Water Fuel Rocket Science

Water contains hydrogen and oxygen. Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
rocket engines burn these chemicals to produce water as a byproduct of
combustion. Water is an extremely compact form of the two chemicals,
saving a great deal of space over hydrogen by itself.

Water is also a stable form for water/oxygen, only igniting after
having been separated and reunited.

It is reasonable, therefore, to conclude that 'water' is the perfect
rocket fuel. But how do we do an efficient separating of the liquid
into it's parts to put them back together?

They can be separated with intense heat as proven by turbochargers on
cars and engines of all sorts. I suspect, however, that only a tiny
portion of the water mist is actually separated and reunited. This is
because the total fusion of even a small amount of mist would instantly
destroy most engines. Each molecule of water releases enormous energy
on molecular fusion.

I am, therefore, coming to the conclusion that two methods are
possible. One, to efficiently create extreme temperatures or, Two, to
vibrate the molecules apart.

To the best of my knowledge vibration separation of water has not been
demonstrated. Intense heat, on the other hand, can be achieved by
lasers.

A powerful CO2 laser -- infra-red -- could be reflected about in a
chamber creating enormous heat that does not, itself, touch the walls.
Water mist could be sprayed into this chamber resulting in an enormous
explosion.

I am guessing that initially the heat would separate out the hydrogen
and oxygen. The speed of the fuel flow, possibly carried on air or
simply sprayed in a vacuum, should exit the separated molecules into an
adjacent combustion chamber cooled by the water which is about to be
injected into the laser chamber. Rapid cooling should induce the
molecules to reform into water yielding the traditional hydrogen/oxygen
combustion.

All of the above is reflection and basic theory. Any comments would be
welcome.


tomcat

Yerwot?

Obviously from a different universe to the one I live in.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"tomcat" wrote in message
oups.com...
Water contains hydrogen and oxygen. Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
rocket engines burn these chemicals to produce water as a byproduct of
combustion. Water is an extremely compact form of the two chemicals,
saving a great deal of space over hydrogen by itself.

Water is also a stable form for water/oxygen, only igniting after
having been separated and reunited.

It is reasonable, therefore, to conclude that 'water' is the perfect
rocket fuel. But how do we do an efficient separating of the liquid
into it's parts to put them back together?

They can be separated with intense heat as proven by turbochargers on
cars and engines of all sorts. I suspect, however, that only a tiny
portion of the water mist is actually separated and reunited. This is
because the total fusion of even a small amount of mist would instantly
destroy most engines. Each molecule of water releases enormous energy
on molecular fusion.

I am, therefore, coming to the conclusion that two methods are
possible. One, to efficiently create extreme temperatures or, Two, to
vibrate the molecules apart.

To the best of my knowledge vibration separation of water has not been
demonstrated. Intense heat, on the other hand, can be achieved by
lasers.

A powerful CO2 laser -- infra-red -- could be reflected about in a
chamber creating enormous heat that does not, itself, touch the walls.
Water mist could be sprayed into this chamber resulting in an enormous
explosion.

I am guessing that initially the heat would separate out the hydrogen
and oxygen. The speed of the fuel flow, possibly carried on air or
simply sprayed in a vacuum, should exit the separated molecules into an
adjacent combustion chamber cooled by the water which is about to be
injected into the laser chamber. Rapid cooling should induce the
molecules to reform into water yielding the traditional hydrogen/oxygen
combustion.

All of the above is reflection and basic theory. Any comments would be
welcome.


tomcat

"Brian Gaff" wrote in news:zbEPf.32419$wl.19615
@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk:

Yerwot?

Obviously from a different universe to the one I live in.

Attempting to explain anything to him will only make your head
hurt. I've seldom seen anyone so determined to misunderstand
everything.

--Damon

Often new concepts seem strange. We think of water as soft cool gentle
liquid we wash our hands with, but it really is hydrogen and oxygen
bound together in the 2H2O2 molecule. And, intense engine heat does
more than turn it to steam, it 'explodes' it enough to supercharge car
engines and turbines.

We need to devote our thoughts to how best to get a much more complete
combustion of the fuels. Apparently, on observation, it can be simply
moisture in a hot cyclinder to achieve at least some combustion.
Extreme temperatures, therefore, just might liberate considerably more
combustion.

If hydrogen and oxygen are split apart it is reasonable to assume that
they might, a microsecond later, come back together again. Thus, we
are probably dealing with molecular fission followed by molecular
fusion.

Note: steam formation cannot account for 'supercharger' energy
increase.


tomcat

All I'll say here is that under your views of the way this works, All those
steam engines that pulled trains would have blown up.

:-)

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"tomcat" wrote in message
ups.com...
Often new concepts seem strange. We think of water as soft cool gentle
liquid we wash our hands with, but it really is hydrogen and oxygen
bound together in the 2H2O2 molecule. And, intense engine heat does
more than turn it to steam, it 'explodes' it enough to supercharge car
engines and turbines.

We need to devote our thoughts to how best to get a much more complete
combustion of the fuels. Apparently, on observation, it can be simply
moisture in a hot cyclinder to achieve at least some combustion.
Extreme temperatures, therefore, just might liberate considerably more
combustion.

If hydrogen and oxygen are split apart it is reasonable to assume that
they might, a microsecond later, come back together again. Thus, we
are probably dealing with molecular fission followed by molecular
fusion.

Note: steam formation cannot account for 'supercharger' energy
increase.


tomcat

tomcat wrote:
Water contains hydrogen and oxygen. Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
rocket engines burn these chemicals to produce water as a byproduct of
combustion. Water is an extremely compact form of the two chemicals,
saving a great deal of space over hydrogen by itself.

Water is also a stable form for water/oxygen, only igniting after
having been separated and reunited.

It is reasonable, therefore, to conclude that 'water' is the perfect
rocket fuel. But how do we do an efficient separating of the liquid
into it's parts to put them back together?

There is no method which does not have more energy than the H2+O2
itself. In orbit, solar power could electrolyze water, directly as in
PV, or indirectly, though homopolar generators powered by temperature
differences (kalina cycle or sterling cycle). The compact mass
requiring no great pressure containers lifted to space can make rocket
fuel gases stored in space (maybe in inflatable storage tanks, but H2
is exceptionally leaky from most containers) for relaunch fuel for
outbound spacecraft.

LEO drydocks will build spacecraft which could never be launched, nor
ever survuve entry to land on Earth, but could be motherships for
planetary voyages and portable cities for workers building habitats in
various orbital locations. They will need fuel, and radiation
shielding, so water and ammonia ice would likely be needed in huge
quantities to be lifted to LEO.

They can be separated with intense heat as proven by turbochargers on
cars and engines of all sorts. I suspect, however, that only a tiny
portion of the water mist is actually separated and reunited. This is
because the total fusion of even a small amount of mist would instantly
destroy most engines. Each molecule of water releases enormous energy
on molecular fusion.

You have misapprehended the chemistry of hydrocarbon combustion. A
portion of hydrocarbons is converted to water vapor as seen in steam
out of tailpipes on freezing mornings. That is not electrolysis or
themolysis of water

I'm afraid you believe that fusion happens at STP conditions on Earth,
but nobody has demonstrated any convincing proof that this occurs in
any useful amounts or under any useful conditions.

I am, therefore, coming to the conclusion that two methods are
possible. One, to efficiently create extreme temperatures or, Two, to
vibrate the molecules apart.

Thermolysis of H20 occurs at temperatures where the highest melting
metals of the platinum group turn liquid. A big problem with the
concept is that the H2 + O2 are mingled as gases far above the ignition
temperature, so as soon as they cool slightly they rejoin as steam and
no progress has been achieved. Somehow you would need to seperate the
gases while they are still four times hotter than lava, and there
simply are no materials you can buy at Home Depot or Walmart to do
this.


To the best of my knowledge vibration separation of water has not been
demonstrated. Intense heat, on the other hand, can be achieved by
lasers.

Lasers and many other forms of radiant energy passes right through
water to great depths.


A powerful CO2 laser -- infra-red -- could be reflected about in a
chamber creating enormous heat that does not, itself, touch the walls.
Water mist could be sprayed into this chamber resulting in an enormous
explosion.

I'm afraid not. Infra-red is one of the radiation forms that passes
easily through water.

I am guessing that initially the heat would separate out the hydrogen
and oxygen. The speed of the fuel flow, possibly carried on air or
simply sprayed in a vacuum, should exit the separated molecules into an
adjacent combustion chamber cooled by the water which is about to be
injected into the laser chamber. Rapid cooling should induce the
molecules to reform into water yielding the traditional hydrogen/oxygen
combustion.

All of the above is reflection and basic theory. Any comments would be
welcome.


tomcat

How about the three Laws of Thermodynamics?

Water itself could be used as rocket propellent, as could sand,
marshmallows, or watermelons. Newton's three laws. Equal and opposite
reactions -- you know, how rockets work.

You need to know about "exergy", which is an important part of energy.

Water is best understood as ashes. It's what's left after the fire has
burned off all the fuel energy completely. To unburn the ashes takes
two things (1) more energy in than you will ever get back again, and
(2) it takes time.

If you have one whole acre of photovoltaics (on Earth surface) it takes
an hour to get 12 kilos of hydrogen and 96 kilos of oxygen. It takes
all day to get 72 kilos of Hydrogen and 576 kilos of oxygen. One acre
of photovoltaics could fill up the Space Shuttle External Tank every
9.5 years. You could fill the shuttle ET in a little over a month if
you had 100 acres of PV. It would take you about 5 hours if you had a
square mile of photovoltaics.

To run your lasers to make that much power would require even more
power.



While it might be nice to have Leprechans waving magic wands making
energy out of nothing so you could fly to the moon and be back in time
for dinner, Creation-Science miracles involving lasers is not science.
It's a cruel hoax.

"tomcat" wrote in message
ups.com...
Often new concepts seem strange. We think of water as soft cool gentle
liquid we wash our hands with, but it really is hydrogen and oxygen
bound together in the 2H2O2 molecule. And, intense engine heat does
more than turn it to steam, it 'explodes' it enough to supercharge car
engines and turbines.

We need to devote our thoughts to how best to get a much more complete
combustion of the fuels. Apparently, on observation, it can be simply
moisture in a hot cyclinder to achieve at least some combustion.
Extreme temperatures, therefore, just might liberate considerably more
combustion.



So basically you're saying launch water and split it into 2H2 and O2 and
burn it as you go?

There's no net gain.

And at that point, if you have that much on-board energy available, you
might as well find a better way to use it directly.



If hydrogen and oxygen are split apart it is reasonable to assume that
they might, a microsecond later, come back together again. Thus, we
are probably dealing with molecular fission followed by molecular
fusion.

Note: steam formation cannot account for 'supercharger' energy
increase.


tomcat

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:
So basically you're saying launch water and split it into 2H2 and O2 and
burn it as you go?

There's no net gain.

And at that point, if you have that much on-board energy available, you
might as well find a better way to use it directly.



A rocket is not an attempt to achieve net gain. Rather, it is an
attempt to maximize thrust to weight efficiency to the point that an
SSTP (Single Stage To the Planets) can be built. Part of the formula
is to decrease 'dry weight' to increase Mass Ratio, but that is another
topic involving lightweight materials, vacuum panels, and the like.

The energy that a 'water rocket' might use is recursive. Enormous heat
is produced by combining hydrogen and oxygen. This heat does not, of
itself, add to the thrust. It is simply a by-product of
hydrogen/oxygen molecular fusion. This by-product could continue the
fusion process once begun. In fact, the combustion chamber could be
wrapped in cool water coils that would prevent chamber melt while
heating the water into superheated steam for the combusion process.

Also, the combusion process creates enormous gas pressure that may aid
the splitting process. This could explain car engines being
turbocharged by water despite the relatively low temperature of the car
engine.


tomcat

In article .com you wrote:
Water contains hydrogen and oxygen. Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen
rocket engines burn these chemicals to produce water as a byproduct of
combustion. Water is an extremely compact form of the two chemicals,
saving a great deal of space over hydrogen by itself.

Water is also a stable form for water/oxygen, only igniting after
having been separated and reunited.
snip
They can be separated with intense heat as proven by turbochargers on
cars and engines of all sorts. I suspect, however, that only a tiny
portion of the water mist is actually separated and reunited. This is
because the total fusion of even a small amount of mist would instantly
destroy most engines. Each molecule of water releases enormous energy
on molecular fusion.


Okay...
How an internal combustion engine works.

There is no water mist injected.

It sucks air into the cylinder, which is mixed with fuel on the way in.
Then the intake valve closes, and this mixture is compressed maybe 15
times as the piston rises, then ignited.

As the heated mixture expands, driving the piston down, and through the
crankshaft the output shaft round, it cools, and comes out through the
exhaust.
The exhaust gasses are pretty much the same as what happens when you
burn petrol/diesel/... in an open flame. (more NoX because of the high
temperature)
Because the exhaust gasses are much hotter (several hundred C), and
because when you burn hydrocarbons, you get H2O molecules as the
hydrogen from the hydrocarbon, and oxygen combine, and CO2 when the
carbon and oxygen combine, which together have a greater volume than the
incoming oxygen, the volume of output gas is higher.

A turbocharged engine adds a device called a turbocharger.
This takes the exhaust gasses, and uses them to spin a turbine.
The other half of this turbine compresses the air input into the engine.

Doubling the pressure into a cylinder means that you can burn double the
amount of fuel, as you've got twice the amount of air.
This (about) doubles the power, minus the power used to run the
turbocharger.

The water/steam is formed during combustion of the hydrocarbon.
It's formed at all times you burn it with oxygen.
Just hold a cold metal plate over a lit candle, and you can see the
condensation.

Ian Stirling wrote:
Okay...
How an internal combustion engine works.

There is no water mist injected.


Admittedly, I am not an expert on car engines. I think the distinction
here is between 'old fashioned' supercharged engines and newer
turbocharged engines. As I recall, supercharging was done to duplicate
the moist air affect noticed by early morning drivers. And, I believe,
that water was used for supercharging cars back in the 50's. Since
then various things have been used and I do not doubt your explanation
of 'turbocharged' cars.


It sucks air into the cylinder, which is mixed with fuel on the way in.
Then the intake valve closes, and this mixture is compressed maybe 15
times as the piston rises, then ignited.

As the heated mixture expands, driving the piston down, and through the
crankshaft the output shaft round, it cools, and comes out through the
exhaust.
The exhaust gasses are pretty much the same as what happens when you
burn petrol/diesel/... in an open flame. (more NoX because of the high
temperature)
Because the exhaust gasses are much hotter (several hundred C), and
because when you burn hydrocarbons, you get H2O molecules as the
hydrogen from the hydrocarbon, and oxygen combine, and CO2 when the
carbon and oxygen combine, which together have a greater volume than the
incoming oxygen, the volume of output gas is higher.

A turbocharged engine adds a device called a turbocharger.
This takes the exhaust gasses, and uses them to spin a turbine.
The other half of this turbine compresses the air input into the engine.

Doubling the pressure into a cylinder means that you can burn double the
amount of fuel, as you've got twice the amount of air.
This (about) doubles the power, minus the power used to run the
turbocharger.

The water/steam is formed during combustion of the hydrocarbon.
It's formed at all times you burn it with oxygen.
Just hold a cold metal plate over a lit candle, and you can see the
condensation.


I do know, however, that water mist added to turbines definitely
increases turbine performance. At first this was thought to be 'steam
expansion' but later it was realized that the power gain was to great
to be accounted for by steam. Something else was at work.

It is interesting that you described the engine compression at about 15
atmospheres. I believe that compression may be a significant factor in
the molecular fission of the water molecule.


tomcat