External Combustion, Closed loop Steam Engine by vpdrive

The comment  response failed, so I am trying this again...

Thank you for your further consideration of my proposal.I think there might be a couple of misconceptions in your comments that can be addressed immediately allow room for subsequent answers to your concerns.

"They felt the proposal could be better elaborated, including the details of the performance of your prototype..."

The original modified engine(s) were 993cc Geo Metro three cylinder engines recovered from a junk yard.

The only modifications were to:

Remove the lands between the piston rings and 'stack' stock rings, (three) in the widened groove and pin them so they could not rotate and align; The adaptation and installation of a Carlin 201 Natural Gas burner at what was the water pump housing to use the water jackets as a heating chamber. (technical specifications for that burner:  http://carlincombustion.com/gas-oil-burner-products/burners/commercial-burners-gas-fired/201-gas-burner/ ); Replacing the head with one that had a port for each cylinder to return the steam to a radiator to recover steam condensate controlled by a single rotating valve driven by the crankshaft at half crankshaft RPM with apertures that would align on the upstroke of the piston on it's return to Top Dead Center. Water injection was by three peizo-electric Diesel injectors, (also recovered from a junk yard) that by adapting a standard Engine Control Unit controlled the volume of the injected water at Top Dead Center.

The result was that as a two-stroke 'proof of concept', the first block reached equilibrium between the water and heat source at 282hp from a block originally installed at 55hp.

This block is a hybrid with steel bores and an aluminum block, and when stable ran for about ten minutes to verify power production, but I knew that it would destroy itself in continuous use at this power setting, so I reduced the water injection rate to the minimum the injectors could deliver, and the power reduced to approximately 20hp, (too high a power production to 'idle' in a chassis). The burner began to cycle as anticipated, the mass of the block sustaining the power production while the temperature dropped from the preset 400 degrees to 390 degrees as measured at the outlet of the condensate port.

The duty cycle of the burner was approximately 7% of the full power capacity, or 4 seconds 'on' for every 60 seconds running.The 'efficiency' was taken to be the Horsepower as measured on the dynomometer converted to a Btu equivalent versus the Btu's of heat provided by the burner, and regardless of the power delivered was calculated to be 34.6 percent. In the full execution, this would double.

The hybrid nature of the block with differing expansion and contractions of the materials as the heat cycled on and off caused the block to deteriorate after about an hour of running, losing oil pressure. 

The next question in my mind was, "How much power will a 110 pound block at 400 degrees deliver for acceleration?".  The heat source could not possibly deliver heat instantaneously, so what was the 'recovery' rate, how many accelerations could the block provide before there was a decay in performance?As a 'two stroke', I doubled the power available from 55hp to 110hp and the block appeared to have no limit of accelerations at 110hp, (did 20 or more, one right after the other, more than normal city driving).

Before the block could decay, at the end of the acceleration cyclic test, I simply slammed the injectors wide open with the block at a stable 400 degrees, and the dynomometer spiked to 630hp at which time the motor 'grenaded', concluding any further testing.

"...They would like to see more detail on the modifications needed to an existing vehicle, given that your proposal is to retrofit existing vehicles..."

While there may be a limited market for retrofitting existing vehicles, the real thrust is to build and test the proposed version, either on a Dyno or in a chassis and simply auction it off to the highest bidder, meaning the Auto manufacturers.

There was a time when engines were unique and proprietary to a specific manufacturer, but that is no longer true: If you purchase a Toyota FRS, the engine is the same engine found in the Subaru WRX.

That being said, whoever bids successfully for this design will market the rights to it to every other manufacturer and recover whatever they bid for it multiple times over.

Given the recognition and prestige MIT holds, if this were a 'product' of their Engineering School with little promotion, the amount to for successful bid would be 'stellar'.  Given the world wide automotive industry as more than 9 Trillion dollars a year in revenues enjoying a 2.5% growth rate, you can only imagine the 'value' of a successful design tested and made available.

Bear in mind that the 'Reference' material is a copywrited Monograph, the establishment of the intellectual property date is irrefutable with no expiration. The Patent, however was intentionally not applied for, as it is finite and SHOULD belong to the highest bidder, making 'their' product marketable.

"...Additionally they would like to see you address barriers to uptake..."

"...They would also like to see the material in the references section at the end moved to the body of the proposal..."

I think the last two are answered, but I am out of time to provide more of a response at this time, as I have to get ready for work.

I will add a response as to what block to use as a fully executed test 'mule' and why in a subsequent posting. There are many details to be addressed in the 'mule' that I knew of, but didn't bother with in the proof of concept testing.

Once again, Thank you for your further consideration,

Kevin

Beginning with a known short block, build a head that has the double acting pistons, valve as described and burner to heat the head.  Using available direct injection injectors from a gasoline engine and a reprogrammed Engine Control Module from a vehicle using these injectors.

Injectors are available that have the capacity to meter the injection of water at the minimum volume from .003 grams to 12.7 grams allowing the pressure applied to the pistons to be controlled from idle to full power as indicated by the a Steam Pressure table.

The burner is estimated to be capable of maintaining the head at 400 degrees using 150,000Btus of heat for a 5,000 pound vehicle.  The burner is simply regulated by thermostatic control and cycles proportionally to add heat as the volume of water is applied to provide the demanded power.

A mathematical model indicates that the average duty cycle of the burner would be approximately 4% of a 530 CFM maximum fuel/air flow at 150,000 Btu.

The burner output maximum Btu delivery is determined by the maximum speed and weight of the vehicle and changes as the demand changes...  The larger the vehicle the higher the Btu demand is.

Testing could be on a dynomometer, but to verify it's function and make it attractive to bidders, I would recommend a chassis to be selected and powered as final proof of function.

I would suggest selling the developed engine to the highest bidder. The concept in terms of it's Intellectual Property protection is copyrighted, and the ultimate execution as a Patent would be the property of the winning bidder.