, the turbine works great for land speed
records, but the engine only has to run for 10 minutes, so it is easy
to carry enough water to get that much time out of it. Most people want
a car that runs longer than that.

There is supposed to be an article on a Lear designed steam piston
engine in Car & Driver in 1969. It was said to have six cylinders,
twelve pistons, and generate 500 hp at 1000 psi. Trouble is, it was
Lear who made these claims and he never allowed anyone to take a close
look at the engine.

Back in the 1940s people were experimenting with hydrogen peroxide over
a catalyst bed, sometimes injecting kerosene and water to generate even
more steam. Might be a tad dangerous for use in the family car, though,
and I would bet that the pollutants would be a serious problem.

Despite all these problems, though, I would think it would be much
easier to get a steam engine to work with actual steam than with
compressed air.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

I read somewhere about steam locomotives that operated from a pressure
tank that was filled up at a "charging station", then run until a
refill was needed. Used in mines and other circumstances where
cumbustion was not acceptable. A proven technology that works - but I
wonder about the range. Problem is, steam is a preishable commodity.
Use it without delay or lose it. Compressed air doesn't have that
problem. Air motors are a proven technology as well - but as others
have said, efficiency may leave much to be desirerd. I for one will be
interested to see if the claims made about this compressed air car
will pan out.

David Johnson

I don't know the specifics, but Bill Lear tried a steam car back in the
sixties. He was going to sell it to the highway patrol. He built a track and
some cars that were 4 wheel drive. I think he had problems with cylinders
blowing.

Al G

Dave wrote:
On Nov 15, 11:06 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dave wrote in news:97dd61d9-9e9e-46f0-9034-
:

Despite all these problems, though, I would think it would be much
easier to get a steam engine to work with actual steam than with
compressed air.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

No one seems to be designing anything to run on steam anymore -
despite it's being a proven technology that will operate on any source
of heat. Is high maintenence the reason? Or is it high initial cost?

It's a PITA for a car which is why it died out in the early years of the
last century. You had to go out and light the fire 20 minutes before you
went driving. The simple cars like the Stanley had no condensers and you
had to top them up with water after about 30 miles and the cars that
recycled like the White were extremely complex to operate (even the
stanleys were pretty daunting)
The performance was amazing, though and they are smooth and almost silent.
Serpollet held the land speed record several times and that was taken off
them once or twice by electric cars IIRC. In the end the convienience of
the IC engine won out after they were simplified enough to be easy for
almost anyone to use. Steam lasted up to about 1930 for at least one make
(I think it was Doble), White lasted up at least through the first war with
steam (they still exist , of course) and Stanley into the 20s I believe.

Nifty contraptions and beautiful pieces of engineering..

Bertie

I would think that many of the drawbacks could be overcome with modern
control systems. From what I have read the Doble did solve most of the
problems of previous attempts. However, it was more expensive to build
and overcome by the cheapness and convenience of gasolne engines. The
ability to burn any available fuel could make a difference in the
future.

If by any fuel, you mean coal, wood, or cow chips, yeah it might
make a difference if there were no liquid or gas fuels to run in a
normal IC engine whatsoever.

That isn't going to happen.

Steam engines are horribly inefficient compared to an IC engine and
unless you have some sophisticated scrubbers on the smoke stack of
your "any available fuel" burner, polluting as hell; real pollution,
not the CO2 boogy man pollution.

Trains, boats, and big electric generators are the best use of a
steam engine.

Notice none of those have used steam engines for a long time.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Dave wrote:


I read somewhere about steam locomotives that operated from a pressure
tank that was filled up at a "charging station", then run until a
refill was needed. Used in mines and other circumstances where
cumbustion was not acceptable. A proven technology that works - but I
wonder about the range. Problem is, steam is a preishable commodity.
Use it without delay or lose it. Compressed air doesn't have that
problem. Air motors are a proven technology as well - but as others
have said, efficiency may leave much to be desirerd. I for one will be
interested to see if the claims made about this compressed air car
will pan out.

It won't.

Have you ever used air tools?

Notice the huge motor and tank to supply the air for a little, bitty
tool?

Ever noticed how hot the tank and motor get compressing the air?

That's wasted energy.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Nov 16, 12:05 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
And another one!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw6NF...eature=related

Bertie

I wonder how much the powerplant weighed. I also wonder why they moved
the condensor from under the fuselage (as shown in the drawing) to the
top - where it appeared to do a good job of blocking the pilot's view
ahead.

David Johnson

On Nov 15, 10:56 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dave wrote in news:085e256a-0987-4249-b920-
:



Don't be too quick to judge batteries that way. New advances in
lithium-air batteries have come a long way since their inception. The
Tesla electric car is using Lithium-ion batteries which has far less
efficiency, but still making waves. It is not unfeasible in the near
future to have a lithium-oxygen battery to power a light GA aircraft
with the same endurance as gasoline with comparable fuel+engine
weights.

I'm all for electric vehicles - but feel that there needs to be an
order-of-magnitude improvement in battery performance to make them
practical. There have been claims of "revolutionary battery
technologies" for years - but they never seem to pan out.

There has been.

Bertie

If that is so, why can't I buy a viable electric vehicle now? In
related matters, probably the nearest thing to a practical vehicle
that runs on battery power (around town, at least) is a "Pluggable
Hybrid" Many experimenters have been working on modifying hyprid cars
(such as the Toyota Prius) to run on battery power alone in urban use.
The primary change is to install a larger
battery, and to modify the control circuits appropriately. There is at
least one commercial conversion that you can buy today. The auto
manufacturers are "looking into it", but have nothing
for sale as of yet. You can read about it he http://www.calcars.org/

David Johnson

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:24:47 -0800 (PST), Dave wrote
in
:

If that is so, why can't I buy a viable electric vehicle now?


Well, you can, but you won't receive it for a while:

TESLA MOTORS NEWSLETTER
November 2007

WAIT LIST OPENED FOR 2009 MODEL YEAR TESLA ROADSTER
Tesla Motors has closed reservations for the 2008 model year Tesla
Roadster. We have logged more than 600 reservations on the books
and filled capacity for our first-year production run. Interest in
the Roadster remains high, and we appreciate all the enthusiasm
and support.

For those who would still like to purchase a Roadster, we have
opened a wait list for 2009 model year cars. Here's how it works:
Simply visit the Tesla Motors website and complete our wait list
form. A refundable $5,000 will hold your place in line. You may
pay with Master Card, Visa, Discovery, American Express, check, or
wire transfer.

Please keep in mind that we have not yet announced pricing for the
2009 model year car. We expect to be able to update you on
pricing, exterior colors, options, and accessories next year. Join
the wait list now at
http://cts.vresp.com/c/?TeslaMotors/...e55/d5bef8ed4d.


CUSTOMER DRIVES
Our customer drive program continues -- nearly 90 customers have
now claimed some drive time in one of the prototype Roadsters.
Several customers, including Michael "Flea" Balzary of the Red Hot
Chili Peppers, have documented the drives on our blogs.

Find Michael's blog along with submissions from our other
customers on the customer blog page at

http://cts.vresp.com/c/?TeslaMotors/...a824529d0/p=57.

LOS ANGELES AUTO SHOW, NOV. 16 TO 25
Tesla Motors will head out to Los Angeles for the annual LA Auto
Show on November 16 to 25. We'll have one of our second-generation
prototypes on display at the Yokohama booth, and we invite you to
stop by and see us.

It's a great opportunity to see the car up close and chat with
Tesla Motors employees. We hope to see you there.

On Nov 16, 9:11 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 17:24:47 -0800 (PST), Dave wrote
in
:

If that is so, why can't I buy a viable electric vehicle now?

Well, you can, but you won't receive it for a while:

TESLA MOTORS NEWSLETTER
November 2007

WAIT LIST OPENED FOR 2009 MODEL YEAR TESLA ROADSTER
Tesla Motors has closed reservations for the 2008 model year Tesla
Roadster. We have logged more than 600 reservations on the books
and filled capacity for our first-year production run. Interest in
the Roadster remains high, and we appreciate all the enthusiasm
and support.

For those who would still like to purchase a Roadster, we have
opened a wait list for 2009 model year cars. Here's how it works:
Simply visit the Tesla Motors website and complete our wait list
form. A refundable $5,000 will hold your place in line. You may
pay with Master Card, Visa, Discovery, American Express, check, or
wire transfer.

Please keep in mind that we have not yet announced pricing for the
2009 model year car. We expect to be able to update you on
pricing, exterior colors, options, and accessories next year. Join
the wait list now at
http://cts.vresp.com/c/?TeslaMotors/...e55/d5bef8ed4d.

CUSTOMER DRIVES
Our customer drive program continues -- nearly 90 customers have
now claimed some drive time in one of the prototype Roadsters.
Several customers, including Michael "Flea" Balzary of the Red Hot
Chili Peppers, have documented the drives on our blogs.

Find Michael's blog along with submissions from our other
customers on the customer blog page at

http://cts.vresp.com/c/?TeslaMotors/...55/2a824529d0/....

LOS ANGELES AUTO SHOW, NOV. 16 TO 25
Tesla Motors will head out to Los Angeles for the annual LA Auto
Show on November 16 to 25. We'll have one of our second-generation
prototypes on display at the Yokohama booth, and we invite you to
stop by and see us.

It's a great opportunity to see the car up close and chat with
Tesla Motors employees. We hope to see you there.

The Chevrolet Volt is "coming" as well. I even saw a commercial about
it on TV the other night. AFAIK they aren't taking orders yet. Like
all the other "Revolutionary Vehicles" we'll see.
However, I won't hold my breath.

David Johnson

"Dave" wrote

I for one will be
interested to see if the claims made about this compressed air car
will pan out.

Have no fear; they will not.

The physics do not allow the claims to be met.
--
Jim in NC

wrote

Have you ever used air tools?

Notice the huge motor and tank to supply the air for a little, bitty
tool?

And how quickly a tank full of air can be used up, without the compressor
motor running. Very quickly.
--
Jim in NC