Hydrogen Generator Experiment

[PA32R]

I took the thermodynamic inefficiency of fuel oxidation into account. The main thermodynamic inefficiency for which I didn't account that of the hydrolysis, because my CRC handbook is at work.

Of course, it is true that if you add enough batteries, you can achieve the 4 m.p.g. increase. No matter how you slice it though, you need something like 3.3 million joules to go the extra four miles. You're getting it from a battery or from batteries.

Let's say you use 200 amp hour/12 volt batteries. These can deliver 2400 watts for 3600 seconds, or 6,240,000 joules. However this is, at best, a 20 hour capacity, so it will not be able to deliver this much energy at a rate which discharges it in an hour. For your 90 minute commute, assuming Peukert's constant for these batteries is 1.2, such a battery can deliver about 80 amps at 12 volts. This is 960 watts for 5400 seconds or 5,184,000 joules. The battery makes HHO (sigh) which is then burned in cylinders. If 25% efficiency is achieved in the overall process (battery to generator to HHO to H2O), about 1,300,000 joules go to move the car. So something like 3 of these batteries might do the trick.

From here on, it's purely estimation. If your 90 minute commute is at 35 m.p.h. on average, you'd take 2.57 hours. You'd be using electrical energy at the rate of 80*12*3 watts, or 2880 watts. 2.88 kilowatts for 1.5 hours is 4.32 kilowatt hours. Depending on where and how you purchase electricity, that could be something like $0.50 worth of electricity. You'd be saving something like a third of a gallon of gas, worth maybe $0.80.

Just as a reality check, 2.88 kilowatts is about 3.86 horsepower that the batteries would be saving your gasoline from having to deliver. That's certainly in the ballpark for a 16.7% savings.

[Concrete]

Originally Posted by Nerys

Roughly Water is 11% hydrogen and 89% Oxygen. Now before people say wait wait there is twice as much Hydrogen.

Well thats only true in PHYSICAL ATOMIC QUANTITY which for any reactions WE are conducting are largely irrelevant.

Once they are GASES all that matters is VOLUME. by volume its 11% hydrogen and 89% oxygen.

WORSE (this is where it gets tricky) its PURE oxygen. not "air" as we know it which is only what ?? 21% oxygen?

So now while YES you are injecting more "fuel" so you need less gas your also injecting COPIOUS quantities or PURE O2 into the engine.

this is going to screw around with your Oxygen sensors. its going to be TRICKED into thinking your running LEAN since its reading a LOT more O2 than it should be coming out the tailpipe. SO the computer does exactly what its supposed to do it INJECTS more fuel to richen up the mixture back to what its programmed for.

There are all kinds of issues and fixes and hacks to be worked on for this but I don't really care about that part.

your chemistry is very badly flawed - none of this is correct

If you break water and burn the hydrogen and oxygen you get... water
it is in perfect balance - there is no need to adjust fuel mixture

Also there is no need to "fool" the oxygen sensor because it will correct automatically
if there is too much fuel (gas or hydrogen) it will lean out
if there is too much oxygen it will richen the mixture
you have no need to adjust the oxygen sensor to optimize this system

This fact alone makes the hydrogen generator hype unbelievable

the only part of this that is even worth pursuing is tricking the car to burn lean
it works without extra batteries

[ASV]

wow there are some real rock heads in this thread

Nerys how is your experiment coming along

Can you tell how many watts are being used in the electrolysis compared to how many your putting to the road

And I also see that you are using a van lots of roof space good place for PV
have you thought of using it ?


to all who want to just try and see if somthing works
I say go for it

[whitevette]

Originally Posted by Nerys

Well I have been researching these HHO generators quite a bit lately.

Here are my conclusions so far.

WILL an HHO give you better gas mileage? In theory the answer is a 100% yes.

Its simply logic and physics if you put something combustable in an engine its going to combust it. If you are adding something besides fuel you now need less fuel.

In my minivan I have never gotten better than 28.6mpg. Ever since ETHANOL was added to our fuel I have never once gotten over 24mpg.



IN THEORY this is what will happen with hydrogen injection. you will have MORE OMPH out of the car and so you will just instinctual "use less pedal" to make the car go and maintain speed.

NOW this does bring us to a bit of a chemistry and computer logic problem.



If it works I will save a ton of money.

"Simple logic"? "Simple physics"? Put something combustible in your gas...to use less gas...what is going on here? Alcohol is put in your gas...isn't this the same thing? Alcohol burns, right? Hydrogen burns, right? But you see what happens when you add LESS caloric content to gasoline? Lower MPG! Hydrogen is lower than gasoline, too. What is gonna happen? Right! Same, same, Kemo Sabe!

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Concrete

If you break water and burn the hydrogen and oxygen you get... water
it is in perfect balance - there is no need to adjust fuel mixture
This fact alone makes the hydrogen generator hype unbelievable

the only part of this that is even worth pursuing is tricking the car to burn lean
it works without extra batteries

I have posted this link before I will post it again

You should read what the military has to say on the matter.

KINETICS OF HYDROGEN-OXYGEN AND HYDROCARBON-OXYGEN REACTIONS.

Apparently you failed chem, or you would realize that the equations to determine reactants and subsuquent results are based on probability & the lowest entropy possible. Needless to say hydrogen and oxygen are much more likely to react with the hydrocarbon, alcohol or ester before they will react with each other. This is empiracly and experimentally proven, so you can say 2xH2 +02 = 2H20 all day but it simply isn't what is going on.

In fact there are patents on the production side of gas that take advantage of the fact H2 reacts readily with hydrocarbons allowing for higher production of useable hydrocarbons

(WO/1990/006351) INHIBITION OF COKE FORMATION DURING VAPORIZATION OF HEAVY HYDROCARBONS

Folks like you do not really want to think and simply chirp off whatever source you trust repeats, like the 1960's military scientist above, work through all the possible reaction paths and you will see that you do indeed get lower entropy reacting H2 & O2 with the hydrocarbon and not with each other.

I certainly do not believe all the hype on hydroxy but I cannot say it has no merit. Foreign countries already use these hho generators to reduce emissions, there is something to it or the military would not have the studies on it. (which are continuing though not public at the moment)

There are both legitimate and fictional sides to this issue, stay to the middle and you will be OK.

[MetroMPG]

Originally Posted by Concrete

the only part of this that is even worth pursuing is tricking the car to burn lean

This fact is what makes me most skeptical of individuals' "tests" of HHO systems. To properly implement the system requires several changes to the base setup, changes which on their own would improve fuel economy. Including leaning out the A/F mixture.

Because of this, producing acceptable evidence that any of these kits really work will have to come from much more stringent methodology than the average person seems likely to follow.

So I hold HHO to the Carl Sagan rule of evidence: extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

[Christ]

http://keelynet.com/energy/waterfuel.htm

After realizing how long that post was, I decided to re-find the link and actually just post that here....

There is a detailed schematic on building one's own HHO system... with REFERENCES!

There's something noone expected... :O

Also, for interested science ideas in general, check out www.keelynet.com

Who was kind enough to host this information free of charge, and help bring knowledge to the public at large.

[Concrete]

rmay635703,
I don't think I said putting H2 and O2 into your engine would create exactly water
- of course it is statistical in nature

I believe I said that it is balanced as a fuel and oxidizer
- no corrections to O2 sensor needed
and pointed to very weird chemistry in this thread

I do think your other point is beautiful (although I found your links were not)
If the military cannot make it work yet, how do you expect an average Joe to?

I was in your shoes once - Hydrogen would save us!
just be careful on who send your money to

Frank,
where was that flurry of HHO activity again?
oh yes - gassavers

[Christ]

And here is a website claiming carb exemption, showing a "test certificate" with 0 emissions... no NOx, no HC emissions... (no RPM either.. engine isn't recorded running for that test. ROFL.)

Stuff like this always is the first thing that debunks ideas according to "people that know what they're talking about".

Stupid things like this website are preventing mankind's advancement, and evolution in general. How are we ever supposed to get ahead when we have these idiots living in tandem with us? Will they ever be phased out?

[Coyote X]

Not to get in a messy thread about silly stuff like HHO but for Nerys, if you want a 4% gain with the HHO using a couple of deep cycle batteries why not just ditch the alternator and run the car off the deep cycles? It has been proven to work and get you as much as a 10% gain in mileage. As an added boost you could swap out the alternator to an electric motor and use that to help drive the car directly instead of the indirect and inefficient method of going from electric > HHO > mechanical you could go straight electrical > mechanical with better than 90% efficiency.

I can see people wanting to make this work and I am all for random experimentation for the sake of personal knowledge. But this is no the 19th century and a lot of fields have advanced farther than a backyard tinkerer typically understands so even though the age of backyard discoveries is not totally over they are much harder to pull off now than they have been in the past. So if you have seen someone try and do something and it either didn't work or they never said if it did(probably didn't), try something else and see if you can get it but duplicating a failed experiment and hoping for a different result typically isn't going to get anyone that far.

But to maybe add something beneficial to this thread. How about before making a HHO powered/assisted car someone actually designs an experiment mythbusters style that does away with the engine all together and just combusts some gasoline in a 14.7:1 AFR and measure the energy output. Then add some HHO, H2, or whatever to the mix and see what kind of difference it makes in the energy output as well as analyze the exhaust gasses. Should be a fairly basic experiment and would be easy for others to duplicate and verify. From there the complexity can be increased incrementally until you are up to running your car on it. A basic step in actual scientific experiments is having others duplicate your work to verify it. If anyone working on HHO really wants it to work, repeatability and duplication should be a basic part of your experimenting.

Zombie Feynman says, "'Ideas are tested by experiment.' That is the core of science. Everything else is bookkeeping."