My experience with HHO Gas.
Week one. Other than the excess heat caused by not mixing my electrolyte correctly I will have to state that I am getting an increase of roughly 35% better gas mileage. That is because I have yet to acquire a modulator to fool my O2 sensor and the fuel pump is still supplying a rich mixture of gas. Once I have that I expect the mileage to go up even further. My 98 eclipse was getting around 300 miles to a tank spirited driving and it's a 12 gallon tank. I am getting close to that mark with a little over half a tank of fuel. 280 miles to 7 gallons. That is 40 mpg!!!
My eclipse is a 4 cylinder dual overhead cam.
A friend sent me this video the other day. It has much to do with why this viable technology isn't out yet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uylSdePEbwI&feature=related
Other than this video I do hear the Japanese aren't waiting around any longer and have started production or trying to start production. Looks like they are telling Big Oil and IMF who have been stifiling this technology for decades to go to hell.
http://in.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idINSP7366720080613
Also some home design by a person who is claiming to produce 10 liters of hydrogen a minute. Great video.
Water for Gas?
Can it be real?....Sure it is.....Why don't we have it?...."Waiting for approval from the EPA"...???
http://www.wkrg.com/consumer/article/water_for_gas_is_it_a_p...
Enjoy!
If you have any idea how to
If you have any idea how to mass-produce these, I would love to come and work with you, as I am currently unemployed.
I am also good at marketing, and can produce excellent websites- If you'd like one on a pro-bono basis, let me know.
|^^^^^^^^^^^\||____ San Luis Obispo, CA
| RON PAUL 2012 |||""'|""\___,
| _____________ l||__|__|__|); Freedom 101
|(@)@)"""""""**|(@)(@)**|(@)
HHO Video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMrRKFETsbo&NR=1
.
.
http://www.ronpaulsingles.com/
Paper Ballots Hand Counted At The Precinct Or Bust
Support WTP Federal Supreme Court Case To Ban All Electronic Voting Or Forget 2010 or 2012
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/Update2009-05-11...
http://www.dailypaul.com/152976/diebold-vs-paper-ballots
http://www.ncel.w4sp.com/
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
http://www.votefraud.org/
http://www.hulu.com/hacking-democracy
Believers in HH0 are ignorant..
I would like to state the obvious...(but it doesn't seem to be obvious)
HH0 doesn't work for the reasons you think it does....
Yes you MAY be burning very small amounts of oxygen and hydrogen,(I doubt it adds much to the bang in the cylinder) however, the real reason there is an increase in the effeciency of the engine is related to air density and % of humidity..
The internal combustion engine is only minimally effecient, with a large byproduct of heat.
In reality the water vapor in the .025% "browns gas" is just STEAM expanding within the cylinder using the residual heat of the combustion chamber/process to increase its efficiency. Anyone can do the same thing if you add small amounts of water to the air filter in the engine. (or use a supercharger, turbo, air scoop etc.)
Remember to change your oil frequently, because there will be alot of the cylinder wall and water in the oil as both the oil and cylinders break down due to the steam cleaning they are undergoing...LOL
This is the same effect that occurs when the air becomes saturated (high humidity) only the effect is usually lost to a direct increase in proportional drag on the body (vehicle) travelling through the same fluid (air).
Look it up, race cars make more horsepower when the air is dense, but it is harder to push through the air to increase speed from the horsepower gain. (at a loss that is a cube of the speed !!)
(this is also why passenger jets cruise at high altitude...low air density)
Don't get me wrong, there may be an increase in effeciency, however it is only a product of the difference between the mean air density, and the density of the air that is moving through the engine. I would be willing to bet that the effeciency decreases proportional to the increase of the air density (outside the engine..that the car has to push through).
Losses increase as the proportion of "browns gas" increases for several reasons. (all stated in other posts) Otherwise we would be squeezing more energy from the water than is available which is a clear violation of the law of conservation of mass.
As you generate more electricity to seperate more hydrogen from oxygen, you reach a point of diminishing returns where the energy used to "split" the water into its components becomes too large to offset the gains in thermal/dynamic/mechanical effeciency. Eventually you will be spending as much energy to split up the water as it would have taken to move the vehicle. (you get much higher effeciencies from electric motors !!)
Smarten up people, if it were worth it to split water up, we would be doing it.. there is just no gain to be had in changing states of matter.
Yes, adding water(vapor) can get increases in effeciency in gas engines, but not due to hydrogen.
For hydrogen to work, there still needs to be a source of energy to seperate water into hydrogen and oxygen, but by the time you work it out, the hydrogen doesn't solve anything. We would like to think hydrogen will solve something, but it is actually just a dead re-chargable battery in need of a real power source.
The sun, and the heat from within the earth are the ONLY reasonable sources of ENERGY man has to work with, so get used to solar and geothermal. (Nuclear will work, but its far too messy for our home planet in the long run.)
Keep in mind, wind, and hydro are only extensions of SOLAR power!!
The real question is can we do away with the fossil fuel all together !! Show me the money on that one, and I'll be impressed !!
If you really think you can show me different than I have described above please feel free to email me so I can see it in person...
Chris
chrisrohrer at hotmail.com
(absolutely no spam!!)
(nothing off this topic either!!)
Shows how much you know
Tell that to the people who've increased their gas mileage by building one themselves. LOL. Big oil Shill. Oh and with your linear thinking the sun is just a dead rechargeable battery because it's fusing hydrogen by the billions of tonnes every minute.
Big oil Big energy has been suppressing technology since before Nicola Tesla. Stop impeding mankind with your greed.
"The Vega Rant"
Go head, say I'm crazy.
In 1974 I bought my first car a 1972 Chevy Vega.
4 cylinder
4 speed
2 door
Mileage was about 24 city and 34 MPG. It was one of Detroit's early "economy cars."
2010 Chevy Cobalt
4 cylinder
5 speed
2 doors
Mileage 24 city and 35 highway
38 years and what the F do you have?
You gonna give me some scientific treatise on that one?
The law of thermodynamics is the culprit?
Both cars are plastic pieces of sh%$, They both have poorly designed little engines and in 38 years NOTHING has been done to improve them. I am not talking about airbags etc.
If you are going to try and defend the manufacturers, how are you going to do it?
38 years at an average of 15 million cars a year. That is a lot of money to NOT spend trying to get cheap little Chevys up to 40 mpg.
No excuse.
Please respond to the following separately:
I am not a scientist.
A catalytic converter takes the exhaust gases subjects them to a 'chemical reaction" and the puke out of the exhaust pipe is vastly cleaner than before. Yay!
I have only one issue with this,
The CC runs at about 1200 degrees F.
In college if you drove out into a field to make out with your girl friend and you parked over grass.....you set it on fire.
This has been corrected....but is still runs at 1200 F.
Now i am stupid, but I know that it takes a sh%$load of natural gas to heat the hot water for my baseboards, about $150 a month in the winter.
Now the catalytic converter on the Buick is 1200 F all the time the engine is running........soooo....I'm heating the parking lot?
The exhaust gas in my Buick is heating my catalytic converter to 1200 F.
Since the effing ICE was created whenever the hell it was in the late 1800's they have done NOTHING to harness the heat puking out of the back of the car....nothing. I don't mean rare cars I mean cheap Chevy's.
WTF?!
This is the same WTF as the one i did when I learned the fed was owned by a bunch of rich guys.
A Ford model T had a switch on the dash. One side for ethanol and the other for petrol.
Change those 2 labels to..."any farmer anywhere" and "Rockefeller."
Guess we know who won that battle...huh?
I have a nose and I smell a RAT.
Unify
People are still falling for
People are still falling for this BS?!
Read a science book and learn math, IT DOES NOT WORK!
Not impossible
It is not impossible that introducing hydrogen and oxygen into the fuel mixture can cause gasoline to burn more efficiently in an internal combustion engine. That is a very complex question theoretically.
But, can the energy released by burning hydrogen in an engine surpass the energy required to create the hydrogen from water in the first place? Nope. Chemical bonds and molecular orbitals have a specific quanta of energy associated with certain states. Changing the states involves the same amount of energy forward and backward.
Yep.
and that wasted energy from the alternator that can power everything from a car stereo system to headlights is whats utilized to electrolyze the HHO.
No
You don't understand how an alternator works. It only produces what is needed and puts that amount of drag on the engine. The greater the load on the electrical system, the greater the load the alternator transfers to the engine. The alternator does not have a constant output and a constant load on the engine. The more electricity you draw from the system, the greater the drag on the engine.
If you don't believe me, get hold of a crank-driven permanent magnet generator. Start cranking it and then while you are cranking it connect it to a load and see what happens. Alternators are no different. If you ever try and run a house off grid with a generator you can hear the engine struggle when big-current items like AC come on line. Alternators and generators create resistance to the prime mover (engine) in proportion to load. Increase the current draw and you will increase the resistance the engine must drive.
So you are not running your HHO cell on "waste" energy. You are increasing the load on the alternator and the engine. I can't say by how much because I don't know the current draw of your cell.
And I am NOT saying you are not increasing engine EFFICIENCY by more than the draw to run the cell. It is possible.
inductive loads, involve magnetism.
that is why starting the a/c or refrigerator draws down the generator. typically it is 3 to 6 times the running load current. this initial load can be reduced by utilizeing start capacitors and not short cycling the unit.
a resissitive load does not have "inrush" current.
an internal cumbustion engine is a pump, an air pump. the heat created is all waste.
yes, it is true! a/c and refrigeration guys think everything is a pump!
creating more pressure via HHO is not difficult to imagine. the amount of energy used is best determined in watts, not amps. multipy amps [current] x volts to get watts.
" the important thing is to never stop questioning, curiousity, has it's own reason for existing..
Albert Einstien
Knowledge is power, action is love.
not trying to follow you
not trying to follow you around, but an alternator works differently than a generator...
a generator gets more electricity the more RPM's and thus more drag requires more fuel, alternators however, put out the same amount of power regardless of the rpm, once they reach there minimum speed.
"These smooth slip rings (unlike the comparatively rough contacts on a commutator in a generator) and the fact that the relatively heavy windings are fixed instead of rotating allows the alternator to be spun to much higher speeds. This allows it to reach it's maximum output sooner and to be spun fast enough at engine idle speeds to produce enough electricity to power most (if not all) of the needs of the car without relying on the battery."
http://www.rowand.net/shop/tech/alternatorgeneratortheory.htm
TSANSTAFL
The problem is, the energy required to turn the alternator, whatever the rpm, is directly proportional to the amperage that it's driving. When you put the water-splitter on the thing, the electrical system draws more amps. The alternator is harder to turn, and thus the engine uses more gasoline to turn it.
There still ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
Aint no. Good grammar there.
It's not a free lunch. it's utilizing wasted fossil fuels with a better burn, and it is using otherwise wasted energy to create Hydrogen which is 8000 times more expansive than regular fossil fuels.
TRSANSTAAFL
There is no "otherwise wasted energy" being "utilized"!
TANSTAAFL is an allusion to the literature.
TANSTAFL
That energy comes from the gasoline tank. When there is a higher load on the alternator because of the water-splitter, it pulls on the engine more.
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
you seem to imply that: a)
you seem to imply that:
a) the combustion engine is perfectly efficient
b) the "water splitter" uses more energy than the radio
and c) that whatever energy is RELEASED from "splittin the water" is equal to the amount of gas used.
what if in the trunk of your car, you had a can of gas hinged above a funnel leading to your gas tank...and when the gas gauge gets close to "E" you flip a switch that runs an electric motor that tips the gas can, essentially separating the gas from the can, and it dumps into the funnel and into your tank....would you say the electricity used to tip the can towards the funnel was the same energy that is in the gasoline that dumped?
of course not.
If you have 1,000 helium balloons tied to a 10 lb weight, and a rope is tied to them and to the ground to keep them from lifting, it will NOT take the same amount of energy to cut or untie the rope as will be exerted by the balloons lifting the weight.
reason:
the energy is stored in the balloons, just as it is stored in water in the form of hydrogen, and the amount of energy needed to "RELEASE" it is different from the amount of energy stored in it.
firewood has a lot of energy stored in it, but the match it takes to ignite it is NOT equal to the energy output of the log.
Straw man
The TV screaming heads use that device. They put words in the other fellow's mouth.
No, I do not imply either a), b) or c). C is close to true. The amount of energy used by the motor to split the water is actually greater than the amount of energy available from recombining the oxygen and hydrogen, because the gasoline engine is far from 100% efficient.
What I do imply is that the silly device does not violate the laws of thermodynamics.
The analogies with firewood and so forth do not hold. Water is hydrogen that is already completely "burned."
lets start here: do you
lets start here:
do you think the hydrogen in water can be separated?
is the hydrogen that is separated flammable?
how is it, that with a motorcycle battery, a hose, a plastic coffee can, and some stainless steel light cover plates, I was able to get a flame from the end of the hose?
1) Yes. 2) Yes. The hydrogen
1) Yes.
2) Yes.
The hydrogen and oxygen that comprise water can be separated. It takes exactly as much energy to separate them as is released when they are re-combined, which is to say, when the hydrogen is burned.
I don't want to start a chemistry class here. There are others who are far more qualified. They can tell you all about the electron bonds and whatnot. Ditto with the physics of electric alternators. I just decided for the sake of appearances not to let this go unchallenged this time around. Next time I will just ignore it and hope it goes away again.
That's all from me. Good night, and pleasant dreams.
incorrect, it takes exactly
incorrect, it takes exactly the same amount of energy to separate them as it does to keep them together...once they are separated, the by product is a flammable fuel, hydrogen...and a non flammable oxygen. Oxygen doesnt like to exist alone so it bonds to something, after combustion it bonds to hydrogen.
if you boil water in a pan, and the steam goes up to a condenser and runs out of the condenser into a bucket sitting on a teeter totter, eventually the bucket fills enough to push the teeter down, and lift the other side. This action is not part of the equation of boiling the water, it is a by-product.
Separating the bond between hydrogen and oxygen is not difficult, nor energy consuming...but once released a flammable gas is present.
Lighting a dynamite fuse with a match is a good way to think of this. The match doesnt have as much energy as the dynamite.
That's funny
Because so many different people all over the globe have gotten it to increase gas mileage by them experimenting with HHO personally. Surely it has to be a conspiracy to sell something. I mean if it didn't work for all theses people that built their own, then why on earth would they tell others it does.
What science book is that you want us to read? The one that defines thermodynamics or the one that identifies frequencies.
Any one ever heard of hydrogen embrittlement?
Just curious? Good luck with crack valves at about 10,000 miles.
doubtful
Why? well cathodic protection, phosphating, pickling, and electroplating, as well as a special case of arc welding, none of which are happening in a combustion engine but all of which it takes for Hydrogen embrittlement to occur is what you're referring too.
The only breakdown you're getting is the minuscule destruction of your hydrogen cell from electrolysis generation. The HHO actually cleans deposits from the valves intake and pistons.
But thank you for your misguided insight.
wow i never knew reading a wikipedia entry made you an expert
hydrogen embrittlement isn't just known to occur in those processes. There is nothing unique or extreme that has to happen. Hydrogen is a tiny little molecule and gets into the micro-structure of high strength steel easily. Even easier when in the presence of high heat.
Now there are plenty of things to refute me on here if you know what you are talking about, but the sentence before your copy and paste reads clearly. "Hydrogen embrittlement can occur during various manufacturing operations or operational use - anywhere that the metal comes into contact with atomic or molecular hydrogen."
And if you go up a paragraph....."The mechanism starts with lone hydrogen atoms diffusing through the metal. At high temperatures, the elevated solubility of hydrogen allows hydrogen to diffuse into the metal (or the hydrogen can diffuse in at a low temperature, assisted by a concentration gradient). When these hydrogen atoms re-combine in minuscule voids of the metal matrix to form hydrogen molecules, they create pressure from inside the cavity they are in. This pressure can increase to levels where the metal has reduced ductility and tensile strength up to the point where it cracks open (hydrogen induced cracking, or HIC). High-strength and low-alloy steels, nickel and titanium alloys are most susceptible."
those deposits might actually protect the valves from having hydrogen get into them.
Name other instances then.
Also since we are on it. You do realize that those deposits rob an energy of horse power..
Name other instances...hmmm
like when you try to run a Internal combustion engine on Hydrogen. Hydrogen storage tanks also can have this problem. Fasteners have this problem...oil fields and refineries have frequent issues. Hydrogen is a tiny little molecule...got high strength steel and a good dose of heat....put hydrogen near it and it will seep in. Just remember its very rare for hydrogen to be a lone molecule.
I am not making this up, I was just curious to hear if anybody has looked at it. I have talked to researches about running Hydrogen through internal combustion engines and they said you got about 10 thousand miles before your intake valves start cracking.
What you should be trying to explain to me is that hydrogen doesn't work like this with HHO because (I don't know) it never separates and stay bonded just like water. See you could run Hydrogen through a turbine because the chemical reaction would be over with before it got to any parts with any stress (blades for instance). With an IC engine you have that whole intake and compression stroke thing.
phathead
I think there may be a bit of confusion as to this issue (Hydrogen Embrittlement, or even IGSCC) due to introducing Brown's Gas into the internal combustion engine.
I'm going to develop my own hydroxy unit - I have been planning on doing this for well over a year, but I sat on my hands long enough to forget about doing it - that is, until the great folks here @ the DP bumped this thread back to the front page. I have a 20 year old Suburban with a 350. It will be a great test bed for any shenanegans that I come up with. While development continues - I think I'll build a standard HHO generator, and do some real, honest-to-goodness, data tracking. I'd like for this to work, and from what I've read - I believe it will, but I don't KNOW that it will give me better mileage... until I install one myself and see it in real life.
This gets me back to your statement re: H2 Embrittlement. My Suburban has an engine displacement of 350 in^3... converted to metric - it's a 5.7 Liter engine... for one revolution, it sucks in ~5.7 Liters of air. That means it's passing over 10,000 Liters per minute at 2000 RPM.
I don't have enough coffee in me to calculate how much H2 is in a Liter of Brown's Gas... but off the cuff, I would say it would be 1/4th of a Liter or so. Oxygen is 8 x larger than H2, and there are 2 Hydrogens for every Oxygen...
The most super whamodyne HHO generators produce ~6 L/min... thereby meaning there is less than 2 L of H2 fractured from H20 in that same minute.
That means that my Suburban will be seeing an increase of .0002 L of Hydrogen per Revolution.
I'm not concerned about that...
Interesting thread
Try this site on for size. It may supply what many of you are looking for.
http://www.befreetech.com/save_gas.htm
I love this thread.
I'll be watching,. I also started working on a hydrolysis machine using a water filter canister like seen at jlnaudin's site for browns gas supplementation.
I have a 96 chevy pickup i'd love to try this on; gets about 13 in town and 19 on the highway.
-------------------------------------------------------
Peace, Freedom and Prosperity. Not War, Welfare and Bankruptcy.
------------
-------------------------------------------------------
Peace, Freedom and Prosperity. Not War, Welfare and Bankruptcy.
------------