Can Tom Ogle's Vapor Engine Claims Be Debunked?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aroc91
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Car Energy
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion critically examines Tom Ogle's claims regarding his vapor engine, specifically the assertion that a 2.5-ton (2267 kg) vehicle can travel 100 miles (160 km) on just 1 gallon of gasoline. The energy density of gasoline is established at 136 million joules per gallon, yet the calculations to determine the energy required to move the vehicle remain unclear. The discussion emphasizes that even under the assumption of 100% efficiency for internal combustion engines, the feasibility of Ogle's claims is highly questionable, as modern vehicles typically utilize only one-third of the energy from fuel for motion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts, particularly Newton's laws of motion.
  • Familiarity with energy calculations, specifically joules and work-energy principles.
  • Knowledge of internal combustion engine efficiency metrics.
  • Basic comprehension of energy density in fuels, specifically gasoline.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the principles of energy conversion in internal combustion engines.
  • Learn about the physics of motion and the calculations involved in force and acceleration.
  • Investigate the efficiency of various fuel types and their energy densities.
  • Explore modern advancements in fuel efficiency and alternative energy sources for vehicles.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physics students, automotive engineers, and anyone interested in debunking claims related to alternative fuel technologies and understanding vehicle efficiency.

aroc91
Messages
181
Reaction score
5

Homework Statement



This isn't really a homework problem, but this section seems most applicable. I'm trying to debunk Tom Ogle's vapor engine claims.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Tom_Ogle%27s_Vapor_Fuel_System

However, I have no experience at all with physics and even with all the reading I did, I still can't figure it out. Ogle made the claim that he drove his 2.5 ton (2267 kg) car 100 miles (160 km) on 1 gallon (originally 200 miles on 2 gallons, I reduced it for simplicity's sake) of gas. I've looked up the energy density of gasoline (136 million joules/gallon), but I can't figure out how much energy it takes to move 2267

Also, just for the time being, I'm making the assumption (although incorrect) that the efficiency of an internal combustion engine is 100%. I can always multiply the final result by 0.3 to reflect the real world efficiency (more or less).

Homework Equations



F = m*a
W = F/d

The Attempt at a Solution



I know that a joule is the work done by applying a force of 1 Newton over the distance of 1 meter, but the whole acceleration thing throws me off when I try to plug stuff in. I don't really know what to do with it. Sorry if this isn't deemed a proper attempt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
aroc91 said:

Homework Statement



This isn't really a homework problem, but this section seems most applicable. I'm trying to debunk Tom Ogle's vapor engine claims.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Tom_Ogle%27s_Vapor_Fuel_System

However, I have no experience at all with physics and even with all the reading I did, I still can't figure it out. Ogle made the claim that he drove his 2.5 ton (2267 kg) car 100 miles (160 km) on 1 gallon (originally 200 miles on 2 gallons, I reduced it for simplicity's sake) of gas. I've looked up the energy density of gasoline (136 million joules/gallon), but I can't figure out how much energy it takes to move 2267

Also, just for the time being, I'm making the assumption (although incorrect) that the efficiency of an internal combustion engine is 100%. I can always multiply the final result by 0.3 to reflect the real world efficiency (more or less).

Homework Equations



F = m*a
W = F/d

The Attempt at a Solution



I know that a joule is the work done by applying a force of 1 Newton over the distance of 1 meter, but the whole acceleration thing throws me off when I try to plug stuff in. I don't really know what to do with it. Sorry if this isn't deemed a proper attempt.

An interesting quote from the first section of the wiki article"

Our cars already capture almost all of it. There aren't any significant gains to be made, regardless of how 'optimized' the system is

With modern cars, the rule of thumb is 1/3 of the energy is used to move the car, 1/3 of the energy goes out the exhaust pipe as heat, 1/3 of the energy goes out through the radiator as heat. The energy referred to here is the chemical energy in the petrol [or gas if you must]

Perhaps wiki should be saying "Our cars already capture as much of the useful energy that they can".
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K