JO's gasified 92 Volvo

Joni, I’m sorry but I wasn’t very clear.
What I meant was woodgas is more efficient because of LESS heat loss than running gasoline. Reasons for that described by others.

Edit: Sorry again! Reply not for me :rofl:


Jo, Joni states that the heat losses are lower, he protests to me, I’m guilty :disappointed:

1 Like

All internal combustion engines operate on the principle of the Carnot cycle, according to theoretical calculations, their efficiency cannot be higher than 33% for gasoline engines and 44% for diesel engines. Based on this, I think that at the same speed on the same road, the engine performs the same work, both on gasoline and on generator gas, therefore, if I am driving on gasoline, I will not have problems with the interior heater, but if I food on gas, that is, they are … That is, with the same operation, the engine emits a different amount of heat, respectively, the result of all this is the efficiency of the engine (the efficiency is higher)


I’m siding with Joni on this. If you watch the Project Farm you-tube channel he has a see through plate over the cylinder and shows on different videos the use of many different fuels in a small one cylinder engine. The flame spread for more powerful fuels, because they ignite very fast, generate more heat in a more confine part of the cylinder. He has demonstrated almost anything that will burn used as IC engine fuel. He has not done wood gas as far as I know but it would have a similar burn pattern to the lower powered fuels, so less generated heat, more spread out across the surface and more easily dissipated through the mass of the castings. Shoot me if I’m wrong.


I keep poking at home to run woodgas in the see through engine!!! He has said a few times he likes the idea

I am not offended. I have a ‘thick skin’, as they say. I love to argue. If you show me I am wrong then I will learn something and I will have a better mind than before. I win. :smile:
Do you understand octane ratings for all kind of fuels. a standard measure of a fuel’s ability to withstand compression in an internal combustion engine without detonating.The higher the octane number, the more compression the fuel can withstand before detonating.
So, what is this detonation? This is when an engine makes a bad sound, like a diesel, but in a petrol engine. You know your engine is breaking. But why does this happen? Because the air and fuel mixture is burning too fast and creating a pressure spike. This is bad for engines and wastes fuel.
Here is more discussion.


Let us simplify.
Internal combustion piston engines are heat engines regardless of their cycle types.
The one that most completely converts that fuels heat made energy into true useable shaft power wins.
Currently that is Atkinson cycle type engines in the small: some Honda’s and some and Toyota’s engine applications. Both now at, and above 40% conversion efficiency.
Some of the very large slow marine piston engines exceed this.

Tone dynamic factors in engines and fuels results are what rules in useages.
You can never fix, or fixate, on one factor.
Gasoline engines have conversion improved by many, many small changes. Like offset crank shafts. Toyota storing the previous engine heated coolant in thermal vacumn bottles for the next useage.
And at times they go too far chasing the rabbit as in direct into cylinder injection. Carboning up to unrunnable in under a thousand hours of useage.
Modern diesel engines have improved by lengthening out the injection into three distinct phases now. Yes. A longer softer piston pushing cycle. Better able to be converted into reciprocating mechanical power.

Conversion efficiency is different from effectiveness of usage.
Mazda’s Miller cycle “Sky Active” is for power with least emissions. Combustion bye-products outputs are the GOD all engine manufacturers must kneel down too for the last 50 years. Very unfair. That GOD makes increasing demands. Never ending demands.
And we only have their produced results to work with as base engine to woodgas fuel with.
Hey! We have it great compared to the 1940’s guys.

Choose wisely.
Steve Unruh


Hey we have it great compared to the 1940’s guys. They dreamed to have our factory compression ratios.

Always this though in your woodgas fuels maths:
Multiply by a factor of WF.
Wood Freedom.
Can’t grow fossil coal in my back yard.
Can’t grow natural gas, or petroleum crude in my back yard.
Can’t grow propane in my back yard.
Don’t want to grow old dead tires or pounds and cubic meters of consumer plastics in my backyard.

I, and anyone else with just 2 acres/one hectare can grow fuel woods. That’s enough for 1/3 of a house hold total annual energy needs. Many here on the DOW do this now.
My WF’s are always X3 factors.


Rindert, Steve, Joni, Jo and other friends, you gave good information for processing in my brain, so the engine captures through a wide open throttle the full amount of a mixture of air and wood gas, which contains in addition to combustible gases a large proportion of nitrogen and water vapor , all compressed well and ignited, but due to the large proportion of ballast gases, the final temperature does not rise as high as when running on gasoline, but the mass density of the gases effectively does the job to the exhaust stroke and heat loss is less. This is logical and meaningful to me, thank you all for enlightening my mind.


Allow me one more thought, if the above statements hold, I could easily simulate this by running part of the exhaust back to the intake manifold at my Subaru and this would reduce consumption from the current 9l / 100km to 6l / 100km. It would be interesting to try. ,:grinning::relieved::thinking:


Doesn’t that already happen in the form of EGR emissions control?


I knew about the diesel engine, but not about the Otto engine. always dripping in the background, Kristjan said well, “we are finding out something that people used many years ago”


Mounted the new trunk lid the other day and then
wife and I went for a 100 mile roundtrip yesterday. 50 miles one way is perfect for this hopper size.
We did one extra stop though - but only to check the cleanout rubber cap. Reason? The temp leaving the heatex climbed above 250C, but I found no obvious extra heat or leak down there.
So it seems the only reason is - with the trunk lid mounted, the temp-probe is no longer out in the open. I was surprised to discover the true reading is almost 100C higher than what I’m used to. Last pic shows the probe’s position.
Also, I will have to add to the insulation around the gasifier, because the hayfilter bucket picks up some radiation. It gets armpit warm on that side but still cold to the touch on the opposite side.


Nice job JO, turned out very well with the tailgate.


Good job JO … I like it very much .


JO, you build the neatest looking stuff as always. I would dare to take that to church! Did you have to paint the lid or was it the right color to start with?


Thanks guys!
Don, the car is dark blue and the lid is medium blue, but close enough. My thinking was to paint it black, but I’ll keep it as is, for now.


JO Really neat addition to a clean build. TomC


Since you have a little time to kill how about a nice flame job on that truck.


JO, do you have any problems with the gasifier becoming clogged with soot?
I’m wondering if I have way too big holes in my grate, so much smaller pieces fall through and the gas is poorly reduced, and that’s why it goes so badly on larger pieces of wood, and that it gets so hot.
I’ve looked at yours and @Bobmac 's, and you have much denser grate.