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


Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-09-2014, 06:06 PM   #131 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 80
Thanks: 24
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO View Post
Attitudes aside, the thermodynamic argument is simply not on your side with known chemical reactions and engine conditions. It is incumbent on you to demonstrate how 100 years of engine and fuel designs can be turned on its head simply by adding just the right amount of extra H2. As I said before, I am making the facile argument, but the historic evidence cannot be ignored.
Your argument is facile because you've not made the effort to learn the material. The reason I said your argument was specious was because you were using properties of a closed system to exclude a process in an open system in which it did not apply.

I'm sorry, but you (and the others) do not have the understanding of thermodynamics that you think that you do. Worse still, y'all continue to parrot the same mistake over and over despite me and Rusty trying to explain it to you.

And the thermo IS on my side.

Look, nobody cares that you were wrong. Being wrong isn't a big deal, especially in thermo-it can be one of the hardest subjects around. But not even trying to correct yourself when it's been pointed out isn't good. What is worse is to use your lack of understanding like a stick to hit people with, ganging up on them and belittling them. That IS a big deal, at least to me. I don't like it and won't stand for it- I hate the bullies that do it, and I'll try to stop it every time I see it happen. I've seen it done in other threads by many of the same in this one, and I'm ashamed I didn't act earlier. All I can say is that if y'all were my boys I'd have probably beaten y'all half to death for your disrespect to others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO View Post
Don't wait on me, I'm patient, this chit chat has been going on for decades.
It wasn't chit chat. It was attacks on others. It's just y'all never expected to be held to account, which I'm doing now.

The sad part is that so far none of the men out there have the self respect and dignity to stand by their words and be judged. And apparently there's not even enough pride in y'all that I can insult and goad into action, even when I take all the risk and put up the money.

Pffft. Y'all disgust me.

I'll be waiting.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-09-2014, 07:32 PM   #132 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
P-hack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,408

awesomer - '04 Toyota prius
Thanks: 102
Thanked 249 Times in 201 Posts
I can't see what numbnuts is saying, though I imagine he his still trying to hide his numerous and egregious errors and salve his ego behind a bet about rusty, or maybe we are back to garbage cans, or proving the earth is flat, but basically what rusty is saying is best understood with a video. Though in this video, the area under the solid green line to the left of TDCC isn't very much but increases with more rpm and more vaccum (whenever ignition is advanced), certainly not enough to get you from 12 to 17 mpg. It describes the effects of rpm and MAP basically. Supposedly we get less area under the pre-tdcc pressure curve with HHO while maintaining pressure peak at ~10 degrees ATDC (via faster combustion of the whole charge making the curve narrower).
If the energy to make the hho is less than 2x the area under the curve left of tdc, you "win", so to speak, approximately of course.


edit: note that "energy" under the curve is the integral of pressure and swept displacement, not accounting for heat loss.

Last edited by P-hack; 01-09-2014 at 07:57 PM..
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to P-hack For This Useful Post:
RustyLugNut (01-10-2014)
Old 01-09-2014, 07:40 PM   #133 (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 178 Times in 138 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by drrbc View Post
Your argument is facile because you've not made the effort to learn the material. The reason I said your argument was specious was because you were using properties of a closed system to exclude a process in an open system in which it did not apply.

I'm sorry, but you (and the others) do not have the understanding of thermodynamics that you think that you do. Worse still, y'all continue to parrot the same mistake over and over despite me and Rusty trying to explain it to you.

And the thermo IS on my side.

Look, nobody cares that you were wrong. Being wrong isn't a big deal, especially in thermo-it can be one of the hardest subjects around. But not even trying to correct yourself when it's been pointed out isn't good. What is worse is to use your lack of understanding like a stick to hit people with, ganging up on them and belittling them. That IS a big deal, at least to me. I don't like it and won't stand for it- I hate the bullies that do it, and I'll try to stop it every time I see it happen. I've seen it done in other threads by many of the same in this one, and I'm ashamed I didn't act earlier. All I can say is that if y'all were my boys I'd have probably beaten y'all half to death for your disrespect to others.



It wasn't chit chat. It was attacks on others. It's just y'all never expected to be held to account, which I'm doing now.

The sad part is that so far none of the men out there have the self respect and dignity to stand by their words and be judged. And apparently there's not even enough pride in y'all that I can insult and goad into action, even when I take all the risk and put up the money.

Pffft. Y'all disgust me.

I'll be waiting.
You have not been following what I have already stated. If you want to close your thermodynamic cycle some where else to avoid or demonstrate energy savings in excess of the 80% loss of generating and re-combusting hydrogen, you are going to have to re-invent the combustion cycle. You've done a lot of hand-waving, and it's irrelevant whether it's sound reasoning or techno-babble, unless you can build something or publish a peer-reviewed paper that proves your ideas, it's just more internet chest-thumping.
__________________
I'm not coasting, I'm shifting slowly.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 10:23 PM   #134 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
ecoTex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 180

green VX - '95 Honda civic VX
Team Honda
90 day: 59.74 mpg (US)
Thanks: 209
Thanked 162 Times in 47 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by drrbc View Post
Well, there should be. But it doesn't look like there is.

Just check all over ecomodder and you'll find this same group, and others (most "Master" ecomodders) disparaging and shouting down others with specious, poorly understood thermodynamics arguments.

It's time others hold these guys accountable. I'm just the first, and I hope others aren't afraid to jump in.

Once someone stands up to the bully and bloodies their nose they usually respond in a positive fashion. It's a little harder with a gang, but the principle is the same.
I was talking about you.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 11:34 PM   #135 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 80
Thanks: 24
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by P-hack View Post
I can't see what numbnuts is saying, though I imagine he his still trying to hide his numerous and egregious errors and salve his ego behind a bet about rusty, or maybe we are back to garbage cans, or proving the earth is flat, but basically what rusty is saying is best understood with a video. Though in this video, the area under the solid green line to the left of TDCC isn't very much but increases with more rpm and more vaccum (whenever ignition is advanced), certainly not enough to get you from 12 to 17 mpg. It describes the effects of rpm and MAP basically. Supposedly we get less area under the pre-tdcc pressure curve with HHO while maintaining pressure peak at ~10 degrees ATDC (via faster combustion of the whole charge making the curve narrower).
If the energy to make the hho is less than 2x the area under the curve left of tdc, you "win", so to speak, approximately of course.


edit: note that "energy" under the curve is the integral of pressure and swept displacement, not accounting for heat loss.
Sunshine! You came back!

...damn

Nope. You still don't get it. It's about the group ganging up on people with specious remarks that you don't understand.

If you want to hold out thermodynamic principals as "proof" the other guy is wrong, then you should expect your remarks to stand up to examination.

I'm holding myself out to the same scrutiny. Find an appropriate Associate or Full Professor of your choosing and let them judge if your electrolysis argument is Shinola or the other stuff you've sprinkled about.

Let's see who a real pro will validate. Choose. I got the tab.

But hurry. It's starting to look like y'all are ch..... well, let's just say I'm thinking y'all are afraid an expert will come in and show everyone in ecomodder that y'all are just a bunch of "dumbnuts".
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 11:41 PM   #136 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 80
Thanks: 24
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO View Post
You have not been following what I have already stated. If you want to close your thermodynamic cycle some where else to avoid or demonstrate energy savings in excess of the 80% loss of generating and re-combusting hydrogen, you are going to have to re-invent the combustion cycle. You've done a lot of hand-waving, and it's irrelevant whether it's sound reasoning or techno-babble, unless you can build something or publish a peer-reviewed paper that proves your ideas, it's just more internet chest-thumping.
I'm following you.

Let's both hold out our comments for examination by a pro. My treat.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 11:44 PM   #137 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 80
Thanks: 24
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecoTex View Post
I was talking about you.
Me? For real?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2014, 11:59 PM   #138 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
ecoTex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 180

green VX - '95 Honda civic VX
Team Honda
90 day: 59.74 mpg (US)
Thanks: 209
Thanked 162 Times in 47 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by drrbc View Post
Me? For real?
Yes, you are being a jerk.
you even admitted to trying to insult people to get them to take your bet. If this forum is full of "retards", maybe all of you geniuses should start your own forum where you can all agree.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2014, 12:11 AM   #139 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 80
Thanks: 24
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecoTex View Post
Yes, you are being a jerk.
you even admitted to trying to insult people to get them to take your bet. If this forum is full of "retards", maybe all of you geniuses should start your own forum where you can all agree.
Yes. You are correct. I am angry.

I'm sorry and I didn't mean to offend you.

But if you feel I'm being unjust, I'd only ask you to re-read all of the posts again carefully.

I welcome scrutiny of what I've written. I don't believe the others will however.

And thank you for keeping me honest.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2014, 12:47 AM   #140 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 9,709

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 231
Thanked 3,169 Times in 2,486 Posts
Wow I saw all these added pages and thought some one made a HHO machine that actually works.
Nope.

__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to oil pan 4 For This Useful Post:
CFECO (01-10-2014), UFO (01-10-2014)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com