What other references are you using? The patent doesn't mention recycling cold exhaust.
The newspaper articles and popular mechanics stories. I think Unc wrote a Hall of Fame chapter on this, but need to locate that again. The patent is not the car, it is the main kernel of the machine. None of these are spoon-fed, always there is some detective work to perform. I should'a attached a text file, not pdf, here is that: RoyMeyers.txt (10.54 KB) Next step is to label Roy's names onto the figure. See if there are any figure numbers/letters that are not referenced in the text, that is often a big clue. After that, rewrite some of his text using modern terms for easier reading in 2018. For example, the lever arm and heating coil adjustment is what we call a thermostat, right? Need to locate all of the exact quotes from news of the day, Unc's site has much here. Regarding feedback, I can already see there is mass feedback from tank B to tank A. Also, the feedback from engine to compressor inlet, IMO, is likely not mass feedback, but cold feedback, I mean lack of heat feedback. What about the electric heaters, what amount of electrical power is needed to raise 1 atm room temp air, adiabatically, to 200 psi? First pass of formulas, skip losses, assume ideal gas laws. Add losses later on. Need to work up an alternate diagram, a block diagram showing the function. Hope this is not too much, just trying to outline a path forward, any other ideas for path forward?
I strongly disagree with your analysis of the physical arrangement, but this is your thread so that's irrelevant. However, in your 4-6-18 document you make an assumption that you should reconsider. The Canadian patent application reveals that Meyers was a mechanic and Hiebert was a policeman, so I seriously doubt if Meyers was thinking in terms of the weight of air used in the October 14, 1931 news article. It's much more likely he was saying that 10 psi was consumed from the storage and another 10% of the working air was lost to leakage.
I do not intend to own this thread. Just opened it to get discussions started. If ideas are not good, then change or refine. Please elaborate on your ideas. This thread is a location to hopefully get this air car built, on paper at least, in a model even better. Need to hear from others, also.
For the Potter injector, I would note that Hiscox thought enough of it to feature it in his Compressed Air book (1909). It's on page 479.
He says that with an upper pressure of 80 psi, it will entrain free air into a tank at 60 psi (a 4:1 pressure ratio). I suspect, however, that the entrainment as such is virtually nil. Probably closer to 3:1 (80 psi inlet, 53 psi outlet) or less would give a more useable entrainment volume.
Do you have an x/y graph which plots pressure ratio in relation to entrainment ratio for this type of injector?
I reread your description of 4-4-18 and found I was in error. At first it seemed to me as if you were saying the heater was heating the storage tanks, and that is mainly what I had issue with. My mistake there.
Ok then, since you asked me to elaborate. What I wrote earlier about the motor likely being based on a Model-A engine does not mean it must be one. I was thinking about the displacement, number of cylinders, bore x stroke, and the horse power.
I stand by my assertion that the compressor in the July 32 photo is a centrifugal compressor and not Meyers' patented compressor. It's easily recognizable from it's layout with the large diameter gear and rotor housing close to the motor, the heat exchanger section next, which is covered by a bolt-on plate and not used as such, and finally the air inlet and exhaust ports at the left. That would be a tremendously expensive device to make a one-off of, and you can tell by the complexity of the housing casting that it's not home-made. Also supporting this assertion is the bell housing and flywheel on the right side of the engine block, and the lack of one on the left, which would make the transmission the rightmost assembly, and it's the size and shape of a transmission.
This would be unimportant except he obviously abandoned his radial compressor in favor of this one, and a centrifugal compressor the size of that one might even pull the exhaust pressure down to atmospheric or lower. Start up would be much easier than with a piston compressor too.
Enough about that. Kudos on finding the March 32 photo. Notice the thickness of the two flat sections with the exhaust ports in them? Zoom in on the lower right corner and you can see how thin they are. Could those be two tank B? They would be mounted right above the pistons where they would work the best. You couldn't get any closer.
Last Edit: Apr 9, 2018 4:34:50 GMT -8 by mac: Corrected terminology of compressor
I haven't had time to read this thread carefully but I'm pretty sure Roy Jerome Meyers had a patent on the rotary compressor too. He was an interesting person and I have piles of info on him but lost a hard drive not long ago and still pulling hair out daily over that. A guy in town says he can fix the drive or retrieve the data. My files are all backed up on CD but to find them is a different story and some of the CD's are unreadable. Carry on, this is a great topic and Meyers worked hard on this for a very long time. He made mistakes but when he hit the news in the '30s he became the most famous air car inventor of that era. George Heaton might have known him since they lived in Sacramento at the same time. Just got my connection back after monthly interruption, hope to get caught up on this conversation eventually. Here's the compressor patent: patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/7c/c3/53/720453d174ec07/US1654893.pdf