Hydrogen Generator Experiment

[UFO]

No, if you put that much power into it, even at a 50% loss, you will definitely see a drop in mileage due to the electrical power you are drawing from the engine to run the apparatus. This has been tested time and time again, for nearly 100 years, and there are no favorable results yet. Plenty of false positives though.

[Bean-O]

One factor of onboard Hydrogen generation that seems to be overlooked. Of course, by law, it will require more power from the crank to turn the alternator to produce the electrical power to in turn perform the hydrolosis, than the ICE can produce from the injected HH2. However consider the fact that while the crank suppies power to the alternator 100% of the time, only a major portion (70% maybe) of that power is suppied by the ICE. The remaining 30% is suppied through the transmission via inertia.

[billhac]

see what i mean, I knew i was asking for trouble, I suppose a dyno report and six months research and testing is not enough proof, that is why i stoped talking about it except to give some advice to wolverine, not to prove or disprove, i have my proof, and for a while had it readily available for anyone to read, but now well ive learned there are just too many naysayers for me to argue with, so if i still choose to use one in the only car i have that still uses gas, then thats for me to decide, after all even the best hho generators cant get better gas mileage than my electric neon. all in all i say if you want to experiment, great, if you get results that you like, please keep them to your self because its just not worth the argument. just my .02

[t vago]

Originally Posted by Bean-O

One factor of onboard Hydrogen generation that seems to be overlooked...The remaining 30% is suppied through the transmission via inertia.

...inertia. Let me get this straight - You're trying to say that the remaining energy that supposedly makes HHO worth it comes from recovery of energy from the vehicle's inertia.

Where do you suppose that energy came from, in the first place? The team of magical invisible unicorns hitched to the front of the vehicle?

[Bean-O]

I'm no physicist putty=tat but consider this. By definition of kinetic energy it will require the same amount of work to decellerate your car from 60-0 as it did to accellerate it from 0-60. Nearly all of the work to decellerate is performed, of course, by your brakes and the energy is given off (wasted) as heat. Now lets suppose we configure our HHO/alternator system to recover some of this (wasted energy). To do this I would attempt to have the alternator charge, idealy, during deceleration only and produce and inject HHO during the acceleration phase only. This would sort of work as a battery chargeing engine brake to in turn produce HHO for the engine. Im sure that there are much better ways of recovering the wasted energy but should'nt this work in theory?

[gone-ot]

...the brakes on the Bugatti Veyron produce 4,000+ hp during deceleration, while the engine produces only 1,001 hp for acceleration.

[Frank Lee]

Whereas I still have the factory original pads and shoes on my '94 with 110,000 miles.

e.g. brakes not used much = not wasting much energy.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by Bean-O

I'm no physicist putty=tat but consider this. By definition of kinetic energy it will require the same amount of work to decellerate your car from 60-0 as it did to accellerate it from 0-60. Nearly all of the work to decellerate is performed, of course, by your brakes and the energy is given off (wasted) as heat. Now lets suppose we configure our HHO/alternator system to recover some of this (wasted energy). To do this I would attempt to have the alternator charge, idealy, during deceleration only and produce and inject HHO during the acceleration phase only. This would sort of work as a battery chargeing engine brake to in turn produce HHO for the engine. Im sure that there are much better ways of recovering the wasted energy but should'nt this work in theory?

It's called regenerative braking. Not converting electricity to something else is far more efficient. It's already inefficient enough.

[Nerys]

regen is 30% efficient. so how your taking lets say 100 watts. your getting 30 watts out of it. from that 30 watts you use electrolysis which is at BEST 24% efficient

so in the end you get 7.2 watts per 100 watts or a conversion efficiency of 7.2% assuming you ONLY use the regen to stop the car and do not have to touch the brakes.

Then you feed that hydrogen into the engine to recover 10% of it as usable energy.

so now we are down to .72% efficiency.

and you wonder why they don't work. its not that HHO does not work. IT DOES.

you just can't make enough of it to make a difference in real time.

[oldbeaver]

I made my own kit of a very hard iron, very heavy, and expensive.
It produced a lot of HOH gas, ( have to use a pump to pump it out of the generator).

However, the energy demanded to break the water molecule into HOH was higher than the energy brought to the engine, as the engine revs down everytime I connected the generator, like connecting the air cooling.

My diesel was a aspirated non electronic diesel, so there was no electronic correction of the rpm, and one can see easily that the effect is lower the power of the engine. It means that MPG will diminish also.

I couldn´t make an instrument measure, but for a tank refuel of diesel I didn´t see any improvement at all.

The system has a lot of additional troubles such as keeping electrolitic solution, avoiding foam, loses of water (corrosive), and warming up of the whole thing. When this happens, water simply evaporates, and the kit produces nothing.

Some people that sell this systems are sending spam emails about electric vehicles, alternative energy and such, where the propaganda about HOH kits is camouflaged inside.

Don´t waste your money.

Oldbeaver