> You do not need expansion chambers the pistons are the expansion
> chambers, Da!
Chill, man, chill.....the reference to expansion was with regard to
liquid nitrogen as used in the Boese Turbo Expander which needed a large
surface area to serve as a radiator/heat exchanger...if it was liquid
nitrogen that Rogers was using (which is not the case based on the
file), then the liquid has to be exposed to a heat exchanger type
system) to let it expand...I don't think a cylinder meets that bill.
At any rate, the argument about liquid nitrogen or any other cryofluid
is rendered irrelevant since the inventor clearly says it is using just
compressed air that we breathe, no separation into nitrogen or oxygen,
nothing but pressurized air.
> Seeding with nitrogen makes no sense if it is flushed with incoming
The inventor said that he used the nitrogen initially. Since he built
it and neither I or you have built it, then I had no reason to dispute
it, so quoted it as he said it. Since I've not built one or seen one,
nor have you (HAVE YOU?) why dispute what the inventor said works?
Didn't the inventor also give the REASON for the initial nitrogen charge
in the following quote;
"The nitrogen is a one time purchase. It also cleans, blows out all oil
and gas residue, cleaning the valves, the engine and everything else
right out the the exhaust."
> A stationary engine would be true but we are talking of utlizing
> momentum energy to run the compression.
Yes, I thought that was implied and thus self-evident, but thanks for
stating it as the inertia of a moving car would certainly be useful to
compress the air.
With regard to my comment about a possible explosion from compressed
nitrogen (which was an unclear reference to the Papp engine that uses a
mixture of inert gases that I should have clearly stated) you wrote;
> You keep forgetting no spark no explosion.
Papp needed a spark plug. It was a correlation to possible unknown
anomalies with regard to nitrogen or inert gases as Papp uses. Not
related to the use of simply compressed air to drive an engine.
With regard to the comments posted from the book (which I did not write,
just forwarded to the list), you also wrote;
> There is no carbon or silicates in the compression mode,so your
> theory crash lands.
My theory? Where ever did you derive that?
I have another file somewhere about a guy in Puerto Rico who also ran a
car on air. Its just compressed air, recharged from the engine running
the car at what the inventor said must be speeds greater than 20mph.
I'm still fascinated with the idea of it so will keep looking for more
information that helps to understand how it could be practically done.
Those who think its 'impossible' or have already made up their minds
that Rogers' idea (not mine) has no future, fine, its still a free
world, so let's move on.
-- Jerry Wayne Decker / email@example.com http://keelynet.com / "From an Art to a Science" Voice : (214) 324-8741 / FAX : (214) 324-3501 KeelyNet - PO BOX 870716 - Mesquite - Republic of Texas - 75187