Horsepower ratings

Small Engines Charcoal Gasification
#21

No actually your response was good and factual.
And farther above you even inferred that maybe fuel gas enhancement would not be so much about engine power but fuel use economy.

But here is the concern here on the DOW Justin.
Folks take existing engines already dedicated to a specific power working.
Say an electrical generator.
A road driving vehicle.
Their gasoline; their diesel gives them THIS. XXX
Now how can they make woodgas; make charcoal gas, give them the closest to the same XXX?
Sorry Charlie, you cannot.

Here take this. IF you converted either of these system to say spec propane. You should not be surprised it could not do the same working (developed, deliverable horsepower) as your previous gasoline or diesel.

But you really need those previous produced electrical watts; or loads towing over the mountains that you previously had . . . .
Then three routes only:
Make that DIY produced fuel gas more engine powering powerful.
Make the engine produce more power on the DIY gas that you can make.
Just change out your engine power maker to make the power you truly need on the DYI gas you can make.

Number three get you done working NOW. Use a bigger engine. The Dodge V-10 pickup guys.
Number 2 can be done but will limit you you then once engine optimized just using that single fuel gas. Racing engine. Be expensive. Drive up engine maintenance costs. Shorten engine service life from your pressure temperatures boosting’s. A former Forman of mine $$$$ forcing his pickup’s 351 to pull as well as factory stock 460’s towing his fifth-wheeler. Just 'cause he wanted to prove a point.

Very few choosing option number 1; make a better fuel gas; ever do anything truly useable down at a realistic DIY level. Geek-gassers.
Most of those fly off into rare expensive catalysts. Undoable pressures and temperatures. Four stage purifying/filtering. Even pure oxygen fed gasifying. Moderna-gassers.
But now I do know one guy says he’s making low-low, near no CO2 woodgas. Nearly all converted to fuel CO gasses. Simply. Only way to truly tell is applying his system to different engines now.
S.U.

3 Likes
#22

Hi Steve, definitely a number of ways to go about it for sure! The power loss through char gas isn’t really a big deal to me, I totally understand that if you want one of these systems it’s just something you have to live with. I think my main original question came mostly from the curiosity of how much power difference was noticed between a system with a water drip and one without. The horsepower rant was more me trying to take what I’ve learned through a schooling to try and clear up a few common misconceptions about horsepower vs torque and what those numbers mean in the real world.

I fully expect and am totally fine with the power loss, I had recently stumbled down the water drip rabbit hole and was mostly curious was kind of power/ charcoal consumption results were noticed vs a non water drip system.

1 Like
#23

Tom, torque is simply rotational force. In a reciprocating piston engine we convert linear force to rotation force by the crankshaft, I’m sure you know all this already but just bare with me. I use the wrench analogy because it’s something easy to visualize. Everybody has experienced pulling really hard on a wrench but the bolt just won’t turn. In that scenario you are putting out a great deal of pulling force, converted to torque through the wrench, however so long as that bolt does not move or rotate we cannot call that work, what we call that instead is effort.

What electric motors and engines and hydraulic motors have is what we call rolling torque, it’s a maximum torque output that they can produce while in motion. Have you ever had a rusty bolt that was tight the whole way coming out? You’re exerting a rolling torque, motors and engines have a maximum amount of torque that they can put out before they will stall. This is typically the torque rating given on engines and motors.

2 Likes
#24

You reasoning here is why I chose for my first wk build to go in the toyota. Factory 22r, 98hp on gasoline. Previose freshened up 22r with aftermarket power adders, 120hp on gasoline. Engine swap to healthy built v8 sbc 320hp on gasoline. If I have a reduction in wood power by up to 50%, I will still gross more hp then the stock engine ever put out! Thus in my mind the truck should still move along just fine at it’s curb weight plus gassifier around 2500lbs. Tire wrecking capabilities will be hindered yes, but the larger performance engine should be just fine to move the truck along well enough!

4 Likes
#25

I remember looking at a chart, from the days gone by, that showed as the the RPM were lowering, the gas power curve was getting closer to the gasoline power curve.

Gas is more of a make do tech, IMHO. :grinning:

2 Likes
#26

1: per definition there is little difference between “woodgas” and “chargas”
2: effective amounts of combustible gasses in the mixture going in the combustion chamber, optimal mixed with sufficient oxygen , delivers the shaftpower

3: know your gas, know how to balance, know the effects on combustion from different mixtures

So far all my stock small engines ( with gasifiers) have been outperforming the standard carburated versions. ( with gasoline )

If your engine runs satisfying for you with your gas/gasifier then thumbs up, well done, good for you, 


If you are a geek, as me, you don’t believe others without making the obvious mistakes by yourself,
You make mistakes, attack gasifier myths, you observe every ping/knock/boum
 you build/rebuild and enjoy every moment of it


At the end you will find that many of these experiments have been done before by others, written down in old books
 but the smile you got from doing it all yourself will last forever


To topic:
If you don’t take away the restrictions that prevent a free flowing gas getting in your engine, you’l have some performance loss

If you do add some “water” drip or “condensate” drip you’l have a more potent gas ( lets call it “less nitrogen” mix) the water will convert to hydrogen, helping on the flamespeed/ignition timing
However more Co and less Co2 in the gas gives most power effect. ( Co has more power per volume as hydrogen under same conditions )

Old books describe the use of “forced induction” with no powerloss at all


Plenty of already running examples out here on DOW, i admire each of them builds/builders/users
It gives me a “kick” as “dang, have to try that myself”

Now i have to get outta bed and start doing


6 Likes
#27

That was a good explanation Kristijan.
Bob

1 Like
#28

You are so right on that comment. I like to check things out for my self.
Bob

3 Likes
#29

I enjoyed your explanation Justin. I’m old, but not too old to learn things. What ever knowledge I have comes from being a drag racer in the ancient past so all my understanding is related to that specific activity. I’m not one of the mavens here. I’m still reluctantly being dragged away from the idea that supplementing gas in the reactor is a good plan with anything but H2O. With weather now permitting I am planning to move my efforts to the engine end of the fuel hose. I need to get away from working totally with a single cylinder generator and work up something with a little more flexibility and far as working with timing. Haven’t had much interest in driving on wood because I seldom drive at all but all these SWEM guys are creating an itch I’ll probably have to scratch. Anyway, my advise is stick a nozzle in a sealed container of sized charcoal and burn off the gas. It a simple thing but kind of like trying an opiate. Gets real hard to stop.

5 Likes
#30

Sounds like the woodgas addiction is rearing its ugly (?) head again. Better be careful.

1 Like
#31

Too late for me Steve. I’ve got a head full of ideas and I can’t let the pressure build too much. That would just be ugly.

#32

Maybe there is a third option.
Torified wood still retains 90% of the energy content of the original raw wood.

Its not charcoal but its more predictable than raw wood

I wager I can build a cross draft that can crack any remaining tars running on this fuel. I am going to give it a shot in this seasons run of tests


4 Likes
#33

The comparison is probably incorrect but you’re basically making brands on purpose?

#34

150 hp and 5250 Lbs ft. of torque.

2 Likes
#35

That’s been around for a long time. A bit hard to do but should be doable. If I recall correctly, the wood will be water proof because some of the tar coats the surface layer. There is some outdoor preserved wood being treated this way.

#36

William, I love old steam engines! Seriously have had an obsession with steam for years. However those old piston steam engines make all that torque at about 200-300 rpm (I believe in the video you showed it was stated it made 171 hp, 5000lb/ft at 180rpm), which is why they were so terribly slow (that and their mammoth weight). They are so cool and I love them but at the end of the day you can do the same amount of work with that engine that you could do with a 150hp Honda Civic engine, it’s no wonder they went out of style. You see those videos of the steam tractors having a tug of war with newer 500hp modified John Deere’s and the steam tractor annihilates them all, but that’s more to do with the fact that the steam tractor weighs 20,000 to 30,000 lbs! The 500hp John Deere after transmission, differential and possible even final drive gears is actually putting well over 5000lb/ft of torque to the ground.

#37

Hi All.
I just finished up the Spring garden rototilling. Usually five spaced day(s) out successive passes to get the dirt dried. The weeds and early grasses growth broken up, dried and shaken out the roots soil/dirt.
And each pass going successively deeper.
Takes rolling continually applied power, and push down weight to do this.

I’ve miss-spoke and said the cast iron bore slant cylinder Intek I/C B&S engine on this tiller is 7.5 hp. It is actully rated 7.0 hp. And at the RPM I run it is probably only producing, delivered 5 hp.
The low down bolt on counter weights on this system weigh ~30 pounds.
Now replace that work-force-down weight with a small charcoal gasifier system. 'Aught to power enough. Others have done this now. Successfully.

So put me in the column of those saying only worked/working applied power is what counts.
Ha! Ha! And easy enough with this tiller configuration to replace out; and bolt on with a larger 10.5 hp rated engine.

Plan ahead. Think ahead. Leave your options open.
Steve unruh

5 Likes