Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > The Unicorn Corral
Register Now
 Register Now
 


Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-15-2011, 02:26 AM   #21 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: India
Posts: 14
Thanks: 7
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
OK, Frank---same wavelength now!

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 04-15-2011, 06:46 AM   #22 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 113
Thanks: 16
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by erichans View Post
There's the opinion that there are other fringe benefits. Eg., that there is a drastic reduction in CO2 emissions (NOx, too) and a cleaning effect of the carbon in the engine. Just wondered if that alone is sufficient justification for installing a system---leave out the controversial MPG gains!
If the MPG gains are controversial - then so are the CO2 emissions (in pretty much all cases).
Case 1: You 'make' the H2 on-board via electrical (& ultimately mechanical) load on the alternator. Even if this helps stabilise the burn for some HCCI configurations, the energy gains of the 'stabilisation' are outweighed by the 50%+ loss incurred through extra mechanical load on the engine.
Case 2: A large tank of H2 is stored onboard. The H2 is generated via - most probably - NG or some other FF. Still plenty of CO2 involved here.
Case 3: Like case 2, but H2 is from renewable electricity. The electricity is 'clean' yes, but electricity is highly valuable in it's own right.

In all three scenarios the amount of CO2 offset by any renewables in the entire system (including the demand for non-transport electricity) is lessened compared with the renewable electricity being used directly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2011, 07:32 PM   #23 (permalink)
...beats walking...
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: .
Posts: 6,190
Thanks: 179
Thanked 1,525 Times in 1,126 Posts
+1 on Homogenious-Charge Compression-Ignition HCCI, which is basically an ICE, using Direct Injection, being operated under both ICE and DIESEL conditions...and switching back and forth between the two states as load conditions dictate by controlling "timing" of both fuel-injection timing (diesel) and ICE-ignition timing.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gone-ot For This Useful Post:
erichans (04-16-2011)
Old 04-16-2011, 01:10 AM   #24 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: India
Posts: 14
Thanks: 7
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks to you and Frank too for the expansion! Lots of stuff on 'search'.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2011, 05:26 PM   #25 (permalink)
Muscle Car Modder
 
Floordford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Nashville
Posts: 117

QuikSilver - '00 Ford Mustang GT
90 day: 24.7 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Ive also pondered about hydrogen generation on the fly to be used as a fuel additive. To me, I know energy will be lost in the transfer but that doesn't necessarily make it useless just because it looses energy. We have drivetrain losses, superchargers take energy to make energy, and even turbos loose energy while making energy. With all three we honestly dont get the energy out that is put in. Its interesting to see those who are such heavy nay sayers on that principle alone. Superchargers are known for their inefficiencies because of heat and the fact that it takes alot of horsepower to turn the belt to make it useful. So for some superchargers to add 100hp it might take away 35-45hp. The same thing might be happening with hydrogen generators. It may take 3hp with alternator load but it might make 5hp. So at the end of the day the gain is worth the loss.

A great many other things also need to be put into consideration too. Like the design, the solution mix, hose placement. Really, general efficiency of the added components.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Floordford For This Useful Post:
erichans (05-23-2011)
Old 05-23-2011, 12:42 AM   #26 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: India
Posts: 14
Thanks: 7
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The Gain Is Worth The Loss!

Hi Floordford,
Thanks for your response. Never has a truer word been spoken!

You have certainly put some thought into this rather than rejecting the concept out of hand. Your analogy to supercharging is a case in point. That the gain may be worth the loss--IOW you come out positive, no matter how small the resultant gain.

>>A great many other things also need to be put into consideration too. Like the design, the solution mix, hose >>placement. Really, general efficiency of the added components.

Oh, absolutely! To take just a single point I'm focussing on---a point of loss, as pointed out by many---My PWM will be linked with throttle opening so that in the 80deg of throttle opening the current drawn by the electrolyser will vary hypothetically from 3A at slow running, to 15A at WOT, and will be adjustable to vary this range as well.

Not much time to be a yea- or naysayer. I am doing my best, as I understand it. I shall just go by what I see.

Regards,

Erich.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 10:35 AM   #27 (permalink)
dcb
needs more cowbell
 
dcb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location:
Posts: 5,038

pimp mobile - '81 suzuki gs 250 t
90 day: 96.29 mpg (US)

schnitzel - '01 Volkswagen Golf TDI
90 day: 53.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 158
Thanked 269 Times in 212 Posts
one good test is worth more than a million opinions.
__________________
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!!!
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 03:44 PM   #28 (permalink)
Muscle Car Modder
 
Floordford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Nashville
Posts: 117

QuikSilver - '00 Ford Mustang GT
90 day: 24.7 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcb View Post
one good test is worth more than a million opinions.
Ive been wanting to get my feet wet in this area to achieve my own results for a while now. The time in research alone is more than id like to admit. My goal right now is to find a descent output very, efficient version. Which I think might be dry cell. It does need to stay low in cost so it can pay for itself sooner. My thoughts also go to the fact that their are varying degrees of designs that range from low output, amp sippers and high output energy hogs. I think finding that happy medium to compliment engine size is the real trick. I can't believe there is a one size fits all or even a "this one for 4 and 6 cylinder. This one for V8s" type of scenario. The "amp draw vs. engine load from that draw vs. benefits from hydrogen output" have to be super fine tuned.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT
273hp/ 309ft.lbs.
Cd 0.36 Im working on it
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 04:35 PM   #29 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,300

Colorado - '17 Chevrolet Colorado 4x4 LT
90 day: 23.07 mpg (US)
Thanks: 315
Thanked 179 Times in 138 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floordford View Post
Ive also pondered about hydrogen generation on the fly to be used as a fuel additive. To me, I know energy will be lost in the transfer but that doesn't necessarily make it useless just because it looses energy. We have drivetrain losses, superchargers take energy to make energy, and even turbos loose energy while making energy. With all three we honestly dont get the energy out that is put in. Its interesting to see those who are such heavy nay sayers on that principle alone. Superchargers are known for their inefficiencies because of heat and the fact that it takes alot of horsepower to turn the belt to make it useful. So for some superchargers to add 100hp it might take away 35-45hp. The same thing might be happening with hydrogen generators. It may take 3hp with alternator load but it might make 5hp. So at the end of the day the gain is worth the loss.

A great many other things also need to be put into consideration too. Like the design, the solution mix, hose placement. Really, general efficiency of the added components.
Considering the goal of adding hydrogen has always been to save fuel, why else would one do it when it doesn't? What benefit is there?
__________________
I'm not coasting, I'm shifting slowly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 04:38 PM   #30 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,300

Colorado - '17 Chevrolet Colorado 4x4 LT
90 day: 23.07 mpg (US)
Thanks: 315
Thanked 179 Times in 138 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by erichans View Post
Hi Floordford,
Thanks for your response. Never has a truer word been spoken!

You have certainly put some thought into this rather than rejecting the concept out of hand. Your analogy to supercharging is a case in point. That the gain may be worth the loss--IOW you come out positive, no matter how small the resultant gain.
Huh? The analogy makes no sense. Supercharging makes more power and consumes more fuel. What does adding hydrogen to the engine do besides consume more fuel?

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
combustion enhancers, electrolysis, hho

Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com