Avatar of Spencer

Would this device generate electricity?

1 rating, 1 vote1 rating, 1 vote (+1 rating, 1 votes, rated)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ... Loading ...

November 10, 2012 in Preparedness


I’m thinking of building a prototype this winter of an internal combustion generator. Imagine if you will an enclosed 4 chamber rotary impeller around the size of a birthday cake(but turned on its side) with a shaft attached to the center made all of iron or steel. The chambers would be nearly airtight much like pistons in a conventional internal combustion engine. Now envision an iron box about the size of a soda can attached to the bottom and an exhaust tube attached opposite it on the top. The iron box would contain charcoal or wood or maybe even coal if I ever build and perfect it, and would contain a flapper valve which lets air in but not out. Do you think this could work to generate heat and electricity?

Infowars.com Videos:

Comment on this article:

10 responses to Would this device generate electricity?

  1. Well all, looks like I’ll FINALLY have some time to tinker with this idea, but don’t hold your breath. If I manage to develop a working three-chamber prototype, I’ll post it on You Tube or Facebook with my daughter’s help. Thanks for all your hard work, Infowarriors one and all~~~~

  2. I assume the box is to burn fuel and then, by compressing hot air into the 4 chambers of the impeller, turn the shaft you described, so I will safely say you can do this, but the heat pressure will divide from one big pressure system into four smaller pressure systems and will not turn the wheel efficiently, not to mention the pressure has to be released somehow or BOOM goes your invention :/

    Assume you were to increase the fire or decrease the number of rotary chambers. This would increase the spin of the shaft. Doing so, you will generate heat that you can harvest via convection, and centifugal force in the shaft you can access to spin a generator. Do you know the capacity of a battery, so that it does not overcharge and go BOOM? A little research and experimentation should enable your will to manifest in that, no doubt.

    Good luck, and never take an amateurs word for fact :)

    • I should mention that a combustion engine is timed via an alternator. You might want a similar device, or nothing may happen at all :/

    • Poemander, Your advice may save me time and heartache in the prototype stages when I get that far. I was thinking 3-6 chambers but that’s still up in the air. I don’t plan on using anything explosive enough to cause a “boom”, though as wood and charcoal are primarily the fuels that I wish to try with this concept~Thank You so much for your advice, Spence

  3. Dr. Robert Bussard invented a device that efficiently drives hydrogen fusion reactions. It is known as the Polywell.

    Should Google Go Nuclear? Clean, cheap, nuclear power…

    It is a technical and long video but it is worth watching. I believe what he says. He did work for the Navy. And I believe he built a functioning nuclear reaction encouraging device. And I have ALWAYS said that the Boron-Helium reaction was what we should be using. Duh. It produces no net neutrons. It doesn’t create radioactive waste. Duh.

    Anyway, watch the video. If you don’t understand the material presented, ask a friend who would understand to watch it and simplify the material.

  4. You should google or youtube Stirling engine. It’s a proven heat engine design.

  5. As a retired mechanic, I was thinking more of a rotary pump with chambers, and I failed to mention the intent was to drive a DC alternator/ battery setup if perfected. It’s just concept to me at this point as I have no workshop to speak of. Just something I want to try out if I can make the time. I know the concepts here are not new- I was mainly thinking of a design which could utilize common fuels such as wood.

  6. Umm, okay, Spencer.

    One, the rotary engine formation has for years been the most reliable. That is why so many prop aircraft have been built on them.

    Two, you’ve described an engine, but nothing for generation of electricity. That requires magnetic interchange between two opposing forces. That is how you form electromotive force.

    I’ve been working on, for years, a design for a “build it yourself, from scrap material” generator that can be powered by low head water streams, that could produce stable, household use power. I have hundreds of designs. All of them stand up under electrical theory, the mechanical is what vexes me. Stability is the main issue. Rain storms and droughts are issues. It takes too much constant personal interaction in a post industrial world.

    Remember, solid state electronics will not be part of the design. It all has to be direct contact electricity, not PLC control. So, your engine has to run on a magneto, or battery, points, coil, and ignition system (think pre-1960 cars, or dirt bike motorcycles up to about 1984 or most lawn mowers), or steam turbine.

    If you have an idea for a “runs on anything” engine, I’d like to talk. Have you considered methane?

    I’m a methodology person. I know and tend to follow the rules of Physics. I like idea people. I’ve never been good at being one. Let’s talk.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.