I don't mean the gas is dangerous, I mean that a highly compressed gas in a car could be dangerous in a wreck.

But I think if the bottle was wrapped in kevlar or something, it would be a bit safer...

 

For those in the Northern Ohioish area who want to lend a hand, this is what i have so far for materials.

-the motor will be up being my running motor from my N/A w/ 85K original miles....
(started some minor smokinng so it might as well be the test dumby.)
-going out today to look for a way to control the H2 pressure. Anyone know if a gasoline fuel pressure regualtor might work?
-i also will have access to CNC machines next semester (Jan 5?)


Nevarmore, were are you located? i would like to come by sometime and checkout the propane setup you made.


Not liking this....stupid evaporation

(from the article link posted above)

Since the insulation can't be perfect, the hydrogen will gradually evaporate, typically 1.7 percent per day. This is too fast for a car to sit for months between uses. A tank of compressed hydrogen holding enough to get to a hydrogen station would solve this. If the engine is flexible enough to burn gasoline as well as hydrogen, a half gallon gasoline tank would suffice. Some automobile companies, e.g. BMW, have experimented with vehicles powered by liquid hydrogen. However, hydrogen cannot come into common use until the political obstacles to nuclear expansion are overcome or the technological obstacles to large scale solar energy are overcome. It is unlikely to be used as long as gasoline remains so cheap, i.e. as long as oil remains cheap and fear of global warming does not prevent its use. We hydrogen enthusiasts will just have to wait.


But this is good to know!!!!!

(also from the article)

In terms of energy contained, 9.5 kg of hydrogen is equivalent to 25kg of gasoline ( Peschka 1987). Storing 25 kg of gasoline requires a tank with a mass of 17 kg, whereas the storage of 9.5 kg of hydrogen requires 55kg, (Peschka 1987). Part of the reason for this difference is that the volume of hydrogen fuel is about 4 times greater for the same energy content of gasoline. Although the hydrogen storage vessel is large, hydrogen burns 1.33 times more efficiently than gasoline in automobiles ( Bockris and Wass 1988). In tests a BMW 745h liquid-hydrogen test vehicle with a 75 kg tank and the energy equivalent of 40 liters of gasoline had a cruising range in traffic of 400 km, or a fuel efficiency of 10 km per liter ( Winter 1986).


So if thw H2 burns with about 2.5 times the amount of enegry but needs four times that amount of storage but also burns 1.33 times more efficent, the range wouldnt be all that bad. I dontt except it to go from Florida in back or anything, i just need it to run. I like the fact that it has more than double the power potenial....

 

using some chm 251 notes i thought of another interesting problem. Now the extent of the reaction will be affect when using an ambieant air source rather than bottle O2. The other gases, particularly Nitrogen, might or will react with the hydrogen. I need some one with a bit of a chem background for this next question but, what is the energy difference between H2 and O2 / and H2 and Nitrogen. Ideally, the bonding of the hydrogen and the nitrogen will give off a similiar amount of energy.

another Q is what parts of the ambieant air will not react with the hydrogen?

i think a O2 sensor of some sort might be needed for this.

 

the mazda hr-x had 80% of the power that the motor of the same size would have it run on gasoline. Which isnt that bad considering it was the first one.

something that has come up is backfiring. This is what is having me reconsider using the carb setup. Static electricity will cause H2 to detonate. (Remember the Hindinburg?) If some static charge occured say when the secondaries open and the H2 goes, that might ruinn the carb. So, how can you inject hydrogen? i am thinking that keeping as dense as possible might be a way to go. Liquid H2 cant be injected seeing that it can freeze air....so i am sure it wouldnt be good for the motor, but it theoretically would cool the motor down considerably, right?

anyway, the backfiring will need to be worked out because it will happen regardless.

after some internet searching, the low end torque is going to suck.

 

No more dangerous then any other gas. Probably less so.

 

Well I'm just inside Cuyahoga Falls near Stow. I may have misspoke or you may have misread, but I do not have a propane setup I've simply done my homework on them. The use of propane intriged me so I went out and found out what I could on it. My Lincoln is the perfect candidate for a propane transplant when I get the money to pull her out of storage and give her the workover she needs.

Hit me up at jbartels@kent.edu and I'll pass on the links I can find and fill you in on the propane system. Roughly, you use a specialzed carburetor to mix the propane and the incoming air. Thats about it. Most of the work is in installing the tanks and finding a place to fill up.

I would imagine that you'd be able to use many of the parts to handle propane to handle the hydrogen. In both cases you are using a gaseous fuel which is stored as a liquid. There is a device to regulate the pressure, and something to control the fuel flow while allowing the fuel to vaporize into the intake stream.

As for the FPR, I would NOT use anything made for gasoline (low pressure liquid) to deal with hydrogen (high pressure gas/liquid). This question concerns me because it seems like you're worrying about very minimal details and/or you don't understand things enough to proceed safely. No offense intended of course. To me it seems that you should be checking out the hot librarian and be neck deep in pencil erasings figuring out how many units of hydrogen you need per unit of air, then figuring out the flow rate of your engine (the 12a is 477cfm at 100% VE IIRC), determining what pressures you need to maintain to keep the hydrogen liquefied, reviewing similar systems etc etc. Having done that, go find out what CSU requires to get the school to sponsor your project because theres no sense in paying for it yourself if someone else will. Then you can go shop for parts and plan how you physically need to hook things up. Finally once you have everything documented you can get greasy. If you planned things well it should all come right together, if not at least you have something to work from if it doesn't go right.

 

i need someone's opinion to make sure that my assumation is correct.

Material Compatibility

Metals

Aluminium Satisfactory
Brass Satisfactory
Copper Satisfactory
Ferritic Steels (e.g. Carbon steels) Satisfactory but risk of embrittlement by hydrogen.
Stainless Steel Satisfactory but risk of embrittlement by hydrogen.
Titanium Not satisfactory, risk of embrittlement

Plastics

Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Acceptable but strong rate of permeation.
Polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE) Satisfactory
Vinylidene polyfluoride (PVDF) (KYNAR™) Satisfactory
Polyamide (PA) (NYLON™) Satisfactory
Polypropylène (PP) Acceptable but strong rate of permeation.

Elastomers

Buthyl (isobutene - isoprene) rubber (IIR) Satisfactory
Nitrile rubber (NBR) Satisfactory
Chloroprene (CR) Satisfactory
Chlorofluorocarbons (FKM) (VITON™) Satisfactory
Silicon (Q) Acceptable but strong rate of permeation.
Ethylene - Propylene (EPDM) Satisfactory

Lubricants

Hydrocarbon based lubricant Satisfactory
Fluorocarbon based lubricant Satisfactory



I think that means the standard block which is made from a ferritic steel will not get along with hydrogen. Meaning, i will not have the means to make a new block out of a different material

 

so does anyone know the material composition of the 13b rotor, various seals and the housings?

 

You know, this is the kind of thing I want to do when I get into engineering. Right now I'm still trying to get my AS in Automotive Technology (everything is piston based in class, though. Arg) but I'm been kicking around ideas to create a hydrogen setup...

Although I want to go the lazy route and see if I can bum an engine off of Mazda for test drive / test market purposes, the issues with hydrogen injection are kind of neat to ponder.

I like the idea of an onboard H2 / O2 splitter, which while you will not be able to make the same level of gas, most alternators will be powerful enough to absorb some of the torque in higher RPMs (say, freeway cruising) to perhaps extend your range in the same manner that hybrids extend range in city by using power breaking (usually power that is usually not needed).

There have been some talk somewhere of materials that can safely absorb hydrogen with a steel-wool mesh for safety containment (I think), that might help with the storage.

An onboard 'recharger' that you can plug in would rock in a final version, making gas stations near-obsolete (although you still pay for it, it'd be at your electric bill, or solar panal installation is applicable ) Keep us updated on the project, I know I for one am *very * interested (dream car being my first gen with a renesis 4-rotor setup running Hydrogen right now...)

 

if i can get the motor to work properly on H2 then there really isnt too much stopping me from a 4 rotor Hydro motor. But interant problem i think i found is the standard housing and rotor will absob the H2 and become brittle like the article above stated. Meaning i would have to machine a new everything.

 

"anyway, the backfiring will need to be worked out because it will happen regardless.
after some internet searching, the low end torque is going to suck."

The Article I read, Mazda had placed the injectors or the inlet port lower in the or in a more retarded area of the rotor cycle. This helped with the backfiring issue.

Material Compatability???

What article did you get this info from? Is it on the web and if so could you provide a link? I am assuming the results your are getting is if these materials are used to "STORE" hydrogen. The results come from long term exposure to H2 and the allowance of permeation of the H2. Any gas will permeate over time. In the world of Vacuum we have the permation rates on file of all materials. Nasa also list the permation/outgassing rates of everything from duck tape to Titanium. This Material compatability article probable is not referring to introducing H2 and O2, compressing and igniting for brief moments.

(the 12a is 477cfm at 100% VE IIRC), determining what pressures you need to maintain to keep the hydrogen liquefied, reviewing similar systems etc etc.

Could the flow of gasses be controlled with a Mass Flow Controller??? I believe so. We only need the CFM requirements (as listed by nevarmore) the Gas to be used (for calibration), the upstream pressure (i believe it was somewhere around 450?????) and the downstream pressure (in your case it would be torr or inches of mercury as the spinning rotor creates a vacuum, what torr?? I am not sure. Some of the tech heads could tell us the answer). www.Hastings-inst.com has all the MFCs you could shake a stick at. Talk to Will Harrison.

Your tank issue is solved by this company www.magnasteyr.com. They already make a Hydrogen tank that is used in the 745h by BMW.

Keep going, your doing great. This thread makes me visit this sight everyday to see your progress. If you get it running, I'm coming to Ohio to see it.

 

As usual, because of wayy to many sharp blows to the head, I think that the internal face of the housings are plated with something. I'm really not sure about that. Will you have access to the equipment to chrome plate the inside of your engine?? Assuming of course that chrome is not permeable and will not be brittle.

With the wording that you posted, there is a chance that will make the steel brittle. The important consideration is how much hydrogen over how much time leads to what chance of making the steel how brittle. You also said earlier that you're goal is to get a running engine. Would it be acceptable to get it running and see how long it takes to make the steel brittle?? Risky because I'd imagine that brittle steel will lead to the engine fragging itself in a dangerous and spectacular fashion.

I finally got around to getting those propane links. Most of them originated from this google search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

I agree with jhammons suggestion. A quick look at the application guide from Hastings appears to indicate that they make exactly what you need. A widget to meter and mix a gaseous fuel and air in very precise increments. They would also seem to be computer controlled, a plus since later on you could advance the project to control the fuel flow as accurately as a gasoline system.

Holy hell! This google: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...on&btnG=Search ;
turns up this link: http://www.meritworld.com/MeritAcade...nstatement.htm an organization dedicated to helping students advance hydrogen as a fuel.

 

This is the link i was refuring. I hope i am wrong in my understanding of the metal being brittle. Who does chroming? Hmm...more interenet. I am going to go talk the SAE group today. My friend is their securatary and they are always trying to find unquie projects. Plus, they have $$$$.

 

i have a little side project up my sleeve too (i seriuosly have too much free time...) that when i get done will be great. Then when i get the H2 project running, ill intergrate both together and get something awesome!

 

Here is the phrase from your link that is essentially your "Money shot"

"The collected data mainly concern high pressure applications at ambiant temperature and the safety aspect of material compatibity rather than the quality aspect."

Air Liquide is referring to pressure vessels for storing the H2. If you were using H2 in the more practicle sense this would be of upmost importance. However, you are not storing the H2 in the engine, rather injecting and igniting. The H2 tank that you need to store the gas needs to adhere to this requirements. The link that I provided earlier takes all that out of your hands and places it with the manufacturer. OR if you are going to build your own tank you merely need to find an ASME certified pressure vessel manufacturer in your area.

Just to strengthen the argument, Aeromatic Hydrocarbons (good ol' 91 octane) is some of the most intrusive vapors out there. I used to work with a polymer coating that was impervious to (would withstand) any chemical attack out there with the exception of Aeromatic Hydrocarbons at 25C. I could've sold this product to the automotive industry like water in the desert if it had stood up to gasoline.

My two cents??? work on the backfiring issue and the injector issue.

BTW I spoke with Hastings. The problem with any MFC is that it can't cycle like our gas injectors cycle. There needs to be some sort of cut off if an MFC is going to work. The H2 needs to be injected at the crit time in order run properly.........correct me if I am wrong.

Chrome Plating
If you were to try to chrome plate the inside. You would have to find out the tollerances for the insides. The Apex seal and the Chamber have a tolerance that would need to be adhered to. So if you add so many microns of chrome plating to the chamber what have you done to, or what will you do to the apex seal clearance?? You would have to have the entire insides milled out say 5 microns and then find a chrome plater that does precision coating that could keep uniformity to put 5 microns back. Good luck, all you Harley chromers out there have seen numourous occasions whe you couldn't get chrome into a corner. The electolysis physical properties is such that the molecule will be attracted to one side of a corner or the other leaving a bare spot in the corner. Chromers call it Shadowing. Another lead would be to try the Vaccuum coaters. The problem vaccuum coating (sometimes called sputtering) is that the molecules travel in a straight line (mean free path) and adhere just were they hit the substrate creating a line of sight coating. Again the coners or whatever would have a shadow.

 

thanks for the clarification on the H2 and metal thing. That means everything is a bit easier. (if that can be said...) I think chrome plating isnt going to happen. Ill have the surfaces refinished for good measure though. Now comes the question of the H2 getting into the intake. I need to find a company that specializes with H2 and jetting it. Also, the methods used to run propane might also prove effective (as in the pressure regualtion). The carb is not going to work because the back fire problem will be way too great. Seeing a small amount of static will cause the H2 to burn, id rathar avoid using the carb setup. (too many moving parts that can cause static discharge) Maybe if i grounded it good enough it would work, but i would rathar not go that route unless absolutly nessacary.


anywho back to C3H8 (propane) and H2 comparison:



Hydrogen Gas Properties
Molecular Weight
Molecular weight : 2.016 g/mol

Solid phase
Melting point : -434.2 °F
Latent heat of fusion (1,013 bar, at triple point) : 13.9 kcal/kg

Liquid phase
Liquid density (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 4.43 lb/ft3
Liquid/gas equivalent (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 844 vol/vol
Boiling point (1.013 bar) : -423 °F
Latent heat of vaporization (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 108.58 kcal/kg

Critical point
Critical temperature : -399.9 °F
Critical pressure : 188.25898 psi
Critical density : 1.878 lb/ft3

Triple point
Triple point temperature : -434.6 °F
Triple point pressure : 1.04427 psi

Gaseous phase
Gas density (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 0.081 lb/ft3
Gas density (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 0.005 lb/ft3
Compressibility Factor (Z) (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 1.001
Specific gravity (air = 1) (1.013 bar and 21 °C (70 °F)) : 0.0696
Specific volume (1.013 bar and 21 °C (70 °F)) : 191.9973 ft3/lb
Heat capacity at constant pressure (Cp) (1 bar and 25 °C (77 °F)) : 3.542 Btu/(lb.°F)
Heat capacity at constant volume (Cv) (1 bar and 25 °C (77 °F)) : 2.559 Btu/(lb.°F)
Ratio of specific heats (Gamma:Cp/Cv) (1 bar and 25 °C (77 °F)) : 1.384259
Viscosity (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 0.0000058 lb/(ft.s)
Thermal conductivity (1.013 bar and 0 °C (32 °F)) : 0.0972 Btu.ft/(h.ft2.°F)

Miscellaneous
Solubility in water (1.013 bar and 0 °C (32 °F)) : 0.00012 lb/ft3
Concentration in air : 0.5 vol ppm
Autoignition temperature : 1040 °F

Propane Gas Properties

Molecular Weight
Molecular weight : 44.096 g/mol

Solid phase
Melting point : -305.9 °F
Latent heat of fusion (1,013 bar, at triple point) : 22.7 kcal/kg

Liquid phase
Liquid density (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 36.333 lb/ft3
Liquid/gas equivalent (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 311 vol/vol
Boiling point (1.013 bar) : -43.7 °F
Latent heat of vaporization (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 101.65 kcal/kg
Vapor pressure (at 21 °C or 70 °F) : 126.18283 psi

Critical point
Critical temperature : 206 °F
Critical pressure : 616.4104 psi

Gaseous phase
Gas density (1.013 bar at boiling point) : 0.151 lb/ft3
Gas density (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 0.119 lb/ft3
Compressibility Factor (Z) (1.013 bar and 15 °C (59 °F)) : 1.0193
Specific gravity (air = 1) (1.013 bar and 21 °C (70 °F)) : 1.55
Specific volume (1.013 bar and 21 °C (70 °F)) : 8.698026 ft3/lb
Heat capacity at constant pressure (Cp) (1 bar and 25 °C (77 °F)) : 0.406 Btu/(lb.°F)
Heat capacity at constant volume (Cv) (1 bar and 25 °C (77 °F)) : 0.358 Btu/(lb.°F)
Ratio of specific heats (Gamma:Cp/Cv) (1 bar and 25 °C (77 °F)) : 1.134441
Thermal conductivity (1.013 bar and 0 °C (32 °F)) : 0.0087 Btu.ft/(h.ft2.°F)

Miscellaneous
Solubility in water (1.013 bar and 20 °C (68 °F)) : 0.00478 lb/ft3
Autoignition temperature : 878 °F


also there are two vapor pressure maps for propane and H2. By looking at the charts, i think that propane components (heavy duty) can handle the H2 regualtion. I am going to look closer after this post to make sure that i am not an idiot.

 

I think the intake is going to be a slightly altered version of the stock one. I can tap the injectors into it whatever point is best for the backfiring reduction. Seeing the stock fuel rail will be removed, along with most of the other jargon in the car, ill have room for any H2 controllers. (i would like to reduce the amount of hosings used {for saftey reasons}) Plus stock N/A parts are cheap!

 

Could one of the Hastings injectors be utilized like a TBI setup??

TBI's and carburetors are less finicky than port injecton (or its rotary equivalent), because the fuel simply needs to be doled out at a constant rate based on air speed (which implies air volume). Port injection has to dole out a specific volume, over a specific time, based on airflow all at a specific point in the engine cycle.

There are a few ways to handle TBI. The simplest, but least tunable and possibly damaging, is to assume that the engine is flowing so much air at a given RPM and for that volume of air it needs X% to be fuel. If you get this wrong the engine dies, runs out of control, or blows itself up.

Next up in complexity is a MAF system, which uses engine RPM and a reading from a MAF sensor to look up or solve for the fuel. This is better because it knows, within a certain range, how much air is there and again injects so much fuel.

A full on o2 system is not really useful for TBI, by the time the sensor figures out how rich/lean the engine is and adjusts the injector its likely that conditions have changed. Again things can go badly.

 

I remember reading somewhere that mazda actually uses some kind of clearcoat or laquer on the inside of the rotor housings to make them stand up to the constant scrub of the apex seals. It was on a machining site that listed the removal of the coating that makes re-machined rotaries have such a short lifespan.

I just wish I had the link on hand... :/

 

The Hastings MFC Cycles really slowly. In automotive sense the opening or closing would be considered "slow as molasses on a cold day" You can turn the dial on a Hastings (or any MFC) controller and watch the CFM slowly come down to where you turned the dial as the pirani closes. It is really slow, I am not sure what I was thinking when I mentioned it earlier. All the bad things Nevarmore described would happen with an MFC. The selling point to an mfc is if you need to introduce an exact CFM into a vacuum vessal or furnace or something like that. In other words you need 27cfm of Nitrogen, Not 26.7cfm or 27.3cfm but 27cfm.

This is the best thread.

 

Hmm since we don't have a budget, how fast to MFC's turn on? If they open and close fast enough you could have them flowing say 5 CFM each and just turn them on idividually as needed.

 

since when do we not have a budget?

 

you should use straight up liquid hydrogen!

That outta give a pretty big KICK!

 

the tempratures at that pressure are so damn cold plus there no way for the liquid to not turn into gas if it works.

 

there was a project done here (University of Canterbury New Zealand) a few years ago they found the best way was to inject the H2 directly into the engine with a custom made injector on the houising, the injector is basically a slit across the width of the housing. The timming of the slit was one of the more important aspects to get it running right and safely ie no h2 mixed with air in the inlet tracts