What methods have been tried to combat the loss of engine power.
How large is the power loss of a gas engine with a coal gas generator?
Compared to gasoline.
1 Like
Joni,
Do not compare gasoline, to producer gas. I know the place you are coming from but it is apples and oranges.
The cheapest thing to do is get a bigger engine. When gasoline is expensive, then big engines are free.
1 Like
Dualfuel,
I have very high taxes on large engines in my country … Moreover, the price of large engines practically does not fall due to liquefied gas (propane), it is very popular in our country and costs half the price of gasoline.
1 Like
High compression ratio, turbo charger or super charger.
You lose %40 between gasoline and producer gas.
It’s meaningless though. You cannot run your gasoline engine at wide open throttle.
You can run wide open with producer gas.
Do you know what density of charge is?
5 Likes
Hi Joni, you can figure about a 25% loss in power at the very best, if you do the gasification in your gasifer correctly.
Advancing the timing correctly on your engine this is a slow burning gas.
Making the richest gases possible and mix with the correct air to gas ratio for your engine to run on.
Also running the gasifer at its best efficiency with out over heating it, burning up the gases you made.
The more heat you build fire tube to handle with out over heating your gasifer the better.
By adding the right amount of oxygen/air and moisture in the charcoal at the nozzles to make rich gas. This because the white hot charcoal fire lobe runs out of oxygen/air in the reduction zone and the hot wet gases pass through the charcoal that is not burned up in the bottom of the gasifer at the grate or grateless. There must be some charcoal reserve left over.
If it is not done correctly you will have a higher lose of power in your engine.
Bob
1 Like
Personally, I immediately started working on reverse process gasifiers for wood, type Imbert. And as you know, the chemical composition of gas differs from gasifiers of direct and transverse types, so I want to know about the capacity of such a gas? My car has a power drop of approximately 30%. What about you?
1 Like
Bobmac,
I already wrote that I drove about 80,000 km in a car with an Imbert gas generator and I know all the conditions you listed. I just wanted to ask if there are any other methods besides turbocharging, intercooling, setting a larger ignition angle, etc. that I have not encountered?
2 Likes
This is actually excellent.
You are gasifying to minimized the atmospheric air in. This reduces the end result nitrogen dilution. Stronger fuel gas. More power.
Doing this without HEAT making and conserving it is easy to fool yourself with powerful tars still pyrolysis “gas”. You WILL tar up the engine on still cold and cooling down cycles.
Here #1 just uses a bigger engine for the needed power.
Here #2 do explore to difficult starting cranking more advanced spark timing. When you have to manually un-advance to crank start you have defined your limits. Deferent engine respond differently. Many factors in play.
Here #3 use a more modern electronic gasoline port fuel injected engine. These will have the much larger flowing intakes, valves and exhausts. More in and out of bulky wood/char composite gasses, the more power.
Two of these are BruceJ.'s effective in-cylinder fuel/air charge densities. 70-80% effective filling versus a restricted carbureted engines at best 50-60% cylinder filling.
Regards Steve Unruh
3 Likes
Dualfuel,
I understand your idea about charge density 
This is familiar to me. Let’s talk better about the compression ratio. Tell me, to what is the maximum limit, do you know of cases, of raising the compression ratio for automobile engines?
2 Likes
Joni,
Look at the Kalle high Performance charcoal producer.
There is one way you have not mentioned.
Take the exhaust heat and turn it into higher volatility gas.
Remember thermodynamics… efficiency lies in the difference in temperature between two resovoirs. The hotter the resovoirs, the more power.
1 Like
Hi Joni, misunderstanding on your question sorry.
Bob
Steve,
what is pitch in gas, I know, I’m not a beginner … Another question is with the heating of the incoming air, but it gives an increase in power of only 2-3%, which is a minuscule compared to an increase in the compression ratio …
1 Like
Joni,
I have run woodgas effectively in a Detroit diesel 6.2 litre diesel whose compression ratio is 21:1
The gas was a fixed gas. No variety of wood species, and no moisture (Iraq in the summer).
This means very little hydrogen.
I would have destroyed the engine if it had hydrogen or water.
Next, I am not teasing or making fun. Do you have an ear to hear charge density? Hear the pinging an engine makes when it has a fast burning charge? These metrics allow you to judge how much is enough.
3 Likes
Good. Good. I am answering with picture. I am old and slow now. Please be patient.
S.U.
Dear Joni,
maybe you already know by your woodgas experience. A quite easy thing is to “inner streamline” the intake manifold and eliminate any heating of the intake gas. On most older cars the intake manifold is heated by the exhaust, on newer often by the coolant. And on most older cars with carburetor the intake manifold is quite restricted (give better torque on low revolutions).
Larger intake manifold without heating is a good for more power.
Regards,
Til
2 Likes
Xoie Ichigo’s now belt driven super charged will-be-again woodgasses engine for his car show vehicle.
Some here do pursue turbocharging and supercharging and precision machining works compression ratio improving for their woodgas systems.
Always the most expensive way to go with many, many downside consequences.
I admit here in the USofA (and Canada) Lands-of-Many-Engines, we are spoiled. Just use a better, different engine.
We will vehicle select for the best proven engine to use. This is practical for us.
Woodgas/producer gas/charcoal gas IC engine compression ratio . . . laboratory of 17/1maximum: India Institute of Science.
The actual real industrial engine makers building for these fuels . . . 11/1 the most common. A few at 13/1. They MUST make systems long life durable for varying climates, loads and operators.
These are compression ratio’s are impractical to use on common pump gasolines. Methane bi-fueling OK. Propane? Maybe. Depends. You will get combustion pre-ignition damage sometimes.
Here now on the DOW the best use proven ARE dual-fueled common pump gasoline and woodgas systems.
Retaining electronic port fuel injected gasoline systems allows for immediate all weather start up drive away WHILE the gasifier system warms up to good gas stability.
And out away; have a woodgas system problem: you, (YOUR WIFE) just goes back to gasoline and drive home.
Smaller engines high loads then gasoline can be metered in for a power boost.
Large engines, high loads, high 2000 meters living altitudes here/Canada and you can just again, blend in some gasoline.
AND . . .just before shutting down to parking . . .go back to straight gasoline to valves cool and wash. Setting up for the best next use experience.
The today future to vehicle woodgas Jodi is for you to learn the electronic ignition timing and fuel injection systems and then re-map those FOR your wood gas.
Not bolt on “solutions”.
Make better the existing in service ownership systems.
US Johnathan Spreadbouro started doing this with his Ford pickup trucks over 10 years
ago.
And this retired Master Auto Tech (me) says many here USofA must now get with it, and come into the 21st Century. With woodgased electronically controlled engines.
I just last month spent $300 USD to get a new minimum capable Vehicle computer reading scanner. My old 1994 upgraded many times unit; obsoleted out effective 2005-07.
Re-program capability reach-in systems start at $1600 to $3,000 USD.
One of you young Ukrainian fellows need to stop PCing and become the vehicle electronic controllers Tuner/Wizard.
Jodi, much respect for you and others there who do show actual DOing.
Yours however . . . . chipped green fuels with even leaf . . . much skepticism you are not making engine tars.
We’ve been DriZzleR’ed before with wild claims.
A little bit air pre-heating. A little bit engine exhaust heats scavenging (some putting the engines exhaust heat energy back into the system with an extra hopper jacket and/or an extra outer oxidization jacket). In system fuels de-humidifying improvements. In-hopper. Outside the hopper, conditioning the fuel just before hopper adding.
It all adds up. Adds up to 20-30% net improvements.
We understand that.
Scroll down for a picture of USofA’s Dave Nichols integrated gas-cooler/green wood fuel conditioner. Enlarge that. And wonder. I have for 10 years now. He was seeking patents so could not detail explain. That is O.K. His system. His to benefit from.
Steve Unruh
3 Likes
Hi Joni,
Here is a very nice paper. See page 542. I hope it will help you. https://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/12531/InTech-Facts_about_producer_gas_engine.pdf
Also, I listen to racing people talk about methanol fuel. Most of them say 14.2:1 compression ratio is best. You can use higher ratios but they will not make more power.
Rindert
1 Like
Hi Til! Long time no read!
I did notice my 1.2l carbourated Ĺ koda has exelent low rpm torq, compared to similar size injected motors. How is that?
Having 4 valves on cilinder helps a lot! My 1.6 chevy was a rocket on a highway but had litle torq in low rpm runing on wood
4 Likes
Hi Kristijan,
oh yes, I was hiding a bit because I have no progress with my gasifier. Too many other things to do, but not forgotten…
Well the better torque at low rpm with a single carburetor is because the carb has a quite small csa and the intake manifold has long and narrow paths. Leads to good mixture for low rpm with a carb but due to restriction less max power at high rpm.
Extreme example is the old Land-Rover: Engine 2,25 litres, max torque at 1500 rpm but only 70 horsepower with a 36 mm carburetor.
I guess your Skoda is less extreme, but still more restricted compared to a petrol injection.
2 Likes
Anyone running a 14 to 1 compression ratio on Methanol is not using a factory block. It would be a little tough even on the better GM LS engines with the six bolt mains. Not sure how you could get a significant increase in compression in those small Euro engines. Old school was mill the heads. At best you can get a few percent increase before you have to start worrying about valve interference. Now compression increase is done by redesigned heads and pistons which are designed to open into the piston. Easier to add boost with a turbo or blower but I don’t know what that means with a low density fuel like wood gas.
2 Likes