Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Moderator: Mike Everman

steve
Posts: 1029
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 12:29 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Clinton Conneticut / Melbourne Flordia
Contact:

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by steve » Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:54 am

pezman wrote:Hmm, maybe Steve would be willing to hold a parabolic shell in front of the intake of his latest FWE to see if it can be positioned in such a way as to augment the thrust.

I managed to get a nice, steel parabolic shell from a lamp that I bought at Wal-Mart (bought it precisely because it had some parabolic and hyperbolic shapes that looked like they'd be nice starting points as PJ parts). The lamp cost about $9.

The shell is about 3" in diameter at its widest point and maybe 4 or 5" long. It should be easy to hold something like this in gloved hands and move it to various positions to see if it has an beneficial effect. I've done some experiments firing my "mini-Gaz-ex" into this shell and when the end of the tube is just the right distance into the shell the resulting concussion is surprisingly powerful.

If a "sweet spot" can be pinpointed, it should be easy enough to affix the shell at that position. If not, you're out $9, but you will have managed to warm your hands in the process (that's got to be worth something).
I would certianly be willing, providing I could somehow aquire a parabolic shell without tearing a lamp apart. I wonder if I could make one from sheet metal....
Image

Eric
Posts: 1859
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:17 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Eric » Fri Jan 28, 2005 7:45 am

I think I have the same lamp, its very thin brushed stainless steel. Im not sure if I want to rip it apart or not.... very tempting... must resist.... such inner conflict..... arrrggghhh


On another note, I guess I should stick to my own threads. It appears that Im not welcome to offer facts or opinions in one of Eric's threads.
Ogge, you are welcome to participate in any thread, provided you follow a general decorum.

Not understanding how pulsejets work is ok, asking questions to experienced people about how these things work is GREAT!

What I dont like is once someone trys to tell you what is going on inside a pulsejet, and trys to help you understand, you all of a sudden:

A) become a pulseating combustion genius and pull BS theories out of your ass and tell the very people who you were asking for help that they are wrong. or
B) Agree with the person in a manner so to make it look like you were misinterpreted even though you went on in lenght and detail about the exact oposite of what you just agreed to.

Then when you are confronted about your wild assumptions being wrong in the first place, you immedately make up a witty retort complete with citations from your favorite highschool physics website with animated pictures of tuning forks as if none of us know what a pulsejet is.

You see its not that I dont want you participating, and that I dont want you asking questions, or to give opinions, its just when you give your great and all knowing techno bs speaches, and then try to prove that the other people are wrong by citing websites, that you are only contradicting yourself, and otherwise making yourself look like an ass, and wasting everyones time.

Many people can attest that I can be a very laid back and relaxed participant of this forum who has much to offer, but one thing I do not have ANY patience for someone who flip flops around like this. If you do not know how a pulsejet works, ask questions, gain knowledge, learn from the experience, and apply the knowledge.

While my responses to you may be immature, we all have things that cause us to lose our composure (and hey im barely 19), but in general I find the manner that you conduct conversations within a group of people, many of which have built dozens of engines or have been studying pulsejets for close to 40 years or more, to be very disagreable and down right disrespectful to the very reason this forum is here for, especially since you seem to have no pratical knowledge about pulsejets whatsoever.

Eric
Image

Talking like a pirate does not qualify as experience, this should be common sense, as pirates have little real life experience in anything other than smelling bad, and contracting venereal diseases

Ogge
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:18 pm
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Ogge » Fri Jan 28, 2005 7:49 am

steve wrote: I would certianly be willing, providing I could somehow aquire a parabolic shell without tearing a lamp apart. I wonder if I could make one from sheet metal....
Steve,
You dont really need a parabolic reflector, just a tube the diameter of the intake with a plug at the far end would be closer to testing the design parameters. The lenght should be long enough to put the reflective surface about at the exhaust lenght but still leave enough opening arround the intake mouth for aspiration.

The goal is to augment the CC with a pulse right as the cycle is returning from underpressurization with a cold air mass traveling towards the CC from the exhaust. Timing at this time should provide maximum compression of the CC and not detract from the operation cycle. It should give a powered boost to the last gulp of mixture before re-ignition.

Granted, the tempature environments will be different from reflector to CC and exhaust to CC so exact calculations would be meaningless but it should be close to that region.

Allow it plenty of room to breath but place it directly in the intake path. I am assuming the fuel intake is in the intake mouth. Some fuel should be blown back into the tube to the dead end. If the tube is mountable and movable, even better but not required.

What I planned on doing was mounting the tube, but welding the plug on a treaded rod giving the plug the capability to slide into the tube to be able to change its position during operation for fine tuning, but that may be way to much to do for initial test.

The biggest concern I have is that you might get a little POP in the tube. It may be hard to hold by hand.

All of this is assuming its a rear facing intake, I forgot, did you make the forward facing intake?
Adam Becker
Innovative Propulsion

Nick
Posts: 359
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 10:36 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Somerset, UK
Contact:

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Nick » Fri Jan 28, 2005 9:43 am

I look forward to the results of these latest experiments but i had to chuckle ref this

"The biggest concern I have is that you might get a little POP in the tube. It may be hard to hold by hand."

Only in so much as mine and Grahams experince at our last test session, we placed a bung in one end as part of our experiments and started ignition, well that thing came out of there like a bleedin cannon ball! travelled 5 yards hit a stone wall and rebounded another 25 yds straight back again.
Granted out jet is quite large but not as big as a lockwood, i just keep getting cartoon images crossing my mind of Steve being dragged backwards grimly holding on to the parabola!.
But seriously folks i reckon you would be better off not holding by hand too. :-)
please film it though!

Nick

Ogge
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:18 pm
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Ogge » Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:01 pm

Eric wrote: I think I have the same lamp, its very thin brushed stainless steel. Im not sure if I want to rip it apart or not.... very tempting... must resist.... such inner conflict..... arrrggghhh

Ogge, you are welcome to participate in any thread, provided you follow a general decorum.

Not understanding how pulsejets work is ok, asking questions to experienced people about how these things work is GREAT!

What I dont like is once someone trys to tell you what is going on inside a pulsejet, and trys to help you understand, you all of a sudden:

A) become a pulseating combustion genius and pull BS theories out of your ass and tell the very people who you were asking for help that they are wrong. or
B) Agree with the person in a manner so to make it look like you were misinterpreted even though you went on in lenght and detail about the exact oposite of what you just agreed to.
Eric,
I dont fully understand all pulsejet operation. I am still trying to learn what are the excepted theories and what are unknown as far as you guys are concerned. I never took thermodynamics and I am learning it on my own. Hell I had to go look up nodes and aninode, I didnt know what the hell you guys where talking about. I had forget the term. I am still trying to figure out what design criteria you guys are using. But I do have areas of expertise that others are lacking.

Wave theory I KNOW! I know what im talking about. Im not making it up or pulling it out of my ass. I didnt care about standing wave frequencies at the time, I didnt realize you were talking about standing waves at all.

If you go back through all my posts you will see I have been concentrating on wave propogation since I got here. Check out my proposed CC design thread its full of wave theory. What I mean by wave 'theory' is established theory, not my own!

Waveguilds I know, same goes for pulseshaping and impedance matching in waveguides. Do you realize a pulsejet and a PDE are waveguides?

That is what got me involved in the 1st place. No one is treating them as waveguides. Some of the PDE experiments at Wrigh-Patterson AFB are total ridiculas. It was so obvious no one knew a damn thing about waveguides. Differences of 1/4 lamda (3.75mm in this case) can make a huge difference how waves can propagate thru geometry. They were making blanket statements about what worked and what did not. In their set ups, turning a treaded pipe one or two more turns could have totally changed the recorded results they would have gotten by changing where on the waveform they tried to make a turn or branch or generating a standing wave on a reflective surface.

AC signals and manipulation I know, thats what a EE does. That includes combining all the different waves bouncing arround at different frequencies.

You stated that the signal would be a jumble of frequencies and dismissed it. Yes it would be, but there are ways to get alot of useful information also.

For example, hooking up a spectrum analyzer would give us all the frequencies, how prevelant they are. We could see tempature driffs in primary frequencies, calculate exact tempature variations causing it. Find out the true fundimental of the chemical reaction at the tempatures in a pulsejet. I know the cell size (wavelengths) variations at detonation tempature variations and only the cell size changes but not for deflagration. What does a change in wavelength due to tempature change imply? It implies to me that the chemical frequency is staying constant and the wavelenth is changing. This also holds true for how a waves transports energy. The amplitude, Not the frequency is a measure of the wave energy. As waves travels they get weaker but the tone doesnt change over distance only the volume of sound.

If the frequencies are the same but only wavelenghts different we would have hard proof that only wavelengths change. We know that wavelenght of detonation cell sizes change based on tempature/pressure. Hell evening hooking up an oscilascope and finding the highest frequency sinewave riding the combustion pressure spike would tell us that.

We would know how many harmonics could be generated in standing waves by knowing how high a frequency it is and design for them. Knowing frequencies can allow for changes in design parameter for focusing them. Knowing their reflection, refraction and diffraction properties that can limit design constraints.

I know what Im talking about with chemical properties of fuels during detonation, I have stated that im assuming they are similar during combustion and I still need proof. I had it as a senior level transmition lines (and waveguilds class back in 91) and the prof was a detonation waveguild consultant to NASA. Im NOT making it up. Its not wild speculation, IT FACT as it was taught to me by a recognized expert in the field. But I cant find any documentation on detonation waveguides, it wasnt in our book.

When I am stating a theory or speculation, I tend to say so up front. If its an idea or speculation I put in IMHO! That stands for ("In My Humble Opinion" if you didnt know). If im stating what Im doing or design goals that dont match accepted theory, thats fine too, I will be doing alot of that. I will not always agree even with what you guys hold as sacrid.

An example of this is my ongoing discusson with Bruno. Yes, I know he disagrees with me. I know he thinks im nuts, so be it. I have respect for him. His BCVP gave me a lot of insperation and I told him so privatly. He holds standing waves as sacrid and wont even consider doing things differently. I am going to try. I may fail, but I will learn in the process.

Point out one instance that I was wrong. To my knowledge, the only wrong assumption that I made was pointed out by Larry. I was thinking microwave frequencies on the focusing ability of waves and he pointed out its shortwave (much larger wavelength) and I couldnt focus it as precisely as I wanted and I publicly acknowledged he was correct and I was wrong.

I give references if I have them when possible. I dont know everyone elses educational status. I give them a place to confirm what I am saying if I can find one handy.
Eric wrote: You see its not that I dont want you participating, and that I dont want you asking questions, or to give opinions, its just when you give your great and all knowing techno bs speaches, and then try to prove that the other people are wrong by citing websites, that you are only contradicting yourself, and otherwise making yourself look like an ass, and wasting everyones time.


I dont give techno bs speeches. I state facts or give my opinion and generally I distiguish between them. I even go back and comfirm most of my facts and correct any errors I find in my posts. I edited the initial post I responded to you, several times. I was angery and had to go back and tone it down. I havent been able to confirm that a statement I made about modulation, that WAS speculation. I took it out of my posts as unconfirmed, I should not have stated it.

As far as my statements about 'Standing waves' I will bet money on it, its FACT. Look it up.

Standing waves are NOT waves. FACT
They do not follow all wave theory or equations. FACT
The equations you stated are wave theory, wave theory doesnt always apply to standing waves. FACT
The correlation is based on wether its property can be derived from the underlying incodent or reflection waves that created it. FACT I think
A wave by DEFINITION travels over time where ALL points of the sinewave pass a given point! FACT

The time frame is the period. A standing wave does not have a period. You cannot use the 1/f formula as period for a standing wave, its invalid. FACT, this is the primary reason its NOT classified a wave.

A node (note its a different term then for a wave for a reason) never moves. FACT

Do you want a link to prove this? I saw it this afternoon.

Movement at an anti-node only oscilates from negative peak to positive peak. FACT you can prove this with a piece of string.

That is the ONLY motion of standing wave, thats even why its called a STANDING wave. FACT

Standing waves are often misunderstood. Well that is an opinion. For example, the drawing you did. You had arrows on the standing wave, were you implying motion of some path that was followed?

Standing waves generate tone, thats easy, blow on a beer bottle. It sets up a standing wave and vibrates the bottle. Also note, that it does not cause major pumping into the bottle, you only need a small air force to set up a large vibration.

Standing waves studies are best found under music and instrument creation information. Standing waves are primarily used for generating sounds. Reducing sound volume is a primary goal in some of the PDE research, thus my desire to try to minimize standing waves resonance. Resonance amplies the sounds. Matter of fact, i think the latin for resonace is 'to sound loudly'.

I have just been refreshing my memory on standing waves for the last few days trying to figure out how you guys were placing intakes and calculating exhaust lenghts. I still havent figured that out.

Matter of fact, had you just stated that you were talking about standing waves after my initial post. I would have appoligized, and stated I was thinking traveling waves. I had just started my standing wave refresher.
Many people can attest that I can be a very laid back and relaxed participant of this forum who has much to offer, but one thing I do not have ANY patience for someone who flip flops around like this. If you do not know how a pulsejet works, ask questions, gain knowledge, learn from the experience, and apply the knowledge.
You need to recognize, you may have been on this board longer. You have some understanding I do not, but I also have a broader range of knowledge and experience as a professional engineer. There are things I will know and understand that you dont, wether you except them or not. I will take any offer of corection but I wont always agree. Wether you agree with me or not but I do enjoy a good debate. If im wrong prove it and I will be glad.

I dont flip flop, if you prove me wrong I will acknowlege it gladly as an clerification. Im here to learn, if I have a wrong assumption I want to know.

My only error with you was jumping to a conclusion about what frequency you were talking about and the tone. I acknoledged that in my next post and even apologized for it. Unfortunitly I think I addressed it to Mike, I got you two confused.

I stated I made a wrong assumption and we were talking about different frequencies.
While my responses to you may be immature, we all have things that cause us to lose our composure (and hey im barely 19), but in general I find the manner that you conduct conversations within a group of people, many of which have built dozens of engines or have been studying pulsejets for close to 40 years or more, to be very disagreable and down right disrespectful to the very reason this forum is here for, especially since you seem to have no pratical knowledge about pulsejets whatsoever.

Eric
Part of that is a character flaw on my part. Im a teacher, when I see something I see as a flaw or where I can impart my knowledge to help I give it. Sometimes where its wanted or not. It can bother some people to have flaws pointed out. Except it or ignore it.

Its never personal, or an attack. Unlike a post about my inteligence and education which has never been remove or appologized for.

As far as disrepectful, I know I jumped on Larry once, then went back and edited my post and apoligized, publicly. You may be misinterpreting my attempt to open a debate to forward theory or try to learn something. But that fact is, pulsejet knowledge has not progressed much in that same 40 years. I want to see it pushed forward. The only way to do that is to question the status quo.

As far as never building a pulsejet, so what. Im not a welder or metal worker but I am a senior engineer. I didnt build the F-22s either but I was an engineer at Lockheed. I did stand next the the F-22 #1 on the flightline. I may never build one myself, but that does not mean I cant design one or debate on theory or just provide a different perspective. Pezman is the only other Electrical Engineer that im aware of on this board. There are huge overlaps between EE and pulsejets even though Bruno is trying to discourage some of it.

Im here to learn, and hopefully make sure everyone is on the same wavelength and to teach. I want to push discussion even if its a controversial topic. Even if it ruffles a few feathers!
Adam Becker
Innovative Propulsion

pezman
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:13 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: USA

Free to good home -- parabola

Post by pezman » Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:57 pm

Steve,

I'd hate to see you weld up a shell when they're so cheap. I'd be glad to fed-ex you one.

I also have some little stainless steel soap containers that I got from Wal-Mart that looks like a tail-less FWE. I'll throw one of those in too. Your welder needs a rest. It would be cool if these turn out to be satisfactory as combustion chambers, since that seems to be the hardest part of the FWE fabrication.

The suggestion of using a pipe s a reflector might be a good one as well -- I'm not sure that the geometry is critical. My current blast compression test rig uses a stainless steel thermos as the combustion chamber ($8, Wal-Mart -- is anyone seeing a pattern here ;) ). Not very parabolic, but it has a "sweet spot" too and seems to work by reflecting the shock wave back into the combustion front/fuel/air slug coming down the ignition tube. The interaction is fairly spectacular. I would think that a suitable pipe could be made from PVC in a pinch -- it should easily survive the few seconds needed to tell if it has the desired effect and it's easy to alter the dimensions to optimize the design.

Like Mike Everman pointed out, "stuff" on the front of the FWE is likely to increase the inertial load on the intake and may result in a need to shorten it a bit.

As far as flying parts are concerned, I think that the worst that could happen is a back-fire that rips the part from your hands and sends it flying (maybe the center for the Eagles can use a secret weapon like this in the Super-Bowl).

If you want the parts, feel free to drop me a PM w/ your address.

Eric
Posts: 1859
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:17 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Eric » Fri Jan 28, 2005 6:13 pm

As far as my statements about 'Standing waves' I will bet money on it, its FACT. Look it up.

Standing waves are NOT waves. FACT


I believe we went over this already, and yes that correct
They do not follow all wave theory or equations. FACT
They follow the equations which were derived specifically for them just dandy.
The equations you stated are wave theory, wave theory doesnt always apply to standing waves. FACT
That is a brilliant observation, so sometimes they do behave according to wave theory even though they arent waves, but sometimes they dont.

Perhaps if you realized that by me completeing the 3 relations to which you gave the first, you would of realized that the temperature and therefore speed at which those waves travel will directly affect the resonant properties (and therefore the frequency) of the air column inside a resonant pipe. You cant say that those equations do not apply to standing waves, while standing waves are not waves but the net effect of a series of waves the equations never implied that there was propogation of the standing wave formation itself in the way a sound wave does, the equations do however govern how the waves themselves will propogate and therefore when reflecting and overlaping waves meet form various standing wave patterns and such. THEREFORE THEY DIRECTLY AFFECT THE STANDING WAVE!. But we already went over this and I thought that the relation was understood.
The correlation is based on wether its property can be derived from the underlying incodent or reflection waves that created it. FACT I think
A wave by DEFINITION travels over time where ALL points of the sinewave pass a given point! FACT
To preserve the accuracy of a scientific statement "FACT" and "I think" should not be used in the same definition. Yes now dont confuse the defintion of a signal with the actual particle vibration of sound.
The time frame is the period. A standing wave does not have a period. You cannot use the 1/f formula as period for a standing wave, its invalid. FACT, this is the primary reason its NOT classified a wave.
Yes, this was aready discussed / assumed once you realized you were talking about the frequency of the waves and not the frequency of the resonance created by those waves.
A node (note its a different term then for a wave for a reason) never moves. FACT
While you are correct in the basic sense, that the amplitude of a node is zero and does not change, you forgot that in a resonant pipe if the temperature of the air mass within the pipe changes it will set about a different resonant frequency, which would in essence be jumping or propagation of the nodes and anti nodes.
Do you want a link to prove this? I saw it this afternoon.
No, linking to first year highshool physics websites in order to try to prove your point as if people have no knowledge of physics is one of the things that I find disrespectful.
Movement at an anti-node only oscilates from negative peak to positive peak. FACT you can prove this with a piece of string.
While I prefer to prove this for transverse waves with a slinky anchored to a wall as we did in 4th grade science class, you should not confuse the actions of longitudinal and transverse waves. While in a spring or string the positive and negitive peaks are actually representitive of their actual physical characteritics and position, when dealing with sound resonance the positive and negative peaks are not representative of particles moving up and down in relation to the axis in the same manner as a spring.
That is the ONLY motion of standing wave, thats even why its called a STANDING wave. FACT
As they say in guinness commercials : BRILLIANT!


Standing waves are often misunderstood. Well that is an opinion. For example, the drawing you did. You had arrows on the standing wave, were you implying motion of some path that was followed?
If you actually read my post, or even looked at the picture you edited, you would know that I wasnt not talking about standing waves in any manner shape or form, infact let me quote myself:
Ok, here is what I think is going on inside the FWE with chinese style intake. I obsevered the same flame pattern with the Jumbo FWE while actually looking down the tailpipe.
Especially in the pictures of the stainless FWE thats now on ebay, you can see where there are hot spots, that just happen to correspond with exactly where I had observed the flame path. The rest of the spots remain a realitively cool red glow.
Eric
Where did I ever mention standing waves? I would like you to point that out. I merely was describing the path that the fuel air mixture took ( and I thought I did that quite clearly by labeling each reflection), simple.

The fuel air mixture leaves the end of the intake with considerable velocity, enough to make 3 very clean impacts and reflections from the wall. YOU were the one that said that the path of the flame front was some how connected with standing waves and even drawing little arrows up and down between what you thought were the positive and negative peaks. I was merely showing that the mixing of fuel and subsequent deflagration was not anything like what an ideal focused wave engine SHOULD be like, infact from my very post you SHOULD of deduced that mixing of fuel such as in a lockwood style fwe would be much more even and efficient since it is going through a narrow tube and expanding into the combustion chamber, not bouncing off the sides of it leaving large pockes and voids.
Standing waves generate tone, thats easy, blow on a beer bottle. It sets up a standing wave and vibrates the bottle. Also note, that it does not cause major pumping into the bottle, you only need a small air force to set up a large vibration.
Excuse me I need to find a good sturdy wall to bash my head against
Standing waves studies are best found under music and instrument creation information. Standing waves are primarily used for generating sounds. Reducing sound volume is a primary goal in some of the PDE research, thus my desire to try to minimize standing waves resonance. Resonance amplies the sounds. Matter of fact, i think the latin for resonace is 'to sound loudly'.
Yes thank you for reffering me to the propper literature so I can better my understanding. Do you even follow pulse detonation research? Sofar pulse detonation engines usually consist of an array of tubes each being mechanically fed fuel and oxygen. The tube is then detonated and each tube detonates at a specific time. The tube is then mechnically refilled with a fuel and oxygen charge and fired again, standing waves play very little in any sound production, if any depending on design.

Do you know what an order of magnitude is? Even if you had a standing wave form in a pulse detonation engine which would cause it to operate like a pulsejet, how loud would the standing wave be compared to a volume of gas slamming into the atmosphere at several thousand m/s ASSUMING that you could seperate the standing wave from the pulsejet like opperation?????? You do realize that the reason pulse detonation engines are so loud is because they are detonating fuel, and not because it is making some kind of church organ resonance in the engine itself?
I have just been refreshing my memory on standing waves for the last few days trying to figure out how you guys were placing intakes and calculating exhaust lenghts. I still havent figured that out.
Yes, well good luck.
Matter of fact, had you just stated that you were talking about standing waves after my initial post. I would have appoligized, and stated I was thinking traveling waves. I had just started my standing wave refresher.
Well then you should be quite the expert on the matter when you are done.
As far as never building a pulsejet, so what. Im not a welder or metal worker but I am a senior engineer. I didnt build the F-22s either but I was an engineer at Lockheed. I did stand next the the F-22 #1 on the flightline. I may never build one myself, but that does not mean I cant design one or debate on theory or just provide a different perspective. Pezman is the only other Electrical Engineer that im aware of on this board. There are huge overlaps between EE and pulsejets even though Bruno is trying to discourage some of it.
I was mearely stating that many of us have done extensive research far beyond the scopes of what you could ever hope to do in several weeks of reading and posting on the forum. Any idiot with a machine shop could download plans for pulsejets and make thousands of the same one. However when one studies these engines, builds many even dozens of prototypes collecting more imperical data than could possibly be posted, and using this data to try and build an accurate working model of a pulsejets inner workings, you should show the same respect as to those who have been studying them from the theoretical approach ie respect the people who you are asking for help. I dont think Bruno is trying to discourage any asscociation of where EE may apply to pulsejets, he is simply trying to discourage things that have been disproven time and time again by hundreds of experiments and even multi million dollar government experiments.
Image

Talking like a pirate does not qualify as experience, this should be common sense, as pirates have little real life experience in anything other than smelling bad, and contracting venereal diseases

Ogge
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:18 pm
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Ogge » Sat Jan 29, 2005 12:17 am

Eric wrote:Ogge, you are welcome to participate in any thread, provided you follow a general decorum.
Does your version of following general decorum include personal attacks, ridicule or insults of inteligence or education?

As far as im concerned you have stepped far beyond general decorum and I wont tolerate it. If my input is not welcome on this board so be it. I am deleting my posts as far back as I can.
Adam Becker
Innovative Propulsion

Mark
Posts: 10690
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:14 pm

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Mark » Sat Jan 29, 2005 12:39 am

Adam, it doesn't matter what anyone says, what is "is". The problem I see is everyone is suggesting all these fantastic insights, fantastic enough to talk about but not fantastic enough to put into motion because they don't have the time or inclination to get it accomplished. You can talk about how things behave until the cows come home, but you can speak from authority when you can show how things behave.
I'm sorry so many of you can't experiment in the least, but if you have an idea that you truly believe in, I would think you could find a way or make an effort to make your dream come true. Fish or cut bait, that's an honest way to look at it. Prove your point or pretend you know some special clever idea. The proof is in the pudding, and the waffles are in the waffler.
Mark
Presentation is Everything

pezman
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 4:13 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: USA

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by pezman » Sat Jan 29, 2005 2:00 am

Mark wrote:... Fish or cut bait, that's an honest way to look at it...
At last, the purpose of the "project squid" has been revealed!

Mark
Posts: 10690
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 10:14 pm

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Mark » Sat Jan 29, 2005 2:23 am

Yes pezman, if I were fishing, that would entail hooking the bait upon the hook in such a way as not to be stolen by some oportunistic fish. I would impale the squid several times so as not to have my bait stolen straight away. Squid are interesting pieces of bait, you can rest assured that they will stay on your hook much longer that any shrimp.
Mark
Presentation is Everything

luc
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 5:05 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Quebec, Canada

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by luc » Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:03 pm

Hi guys,

Woowwww ... You guys are up to serious knife trowing and low blows here ... What's the point?
I didnt build the F-22s either but I was an engineer at Lockheed.
Cool Ogge ... I, for myself, was part of the devellopment of the FAADS (ADATS) project, which used the Martin Marietta EO Module (Equivalent to the Appache TADS). By the way Lockeed = Martin Marietta. You were building planes Buddy ... I was building the system to shoot them down ... He he he. Anyway, I will always recognize the knowledge of someone that stood next to something like the YF-22, as I will recognize any knowledge.

Look at me, I am only a high school graduated grease monkey, with a car mechanics diploma and became a jet engine mechanic later. Today, I probably hold the record for the most private money invested, fuel burned and the number of posting pages for such engines. It does'nt make me "The Specialist".

No one here can pretend posessing the true science about pulsejets, pressurejets and others. Strangely, when I first built my first pulse jet, I used a document called "Inside the pulsejet" which lead me nowhere. This engine would'nt even BANG. That why I am so crasy about any type of calculator and don't beleive in jet engines Gods anymore (I used too). Real life made my realize there is a HUDGE margin between theory and practice.

I for my self, consider to be the luckyest bastard of all, having tripped on a guy like Viv collins. To my knowledge, he is the one that helped me the most in my pressure jet project and strangely, the one with the best understanding for these engines. Well, I have to admit, he even is the one that cracked Eugene's code, not me. You guys would be impressed how Viv really understand acoustic compression.

But what is magical about Viv, is that he is without any pretention and left the big head attitude behind. I beleive guys like Viv, Mike, Mark, Larry and many others, are the real engines behind real engines devellopments. Not because of their knowledge ... But because of their attitude. Damnn ... Viv was even able to make me understand acoustic ... That's an acheivment of its own ... He he he.

So guys ... Please step down of your podium ... Their is only one God ... I beleive he is still up in the coulds ... And for sure, It's not you ...

Anyway ... Ogge, If you need help or informations, feel free to contact me or Viv. We will be happy to help you.

Best regards to you all,

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

Mike Everman
Posts: 4894
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:25 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: santa barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Mike Everman » Wed Feb 02, 2005 4:06 am

I, for one, am choking on these huge posts! ;-)

Oh, and Eric, I was on the road and no time to mention it, but (regardless of the inspiration) this was LO f'ing L classic genius flamethrowing (no slight intended, Adam). I soiled myself, man. I've got to hire you when you get out of school.
eric wrote:Standing waves arent really waves at all, they are really just a distortion of the space time continum when the force of gravity between interacting chemicals reaches the schwartschild radius of said chemical reactions. The resulting black holes formed from the chemical reaction cause compression. Now the frequency proceeding said chemical reactions is not limited to, nor confined by the laws of physics or any other laws for that mater, but strictly by the free will of the singularities themselves.

Once resonance is achieved the sub atomic quark gluon mixture present in the combusting gases will set up resonance in the pipe itself, which obvioulsy you must know are also not waves either, but energy being transfered like a superconducting magnetic gyroscope inside a small faraday cage. Once this happens you can very easily derive an equation to govern the laws of the point particle universes inside the combustion chamber resulting from the expansion of the black holes.
And Adam, please don't delete posts! It's OK of course to go back and turn the flame down a bit, but a great many of us feel violated when threads are vandalized like that. I'm sure there are valuable bits and paralells in what you are saying. IMHO, interdisciplinary work is our greatest tool. Let's take it a small bit at a time.
Mike
__________________________
Follow my technical science blog at: http://mikeeverman.com/
Get alerts for the above on twitter at: http://twitter.com/mikeeverman

Viv
Posts: 2158
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 2:35 pm
Antipspambot question: 125
Location: Normandy, France, Wales, Europe
Contact:

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Viv » Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:24 am

What the hells going on? I thought this deleted posts thing was fixed Mike? god damn forums turning in to a kinda garden!

People throwing their toys out the pram and other people vetting other members credentials for posting ideas! jeez give me a break!

Its a forum for posting ideas about pulse jets children, not some were to play who's right and who's wrong, and certainly not some were to start personal attacks just because you think you are wright and they are wrong!

Grow UP! I don't want to see people stop posting their ideas because they are afraid of getting flamed and ridiculed, I don't want people to stop designing their own engines because some arrogant so and so thinks they know it all and their answers and way of doing things is the only way to do it.

I found Adam's posts interesting and insightful, a fresh pair of eyes from a different perspective, and he was right on a at least two points that I have all ready researched and proven (and nearly right on three others:-), and also starting to crowd some of my current research!

Thats pretty damn good from a cold start i think.

Lack of time meant I could not join in and now he has been alienated so I won't get the chance.

Every one has rough edges that with time on the forum most smooth off, but some people think that what you know defines your intelligence, thats an arrogant mistake that just means new people leave after being flamed or never post at all.

We all lose then.

I am very annoyed about the recent behavior and treatment of new members in general, in future I may start being very picky with certain people's post just to see if they like receiving what they have been giving out to the new members.

It takes no effort to say to some one they are wrong in a constructive fashion, you can do it with out making it a personal attack and an insult to their intelligence.

A little more decorum and lot less snot nosed arrogance please

Viv
"Sometimes the lies you tell are less frightening than the loneliness you might feel if you stopped telling them" Brock Clarke

Viv's blog

Monsieur le commentaire

Mike Everman
Posts: 4894
Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:25 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: santa barbara, CA
Contact:

Re: Blast Compression Intake proposed design

Post by Mike Everman » Wed Feb 02, 2005 5:53 am

I couldn't agree more, Viv. Is is obviously a two wat street, too. You know, I think maybe I just had a bit too much Sake. G'night.
Mike
__________________________
Follow my technical science blog at: http://mikeeverman.com/
Get alerts for the above on twitter at: http://twitter.com/mikeeverman

Post Reply