| Author |
 Topic  |
|
mrgone
Nobel Prize Winner
USA
1176 Posts |
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6717 Posts |
 Posted - Jun 13 2008 : 11:25:14 AM
|
| Based on the diagrams it appears that the intent is to run the engine on hydrogen produced in the vehicle using electrolosys? If so, it will never work. |
 |
|
|
mrgone
Nobel Prize Winner
USA
1176 Posts |
Posted - Jun 13 2008 : 5:42:00 PM
|
| I don't know. I believe the frequency helps break apart the water molecule as well as the higher voltage. The quote I posted seems to suggest a fairly good efficiency. At any rate it could be applied as a suppliment to your gas. Good God, I would be more than happy to shave a couple of bucks off the price of a gallon. That may be achievable. What do you think? |
|
|
|
audioguru
Nobel Prize Winner
Canada
4218 Posts |
Posted - Jun 13 2008 : 7:58:43 PM
|
Electrolysis of water takes a very high current to make a tiny amount of HHO.
The air-fuel intake of a car has much more than the tiny amount of HHO so it is neglegible and the electrolysis power is wasted. |
|
|
|
mrgone
Nobel Prize Winner
USA
1176 Posts |
Posted - Jun 14 2008 : 07:23:50 AM
|
| In this article they said just the opposite. That it used a very high voltage of around 2000 volts and low current in the milliamps. |
|
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6717 Posts |
Posted - Jun 14 2008 : 10:39:02 AM
|
Power remains constant in a circuit. It's either high current and low voltage, or high voltage and low current. Can't get around the laws of physics.
To save a few bucks at the pump, learn to drive efficiently. |
|
|
|
CurrentOverflow
Mad Scientist
Canada
311 Posts |
Posted - Jun 15 2008 : 1:43:54 PM
|
| Electrolysis by certain frequencies seems to be the hype in the energy world lately. I've read about the man who discovered that you can burn water by feeding a high amplitude signal into it. However the machine he used was massive and could probably power a whole State. Traditional electrolysis says that all you need to electrolyse a liquid is the combination of the oxidization and reduction voltage. In water its 0V to oxydize hydrogen and 1.23 to reduce oxygen. Farady discovered that the moles produced correlate to the quantity of charge pumped in. So charge = coulombs or 1 C = 1A/s and hundreds of amps are needed to produce even 1 mole. All this to say that there still is a lot not known about the universe as this science dates back only 200 years and there is plenty of room to grow. I dont believe that it is possible with very little current due to Farady and as well i believe the pulsed high voltage creates nothing but wasted heat. |
~Mike~
Theres 10 kinds of people, those who understand binary and those who don't |
|
|
|
cyclopsitis
Nobel Prize Winner
Canada
732 Posts |
Posted - Jul 04 2008 : 7:03:33 PM
|
Its called resonant electrolosis. I checked a few sites out about it and ofcourse there is that you tube video on it with the guy who works for some TV station who came up with it. It is more efficent then regular electrolosis and one company does it off of two 12V car batteries. I emailed the company in Ontario but they never retured my emails or phone calls about their system.. So I think the company is full of hot H.
I wish there was a way to get around it but there isn't. I recently took a Quantum physics course... Even at the atomic level yes energy and momentum are conserved but there are many places that the energy can go in quantum structure (not all in heat). Nuclear fusion would be an answer if only we could figure how to contain a reaction at 1,000,000degC. Some scientists have acomplished it at cooler temps but you have to HUGE magnets to contain the high energy particles. |
|
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6717 Posts |
|
|
mrgone
Nobel Prize Winner
USA
1176 Posts |
Posted - Jul 24 2008 : 11:17:59 AM
|
| Yeah more and more it seems highly improbable. You hear & see all these reports like the Reuters video clip of a car Japan supposedly built that runs and water. The only thing with that is, about two or three years ago I saw this fabulous robot that did cart wheels and back flips and was supposedly built in Japan. It was plan to see from thows curves that it was a girl in robot suit. I'd do her...lol. Just hope I don't get it caught in the mail drive gear. |
|
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6717 Posts |
Posted - Jul 25 2008 : 3:53:22 PM
|
| I've seen the "runs on water" video as well. Funny thing is, it doesn't run on water any more then a steam engine runs on water. It really runs on whatever power is being used to crack water and excite it enough to make it burn. In the same sense that a steam engine runs on whatever is used to heat the water. |
|
|
|
spaman
Apprentice
USA
128 Posts |
Posted - Jul 27 2008 : 9:12:07 PM
|
Hello yall,
The funny thing about this subject there are those who believe and install the HOD system and get anywhere from 25% to 50% increase in fuel mileage, now i was riding the line on the subject and built a electrolyzer for my garden tractor and guess what, i have cut my grass 7 times (1.5 acres) on 2 gals of gas, that a fact! It works, and the more you talk about it the richer you make OPEC and the Big Oil Companys.
Now Aarron, it you think its that impossible then just get a hold of one hook it up and light a match at the outlet, BOOM! it will blow up! That should prove that water burns!
I have told you guys some time ago that a co-worker was using the HOD system and getting GREAT gas mileage, but that was just garbage talk to most of you all, infact i have installed this HOD system on a friends S10 and he went from 30MPH to 45MPH with the proper controls inplace the numbers are there! I will be doing my 2 cars on my next break, i have already have made the electrolyzers, putting 6 on my Impala and 4 on my Escort, I hate paying OPEC and the crooks that are robbing the American people, so i am doing something to ease the uncontrolable sprial prices of fuel by cheeting OPEC and THE Big Gas companys.
If you dont believe thats ok, mrgone get it done it works! The last time i missed an opertunity like this was in the early 80's when a long time friend offered me cell blocks on a satelite for cell phones, i though that was impossible, well look at us now! My friend purchased 2000 cell blocks (each held 144 cell numbers) now hes a multi-millionare, making $2.25 per month per number, well do the math.
Just one match will make a the impossible a blast, try it! If you dont blow up or get burned than i will agree with you, it dont work! |
|
|
|
audioguru
Nobel Prize Winner
Canada
4218 Posts |
Posted - Jul 27 2008 : 10:04:21 PM
|
It is easy to make a tiny amount of hydrogen from a fairly large amount of expensive gasolime when an engine drives the alternator for electrolysis. But an engine uses a lot more than a tiny amount of fuel. So the electrical power is wasted and the engine runs worse than before (loaded down by the alternator).
Why don't gullable people understand that it takes more power to break water into hydrogen and oxygen than you get by burning it (if you adjust the engine's computer to deal with it). |
|
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6717 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2008 : 11:16:17 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by spaman
Hello yall,
The funny thing about this subject there are those who believe and install the HOD system and get anywhere from 25% to 50% increase in fuel mileage, now i was riding the line on the subject and built a electrolyzer for my garden tractor and guess what, i have cut my grass 7 times (1.5 acres) on 2 gals of gas, that a fact! It works, and the more you talk about it the richer you make OPEC and the Big Oil Companys.
I flat out don't believe this. Primarily because I understand the scientific process behind what is supposed to be happening. Any improvement in fuel consumption is due to other external factors.
I've had people stick two magnets on their fuel lines and then tell me it's increased their mileage. Of course they are driving differently, even if they don't know it. I get all kinds of wackos and conspiracy theories because people see me driving the Insight around.
"Big Oil" is a public company. You can invest and get rich off of high fuel prices just like everyone else can. In fact, I have some money saved so I probably will. It seems like a no-brainer type investment to me.
quote:
Now Aarron, it you think its that impossible then just get a hold of one hook it up and light a match at the outlet, BOOM! it will blow up! That should prove that water burns!
No, no, NO! Water does not burn. Hydrogen burns.
The following actual scientific proof of this scam not working has been copied and pasted from http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml:
------------------
The first thing you'll note about these "run your car on water" schemes is the size of the electrolysis cell and the wires that lead to it.
Typically they're about jam-jar size and the wires are about 16 gauge, a thickness that can comfortably carry about 30A which, at 12V, represents about 360W of power.
So the first question obviously has to be...
How much gas is needed to reduce fuel consumption by 40%?
Well the first thing is to work out how much energy it requires to keep an average vehicle cruising at(say) 65mph. According to this source it takes around 20HP to cruse at that speed.
Let's convert that to electrical energy by multiplying by 746 (the number of watts in a horsepower). We get 14,920, or roughly 15KW.
Now, if we want to replace 40% of that power with energy from HHO gas, we'll need to use at least 15KW x 0.4 which comes to 6,000 watts (6KW).
If we assume that the electrolysis cell which converts electricity into HHO gas is 100% efficient (which it certainly isn't) then that means we'll need a massive 6000W/12V or 500 amps of current to make that much gas.
Suddenly those 30A wires are looking rather inadequate aren't they?
What's more, since the average car's alternator can only deliver about 80A of current, this means the battery would have to deliver the other 520A and (in the case of even a good 80AH unit) would be flat in under 10 minutes.
Of course these simple calculations ignore the fact that electrolysis cells are not 100% efficient and the even more important fact that the average internal combustion engine is only around 30% efficient -- so even if we delivered 6KW of HHO gas to the engine it would only produce under 2KW of actual power.
With these inefficiencies taken into account we'd actually need a staggering 1,500A of electrical current to generate the necessary HHO gas to reduce our fuel input by 40%.
So clearly the math doesn't add up. There's just no way you can extract enough electrical energy from your car's automotive system to create the gas volumes needed to create any meaningful amount of energy.
How efficient are those electrolysis cells?
Well in the above calculations, we've assumed 100% efficiency but the sad truth is that even the best electrolysis cells offer far less than that.
In the case of these "run your car on water" scams, the tiny containers of water usually pictured are grossly inadequate, not only in their efficiency but also in their actual size.
http://www.youtube.com/v/lSrYX8Va2E
Take a look at the YouTube video above and note the following:
the amount of power the small single-cylinder is producing
the amount of gas being used to produce that small amount of power
the size of the electrolysis cells needed to generate that amount of gas
the amount of electrical power (1.7KW) needed to generate that gas.
Obviously, given that it's taking 1.7KW (or around 2.3HP) of electrical energy and a huge electrolysis cell to create *just* enough gas to keep a lawnmower engine barely idling, the jam-jar sized cells promoted for vehicles are a joke.
And the sad thing is that, even if you used a huge cell like this, the amount of gas created would still be too small to have any discernable effect and the amount of electrical energy required would be beyond any vehicles electrical system.
So there you have it folks.
The laws of thermodynamics remain safe. The only thing at risk is the hard-earned cash of those who are gullible enough to be duped by these scammers.
No, you can't run your car on water by installing a useless electrolysis cell under the bonnet.
But wait... I've recently had a lot of email from HHO scammers who claim that I've got it all wrong and that HHO doesn't violate the laws of thermodynamics.
------------------
And here's the continuation of that article from http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam2.shtml that specifically covers the HHO scam:
------------------
Since I wrote the original article pointing out how the claims that by creating HHO gas, you could "run your car on water" were a clear violation of the laws of thermodynamics, I've had a lot of correspondence from people who say "that's not how it works".
They claim that these HHO schemes don't violate the laws of thermodynamics because the extra fuel savings gained comes from the way HHO gas improves the thermal efficiency of your car's engine by altering the way regular gasoline and diesel is burnt.
They claim that the injection of HHO into your vehicle's air intake significantly increases the speed with which the air/gasoline mix inside the cylinder burns and therefore more of the fuel is burnt than in an unmodified engine. That extra fuel-burn means extra power or lower fuel consumption.
Well I always try to keep an open mind about these things so I thought I'd do some research to see if this was really true.
I Googled the web to try and find some sound-science that supported the claims of the pro-HHO community and I found an interesting paper (PDF) published at the 2004 FISITA world automotive congress in Barcelona.
The testing methods seem sound and the results/conclusions presented in this paper are indeed very interesting. They seem to lend credibility to the claims of those pushing HHO systems.
However, on closer inspection it all falls apart.
Yes, the addition of H2 and O2 the intake of an engine does appear to improve the thermal efficiency by (in the case of the tests cited) an astonishing 15%.
However, the following destroys the claims of the HHO fans.
1. The amount of HHO gas required is far, far greater than any of the commercially available or DIY electrolysis cells on the market can produce. Indeed, the amount of electricity required to create these gas volumes is once again beyond the ability of any conventional car's electrical system.
2. The particulate output of the engine being tested actually *increased* significantly, whereas the HHO proponents are claiming lower emissions. In fact, particulate emissions are now being cited as a major health risk and cause of premature death
So, as is so often the case with these scams, this one does have some very tenuous link to scientific principle. Unfortunately, what they don't tell you (or probably don't even understand) is that the very tiny amounts of this gas they're injecting into their engines will have almost no effect whatsoever on the combustion efficiency of their engines -- and what improvement there is will be more than lost to the extra load put on their alternators.
One thing that should be noted however, is that vehicles with an electronic engine-management system and computer that displays fuel use in MPG can become confused when even trace amounts of H2/O2 are injected in the manner the HHO proponents suggest.
This can cause erroneously high MPG figures to be displayed, even though they're not actually being attained and (even worse) they can cause your engine to run very lean -- effectively risking damage and creating increased emission of nitrous oxides.
And if you're someone who's certain that you're getting improved mileage from your HHO system, here's an experiment for you to try...
First, make sure you can turn your electrolysis cell off and on while driving.
Now with the cell turned off, drive at a constant 60mph for a minute or two, so that the engine reaches a steady temperature. Don't use cruise-control, just use your foot to position the gas-pedal so your speed remains constant.
Without moving your foot (the one on the gas pedal), turn on your electrolysis cell.
Now if all the claims for HHO are true, your engine will be developing 20%-30% *more* power than it did with the electrolysis cell turned off -- so you should notice your speed increase to around 70-75mph as the HHO gas starts flowing.
If you don't get this increase, then it's *not* working.
Or you could do this the other way...
Ensure your electrolysis cell is energized and drive along at a steady 60mph.
Now turn off the cell without moving the gas pedal up or down.
Your engine's power should drop noticeably -- since the combustion efficiency will (according to the pro-HHO people) now be much lower than before. THis means your car or truck should slow down quite noticeably -- perhaps to as little as 45mph.
If you try these experiments and don't see the changes you should then you can be pretty sure that the fuel-efficiency you think your seeing is just the placebo effect or your engine's electronic management system being fooled into running your vehicle dangerously lean (with a high risk of damage).
Here's another question -- does your engine's idle increase by 40% as the HHO gas starts being generated after you start it? If not -- why not?
If the fuel is burnt 40% more efficiently then the amount of fuel that produces an idle of (say) 1,000 RPMs should produce an idle of 1,400 RPMs when the gas kits in. If it doesn't then there's your proof that this system doesn't work.
Update: I've now asked over 100 HHO scammers to perform these tests and report their observations. Not one has done so. That's because the vast majority of those claiming it works don't even have a system in their vehicles, they're only in this scam for the money they earn from it.
And another worrying aspect of these HHO conversions has been brought to my attention...
All of those who are *actually* seeing a small improvement in fuel efficiency after fitting one of these kits have one thing in common.. they've messed around with the O2 sensor in their engine. The rationale here is that the extra oxygen from the electrolysis is causing the O2 sensor to return a reading that will cause the engine computer to increase the amount of gasoline injected -- so the O2 sensor should be disabled or adjusted to compensate.
This is utter rubbish. The O2 coming from the electrolysis cell will be totally consumed when it oxidizes the hydrogen during combustion.
What happens when you fool with the O2 sensor is that you trick your engine computer into forcing your engine to run lean -- far leaner than it's designed to run -- and that's bad.
Yes, you *may* save a few dollars per tank in fuel costs but you'll pay dearly for it a little further down the track in the form of burnt valves and damaged piston-crowns.
When you allow your engine to run lean, the internal operating temperatures soar, as does the exhaust gas temperature. This has a huge effect on the life of the valves and valve-seats, as well as promoting pre-ignition and the damaging effects that can produce.
And if you are someone who's done this and claim extra mileage, try disconnecting your HHO system without further touching the O2 sensor. Guess what, your fuel efficiency will *increase* even further! The HHO system has *nothing* to do with the fuel-economy you're seeing, it's simply the over-lean setting you've fooled your engine's computer into delivering.
I also urge you to read this proof which contains some rather more involved math but addresses all the issues very well and provides further conclusive proof that this whole HHO schem is just a scam.
------------------
And there you have it. The above two articles were written by Bruce Simpson, and thus the content is copyright © 1995 - 2008 to Bruce Simpson. It is reproduced here without permission.
In addition, Bruce Simpson has offered $1,000,000 to anyone who can prove this junk works.
From Bruce's page:
------------------
Since I originally published my pages debunking the science behind HHO and exposing these schemes as blatant frauds, I've had hundreds of emails from scammers who insist that *they* are getting the claimed "40% improvement in gas mileage".
Well I'm calling their bluff by announcing the One Million Dollar HHO Challenge.
Full story: http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_challenge.shtml
------------------
Yesterday I found a good video on YouTube which expresses my views perfectly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSnSxAMjXq8 |
|
|
|
spaman
Apprentice
USA
128 Posts |
|
|
Aaron Cake
Administrator
Canada
6717 Posts |
Posted - Aug 02 2008 : 10:27:59 AM
|
Well no kidding, electrolysis makes hydrogen which explodes when flame is applied. What's your point? Any 6 year old knows that hydrogen burns...
"Hydroxy" gas doesn't exist. The gas produced by electrolosys is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. Chemically combine them into "hydroxy" and it's water again.
The video calls it "exploding water", which it clearly is not. It's just hydrogen and oxygen burning. Nothing the least bit extraordinary.
This is an experiment that an 8th grade science student performs. Split water into hydrogen and oxygen, put hydrogen in a test tube and light it for a nice bang. I don't see how this is at all special.
There's a few other things you need to notice about that YouTube account:
1. He constantly claims that he is burning water, when in fact he's just burning a bit of hydrogen and oxygen.
2. All his favourites are other "Water4Gas" scams.
3. Many of his subscribers are conspiracy nuts. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Hydrogen Fuel for Cars
