Fw: Fw: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
dh at busb.com
dh
Sun Jul 31 15:02:15 UTC 2005
----- Original Message -----
From: dh at busb.com
To: Mark Cherry
Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
Ok, I'll reply responsibly.
Yes, I've paid for testing before, and I've charged for testing. Having been on both sides I can tell you that most testing is undercharged because of dealing with people that don't know what they want to test.
Get a pro forma quote for a number of EPA Certified laboratories. A three to one difference in charges shouldn't surprise you. They are likely using different assumptions for their quotes. You'll probably find a lot of the time is for setup that you can provide in advance. A certain percentage will be for providing reports, so reduce the reports to what you find useful and the price will drop. Later, you can generate your own reports from the data and the data is what is certified.
DIY - Dyno time is by the hour. If you visit the operator in advance you and he can create a test plan that can be accomplished in a few hours. He may even have a program in hand for dynamic load simulation for road use. Again, he can, and probably will be glad to, tell you what you need to know to reduce dyno time. I've heard different quotes, but less than $100/hr is normal and less than $50/hr is common - especially since you'll probably be using a chassis dyno. Your dyno data can then be published along with the conditions of test.
You should be able to perform a test for a day's dyno time and a week of your own preparation.
I'd be willing to help crunch data. The important parameters are air flow, fuel flow, torque and RPM. Each has to be corrected for the conditions. Some dyno sites can't give corrected numbers because they don't have the air flow attachments. Other information you would need would be water temp and exhaust temp for each exhaust port. Before and after for each of (A) standard ignition, (B) modern electronic ignition and glow plugs, each connected for typical use. The engine should be high compression and high efficiency like modern automotive engines.
I suspect that you will only want to publish steady state data, that is data for an engine under fixed load. That is not a put-down but a prediction of results. An airplane engine is just such an engine (fixed load). They are rarely operated outside of a narrow power band which is very nearly full power. Power generation engines are the same. Usually they want to provide nearly full power to a relatively fixed load. Automotive race engines are the same. All out power or idle with little in between.
Automotive engines for road use, on the other hand, have an extremely wide band of operation. Timing changes of 20 degrees or more between ignition events are normal. Ignition of a cylinder that is less than 10% full (by weight) is essential. Three hundred honest horsepower engines that cruise at less than 30 horsepower are being sold every day.
I can see a fixed timing device being adequate for the fixed output operation market, even possibly being superior with respect to starting ability, but not for automotive road engine applications.
Lastly, hopefully, I again say that if I had a patent, SBIR report, or SAE report that supported my position, I would refer to it in a manner that made it VERY easy to find. Certainly not as:
There also are publications at the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE.org) web site that discuss the results found by the University of Idaho. We cannot post these on our web site due to copyright restrictions, but you can obtain them from SAE.
Speaking for myself, the absense of data is still quite revealing.
And yes, I used to be KE4HCN before I let the license lapse, before that I was WD4AOQ. So I am no longer an amateur. Nice try.
dh
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Cherry
To: dh at busb.com
Cc: Bobby Yates Emory ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
Dear DH,
Have you ever paid for in dependant laboratory testing of a new product? Southwest Research Institute has quoted us $20,000 for a back to back test on a Briggs and Stratton industrial engine. The data we generated at Briggs and Stratton's laboratory is subject to an NDA.
An EPA certified testing laboratory quoted us $100K to certify the fuel economy and emissions benefits. ( This is mandatory prior to making any claims other than testimonials in product literature for on-highway vehicles)
So until we have the adequate funding to not only conduct in-house testing but pay for third-party independent testing, we are stuck demonstrating vehicles that have no other modifications that installing the SmartPlugs. We cannot legally sell a set to any believer until the product is certified by the EPA and approved for on-road use. This is why we are focusing on products that do not require EPA testing or certification until we can afford to do so.
The Mooney, which had no modifications other than the addition of 12 SmartPlugs and the removal of the magnetos and high tension leads and spark plugs, was owned by one of our investors who invested several hundred thousand of his own money to test his own aircraft. Do we have the money to get this to the market or go into production, not yet. But when we do, I expect that every TSIO 360 will acquire a set for the very reasons you state.
If you know of an EPA certified, third party testing facility that will test and verify our claims for free, please let me know. This would solve one of our biggest obstacles in getting to the market.
Bob Emory asked me several questions which I have tried to answer to the best of my ability. I did not initiate any communication with this chat group, but rather responded to questions I received.
Our SBIR contract is listed on the DoD SBIR web site. I believe you can search by the principle investigator's (Mark Cherry) name or by Catalytic Ignition.
Do you ever travel or take a vacation? Sandpoint.com is a popular vacation destination. There is no better third party than your own eyes and ears and seat of the pants acceleration. There also are publications at the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE.org) web site that discuss the results found by the University of Idaho. We cannot post these on our web site due to copyright restrictions, but you can obtain them from SAE.
I have done the best I can afford to do. I am sorry that you chose not to believe, but that is your choice, not mine. Meanwhile, I will continue to pursue my dream of taking the catalytic process out of the tail pipe and using it's benefits inside the engine where it does more that just clean up emissions but improves fuel economy and power and enables the use of domestically produced fuel.
Out of curiosity, what is your background? I would guess that you are not amateur as you imply in your most recent email. You seem to be more knowledgeable than a weekend warrior. Perhaps you even have a mechanical or other engineering degree or experience. I would love to converse further with you and am dead serious about the invitation to come visit. I have met many skeptics over the years and love to watch their expression as they drive the car or fly in the plane that they said was "Bull"
Sincerely,
Mark Cherry
(208)265-2723
At 05:22 PM 7/25/2005, dh at busb.com wrote:
Instead of talking on the Internet why not give access to the public documentation that would accompany all the claims you have made. That is, public documents that were generated by third parties. That would be an interesting URL.
You were ask for a set by a believer, and I don't believe you have delivered.
I've read a lot of hype and would openly accept anything else with keen interest.
Again, if you are not looking for investors, why are you here talking to us rank amateurs?
Why don't you answer the questions of the rank amateurs?
Something more than claims without any backing info would be very interesting. BTY the endorsement of ABC is not exactly a step up in credibility.
What was the SBIR contract number. That is public domain.
No other mods to the Quad 4 than smart plugs? Bull!
Why did you use investor money in a Mooney? Is that how you've spent investor money? BTY what is the range before and after the changes to the Mooney? Were the spark plugs the only change? I don't think so, or else every TSIO 360 Continental on the planet would have a set. People that own that type hardware know a superior product and avgas is rather expensive.
Generators are fixed load.
Wow PhD? Where is their reports?
Why would I invest in traveling to your place when you have presented NO documenation. Simply words with no backing and an internet site that is careful not to get into detail. Since the individual is given the monopoly for full public disclosure. Yes I've read the base patent, and it is a fixed timing patent that touts the disadvantage of a shrouded spark plug as a benefit, very questionable since each shouded sparkplug has the same characteristics.
Bet you haven't spend a penny defending the patent. No need. No violators.
Not even the Chinese are interested and they have a severe oil problem.
Again, what was the projectg for which SBIR money was awarded? What was the bid number? What was the contract term?
Be open and I'll be honest as to the information you present. Until then, as I promised other list members, adieu.
dh
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Cherry
To: dh at busb.com ; Bobby Yates Emory ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org ; Gary at smartplugs.com
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
Dear DH,
You, and anybody else who would like to, have an open invitation to come drive our 9.5:1 Quad 4 powered Olds Cutlass Calais. This car gets better fuel efficiency than with the factory ignition and readily revs to 6500 rpm during hard acceleration. Or to fly in our investor owned Mooney 231 with a turbo charged TSIO 360 Continental aircraft engine power plant. This plane can only reach 10 gallons per hour on standard ignition under cruise conditions. With SmartPlugs, this plane can reach 6.5 gallons per hour on unleaded fuel - without detonation.
You can also rope start our Honda generator on carbureted Jet A or #2 Diesel with your own hand. This is an 8.5:1 compression ratio engine that would normally require 90 octane to avoid detonation or knock since it is an air cooled engine. #2 Diesel has an octane rating of about 40 and Jet A about 60, yet the engine reaches full power and does not detonate.
And relative to the Army, These are not just-run-of-the- mill engineers, but PHD engineers who studied and carefully awarded us this contract out of 50 different proposals on how to get this job done. Not only have we had to compete with many engineering firms to win our first SBIR contract, but also had to complete to win our second and third phase of this contract.
They say that seeing is believing, so instead of talking about how it doesn't work, why don't you come to our facilities at 1926 industrial drive, Sandpoint, ID and take our car for a spin? or fly with one of our investors in his mooney?
Anytime one seeks to change the accepted status quo, there is resistance. We carefully working off the radar screen to develop the next combustion system that will allow the IC engine to meet the emission standards of the next century and beyond.
If our patents do precisely control and adjust the timing of a catalysts mounted inside the combustion chamber rather than in the tail pipe, do you see any thing wrong with that? Let assume for the moment, that all of our "know how" and trade secrets are not fully disclosed in our patents since our patents are being updated and changing as we develop this new technology that perhaps the patents don't reveal how we cause the catalyst to respond to and change the timing dynamically in response to cylinder conditions.
Perhaps the best thing would be for you to come visit and have a hand on demo. I look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Mark Cherry
PS, I have no idea who Ernest buckler is and have never heard his name prior to your email.
At 01:24 PM 7/16/2005, dh at busb.com wrote:
Then I would ask you and the Army if you've ever heard of a buzz box? You know that device that was put on the Model T's for ignition purposes. It just kept putting out sparks asynchronously until one of them happened to ignite the fuel mixture in the combustion chamber. The low RPM engine had multiple sparks and the fuel would ignite before optimum firing time and burn very slowly until the compression came up and the combustion speed increased. The timing of the engine was actually determined by compression pressure. Problem was that the timing changed due to fuel, throttle opening and a number of other FIRST ORDER factors.
A HUGE improvement was timed ignition, such that the engine had a consistent firing point. That point was the same whether the fuel changed, the compression changed or other FIRST ORDER factors. This allowed the development of high compression engines which would otherwise ignite too soon with sometimes disasterous results. Compression ratio is the primary consideration in fuel efficiency, not a first order factor, THE first order factor.
To the military, shame on you. Get an engineer. Understand the basics.
Questions:
When will Bobby Yates Emory receive his set of plugs?
Where is the documentation that the military received?
What is the relationship between you and Ernest Buckler <ebuckler at icehouse.net >?
You have made public claims in an effort to attract investors. Now you should step up to the plate with your actual claims.
For those who have not read the patents, the object is to embed an ignition device inside a pipe. Druing continuous operation, the contents of the pipe will be burnt gases which cannot be burned. Compression fills the chamber with burnable gas which is ignited when the burnt gasses are compressed into the chamber to the pint that the burnable gas comes into contact with the ignitor.
The first order effects will be the total depth of the pipe and the position of the ignitor. Might work great over a small range of conditions, but there doesn't seem to be any method for compensating for RPM, load, fuel quality and so forth. Very ingeneous method for retarding timing in an ICE with what is essentially a glow plug.
Sort of like the advance retard on a distributor, not needed for racing, indispensable for road operation.
Sort of like the low speed retard, not as important on a starter equipped engine, but indispensable on a hand cranked engine. (This last one was just for the humor - but true.)
Sort of like a detonation detector, VERY important in a high efficiency (high compression) engine when the gas truck mixes up the tanks at the local station. (no humor here.)
Yeah, I looked and think I sort of understood. Did I go wrong somewhere?
Now for a "I don't understand" question. I don't understand how the burning gasses are splayed into the combustion chamber when the deepest volume contains already burned gasses that are already hot and have no combustion products.
Once you've understood the mechanical advantage of the wheel and axle combination, it's hard to understand why one would go back to rolling over logs.
You may wonder about my extended response. It is the reference to 9/11.My opinion is that the problem with Smart Plugs is the same problem with the buzz box. They don't work as well as current solutions. To blame that on 9-11 is a sad, sad excuse for an intelligent marketing approach.
Military money has bloomed since 9/11. The requirements for sanity in military purchasing have diminished since 9-11. There is now more money than ever before for startups. This government seems to throw any amount of money to gadgets when they should be giving more money to the soldiers, in particular those that have been injured, instead of gadgets that seem to be inferior to existing technology.
Bobby, my original response was too long and must wait for approval. I stripped some of the extra stuff from this one. I did, however like your response to me and think you should post it
dh
----- Original Message -----
From: SmartPlugs
To: dh at busb.com
Cc: Bobby Yates Emory ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
I am not part of this list, I am just responding to questions asked by Bobby Yates Emory.
Sincerely,
Mark Cherry
----- Original Message -----
From: dh at busb.com
To: SmartPlugs
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 6:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
Then what are you looking for on this list?
dh
----- Original Message -----
From: SmartPlugs
To: dh at busb.com ; Bobby Yates Emory ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Cc: Gary at smartplugs.com ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
Dear Dh,
Patents are public information and freely available to the public. Simply go to www.uspto.gov and type Mark A. Cherry in the in the inventor's name and search. This should bring up all the patent numbers.
Don't worry about the investors - the SEC has very strict rules on seeking investment and I would definitely not look for investors on this list.
Sincerely,
Mark Cherry
----- Original Message -----
From: dh at busb.com
To: Bobby Yates Emory ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org ; SmartPlugs
Cc: Gary at smartplugs.com ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 7:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
You know, if you would give the international and other patent numbers there might be some funding. And the whole concept of patents is to get the information out to people. All people and all the information is the patent requirement. Just the patent numbers are all that is required.
Come on, get serious - I don't believe that you will get any investors from this list. Try one of the money for nothing lists or I just made $200,000 last month for setting on my @#$ lists because I sent in $19.95 in 5 easy payments.
Put up, or shut up.
dh
----- Original Message -----
From: Bobby Yates Emory
To: SmartPlugs
Cc: Gary at smartplugs.com ; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Greenfire re: Smart Plugs - anybody actually looked?
Mark,
Thank you for your forthright reply.
Good luck with your search for private placement investors.
I am still wanting a set.
Please pass along to your marketing team that internet marketing can be incredibly inespensive. If they start collecting email addresses, when you announce production start-up, they will have a list of customers ready to go.
Bobby
On 7/4/05, SmartPlugs <info at smartplugs.com> wrote:
Dear Sirs:
We have been, for the last three years, working on a US Army Funded SBIR program that will allow the army to use the SmartPlug technology to run Carbureted Honda Generators on JP-8 ( military jet A) and on #2 Diesel. We current are under the third SBIR Contract or Phase II Plus. We have delivered 5 generators to the army for their testing and evaluation. The military does not spend millions of dollars on a technology that is a scam, but rather they have seen with their own eyes the ability of the SmartPlug to precisely time any internal combustion engine with a constantly hot catalyst. We can rope start these 8.5:1 generators at -25F in one to two pulls and reach rated power with out detonation. Our exhaust is transparent and as clean or cleaner than the factory spark and gasoline operation.
We can't sell product on a large scale until we have raise the proper funding to build the factory. We have been seeking such funding since 2000. At Oshkosh 2001, we thought we had fully funded our company. But after 9/11 all of the promised investment disappeared. It might come as a surprise to you, but building a SmartPlug factory is a multimillion dollar undertaking and without the factory, we can only build SmartPlugs on a custom order basis and that is painstakingly slow and costly.
We have 5 international patents on our technology and are working with several major players in the automotive industry and are also discussing with several aircraft companies.
I would love to be able to sell SmartPlugs to all who want them too, but post 9/11 I am just thankful that our patents are still enforce and that we are still here, unlike so many other start-up companies that are not.
The bottom line is that the product works. We are driving a Olds Quad 4 with SmartPlugs, have an STC on the O-200 in progress and we are preparing to go into production with Honda Generators converted to operate on JP-8 and Diesel using the SmartPlug Technology. At the University of Idaho, we have a Ford 351 van running on 35% water and 65% ethanol and also a yanmar diesel converted to run on Homogeneous mixtures of air and 35%water and 65% ethanol. We are struggling but we are planning to go into production for certain niche markets after we have raised the capital for the factory. Perhaps your group might be the source of our factory financing? Do you have any accredited investors who would like to review our Private Placement Memorandum? If so, availability of SmartPlugs might be sooner than you think.
Sincerely,
Mark Cherry
Chairman
Smartplugs Corporation
(208)265-2723
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/diy_efi/attachments/20050731/7dd9d070/attachment.html
More information about the Diy_efi
mailing list