Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Idear?

Moderator: Mike Everman

Locked
Bruno Ogorelec
Posts: 3542
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 7:31 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Zagreb, Croatia

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Bruno Ogorelec » Fri Oct 29, 2004 10:14 pm

Guys, let's be realistic. It is nice to have sixteen engines when you're Bill Gates, but if your target audience is pulsejet enthusiasts, four or five key designs are max. A garage enthusiast will not be buying or building a Kentfield four-piper with rectifiers. Even Bill would not have built it if he did not have this long-range plan of eventually developing a real aircraft engine. Let's forget the fine distinctions of whether an inch here or an inch there makes an engine fundamentally different, for it does not matter in a project like this, especialyl not in the first stages. One has to start from basics. If it works, it is not so difficult to add fine detail later.

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Viv » Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:00 am

Well to anwer every one at once:-) what I would like is to redraw and model all the plans that we can get our hands on:-)

Yes its a lot but i figure if we do a bit as we can over time we will get them all done, laser cut kits and machined parts kits can be added for the most populer engines.

But the main thing I think is to get them drawn properly first so people can choose for themselves, I for one am fed up of all the time wasted with bad plans instead of people getting on with testing their engines and enjoying themselves.

I am quite happy to do the donkey work at this end and then update the plans with peoples modifications as they perfect them, that way we perfect these old engines and learn something new as well.

New engines I am also only to happy to host for people, Larry engine is a case in point, I want to get this drawn up and kited for him so he can make a few sheckles from it and also to give peolpe a chance to develop it themselves.

This is a good way for the forum to progress, too many people would love to experiment but do not have the facilites to make there own engines, this way they can get an engine and join in the fun.

The Lockwood we have drawn up but I cant find any decent fueling information for it! now this is one of the most populer engines and no one has written down or drawn a succesful fuel feed for it, and I think thats a big point to make, lots of these engines are talked about but the plans are incomplete! this is one every one is told to build for high thrust and we cant say exactly how the best way to fuel it is.

The Kentfield is on my list to do as soon as we can, along with a load of others, I have a lot of the plans but I need to prioritise the time, so I need a straw poll to work it out:-)

Yes we will offer a range of our modified pressure jets both in kit form and complete tested engines, we went metric so all the thrusts are now in kilograms:-) these will be the traditional engines re-engineered to make them more reliable and easier to build, but they will be optimised designs based on our experiance and insights gained from the pressure jet thread.

Being able to offer good plans and kits of all the parts is a big step forward I think, some of the engines we will be able to do fully built and tested but thats more time out of our budget so those will be the ones that are limeted, plans are no hassle once they are done, kits are off the shelf so the workload is low.

so to summerise we will do as many plans as is practible in the order people want them, the most popular we will do kits for, the really popular ones we will also do fully built engines as well, and if you have a working design we will do a deal with you a produce it and sell it for you and give you a cut of the profits.

and it may sound silly but I want to do a full kit for a jam jar:-) some thing dead cheap so people can play:-)

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

larry cottrill
Posts: 4140
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 1:17 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Mingo, Iowa USA
Contact:

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by larry cottrill » Sat Oct 30, 2004 8:37 pm

Viv wrote:and it may sound silly but I want to do a full kit for a jam jar:-) some thing dead cheap so people can play:-)

viv
Viv -

No, that's not silly at all, if you do it right. It would be neat to have a jam jar with a lid that would provide an outer ring of openings that could be adjusted from zero to full open [via a rotatable 'waterhouse stop' type shutter] and a threaded center hole, with different length stacks that could be threaded on to experiment with. A tad more sophisticated than what you might be thinking of, but it would be a flexible, "Lego" kind of approach. Maybe, even include a couple different size jars that fit the same lid.

If the price was right and it was marketed properly, I'll bet the Physics departments of a lot of schools would buy them!

I've thought of doing a similar thing with 5- or 10-dollar spectroscope kits, using replica diffraction grating and surplus lenses.

L Cottrill

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Mike Everman » Sat Oct 30, 2004 8:51 pm

Viv, you need to start a new thread. You're blatantly puffing this one out of proportion! ;-)
Mike
__________________________
Follow my technical science blog at: http://mikeeverman.com/
Get alerts for the above on twitter at: http://twitter.com/mikeeverman

hinote
Posts: 1241
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2003 1:54 am
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: Central California

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by hinote » Sat Oct 30, 2004 9:23 pm

Viv wrote:


But the main thing I think is to get them drawn properly first so people can choose for themselves, I for one am fed up of all the time wasted with bad plans instead of people getting on with testing their engines and enjoying themselves.

I am quite happy to do the donkey work at this end and then update the plans with peoples modifications as they perfect them, that way we perfect these old engines and learn something new as well.

This is a good way for the forum to progress, too many people would love to experiment but do not have the facilites to make there own engines, this way they can get an engine and join in the fun.

The Lockwood we have drawn up but I cant find any decent fueling information for it! now this is one of the most populer engines and no one has written down or drawn a succesful fuel feed for it, and I think thats a big point to make, lots of these engines are talked about but the plans are incomplete! this is one every one is told to build for high thrust and we cant say exactly how the best way to fuel it is.

The Kentfield is on my list to do as soon as we can, along with a load of others, I have a lot of the plans but I need to prioritise the time, so I need a straw poll to work it out:-)
Viv:

I can offer you the following about the Kentfield:

1. The engine runs REALLY good, with the dimensions taken right off the SAE paper.

2. I can provide you with a simple propane fueling system, if you want it; the engine can be operated with barbecue tanks that have the overfill restrictor in them (but not at full throttle).

3. The engine isn't hard to build, but there's no way to reverse the intake outflow without either the 4 recuperators, or a complex megaphone and u-bend combo (you could probably work this out). Another possible option (not tried) would be a single recup that would handle the outflow from all 4 intakes.

4. This engine starts very easily, and throttles well.

Let me know if you need some help--I think I'm still the only one who has run this engine--other than Kentfield.

Bill H.
Acoustic Propulsion Concepts


".......some day soon we'll be flying airplanes powered by pulsejets."

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Viv » Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:14 am

Larry Cottrill wrote:
Viv wrote:and it may sound silly but I want to do a full kit for a jam jar:-) some thing dead cheap so people can play:-)

viv
Viv -

No, that's not silly at all, if you do it right. It would be neat to have a jam jar with a lid that would provide an outer ring of openings that could be adjusted from zero to full open [via a rotatable 'waterhouse stop' type shutter] and a threaded center hole, with different length stacks that could be threaded on to experiment with. A tad more sophisticated than what you might be thinking of, but it would be a flexible, "Lego" kind of approach. Maybe, even include a couple different size jars that fit the same lid.

If the price was right and it was marketed properly, I'll bet the Physics departments of a lot of schools would buy them!

I've thought of doing a similar thing with 5- or 10-dollar spectroscope kits, using replica diffraction grating and surplus lenses.

L Cottrill
well Larry I am quite serius about an experimental kit jam jar but maybe we should start a new thread as I seem to be rasing the ire of the moderators:-)

I was thinking of a camera shutter arangement to alter the opening? what do you think?

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

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Viv » Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:17 am

Mike Everman wrote:Viv, you need to start a new thread. You're blatantly puffing this one out of proportion! ;-)
Ah Mike but I try to mention pressure jets in every other post so I can stay on topic and the thought police wont bust my ass:-)

Viv
Ps the poor ass is a much maligned animal anyway
"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

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Viv » Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:22 am

hinote wrote:
Viv wrote:


But the main thing I think is to get them drawn properly first so people can choose for themselves, I for one am fed up of all the time wasted with bad plans instead of people getting on with testing their engines and enjoying themselves.

I am quite happy to do the donkey work at this end and then update the plans with peoples modifications as they perfect them, that way we perfect these old engines and learn something new as well.

This is a good way for the forum to progress, too many people would love to experiment but do not have the facilites to make there own engines, this way they can get an engine and join in the fun.

The Lockwood we have drawn up but I cant find any decent fueling information for it! now this is one of the most populer engines and no one has written down or drawn a succesful fuel feed for it, and I think thats a big point to make, lots of these engines are talked about but the plans are incomplete! this is one every one is told to build for high thrust and we cant say exactly how the best way to fuel it is.

The Kentfield is on my list to do as soon as we can, along with a load of others, I have a lot of the plans but I need to prioritise the time, so I need a straw poll to work it out:-)
Viv:

I can offer you the following about the Kentfield:

1. The engine runs REALLY good, with the dimensions taken right off the SAE paper.

2. I can provide you with a simple propane fueling system, if you want it; the engine can be operated with barbecue tanks that have the overfill restrictor in them (but not at full throttle).

3. The engine isn't hard to build, but there's no way to reverse the intake outflow without either the 4 recuperators, or a complex megaphone and u-bend combo (you could probably work this out). Another possible option (not tried) would be a single recup that would handle the outflow from all 4 intakes.

4. This engine starts very easily, and throttles well.

Let me know if you need some help--I think I'm still the only one who has run this engine--other than Kentfield.

Bill H.
Acoustic Propulsion Concepts


".......some day soon we'll be flying airplanes powered by pulsejets."
Bill any help at all would be very appriciated, it would be grait to get this engine out there for people to play with.

I was very impresed by your project and your progress with it.

It looks an easy one for peole to do as well so thats a big plus.

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

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Viv » Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:25 am

Mike Everman wrote:Viv, you need to start a new thread. You're blatantly puffing this one out of proportion! ;-)
So its not a blatant attempt to limit the number of posts so your Kazoo thread can catch up on the most read thread thread then?

Sussed you out mate:-) a cunning plan indede.

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

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by luc » Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:19 pm

Hi guys,

Mike wrote
Viv, you need to start a new thread. You're blatantly puffing this one out of proportion! ;-)
And I TOTALLY agree with you Mike, where this "Pressure Jet" thread is a pure and marvelous piece of work and collaboration result.

We should keep this thing clean of any additionnal debates, or peoples will loose them selves in it.

Doing so, let me bring you guys to the original question here and its purpose. We need to know what you guys Want.

There is a big difference in what peoples wants and what they would like. If I consider all the "I would like this" ... I will probably have to hire 20 draftman and 3 engineer by the end of this thread.

So ... My question to guys is :

What do you guys WANT or NEED?

Also, consider that if any of you send us a request for Plans, Kits, engines or design, using your inputs, this work will still end-up in our "Available products List" with a price next to it.

But consider this ... If some of you send me a request for plans, as an exemple, I will probably have to work 8, 16 or 24 hours on it. If you calculate the total cost, knowing I am working at $65.00 CND Per hour, I am sure you will find that a $25.00 CND price tag next to your requested plan, is not much compared to the real cost.

This way, you get to see your project being born and we get food on our table.

Now ... Back to the question ... What do you need or want?

Cya guys,

Regards,

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by luc » Mon Nov 15, 2004 2:12 pm

Greetings guys,

Okey ... I am starting a new thread in the "OFF Topic" forum.

You guys should find this one interesting to watch.

Have a look and reply if need be.

Cya,

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

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

Re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by luc » Thu Mar 03, 2005 12:47 am

Greetings ladies and Gentlemens,

Last week we received a quote request from a gentlemen named Jerry. After sending our quote, Jerry questioned few points on our quote that lead to a few emails between him and us.

One of his email was quite interesting and we suggested that it should be posted and he gave us the autorisation to do so.

So, here is a part of the communication and the most important one, please read this :


Good morning luc,

I want to say first, if my question offended you, my intention were in no way challenging your product or your contribution to the revitalization of the pressure jet.

Back in the 80's i had weekly conversation with Eugene Gluhareff. I am very familiar with the presure jet and with the 55 lbs. thrust rating of the Vortec engine and Riley prints.

The three that we built according to there prints were total failures, out of months of testing we were only able to get sonic lock TWICE, total thrust 10 lbs with 160 psi nozzle pressure, it made a great burner and that was all.

No matter what coil gauge we used, alignment of the stages and the 3/4 wave lenght, we tried everything according to the print but to no avail.

In 1995 before Eugene past away he told me that the new propane on the market was contaminated and that we had to use laboratory grade propane if we wanted to get the 130 lbs thrust result. It was not just nozzle pressure but vapor temperature and velocity that was needed.

I have been to all the forum online and spent lots of $ now i am totally disgusted with this engine design but now your company came along and that is why i am sceptical.

I am very happy that you have solved this mystery

Keep in touch

Jerry Marra
pulso

Now ... Here is my answer to his message.

Greetings Jerry,

As for offending us, not at all. We just perceived your message like someone who is about to make the same mistake as many others and that I did 5 years ago ... That's all. Now, knowing who you are give mutch more weight to your message and Viv and I actually are very sorry that you went through all this and lost alot of money in that process.

We also feel that the content of your last message should be made public, so peoples will not fall into the "Vortech, R. Q. Riley and Tipjet" trap again. This why we would like your autorisation to post the content of your last message on our forum and the pulse-jets.com forum.

Now, as for the knowledge you got from Eugene, you have to understand that he deliberatly hid (Obviously from you also) important details and information. Today, we can understand him, trying to protect his secrets and perceive Eugene as a very clever man in that process.

Now, as for what Eugene told you about propane contamination, 3/4 wave lenght, coils thickness and all the others you mentioned, put that aside and forget about it. These are just misdirecting informations to keep you away from the secret code. Attached to this message, you will find a picture showing what 130 + Lbs. of thrust looks like. And beleive me, the picture you will see come from calibrated instrumentations. I guess you have missed this one when it was posted on the forum.

I hope with this message, I will revitalize your interest in that engine, because YES, this engine can deliver what it is ment too.

Do you still have the remains of your original engines? Perhaps we could rebuild those, tune and get them working for you? But be aware that this process will have a minimum cost of $1,000.00 Canadian, to completely replace the heat exchanger coils.

Otherwise, we would be happy to supply a fully built engine running to specifications with a thrust stand certificate or we would be happy for you to visite our facilities and vue the engine running on the test stand and validate the performance with your own instrumentation before taking delivery of the engine and completing the sale.

So, as you can see from this message, we are quite honnest and open about what we are doing and our operations, but again, up to the point we are not going in confidential issues.

I hope this has clarified a few areas and I will be waiting for your answer,

Best regards,

Luc Laforest
Conception GLC inc.

So ... Here it is guys. Another guy that went through the nightmare of buying engines and prints from the Websites we have been trying so hard to warn peoples against.

I hope this one too ... Will serve its purpose.

Best regards,

Luc
Luc
Designer & Inventor

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

re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by Viv » Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:09 am

Just to complete the record and clear up a little mystery for any one reading through this thread I have decided its about time to post the email (at the bottom) that caused us all to stop posting anything important halfway through the resolution of the 130R engine power failure thread.

To sum it up there was a bit of sour grapes and name calling going on in the background and we did not see why people who were trying to help should be messed around like that when the people doing it were watching the thread to see if there was any thing they could use to their own benefit.

I do regret that decision as it went against the free and open nature of this forum and the work that was being done in the thread, but I do not like to be used, abused or my work ripped off with no recompense or even a thank you!

The technical details in this email have since by experiment been proven totally incorrect and can be assumed to be at best a genuine mistake or misdirection at worst, since the 130R engine at the end of the thread was developing over 145Lbs of thrust I think we can take that as proof of the good work done by everybody concerned.

The person who sent this email had access to Eugene Gluehareffs notes under a non disclosure agreement at the time of this thread with regards to Eugene's inline pressure jet normally referred to as his retirement engine, so I think he certainly had access to information also covering the 130R engine, but as you can see by his input he failed to help.

Its an interesting story that is as yet not all told as having failed to develop the inline pressure jet from Eugene's notes with the email writers help the business person gave up on him and approached us in the hope of forming a partnership.

That sadly did not go too well for a number of reasons, one being we had developed the inline engine on our own with out the aid of Eugene's notes and did not see a valid reason to endanger our title by reading them, and two there was an unfortunate and some what acrimonious personality clash during negotiations! hey it happens its real life:-)

Shortly after negotiations broke down and we went our separate ways, sadly this just underlines the fact that I will probably never be able to bring my sheer brilliance, style and intuitive grasp of an interpersonal problem to the world of international diplomacy ( and that will probably safely delay the onset of WW3 by not being there to open my big mouth:-).

Michael A Stram sent his patent infringement warning to us a little over two weeks later but we have I think dealt with that topic and his impersonation of an Attorney at law in other threads and we have dealt with him in a number of different and creative way off forum, I only mention it here to complete the story and I am sure it is in no way connected to these events.

Its all water under the bridge now and safely in the past so I bear the email writer and the business person no ill will or animosity, I wish them the best in their future endeavors.

We also promised to release free plans for the Gluehareff pressure jet engines at some point, we have not forgotten and ask you to bear with us only a bit longer, we have been very busy (14 hour days for a year!) with our development work and have patented our most relevant findings, this now clears the way for us to release the plans to the first generation Gluehareff engines but as you can imagine we are up to our eyes in paying work so free work that makes no money will have to wait a while:-) As soon as Luc has some slack in his schedule he will put together a set of plans for you, I intend to post them here on this forum and ours so every one can download a free set with the only license condition that they are not for commercial use or sale.


Email received via a hidden path to protect the innocent and uninvolved:-) I should also add that the email writer had been involved before this thread or email in the low power issue of this engine in a consultant capacity by the business person and had failed to resolve the issue, records of this are also still available.

Email between ""

"I'm not impressed. These guys are the reason I don't post any
more. I see where D.E. Cook mentioned that he was essentially disappointed
in me for thinking they are all idiots, but 31 pages on that thread do
NOTHING but reinforce that opinion. Here's why.

1) Viv is right- it's a pulsating combustor, alright- but what he doesn't
understand is that THAT IS PATHOLOGICAL OPERATION, ***NOT*** the design
principle!!! It's SUPPOSED to put out white noise and not pulsate at all,
but things are never perfect. He and the rest seem to think it's an asset to
pulse!

2) They are REALLY getting *stupid* about the tuning; not a SINGLE ONE OF
THEM apparently understands that the point of tuning the 3rd stage and the
diffuser/combustor is to QUENCH the resonance of the intake! If you look at
the FFT spectra they've taken, you can see the intake freq at about 460 Hz-
it's that thing they're calling the "second source". If the tuning was
correct, that orphan peak wouldn't be a peak- it would be a NOTCH. These are
poorly tuned engines. They have the means to observe the effects of proper
tuning, but they are looking at it WRONG.

3) They also don't understand that the 3rd stage is a half wave length and
the diffuser/combustor is a quarter wave, and those are the ONLY ducts that
are tuned; trying to tune the other ducts only INTERFERES with that
"bucking" of the 3rd and diffuser/combustor combination. You want the second
and first to be NOWHERE NEAR the resonant frequency of the intake, because
it just drives them out of sync.

4) Everything else in the acoustical spectra is just the tailpipe
fundamental and it's harmonics. You want ALL of that to go away; a proper
engine would have a spectra with NO peaks. And a proper engine doesn't
exist- but these guys don't understand, and they're essentially trying to
optimize the PATHOLOGY.

5) From the pictures of Luc's engine, he's clearly got burning going on
outside the engine- either the tailpipe is too short, or he's running too
rich, or the fuel isn't pure propane. Likely all three things are wrong. No
wonder he's got rotten fuel specifics. You'd THINK that these geniuses could
pick up on that.

I could go on- but, I've had so much time wasted by people that are
enthusiastic and DON'T LISTEN that I'm REALLY OFF on advising people. I'm
writing to you to get this off my chest since my name was invoked several
times, but you're the ONLY one I'll converse with at this point. Feel free
to post this- but make it clear that I'm not going to participate directly,
because for all their enthusiasm and glorious high-tech approaches, they're
barreling full speed down dead ends, and it's not going to be me that sorts
it out over and over with no lasting effect.

I mean REALLY- 31 pages and they've gotten NOWHERE! In fact, their
understanding has gone BACKWARDS, because they've just reinforced mistaken
notions! And *I*, like a fool, actually READ all 31....sheesh.

Sorry for the rant, It just galls me that NO ONE seems to have a
clear notion of the Gluhareff operating principles, and that's what the
forum is supposedly about: clearing up misconceptions and educating people.

Well, it *isn't working*.

The email writer."

END



As I said at the beginning, 145 Lbs thrust from an engine that only ever produced 55 Lbs and he never fixed it!

Hey you want some salt with that buddy?


Viv
released under a creative commons license, all above facts are public domain, verified by events witnessed by me or reported to me by at least two other witnesses, opinions stated are only opinions and are based on my knowledge and experience of what happened, all characters implied are real people with their own view of events and their identities were hidden to protect them from any embarrassment actual, implicit or implied, and finally it should all be taken with a healthy pinch of salt and a nice glass of Chardonnay! and any way I recorded all the important conversations and I file all the emails I receive should you want to argue:-)

flashback
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 10:07 pm
Antipspambot question: 0
Location: milkeyway

re: Gluhareff 130R power failure issue still open ... Any Id

Post by flashback » Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:49 pm

JUNK+JUNK=Gluhareff 130R Heat up 1st chamber defuser with 3 V tubes

Locked