gee Carl
thank you so much for your points.  Since you are so well versed on this can you
maybe assist and educate those of us that are beginners instead of trying to
prove how superior you are?
 
The last thing i built was a reverse trike 20+ years ago powered by a small
shaft turbine engine and it ran on jp4, i have no clue where its at and if its
still running.  It wouldnt win at a drag race but over distance could really get
going.  The body was a fiberglass shell formed over foam supported by chicken
wire and plywood bulk heads.
 
If the last guy to own it didnt maintain the turbine it has probably shelled out
and is sitting in some junk yard somewhere,
 
Im working now on trying to figure out how i can afford to build another trike
powered in a much more mundane manner.
 
Woody
 
 

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, carl dickinson <ballastmn@...> wrote:


From: carl dickinson <ballastmn@...>
Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?
To: vortex3wheeler@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 8:14 PM








Hi Guys,
              I guess I need to throw in my 2 cents worth at this point. One:
Who can afford all this technology on a home-built budget. Two: If you can
actually put these ideas into the car, the weight would absolutely kill the gain
in efficiency. Three: Have any of you actually built anything that carries your
butt down the road for at least 5 years and gets 40 MPG consistantly with no
major problems? I have===17 three wheelers, and 3 four wheelers. My oldest 3
wheeler is now in Dallas TX and still running fine 11 years later. I'm a builder
not an armchair talker------ ---"ARE YOU"?
 
Respectfully,
                   Carl D.

Carl R. Dickinson Jr.
"You will never know unless you try "

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com> wrote:

From: jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com>
Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?
To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 6:28 PM

                Hi Woody and All,

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, Harold Wood <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Harold Wood <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?
To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com
Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 4:51 PM

Did you look at the cyclone technologies MARK II engine? i found it extremely
interesting in that it runs much cleaner than a diesel and add a WHE with it and
i think its a winning pair.                        Yes that's what I was talking
about. But with another heat exchanger it is the WHE.  I don't think the MarkII
has enough heat left to run a WHE unless it's a low temp one using say propane
as the working fluid.

im just thinking that a battery only vehicle will have limited range. I drove
from Long island new york to seattle washington in 2.5 days, i cant see a
battery operated vehicle doing something like that when you add in all the
recharge time.                        While in 10 yrs you'll have fast chargers,
15 minutes, all the way so you can, just a 8hp/DC generator gas engine will do
the trick for unlimited range at over 100mpg if done right. Mine is designed for
one and I'm building one for my EV
trike.                                                          Jerry Dycus.

if you have a battery operated vehicle that has an onboard fueled generator you
have as much range as you have fuel without having to recharge.

just my thoughts

woody

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com> wrote:

From: jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com>

Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?

To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 4:12 PM

Hi Woody and All,

Interesting stuff but as I said, the fuel cells are not eff or doable.

The first one if you read it is only 25% eff and fairly large and not available.

The second is on 250wts and only 5-8% eff at 30hwhrs for 11kg of propane.

The third is interesting one I know of because I'm into Uni-flow steam engines
and I use to work for him 35 yrs ago building his very expensive, cool yachts.
He is a very smart man/inventor and is the best steam engine design I've ever
seen, even better than mine!!.

Now this steam engine could drive your RT and about 30-35% eff which is
excellent. It's best use is for a solar thermal engine or on a semi running off
it's exhaust.

But as a combo you don't have enough room for the fuel processors, fool cell and
steam engine plus batteries, motor, alternator and controller.

It would be much better, several times less costly, much more eff to do a 300
mile range Lithium battery RT or buy a Tesla for that matter.

Jerry Dycus.

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, Harold Wood <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Harold Wood <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?

To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 1:59 PM

Hey jerry

on an integrated fuel cell processor:

http://pubs. acs.org/doi/ abs/10.1021/ ie0498450

on fuel cells for the rv market

http://www.truma. com/truma05/ en/presse/ detail_en_ 261575.html

on tapping exhaust heat

http://www.cyclonep ower.com/ press/06- 30-09.pdf

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com> wrote:

From: jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com>

Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?

To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 12:21 PM

Hi Woody and All,

Nothing comes up on yahoo, could you give the website address?

Jerry Dycus

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, Harold Wood <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Harold Wood <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com>

Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?

To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 11:16 AM

They are being manufactored for RVs right now, so commercially available. The
numbers i quoted came straight from the website, and a WHE is a Waste Heat
Engine so it runs off the heat generated by the fuel cell,

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com> wrote:

From: jerry freedomev <freedomev@yahoo. com>

Subject: Re: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?

To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 7:44 AM

Hi Woody and All,

Several reason it won't work worthwhile. Are they even available to buy? Their
cost would be way too high

They have much less eff than 85% unless you can use the huge amount of waste
heat. The military uses at least one that has so much waste heat it's used to
drive as the burner in a gas turbine prop jet type of engine as a generator. And
the combined unit is not 85% eff.

Far less costly is a Lithium battery EV of 300 mile range which RT's are perfect
for if design for it. You can even do a 100 mile range RT EV with lead batteries
just by making it aero, low rolling resistance tires and 50% battery weight, all
cheap and fairly easy.

Jerry Dycus

--- On Wed, 7/8/09, Woody <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Woody <hwoody2wood@ yahoo.com>

Subject: [vortex3wheeler] why not use high temperature fuel cells?

To: vortex3wheeler@ yahoogroups. com

Date: Wednesday, July 8, 2009, 4:05 AM

The new high temperature fuel cells use LPG at roughly 80% to 85% conversion so
thats about 4000 watts per pound of lpg, they run at around 600 deg so add on a
cyclones technology WHE to recover some of that and now you have increased the
range of the vehicle to something thats for more than just zipping around the
neighborhood.

i drive 70 to 80 miles everyday between my job, my wifes job and fetch'its.

so just curious, how about batteries and fuel cells? the drive train stays
electric so that simplifies the circuitry, the fuel cells are kicked in when the
batteries get below say 30% charge, the fuel cell could provide enough juice to
recharge the batteries while also proving drive power.

just some wonderings.. .

thanks

Woody

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]