Having built and tested (more or less) my own hydrogen generator design I do think there can be some mpg gains. But to see consistent gains you need high efficiency and this takes a good bit of serious engineering to accomplish. Plus in colder areas there is the freezing issue.
On a cost/return basis there is a big hill to climb.
People who do a blanket dismissal should be ignored?
I've been away from the whole hydrogen issue for a good while.
Here is an available design...
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Smack.pdf
* note he no longer makes these due to issues around potential hex chrome poisoning from the ss plates.
SEARCH "smack booster" for lots of info
TRY the test below with propane or welding gas????
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokey442
I did a hydrogen experiment a few months back. 200 cu ft. tank. Used an adjustable regulator. Used an electric fuel shutoff solenoid to control introduction into airstream before the throttle valve. Without hydrogen assist 36mpg. At 5psi setting about 70 cu ft. per hr. 40mpg. 10psi setting about 100 cu ft. per hr. 45 mpg. There have been a number of papers published on hydrogen enhanced combustion. Their conclussions seem to be in line with the results I was able to obtain. Using brute force electrolysis to generate hydrogen on the fly to get you further down the road on a given amount of fuel seems to not work. I suspect there is something to be gained by using pulse width modulation to increase the yield for electrical energy input. With all the Stan Meyer disciples out there I still haven't seen anything of substance suface. Conclusion hydrogen has some desirable combustion characteristics. Downside cost is high per energy density.
|