rolling coal vs production gas engine.

I hate the trucks who roll coal. They are pushing to get it made a moving violation and ticket able on the grounds that it creates a safety hazard (limited visibility). They can't pass that bill soon enough.

Rolling Coal produces "Particulates"... of Soot.
Soot can be burnt, yes, but not anything usable in a fast burn infernal combustion engine...
Maybe you could push the exhaust gas through a condenser that fires something to create heat that may fire a boiler... but thats just a lot of weight for something no better than a bloody steam engine running on Charcoal?.

Rolling Coal is just a way of saying "Look I am so full of dosh I can afford to waste fuel", and stupidity.
Some yee-haw rednecks may see it as fun, but the only thing I want to see coming out of an exhaust other than safe emissions is maybe a blue flame from some hyper-tuned engine as it says "Byebye" on the hurry up?

I agree. Totally. I have your back on this one, it should be shown.
But I am old enough to have HAD to roll the coal in older less clean Heavies before they leaned how to clean their act up and give us cleaner burning wagons.
Trust me, what came out the stacks was not good for man beast or wildlife of any type, even the trees hated us...
But as a re-burn fuel?.
Onwards with that thought...

I am just taking a few ideas and running with them here, so feel free to correct any dodgy physics I may make?.

Has anyone here changed an air filter on their vehicle recently?.
I havnt for about 8-9 years, and I recently did a service, where I hoovered off my old one, and put it back in place.
When I first started driving, Air filters were something you changed as often as you did windscreen wipers... as much as below 18 to 24 months...
They were clogged by particulates in the air from "dirty" exhausts.
Admittedly, I live and worked in Manchester, ^{Britain's second largest City, if it isnt, just wait a week for the builders to catch up eh?.}
Either we got better air filters that started making that stuff disappear, or engines got cleaner.
And then, if all that stuff was instantly usable, why filter it out?.

I agree that there is a LOT of unburnt fuel going up the stack, I just dont think its going to be usable, as much of it will evaporate and dissipate into the soot into an unusable heavy oil state?.
To get it usable, it would have to be either refracted back down to a lighter oil, or burnt in a pre-warm system for the air, which will provide hot air into the cylinder, which on its own is exactly the opposite of an Inter-cooler system that cools the incomming air to make it denser for burning.

I therefore propose, if you have to take a modern Turbo engine to a stage where it can re-burn fuel, that would mean loosing the inter-cooler, and therefore also the turbo, thus an equivalent drop in horses by not being able to run at higher air pressure.

Plus, can a modern engine run for long periods of time when the intake is as hot as the exhaust used to be, which would mean the exhaust being glowing most of the time?.
I suspect the temps in there may start to combust the crank-case oil and you would get a runaway.?..

Good point, how much is Ash, how much is worth collecting...

Now from what I have seen.
"Somewhere" in a run of Diesel Brothers, a Disco show, they did a rather large tractor unit that did a lot of smoking with hard acceleration, so "For show", the fitted Flame throwers on the exhaust.
Gas fed flame throwers.
No they didnt sell it like that, this was just for show...
I believe they do similar with certain funny vehicles on Drag strips?.

The bit I am aiming at, is when the turn off the gas, they dont get "Runaway" flame out the exhaust.

Therefore, I suggest they run a rolling coal exhaust past a flame thrower and see if the exhaust gasses ignite.
And then see what kind of engine tinkering would, if it does, provide enough fuel in the exhaust to get ignited.
I am suspecting that you wont get much of a flame from a diesel exhaust...
A Badly tunes Petrol exhaust, however, I know CAN provide a flame, whilst on a camp one time, to get a fire out of slightly damp wood, a friend decided to fan the flames by revving his exhaust over the fire... it worked, until he got a flame out of the exhaust and a blow-back misfire that stalled his engine... 440-4 Honda GX engine that needed regular fettling and perhaps a rebuild service?. on regular leaded 4star at that time.

I wonder if that was a water/methanol injection system. There is a water only system, but I don't think it is for increased power. The water/methanol system was invented in the 30's and was used in WWII fighter planes to increase horsepower.

www.dieselarmy.com/engine-tech/how-it-works/how-it-works-water-methanol-injection/

Bloody hell, that reminds me of something I read back before the internet was invented...
Someone was blasting pressurised water into the exhaust system to cool down the turbo system that cooled both sides of the turbo to allow cooler air into the intake.
Or so I though... maybe its just one side of the intake?.
I had no idea how it worked.
Now I have that...
First, water droplets injected into the system will flash over to steam almost instantly upon combustion, increasing power, and fuel efficiency, and also cooling the cylinder as it absorbs heat to do that, thus you have a cooler burn.
The ethanol in the methanol [Edit...?.. I know what I am trying to say, but can you work it out?. I hope so, because I am slightly confuzzed there?..]will make a slightly delayed burn, so the combustion is a micro-second after TDC, so all the power is now directly on pushing the piston down, and also, will cool the air going into the cylinder as it absorbs heat to change from liquid to gas form, thus you are now getting a cooler burn from that as well.

Bloody hell, they finally got that working did they?.

BTW, Its fun to watch Truck racing, the bit when they use the traction unit from Semi's Articulated vehicles, because you get steam off the brakes as well, clouds of steam, created when they inject water into the venting system on the disk brakes to cool the brake system down...

The methanol will not combust with the diesel fuel, it requires a higher ignition temp, so will combust after the main event, post ignition, but on doing that, will delay the main ignition as it mixed with the fuel, thus ignition is post TDC for the diesel. Which is better for the diesel.
I think.
Again I ant the mechanic here, just the Driver reading what the mechanic has written?. I think I understand it, so if I am mistaken, please correct?.

On the Methanol, how did they discover this worked?. [ethanol methanol still spirits, I can never remember which is which?.. ]
This "wood alcohol" type mix is what we drivers put into the air lines to prevent water moisture freezing the air lines in winter, its an anti-freeze.
Somewhere back in time, "Or so the legend says", to make it plain that this is a myth amongst some of the older drivers, one "Bright sod" decided to use it as a diesel additive as a fuel anti-freeze in the VERY cold winters... he was fed up of having to light a small fire under his diesel tank to warm up the gloop into something his engine could suck in and burn through the injectors...
And yes, there have been tales of in below minus 30, drivers of old having to put a fire under their tank to warm it up.

And therefore created his own myth, because he swore profusely that his engine "Ran better" with the stuff in, so added a can per tank of fuel.
Even in warm weather.
Someone decided to bust the myth... but instead, "confirmed" that as an additive, it did work rather better than expected.
Even if it just worked as an anti-freeze, its better than nothing eh?. But does it work better in warmer weather as well?.
Not scientific like, just hundreds of drivers trying it out and "well I didnt expect that", and it spread, and the oil companies caught on, and started formulating their own anti-freeze "Winter diesel" blend.
Now if you but diesel in winter, it already has that additive... or so I believe... or its that another myth?.
Or have the engines evolved that much that they now dont need that help.
Or has Diesel technology gone on that modern blends have found something even better?.

So if you have a diesel car, is this myth worth investigating, that adding ant-freeze of the right type, methanol, does it make the engine work better?.
I suppose this is the right thread to post it in then?.

CH₃OH vs C₂H₅OH. Its the extra CH₂ that makes it drinkable...
On that score, why is it the longer word is the shorter compound?.

Of course.

The maximum setting of the diesel pump depends on what you want to achieve.

Until the late 1970s, a (semi) truck pump was usually set to 10..20% over the point where the engine starts to smoke a lot. The driver knew to avoid depressing the pedal to more than 80% unless he badly needed the extra power. Full throttle was considered as wasteful and even harmful to the engine. But you had the option to use some extra power whenever you want.

With turbo chargers and a modern mind for the environment and health, the pumps are set to before the point where it starts to smoke.

I owned a classic tractor and naturally I did a lot of experiments. Also my very first car was an atmospheric diesel and I have confirmed a lot of what I have learned as a teenager on a tractor.

Consider the point where the exhaust starts to become clearly visible as 100%. By dumping 200% into the engine, you get as much smoke as from a major forest fire but only a power increase of 15% to 20%. So more than 80% of the extra fuel is wasted.
Running at 300% fuel, your extra power is less than 25% and your engine may "drown" and have a hydrolock eventually! Your cylinders can slowly fill with liquid diesel which can't be compressed so the engine can violently crash to a halt when there is too much liquid.

Military vehicles are usually classic diesel engines for two reasons. They never break down out of a sudden while running, they always make weird noises or start smoking funny long before they fully fail. Also once running, they keep running after a NEMP (nuclear electromagnetic pulse).
NATO locked vehicles seem to run between 90% and 100% injection. (remember 100% = clearly visible smoke). Without lock it seems like 150% to maybe 200%. Russian military trucks seem to run at 130% when set to "peace" and way over 200% when set to "war".

Does the smoke burn? Of course. Take the 30 ton 6x6 German millitary truck, pile thick logs in front of the exhaust pipe, remove the NATO lock and use a common lighter to have a huge bonfire burning perfectly within a few minutes! Think of a giant blowtorch - and now an even bigger one!