Compressed air instead of fuel? - Page 2 - Zilvia.net Forums | Nissan 240SX (Silvia) and Z (Fairlady) Car Forum

turtl631 · 11-08-2008, 10:47 PM

WOW.

WOW.

Physics is 2007. Air is more efficient!

B Love · 11-08-2008, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtl631

WOW.

WOW.

Physics is 2007. Air is more efficient!

You feel pretty good huh, Love how people cannot explain there statements. oh physics its physics. Because Im pretty sure the people who built that thing couldnt be as smart as you right?

turtl631 · 11-08-2008, 11:04 PM

You don't just get energy for free. To keep a car moving you have to overcome frictional losses from the tires as well as air. To generate energy to compress air, you have to take it from the moving car. You'd be converting kinetic energy into potential energy of a sort. The point is, you don't do anything for free, and each step has losses from friction (heat). So no, you can't just fill your car with compressed air and drive off at 30mph, turning an alternator to power a compressor that compresses more air to keep you moving.

B Love · 11-08-2008, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtl631

You don't just get energy for free. To keep a car moving you have to overcome frictional losses from the tires as well as air. To generate energy to compress air, you have to take it from the moving car. You'd be converting kinetic energy into potential energy of a sort. The point is, you don't do anything for free, and each step has losses from friction (heat). So no, you can't just fill your car with compressed air and drive off at 30mph, turning an alternator to power a compressor that compresses more air to keep you moving.

Of course it wont be able to just start from nothing that why it needs to have a tank full of air already this will start the motor and it can use the air from that tank to get the process started. How can you say there is no way when you see the car actually moving

turtl631 · 11-08-2008, 11:05 PM

Post 666 for me - everyone who wants a physics free lunch can go to hell!

turtl631 · 11-08-2008, 11:20 PM

I just read up on this for a few minutes and you guys are going way beyond what even the inventors are claiming. The farthest an air powered car has traveled is 7.2 km. The goal is 200 km.

You can't use an air motor to power a compressor that will compress enough air to sustain a constant speed. Think about it- that initial filled air tank has a certain amount of energy in it. Some of this is used to turn the motor, while some will be wasted (internal friction, for one). Then, some of THAT energy will be used to keep the car moving against air resistance and rolling resistance, while some will (in your plan) turn an alternator to generate electricity. Energy will be lost in the alternator, and energy will be lost once you run a compressor with it. Sure, you'd be able to compress some air with a scheme like this, but I really doubt it would significantly add to the range. The added weight would also reduce the benefit.

Quote:

How can you say there is no way when you see the car actually moving

You believe everything you see on youtube? I can claim I'm using condensed strange quarks to power my car and push it down the street, then take video to prove it. Will you invest in my company, Quarkcars?

boske · 11-08-2008, 11:46 PM

This thread is killing me. For whoever was talking about only needing enough electric to run a small compressor, instead of a large electric car motor, your wrong.

The size of the electric compressor motor you would have to have would be LARGER than the size of an electric car motor. This is because using electric to compress air is LESS EFFICIENT than using electric to power the car. You are wasting tons of energy, not even just a little wee bit. I can't even imagine this kind of car working because of the massive amount of air flow it would need (500 gallon tanks would likely be drained almost instantly) but to be efficient it would have to compress air without electric being involved, maybe some type of turbo or supercharger to refill the tanks? If you could get something like this to work it would end up being more of a toy than an energy saver I'm sure. I wonder what a car like this could do full throttle with some 4500psi nitrogen tanks

murda-c · 11-08-2008, 11:27 PM

irt b love

Having a battery powered electric motor to compress air to turn an engine which moves both the car and the alternator which charges the battery makes sense to you?

It's a compressed air tank supplemented by a flexible internal combustion engine for when you run out of air.

What would be cool is a valve system that allowed regenerative braking - have the exhaust air be captured...but since i doubt it would get near 4500 psi i don't think it would work without a separate compressor with a higher compression ratio, which would add weight and complexity you don't need in a car like this.

turtl631 · 11-08-2008, 11:42 PM

O Pipe (Single Exhaust) - $89.95 : KaleCoAuto, Hard to find automotive items!

turtl631 · 11-08-2008, 11:46 PM

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....007/11/dei.jpg

BustedS13 · 11-09-2008, 09:35 AM

jesus fucking christ

Perpetual motion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

crack a book, seriously.

B Love · 11-09-2008, 09:50 AM

How about your head.

theicecreamdan · 11-09-2008, 10:32 AM

while we're at it.

Conservation of energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

B Love · 11-09-2008, 11:35 AM

While were at it Fuck You - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SmogSUX · 11-09-2008, 12:14 PM

Bleh I dun wanna read all the replies..but like few have said you can't have a perpetual energy car like that. The compressed air can't power the motor that powers a compressor that fills the tanks and makes the car run forever. It's impossible. Like other people have said there is wind resistance blah blah blah....either way though if it really does take 3 minutes to fill the tanks to go 200 miles that is a fraction of the cost of gas. The amount of electricity that my compressor uses in 10 minutes doesn't even come close to 8 gallons of gas. (I figure 200 miles/25 miles per gallon)...hell even if I had a car that got 50 mpg meaning 4 gallons of fuel. My compressor doesn't cost that much.

It's an interesting idea...I'd like to look at one of these cars..I don't see how they can travel 200 miles in a trip before needing to repressurize.

EDIT: And yeah lol whoever said you're just moving the energy from one tank to another was correct. You can't get something from nothing. THOUGH they could have the motor running a small compressor that does fill another tank, BUT it wouldn't put out enough air to completely make the car never need air again, it would just make the range better. It's similar to EV's regenerative braking or w/e it's called where the braking even stores some energy for the car. It doesn't make the car go forever though..

ESmorz · 11-09-2008, 12:52 PM

Fluid Karma

ohhhh yeah

11-08-2008, 11:27 PM	#8
murda-c Post Whore! Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montgomery County, MD Age: 36 Posts: 3,198 Trader Rating: (1) Feedback Score: 1 reviews	irt b love Having a battery powered electric motor to compress air to turn an engine which moves both the car and the alternator which charges the battery makes sense to you? It's a compressed air tank supplemented by a flexible internal combustion engine for when you run out of air. What would be cool is a valve system that allowed regenerative braking - have the exhaust air be captured...but since i doubt it would get near 4500 psi i don't think it would work without a separate compressor with a higher compression ratio, which would add weight and complexity you don't need in a car like this. __________________

11-09-2008, 09:35 AM	#11
BustedS13 Post Whore! Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Phoenix AZ Age: 40 Posts: 10,287 Trader Rating: (0) Feedback Score: 0 reviews	jesus fucking christ Perpetual motion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia crack a book, seriously. __________________

11-09-2008, 12:52 PM	#16
ESmorz Post Whore! Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: It Looks Like A Dong Posts: 6,902 Trader Rating: (2) Feedback Score: 2 reviews	Fluid Karma ohhhh yeah __________________

11-08-2008, 10:47 PM	#1
turtl631 Zilvia Addict Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Milwaukee WI Posts: 900 Trader Rating: (3) Feedback Score: 3 reviews	WOW. WOW. Physics is 2007. Air is more efficient!

11-08-2008, 11:04 PM	#3
turtl631 Zilvia Addict Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Milwaukee WI Posts: 900 Trader Rating: (3) Feedback Score: 3 reviews	You don't just get energy for free. To keep a car moving you have to overcome frictional losses from the tires as well as air. To generate energy to compress air, you have to take it from the moving car. You'd be converting kinetic energy into potential energy of a sort. The point is, you don't do anything for free, and each step has losses from friction (heat). So no, you can't just fill your car with compressed air and drive off at 30mph, turning an alternator to power a compressor that compresses more air to keep you moving.

11-08-2008, 11:05 PM	#5
turtl631 Zilvia Addict Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Milwaukee WI Posts: 900 Trader Rating: (3) Feedback Score: 3 reviews	Post 666 for me - everyone who wants a physics free lunch can go to hell!

11-08-2008, 11:46 PM	#7
boske Zilvia Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: PA Age: 39 Posts: 230 Trader Rating: (8) Feedback Score: 8 reviews	This thread is killing me. For whoever was talking about only needing enough electric to run a small compressor, instead of a large electric car motor, your wrong. The size of the electric compressor motor you would have to have would be LARGER than the size of an electric car motor. This is because using electric to compress air is LESS EFFICIENT than using electric to power the car. You are wasting tons of energy, not even just a little wee bit. I can't even imagine this kind of car working because of the massive amount of air flow it would need (500 gallon tanks would likely be drained almost instantly) but to be efficient it would have to compress air without electric being involved, maybe some type of turbo or supercharger to refill the tanks? If you could get something like this to work it would end up being more of a toy than an energy saver I'm sure. I wonder what a car like this could do full throttle with some 4500psi nitrogen tanks

11-08-2008, 11:42 PM	#9
turtl631 Zilvia Addict Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Milwaukee WI Posts: 900 Trader Rating: (3) Feedback Score: 3 reviews	O Pipe (Single Exhaust) - $89.95 : KaleCoAuto, Hard to find automotive items!

11-09-2008, 09:50 AM	#12
B Love Zilvia Addict Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: California Posts: 889 Trader Rating: (3) Feedback Score: 3 reviews	How about your head.

11-09-2008, 11:35 AM	#14
B Love Zilvia Addict Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: California Posts: 889 Trader Rating: (3) Feedback Score: 3 reviews	While were at it Fuck You - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

11-09-2008, 12:14 PM	#15
SmogSUX Zilvia Junkie Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Chico Age: 36 Posts: 588 Trader Rating: (15) Feedback Score: 15 reviews	Bleh I dun wanna read all the replies..but like few have said you can't have a perpetual energy car like that. The compressed air can't power the motor that powers a compressor that fills the tanks and makes the car run forever. It's impossible. Like other people have said there is wind resistance blah blah blah....either way though if it really does take 3 minutes to fill the tanks to go 200 miles that is a fraction of the cost of gas. The amount of electricity that my compressor uses in 10 minutes doesn't even come close to 8 gallons of gas. (I figure 200 miles/25 miles per gallon)...hell even if I had a car that got 50 mpg meaning 4 gallons of fuel. My compressor doesn't cost that much. It's an interesting idea...I'd like to look at one of these cars..I don't see how they can travel 200 miles in a trip before needing to repressurize. EDIT: And yeah lol whoever said you're just moving the energy from one tank to another was correct. You can't get something from nothing. THOUGH they could have the motor running a small compressor that does fill another tank, BUT it wouldn't put out enough air to completely make the car never need air again, it would just make the range better. It's similar to EV's regenerative braking or w/e it's called where the braking even stores some energy for the car. It doesn't make the car go forever though..