Lawn Mower Running on Vapors Only No Plasma, No Steel Rod

Lawn Mower Running on Vapors Only No Plasma, No Steel Rod

www.youtube.com

This breaking alternative news has to do with a man that goes by the name of "ElManlinos" on YouTube. He has 5 videos in particular in which he shows engines running off of a new technology called "GEET", which is all over youtube also.

Strangely enough "ElManlinos" seems to have stumbled upon a process by which engines run on vapors of gasoline or alcohol instead of off of the liquid form of gasoline or alcohol.

I think there is something to this mans discoveries.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.youtube.com
www.youtube.com
www.youtube.com
www.youtube.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
www.youtube.com...

I can see where this man headed. He has discovered something that needs to be improved on. The GEET process is not up to par, and neither is this mans method, but he seems to be much farther along in discovering a great discovery.

We all know that gases are more explosive than liquids, yet we inject liquids directly into engines instead of the gases themselves which have more explosive power to power engines. The process is more dangerous, but putting some type of safety barriers into his process should not inhibit his process or discovery.

This man is on the verge of cutting the worlds gasoline consumption in half over night if the world catches onto what he has done, and improves further on it.

www.youtube.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Hmmm, I think all you have here is an unreliable carburetor. Carburetors are designed to mix air and gasoline and vaporize it before it is sucked into the combustion chamber. Carburetors can vaporize more or less on demand. However, this guy's peanut butter jar can only create a fixed amount of vapor (unless you warm the gasoline to increase evaporation). So this wouldn't work on cars. Sure you can probably start the car and let it idle, but the second you hit the accelerator it will do nothing.

Also, I think the rate of evaporation might be too slow, and sooner or later the engine will stop running because it sucked up all the vapors.

I don't think there is much to this. You can probably create an engine that runs at only one speed, and consumes the same amount of vapor that is naturally vaporized so you never run out. I guess you can speed the engine up by warming the gasoline and increasing the evaporation process, but it would be hard to control.

I know I've debunked this GEET thing before, but too tired to think right now. I think that the guy was making the claim that mayonase was being vaporized and burned or something....zzzzzz.

reply to post by 0ne10


I think his carburetor is working fine, especially since he shows it working on two different units; a lawn mower and a high pressure sprayer. I think I'm going to have to buy a junky old lawn mower at a garage sale, and test this stuff out especially since there is a man getting ready to do an AROUND THE WORLD TRIP in his Giant Survival Type Looking SUV on the following video at approximately 13 minutes and 40 seconds.

www.youtube.com...

Further more "Andreaus Kalcker" in the above video shows his own GEET system operating a 2000 watt generator that uses less than 20% of the fuel that is used to generate the same amount of electricity; which you can see here...

www.youtube.com...

I used to work with an inventor about 30 years ago and he doubled his gas mileage using a very simple similar concept on his pickup truck and his gasoline powered big truck which he used to purchase and haul equipment weighing over 15 tons per load. He traveled all over the USA in those days in his trucks purchasing different equipment that he needed.

He basically created an extra long fuel line running to his carburetor by wrapping it in coil fashion around his radiator hose. The heat coming off of his radiator hose expanded and heated the gas going into his carburetors thereby giving him over 27 mpg with his regular pickup trucks which he drove like there was no tomorrow.

He never patented any of his inventions, he simply sold the products from them or the inventions themselves, and made his money that way until he was hit in the head by a large metal cylinder that he was milling down for one of his inventions when it got loose on his lathe. That man had a nack for making some serious money in a very short time, and his business was really booming when his unfortunate accident sent him to a home for people that had physical and mental disabilities.

One of his inventions was a sand screw that was simple, yet highly efficient. He built several different sizes and whatever size he built back then, that was how many thousands of dollars he charged. If he built a 36" sand screw he charged $36,000; a 48" sand screw $48,000. He was also in the areo industry, just getting ready to ramp up on some stuff. He also produced plow shears which he pumped out extremely quickly by building a huge hydraulic press for. One punch of a button and twenty seconds later there was a plow shear worth maybe 50 times what it cost him to produce out of a sheet of iron. That mans name was Leo Bassett.

I may have gotten off subject, but I did so to let you know that there really are inventions that do save some serious money and increase the gas mileage of vehicles without a reduction in power. As a matter of fact, his trucks seemed to have a lot more power once the engines had warmed up, you could tell the power increase going up long hillsides with heavy equipment on the back of the big truck. Before, there was a power loss, after that, there seemed to be very little power loss going up hills with heavy loads.

reply to post by quantum_flux


Funny quantum_flux. This man shows his process working with two different systems, and neither of them had anything to do with bread spreads.

reply to post by RussianScientists


I didn't say it wasn't working fine... but don't you understand the limitations of this device? The gasoline in the peanut butter jar is evaporating naturally, and the engine is sucking in the evaporation on the intake stroke. Gasoline can only naturally evaporate at a fixed rate (unless you cool or heat it). Unless his engine is tuned to only suck in vapors as fast as they are created, more then likely after an hour of running he will get low on vapor and run out.

I said it was an unreliable carburetor because it is relying on natural evaporation which is not exactly controlled. It changes with temperature. A real carburetor and evaporator setup induces evaporation on demand when you need it, so you never have to rely on natural evaporation.

Also, when you said they coil the vapor line around a radiator hose to help evaporate the fuel. That has already been done in a way. Old Volkswagen Beetles have "heat risers" that take heat from the exhaust pipes and run it to the intake manifold so the heat can help evaporate the gas and air after it leaves the carburetor. Other evaporator devices use heat from electricity to help evaporate the gasoline.

I really don't see anything world changing here that hasn't already been thought about.

Originally posted by 0ne10
I really don't see anything world changing here that hasn't already been thought about.

I agree.

It was thought about in 1824:

www.scienceclarified.com...

In 1824, French physicist Nicholas Carnot (1796–1832) published a book that set out the principles of an internal-combustion engine that would use an inflammable mixture of gas vapor and air.

Exactly how we get the liquid gas to vaporize has been the subject of much study, when switching from carburetors to fuel injectors for example. Pressure to meet emission standards etc means the combustion must be complete as possible which means that most engines already do a pretty good job of vaporizing all the liquid gas.

As you said this is more like an external carb.

In order to prove the 50% water is doing anything, you'd have to run 2 trials with the lawn mower, one without the water and one with the water added, and see of you can get any more work out of a dynamometer with the water added. My guess is, you can't.

reply to post by 0ne10


The savings is in running the motors off of natural vapor instead of liquid vapor or miniscule droplets of gasoline injected into the motor on current autos.

In the fourth video he shows the motor running for approximately 20 minutes on 8 ounces of gas. When mixed 50/50 with water 10 ounces of gas ran the motor just over 47 minutes according to his video. That is a major improvement in fuel savings.

The amount of vapor can be increased by adding heat, mechanical stirring, and increasing the amount of surface area. Obviously the small amount of area within the peanut butter jar is not enough for a large engine, so the surface area must be increased. I can see where people using some ingenuity will do well in making some great discoveries.

I've already debunked most of the claims being made about plasma and various metals about a year ago and I care not to do that again other than to say that the molecules traveling up the tube are in a vapor state rather than in a liquid state, anyhow, here is an excellent article on The Geet Controversy:

The scoop on Pantone's engine:

1. Nothing special about the engine itself. A plain ol' lawnmower engine would work fine.
2. Principle: Run the engine on fumes rather than injecting liquid gasoline. Only the fumes ignite anyway. The evaporation of liquid in a normal engine merely helps keep valves from overheating, but is wasteful. So that basic premise is solid. The approach does in fact increase mileage.
3. Preheating the fuel vapors with exhaust heat helps increase the tendency to combust. No problem.
> 4. The jar containing the gasoline where the fumes are drawn off can contain mayonnaise or anything else, matters not. Those materials are non-volatile and stay in the jar. The only purpose is to spoof people into thinking that they are being consumed.
5. All the talk about magnetic effects and other wild extraneous claims are to mask the simplicity. Such claims must be obscure enough that people not understand them, or the promoter would reduce himself to pedestrian levels and sacrifice people's presumption that they need him in any way to produce the same effect themselves.

Originally posted by quantum_flux
2. Principle: Run the engine on fumes rather than injecting liquid gasoline. Only the fumes ignite anyway. The evaporation of liquid in a normal engine merely helps keep valves from overheating, but is wasteful. So that basic premise is solid. The approach does in fact increase mileage.

I see how this heating might be considered wasteful in a steam engine where all the heat lost is not available to heat the water into steam. However a gasoline engine doesn't work that way, and in fact you don't want the fuel to combust too quickly. You might get better efficiency compared to a cold engine but once the engine is warmed up, most engines are trying to divert excess heat to the cooling system anyway so using a little of that excess heat to evaporate the fuel isn't really any more wasteful than sending the excess heat to the cooling system, you've got to get rid of the heat one way or another to keep the engine from overheating. And the pure vapor might actually create other problems if it ignites too quickly:

www.custom-car.us...

When the air/fuel mixture burns too quickly, it spends its energy too soon and creates too much pressure too quickly. This can cause irreparable damage to the engine. The chemically ideal ratio of air to fuel is 14,7 parts air to 1 part fuel (14,7:1) and is referred to as the stoichiometric condition. However, the air/fuel mixture requirements of the internal combustion engine are influenced by RPM, engine load and temperature. Heat is required for fuel vaporization. Therefore, in cold start conditions, a richer mixture is required and at full throttle, or wide-open-throttle (WOT), a leaner mixture is required. This is why fuel injection has a major advantage over the carburetor; it can provide the correct air/fuel mixture under varying conditions.

The Vapors are explosive thats what you want.
With gasoline additives the vapors may suffer and not be as explosive.
There were vapor carburetors at one time that perhaps do not work so well now.
I don't know about fuel injection operation but sounds like an amount of
liquid is used.

Sounds like since gasoline can totally vaporize leaving a residue there
is a separation process going on to retrieve the pure gasoline content
as explosive vapors and leave the additive behind which would be
illegal to run in your engine according to the laws of this country.

Its defeating the automotive anti pollution fixes that we pay for and
go into the pockets of the elite.

Originally posted by RussianScientists
I can see where this man headed. He has discovered something that needs to be improved on. The GEET process is not up to par, and neither is this mans method, but he seems to be much farther along in discovering a great discovery.

We all know that gases are more explosive than liquids, yet we inject liquids directly into engines instead of the gases themselves which have more explosive power to power engines.

Huh?

Modern fuel injectors attempt to (and are successful at) aerosolizing liquid fuels quite effectively. Not quite a fully dissolved gas but close. And what does a carburetor do?

And it is not very difficult to convert traditional internal combustion engines to run on gaseous fuel, propane and methane (dominant component of natural gas) are common standard technology.

This is a mature technology.

This is the Papp Noble Gas Plasma Engine that runs on the five Noble Gases. No intake, no exhaust, developing tremendous torque and would run for approximately 7000 hours continously before refueling. Joe passed away in 1989, taking the Gas Formula with him.

But how simple is that. A gas. Not even a vapor of any type.
How much of a formula mystery like Helium and Argon might bring back this
invention except for production rights.

reply to post by TeslaandLyne


Wow, nice find. This engine runs forever on gases inside of the engine. I wonder what happened to those engines. They must exist somewhere, and someone must know how they work.

reply to post by RussianScientists


The Science Dictatorship is probably doing things to stop any progress.
If you see all the videos there is a old VCR or computer sized, almost
portable, motor and assembly.
They say they don't know the gas formula or perhaps the timing and
lots of other things. As one test was interfered with and the engine
exploded there is so much energy in the explosions.
Search under Papp Engine Navy Test.here
I'd say keep the engines in a container to get any gas leaking out
and get that analyzed. The youtube videos are connected with the
company still working on the engines if you want to believe them.
Just like with Tesla, funding is most likely banned.

I'd say tap the gas to know the volume and gas constituents to
get the formula and volume required. A good gas analyzer and
vacuum from Tesla might work just fine for these guys if they
were serious. Do everything yourself as sending a gas sample
for independent analysis, it might get lost and get sold to the
Science Dictatorship.here

You can run longer and get more more by running on gasoline vapors BUT you are operating the engine LEAN and your exhaust pipe will glow red hot and your cast aluminum pistons will eventually melt.

The only way to counter this is to inject more fuel than the engine needs which cools the inside of the engine. Or you could adapt a methyl alcohol/water injection system to do the cooling, which was all the rage a few decades ago and is making a come back with rice car tuners running turbos.

We do not fully utilize the thermal energy of our gasoline in today's engines. This guy didn't stumble across anything new. We've known it for quite sometime and the powers that be want us buying more gasoline, not less.

reply to post by Pervius


They must have stumbled across something new, especially by your standards Pervius, because some of these engines run cool as shown in some of the videos on GEET when they stick there hands right on the manifolds to prove they are not hot.

reply to post by RussianScientists


There seems nothing new about this particular notion.

Perhaps the most well known example of running an internal combustion engine utilising a gasoline vapour is Charles Nelson Pogue's invention and 1935 patent here :

www.rexresearch.com...

Although it is worth pointing out that it does not seem to have been successfully duplicated to date as stated here :

Dr Murray Bell, of the University of Plymouth’s department of mechanical and marine engineering, said he would consider trying to build a model of the Pogue carburetor. Engineers who have tried in the past to build a carburetor using Pogue’s theories have found the results less than satisfactory. Charles Friend, of Canada’s National Research Council, told Marketplace, a consumer affairs programme: "You can get fantastic mileage if you’re prepared to de-rate the vehicle to a point where, for example, it might take you ten minutes to accelerate from 0 to 30 miles an hour."

And just a quick mention about using water as an additive, once again there is nothing new here it has long been known that introducing water into an engine in the right way has many benefits from producing more power to enabling better mpg in fact water injection systems have been on the market for the intended use in performance cars for sometime however there maybe corrosion issues if used in engines over the long term, ie your everyday vehicle but personally I do not see why this could not be overcome with the correct selection of materials by manufacturers, maybe there is a conspiracy afterall