My replication of the fuelless oil heater

[Peter Lindemann]

Where it all came from.....

Hi Guys,

Here's a link to the Rex Research file on these things. It all started with Eugene Frenette's patent in 1979.

Eugene Frenette / Eugene Perkins: Friction Heater (US Patent # 4,134,639, etc.)

Warmly,

Peter

[mrbreau]

Another link

IMO, it is NOT a stretch of the imagination to visualize the *Frennet Friction Heater* as a POSSIBLE heat source. There are many examples of the system in use today, for example, the automatic transmission in today's cars. Ever wonder why there is an oil line to the radiator from the automatic transmission? To cool the oil TO 180 degrees? From what temperature? And what is the potential temperature if the oil ISN'T COOLED?

Consider also the clem hydraulic motor, which can be seen here:

Link; Richard Clem: Hydraulic Engine

There is a LOT of reading there but the concept is surely plausible AND doable.

Warren
..

"When a man's knowledge is not in order; the more of it he has, and the greater will be his confusion." Herbert Spencer

[Ted Ewert]

I was going to mention the Clem motor too. Anytime you have two surfaces rotating against each other in close proximity, with a liquid in between, you'll get heat.
The sleeve bearings on a crankshaft would generate some good heat. I wonder how much extra heat could be generated by applying some pressure to a couple of metal sleeves pressed against a rotating shaft in a bath of oil? Some radial, or even spiral slots cut into the shaft would provide a constant supply of oil in between the sleeves. Or no slots at all and just a small gap between the sleeves. The oil would then adhere to the shaft through surface tension.
I have a theory about this type of heating. What I think is happening between the two counter rotating surfaces is the creation of small vortexes. These vortexes are created by the drag of the two surface tensions moving in opposite directions. Their rotational axis is the same as the cylinders.
If you have ever studied the Hilsch vortex tube, you know that a high speed vortex will separate into two components: a centrifugal flow, and a centripetal flow. The centrifugal flow is around the outside of the vortex and gets quite hot through expansion, The centripetal flow is in the center of the vortex and gets quite cold through implosion.
As in a hurricane, the centrifugal component occupies most of the volume of the vortex. It is this part that is also coming into contact with the two rotating surfaces. Naturally, the heat separated by the centrifugal component of the vortex would be transferred directly to these surfaces.
As there is no surface in contact with the inner centripetal component of the vortex, its cooling effect is not realized.
To get the most heat separation in a vortex, angular velocity needs to be quite high. A Hilsch tube operates at around a million RPM. This is possible because the vortex creates coaxial laminations which are virtually friction free. The inner part of a vortex spins many time faster than the outer part. Therefore, the inner part of our vortex will be spinning many times the speed of the relative velocity of the two rotating surfaces in our device. This is the speed we need for heat separation to take place.
This mechanism makes sense to me anyway. Cavitation may be a part of the centripetal implosion in the vortexes, but I don't really know.

Ted

[Jetijs]

A little update. I made a smaller heater using tubes about 2x smaller in diameter. Although the diameter is smaller, this small heater had 2x smaller gap between the cylinders - about 3mm. So I started testing. Using the small heater with gear oil, I was able to get its temperature from 20 degree celsius to 50 degree in 10 minutes and 10 seconds. Not too great. Then I made the same test using the bigger heater. It has a bigger gap between the cylinders - about 6mm. I used the same oil and the same RPMs. The temperature got from 20 degree to 50 degree much faster - in 5 minutes and 52 seconds. So although the gap is bigger, the big heater performs much better. I think that this is because of the greater diameter. If the diameter is bigger and the cylinder is moving at the same RPM's as the smaller diameter tube, the bigger tube surface will travel much greater distance than the small cylinder surface.
I also tried it on vegetable oil, but the results were not very good. So far it seems that the thicker the oil, the better.
Thanks,
Jetijs.

[rickoff]

larger vs smaller:

That's exactly right, Jetijs. The larger that you build one of these units, the more efficient it will be. Doubling the diameters of the tubes doubles the circumferences of the oil/air space, requiring the oil to cover twice the distance in the same amount of time (if the same rpm is used, of course).

In reading the Farm Show Magazine story of the Frenette friction heater, it is stated that, "It's made up of two cylinders spinning in opposite directions. There is a clearance of 1/8 in. between the two cylinders which are lubricated by a quart of light motor oil." Now that would seem to be an ideal arrangement. Not only do you double the effective speed of the driven shaft, but you also create a much greater degree of friction. Think of the oil flow as acting kind of like two cars passing closely by each other in different directions on a highway, and the significant turbulence that produces. Spinning the cylinders in opposite directions would require a little bit of gearing if one drive motor is used, but it would be very interesting to observe the comparative results. In looking through the various patent diagrams within the Rex Research link that Peter provided a link to, none of the designs (including Frenette's) was shown with two cylinders that would rotate in opposite directions. In all cases, one cylinder is stationary. Thus, the writer of the Farm Show Magazine article was either mistaken, or related something revealed to him by Frenette that is not disclosed in the patent application diagram. In any case, the opposite rotation idea would appear to make sense in that it may greatly increase turbulence, and the resultant heating effect, and is definitely worth exploring.

Best to all,

Rick

[rickoff]

Re: different oils

I also tried it on vegetable oil, but the results were not very good. So far it seems that the thicker the oil, the better.

Hi Jetijs,

Have you experimented with a wider variety of oil types and viscosities? It would be interesting to note and record the differences obtained using brake fluid, automatic transmission fluid, standard transmission oil, differential gear oil, positraction differential gear oil, and marine grade lower unit gear oil as used for outboard drives. It would seem that the molecular structure of the lightest oils provides the slipperiest substance with least friction from turbulence. It would also seem likely that a point would be reached where the heavier viscosity oils would not be capable of receiving and transferring the full benefit of the turbulence/friction effect. No doubt you have already been thinking along these lines, and it will be interesting to see what the optimal oil type and viscosity appears to be. Does the heating rate seem to rise in a linear effect in relation to elapsed time, or is the rate of heating speeded up exponentially as the temperature rises? If the latter is true then you probably wouldn't do well using a multi-grade oil, such as a 10W-40.

Just some additional food for thought from the man in Maine.

Best regards,

Rick

[FuzzyTomCat]

Oil Information

Hi Jetijs,

Here is some information on different ISO viscosity grade oils from 46 to 460 weight oils, the bad thing is all are rated at 200 degrees F maximum for all major oil manufactures. I've seen ISO 220 used in very large "Jeffery Hammer Mills" for Rexnord bearing lubrication @ 5 GPM / 60 PSI for Temperature and foaming problems, it operates at 160 degrees F and the oil viscosity is equal to ISO 30 weight oil at that temperature. ( at 214 degrees F you replace the burnt up bearings )

http://www.delzer.com/Rexnord/falk/128010.pdf

Also some information on "Oil Foaming" thats quite good it has data on preheating heavy weight oil prior to adding to a system and some other things to help eliminate foaming that I found surfin around.

Controlling Oil Aeration and Foam

Hope this may help,

Glen

[Vortex]

Oil info

glycerine has a high viscosity but getting a str8 answer on the
flash point is going to be hard. It always amazes me how different
or non-existent some of this data can be on spec sheets.
It's around 190 C.

That's an example of how screwed up science is, I guess.

vegetable, olive is highest viscosity of the vegetables,
flash point somewhere around 600 F as I remember.
Mixing some Diatomaceous Earth, it will not burn,
in the oil will beef up the viscosity.
Go easy, it will make your oil just MUD real quick!!

[Guruji]

Oil spinning heater

I did one with a pump casing and never tried it for a long time spinning but it seemed that heat was increasing.
I heard that if one does it in a form of a cup it's much more efficient.
It would be good if one tries this.
Thanks.

[flag]

What I'am doing wrong? (fuelless heater)

What I'am doing wrong? (fuelless heater)
I constructed this prototype of the fuelless heater. But it did not work.
I didn't try for running this for 5 minutes. I used some machine oil for 2 stroke engines.
At the bottom, there is a little ball. It can touch the bottom of the outside aluminum. The outside is aluminum. The inner cylinder is sheet metal from a eating can. The rod is welded on top of the can.

[Foggy-Notion]

Jetijs, you da man!

[Foggy-Notion]

I did one with a pump casing and never tried it for a long time spinning but it seemed that heat was increasing.
I heard that if one does it in a form of a cup it's much more efficient.
It would be good if one tries this.
Thanks.

If you mean cone shaped or semi-cone shaped,
(base diameter smaller than rim diameter) I know one thing about that idea,
it will be easier to find ready made materials.

I knew this worked but could never find cooking pots that fit into one another
with the perfect gap remaining., so figured I would have to have if fabricated
and put it off until other projects were done and or money available, etc..

But then I saw this thread by Jetijs, another true hero of the people,
who just did it, and settled the matter, way cool. Anyway not sure if
cone shape is more efficient but deffinitly makes fabrication easier as
it opens access doors to all kinds of available ready made materials.
Stainless steel waste baskets that stack into each other the way that
styrofoam cups do, just buy two of those waste baskets, prefect.

Here's an example, not sure how big it is though.
Two-Tone Stainless Steel Wastebasket - Bed Bath & Beyond

i'm not saying this is better than pipe, heck if the pipe worked and you can afford it,
I would go that route in several cases, where space saving is a concern, long tall ones,
in the corner, small shop heaters, like Jetijs made, etc, certainly durable.

[gene gene]

Hi Jetijs,

Another very nice build my friend. Thank you for all your hard works here, and sharing.
In reading post #18 by Ted I again began wondering if these temperature differentials might somehow be put to work, for I too am fascinated by the Hilsch vortex tube.
Whenever I look at a mechanical type heater like yours or say a (Lloyds), I find myself wondering if you might be able to use the heat for the hot side of a Stirling engine? When we looked at this in the Lloyds F S B thread, it seems that Rick said that we need about a 300 deg diff between hot and cold sides of engine, for it to produce much work. If the heater is in my basement, and the Stirling is sitting in the boxsill between the floor joists. The cold side of engine could be extended to the outside of the house. Here in N Wis. we have many days in winter when we have a temp diff inside to out of 65 deg or more. Might your heater produce the rest of the required temp differential? It could be started with a torch and left to run on it's own for free. The colder it gets outside the more efficient system becomes.
What do you think?

Keep up the good works,
Gene

[bugler]

Jetijs you are really an amazing engineer. I can only wish that some day I can do a fraction of what you do.

What I don't understand is what is preventing this kind of easy-to-replicate technology from reaching the market. It is not rocket science. Why is it not available?

Thanks.

[Jetijs]

Hi guys
Thanks for the kind words
I have not really done any further experiments in this area, I just made those quick tests back then and verified that you can indeed create heat this way, but my results were not as promising as in that pdf manual (as always). I did not measure the heat BTU's and did not compare the heat energy to the applied electric energy so I can't tell you if you could use it on a Sirling engine, probably it would not work well, because as far as I know stirling engines are not the most efficient engines. Also what would be the point in using electricity to turn the barrel to create heat to run the stirling engine? The losses would be great.