Hello.

 

Before I discuss. If anyone is not familiar with "cymatic". Sound waves cause shapes in vibrating boards altering by pitch.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtiSCBXbHAg

 

Now imagine a fuel injection system where less fuel was used in combination with sound frequencies most conducive to spreading the misty fuels.

 

So instead of the sand/salt in video on a 2D surface, we are discussing fuel particles spreading by sound waves in a 3D plane.

 

If this idea works it could be a billion dollar one, but I have other pursuits. How is it faulted? Has there been publishings on effects of sound on gasses?

 

This idea seems to make sense to me. I am thinking the explosions could be designed for efficiency. Perhaps this sound wave helps direct the explosions by shaping its fuel.

 

I am interested in knowing if any research has been done in this area, or any insights.

 

I am a Soil Engineer, but would love to try this if nobody else does.

Edited June 9, 201411 yr by barfbag

Welcome soil engineer I look forward to some interesting posts.

 

As regards combustion, why would you want to spread out the fuel?

 

Boiler Plant that burn fuel would certainly benefit as the heat of controlled combustion is transferred in the heat exchanger.

 

But combustion engines need to burn the fuel as quickly as possible since the wanted energy transfer is not thermal but mechanical in the work done by the expanding gases. Thus concentration is required. Timing also plays a part.

 

Edited June 9, 201411 yr by studiot

A similar route, naturaly aspirated, no injection seems more promising. Gasification (or misting) frequency is not audio, but near 2MHz

The wrongly called 'ultrasonic' 5 micron droplets fogger transducers are cheap and available at many vendors.

 

----> [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKb7KWTYgdo] -remove brackets-

Thank you for replies.

 

I saw this helping in several ways. I thought a smaller amount of fuel might spread out and explode more efficiently if coupled with sound wave compressions.

 

I hoped it would affect the speed in which a chamber could be filled with gas, and also hoped an explosions efficiencies could be altered in this way..

 

It is just a concept that is bothering me.

 

I have wondered about the use of Cymatics coupled with various science pursuits, and another area I could see this is in the recent return of "Cold fusion/LENR" The Widom/Larsen Theory of it describes the Nickel absorbing so much Hydrogen in advance that it forms droplets in a similar manner a soaked sponge might have drops form on its surface. I wonder if Cymatics could help improve the outputs.

 

Forgive the quick reference to Cold Fusion/LENR. I follow the updates on it with interest though. I know many here would consider that Junk Science, but this thread is about Cymatics/Sound.

Yes you said you wanted it to spread out, but why do you think that will increase the explosion?

 

And even if it does why do you think that will help an engine that depends upon the expansion of gas?

 

The smaller the start volume the bigger the final expnasion and the more the work that can be extracted.

 

This is the reverse situation from heating a working fluid in a boiler or heat exchanger.

@ Studiot,

 

Despite being a Soil Engineer. I am mostly a glorified driver heading from property to property or have others do it. I am not a gas or sound expert, and am more than a few years out of University.

 

You said

The smaller the start volume the bigger the final expnasion

 

 

 

So my question to that is, could the start volume of the gas be separated into smaller areas by using standing sound waves.

 

It seems like consensus is it would not be worth effort to try, but it is one of those experiments I'd love to try someday.

Not my forte, but it doesn't seem unreasonable that spreading out the right amount of fuel, with more surface area, with the right amount of air (stoichiometric ratio) might lead to a more complete burn and better efficiency with perhaps less pollution, and the quicker it can be done should be advantageous also, as it could be better timed with the cycle of the pistons. So, if in fact that is the case, perhaps the right sound waves would help accomplish this better than existing means alone. It may be worth investigating if it hasn't been already.

Actually he does have a point studiot, better atomization leads to more efficient combustion.

 

Most efficient fuel injection systems are going away from throttle body into tuned runner injection to port injection or even direct chamber injection as on diesel engines. This is done to avoid the knock-out of fuel particles as the air accelerates through the runners.

 

The point of combustion is not to have the fastest explosion possible, that leads to knocking unless initial timing is retarded severely. Higher octane gasoline actually slows the combustion allowing for timing to optimize power extraction.

 

Maybe John C can provide some further insight into the combustion process, or do we have an automotive engineer in the house ?

 

Actually he does have a point studiot, better atomization leads to more efficient combustion.

 

Yes indeed that is true.

 

But overall machine efficiency (and therefore fuel economy) is measured in terms of heat or work out against the calorific value of the fuel, not in terms of how well the fuel burns.

 

What do you think of my distinction between a boiler and an internal combustion engine?

One produces heat, the other work.

 

Not only this but the IC engine has a large speed variation, so time available for fuel distribution varies with speed.

Is the proposed method using sound capable of accomodating this?

 

So I am querying whether it would be more appropriate to consider this for boilers.

 

 

Yes comments from a mechanical engineer would be welcome, by why restrict to auto and? why not also turbines, gas engines, oil engines etc?

 

It may be of interest to note that before loudpeakers were invented there was a device called the ionophone that performed the reverse operation.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en-GB&source=hp&q=ionophone&gbv=2&oq=ionophone&gs_l=heirloom-hp.3..0j0i10l9.1562.4343.0.5812.9.9.0.0.0.0.140.1048.1j8.9.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-hp..0.9.1048.DaYQEsg3jH8

Edited June 9, 201411 yr by studiot

Sounds like a Thesis opportunity for some Chemistry student...

 

@ Studiot,

 

I agree this could apply to many chemical and nuclear processes if possible. This is merely a curiousity to me, but could have realworld applications if the effects are present.

 

I think experimental data might be required to solve this because I have not been able to find much reading on this except to now know someone has suggested something similar in the past. I hope I can find the research.

Is this serious?

The video shows that the changes in the pattern take place over several seconds.

That's obviously far too slow to be relevant to engine combustion which happens in milliseconds.

Is this serious?

The video shows that the changes in the pattern take place over several seconds.

That's obviously far too slow to be relevant to engine combustion which happens in milliseconds.

However in the video those are solid particles of sand on a flat surface. Gaseous molecules may respond faster, relative to the correct frequency. Definitely worth trying to see.

Edited June 10, 201411 yr by Elite Engineer

The point remains, the molecules in a gas are already traveling at roughly the (local) speed of sound.

There simply isn't time for this to have much effect.

@ John C,

 

So you think particles moving almost as fast as sound cannot be influenced by sound itself? I am sure volume and other factors must enter into speed of shape. It seems like something worth exploring.

I'm sure that things can only react as fast as they can mix and that is limited by the speed at which they move.

Can you come up with a mechanism where sound helps, for example, fuel on the right of a cylinder react with air that's on the left?