Ford Power Stroke Nation banner

1 - 20 of 64 Posts

·
2nd class citizen
Joined
·
797 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
I have spend countless hour working on this... Really more like 10 hours per week for about 10 weeks but most have been research... I had a cell producing 1.2 LPM which is not bad but for a 7.3L like ours you would need about 4-6 lpm... I think it could work but not to the extreme some people make it to be. Maybe a 15-20% increase but I have no data to back this up... to make it efficient it would have to be a big unit.

It will take power to generate the HHO but hopefully the increase in combustion efficiency plus the added combustible would make up for the energy it take to make the HHO and then spare some to contribute to MPG improvement. try www.hydrogengarage.com They have a bunch of free info.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
I have spend countless hour working on this... Really more like 10 hours per week for about 10 weeks but most have been research... I had a cell producing 1.2 LPM which is not bad but for a 7.3L like ours you would need about 4-6 lpm... I think it could work but not to the extreme some people make it to be. Maybe a 15-20% increase but I have no data to back this up... to make it efficient it would have to be a big unit.

It will take power to generate the HHO but hopefully the increase in combustion efficiency plus the added combustible would make up for the energy it take to make the HHO and then spare some to contribute to MPG improvement. try www.hydrogengarage.com They have a bunch of free info.
are you going to make a bigger cell? Or do you feel it is not worth the time required to do it?
 

·
Jaw-Juh Stroker
Joined
·
91 Posts
Snake oil. Pure and simple snake oil.

The problem with all these claims about running cars on water is that you must separate the hydrogen and the oxygen somehow. Doing so requires a certain amount of energy to be expended. In this case, they're using electricity to do that work for them. That means in order to get your fuel from water, you have to first process it with electricity, bringing a cost into the equation. Your fuel bill will just be paid to the power company instead.

Water is the least energetic combination of hydrogen and oxygen. You can think of water as the "ash" left over from burning hydrogen. Two hydrogen atoms at high temperatures in the presence of an oxygen atom will bond, creating flame in the process. You can't then burn this molecule called water. Try it some time. Light a match and stick it in some water. Doesn't burn. You can think of it like trying to light up the wood ash in the bottom of your fire place. It simply won't catch because it's in an ash state. You need fresh wood to supply the atoms and molecules that will bond with the oxygen in the air in order to create flame. Once it's bonded, it's used up and you'll have to expend a lot of energy to break those bonds. The amount of energy that must be expended to do this is greater than the amount of energy that will be released when you burn them again. The laws of thermodynamics will not be denied.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
Snake oil. Pure and simple snake oil.

The problem with all these claims about running cars on water is that you must separate the hydrogen and the oxygen somehow. Doing so requires a certain amount of energy to be expended. In this case, they're using electricity to do that work for them. That means in order to get your fuel from water, you have to first process it with electricity, bringing a cost into the equation. Your fuel bill will just be paid to the power company instead.

Water is the least energetic combination of hydrogen and oxygen. You can think of water as the "ash" left over from burning hydrogen. Two hydrogen atoms at high temperatures in the presence of an oxygen atom will bond, creating flame in the process. You can't then burn this molecule called water. Try it some time. Light a match and stick it in some water. Doesn't burn. You can think of it like trying to light up the wood ash in the bottom of your fire place. It simply won't catch because it's in an ash state. You need fresh wood to supply the atoms and molecules that will bond with the oxygen in the air in order to create flame. Once it's bonded, it's used up and you'll have to expend a lot of energy to break those bonds. The amount of energy that must be expended to do this is greater than the amount of energy that will be released when you burn them again. The laws of thermodynamics will not be denied.
so you tried it and can attest from experience that you get no gains from the systems they offer? I took chemistry too, I do understand your points. What I also learnd from all the science was experimintation. Sure there were no scientific journal refernces on it to be found...but how about using solar to fuel the elctrolisis. Pretty clean
Do a search for solar produced hydrogen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
check this guy out.
Stan Meyer - hydrogen oxygen ( HHO ) - Zero Point Energy

His electrolisis process is baffling even scienists, no joke.
 

·
you want some of this?
Joined
·
2,922 Posts
Snake oil. Pure and simple snake oil.

The problem with all these claims about running cars on water is that you must separate the hydrogen and the oxygen somehow. Doing so requires a certain amount of energy to be expended. In this case, they're using electricity to do that work for them. That means in order to get your fuel from water, you have to first process it with electricity, bringing a cost into the equation. Your fuel bill will just be paid to the power company instead.

Water is the least energetic combination of hydrogen and oxygen. You can think of water as the "ash" left over from burning hydrogen. Two hydrogen atoms at high temperatures in the presence of an oxygen atom will bond, creating flame in the process. You can't then burn this molecule called water. Try it some time. Light a match and stick it in some water. Doesn't burn. You can think of it like trying to light up the wood ash in the bottom of your fire place. It simply won't catch because it's in an ash state. You need fresh wood to supply the atoms and molecules that will bond with the oxygen in the air in order to create flame. Once it's bonded, it's used up and you'll have to expend a lot of energy to break those bonds. The amount of energy that must be expended to do this is greater than the amount of energy that will be released when you burn them again. The laws of thermodynamics will not be denied.
What he said.
Pay me now, pay me later. Besides, if it DID work, how dangerous would that be having raw hydrogen, and raw oxygen in the same little jar or bottle? hmmmmmm
what was that name again? hindenburg? No such thing as a free lunch.
 

·
Jaw-Juh Stroker
Joined
·
91 Posts
so you tried it and can attest from experience that you get no gains from the systems they offer? I took chemistry too, I do understand your points.
No I have not personally tested it, and I actually failed chemistry. However, I aced physics and understand thermodynamics much better than many mechanical engineers.

What I also learnd from all the science was experimintation. Sure there were no scientific journal refernces on it to be found...but how about using solar to fuel the elctrolisis. Pretty clean
Do a search for solar produced hydrogen.
Currently solar energy is limited in the amount of wattage it can produce to the point that it's simply not economical. Your up front investment in solar tech would never be recovered by using that energy to split water in electrolysis. Even if solar power was much much cheaper, it would be more practical to outfit your car with batteries and an electric motor than to waste energy in the electrolysis process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
No I have not personally tested it, and I actually failed chemistry. However, I aced physics and understand thermodynamics much better than many mechanical engineers.



Currently solar energy is limited in the amount of wattage it can produce to the point that it's simply not economical. Your up front investment in solar tech would never be recovered by using that energy to split water in electrolysis. Even if solar power was much much cheaper, it would be more practical to outfit your car with batteries and an electric motor than to waste energy in the electrolysis process.
so you think that guy on youtube is a load?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
188 Posts
Wow! where in the hell have I been:doh: Can we run a setup like this in a diesel engine?
 

·
PSN Mega Miler
Joined
·
6,480 Posts
Hydrogen is a great fuel to run vehicles on, ask yourself why bmw and the others just finished developing cars to run on the stuff.

Also there are stations in one country in europe that allow you to refill with hydrogen. The conversion is done at the roadside stations off city tap water. Works great.

Now back to whats being discussed here...

Nope it isn't working out so hot and yes most are what Id call snake oil.

It takes a bunch more than just squirting hydrogen in a gasser or diesel to run the stuff. Mixing some in with the current setup already on the vehicle takes far to much hydrogen to be effective. The reason is that to produce an amount that actually will show up in a mpg change or a power output increase is WAY beyond what the electrosis methods available are capable of.

Also even if it worked you consuming extra power from the alternator to produce the stuff in the first place. A cell conversion tank large enough to produce a usable amount of fuel would take up the entire bed of a long wheelbase truck. This size cell could work to produce a usable amount of hydrogen.... in a week :D

Thats the clincher. The simple conversion systems people are playing with take to long to yield anything worth while. They are looking at it as an on the fly system and its not efficient enough of a conversion to do that at all.
 

·
Jaw-Juh Stroker
Joined
·
91 Posts
Yeah I think the youtube video is a crock. If his method worked so much better than all other current methods of electrolysis he would have already patented it.

The thing that really sells it for me is the "scientist" (whoever he is) talking about how this man splits water into its component atoms without any increase in heat of the water even over a long period of time so clearly "something must be different". Total crock. The water will increase in temperature unless it is subsequently cooled. This only transfers the heat to something else.

In other words, this man would have had to have created a system that looses absolutely no work to heat. There's no friction, no resistance, no background heat radiation, no nothing of the sort. In other words, he's doing work without adding entropy to the system, and the laws of thermodynamics state that this is simply impossible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
I do understand the laws of thermodynamics (maybe not as good as you but enough to know a perpetual motion system is imposible...) so I don't think you can run purely on Hydrogen created from this electrolicis proccess. Although a high school did one with HUGE solar panels... don't have a link. This high school I believe used the Hydrogen to run a gen that runs a electric motor. The truck is a S-10 droped to the ground with weird stuff going on the bed...

Back to HHO on Diesels. In theory it would work as Propane does on our engines... Inject it and it is just another source of combustible but just as propane their is a price involved with it. The price paid for just the raw energy is not worth it... It probably takes about 1 HP from the engine to create .5 hp wourth of hydrogen (been optimistic) but then again you must remember engines are very inefficient machines which just spit raw fuel out the exhaust (that is why we have cats) and if hydrogen can tap into that unused fuel and make a more efficient burn it would not only help the MPG with its own energy but also with the energy of the unburnt fuel that now is being burned...

Now this is in theory... I don't have math done to prove it Nor have I done experimentation yet. I have plans of doing a bigger cell but as said above... to even feel a change we need to produce a lot of gas for an engine like ours (7.3L).

LETS SEE HOW IT GOES...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
So no matter how a water molecule is broke it will always take more energy to split it than the hydrogen can produce? That's the law?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
Yeah I think the youtube video is a crock. If his method worked so much better than all other current methods of electrolysis he would have already patented it.
did I miss something I thought the video said he has it patented?
 

·
Jaw-Juh Stroker
Joined
·
91 Posts
It may have said that, but I think it may only be "patent pending". Once a patent is approved, the full schematics and documentation on it is filed in the patent office and is now "public knowledge". Any scientist could go there and pull up the patent to understand how it works. Since the supposed scientists in the film didn't know how it worked, I find it difficult to believe that the invention is actually patented.

Also, the guy says that he is very concerned about people stealing his inventions and that he has had patented inventions stolen from him, another thing that leads me to believe it is not patented.
 

·
Jaw-Juh Stroker
Joined
·
91 Posts
So no matter how a water molecule is broke it will always take more energy to split it than the hydrogen can produce? That's the law?
Well, not exactly. You could produce a heap more energy by fusing the hydrogen atoms together into helium for example. After all, that's how the sun works.

The trouble is that water (H2O) is the lowest energy state of hydrogen and oxygen. Splitting them apart requires an infusion of energy that is then returned when the atoms join back together into water. If we were able to do this at 100% efficiency (loosing no energy to heat), we would essentially break even.

Energy is basically a negative-sum game. Without 100% efficiency, some energy is always lost to heat. Thankfully, we have this gigantic ball of energy called the Sun that bombards us with solar energy every day (until it eventually runs out). It's that solar energy that basically gives us everything we have. The dino oil you burn is the result of plant life that lived millions of years ago and trapped that solar energy and used it to create sugars. That energy was converted into oil millions of years ago by pressure after the plants died. Our wonderful oil, coal, and other fossil fuels are really nothing more than sunlight trapped into organic proteins when you think about it.

I've rambled off the topic here though. If you harnessed solar energy to make HHO from H2O and burned it in your vehicle, you would see a net increase in the amount of energy only if you discount the solar energy used because it is free. We get a net increase in energy from burning oil because it is simply free sunlight trapped and condensed into organic proteins. When you boil it down to its base form, all of our energy comes from hydrogen fusion in the core of the sun. Unless you figure out a more economical way to benefit from this "free" energy, you're just blowing smoke (literally).
 

·
you want some of this?
Joined
·
2,922 Posts
And again I will add....what happens when you have hydrogen and oxygen under pressure in a container together rattling around. ???? Even IF there is a solution where you could make your own, is it really something ya want flopping around under your hood? Look at the designs of these new hydrogen powered cars. Fuel cells, with hydrogen specially contained. If these gadjets produced the amounts of hydrogen and oxygen necessary to run even a briggs and stratton for any amount of time, the pressurized container with these gasses floating around is basically a bomb. All it would need is an ignition source. Not much of one either. Whats tha flash point of hydrogen? Now add in the fact that it would have pretty much pure oxygen in there with it. Theres a reason they build those specail fuel cells. Its called staying alive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
btw recently their has been a more economical form of solar panel which is not really a panel anymore... It is like a foil and can be produced inexpensively and because of its lightweight and foil thickness it has many applications. The drawback is that it will produce less power per area but that is compensated with its more versatile and can be installed in more places so you could install more area that you would be able to with the panels.

BTW Alan Hicks you seem very knowledgeable. My hat is off for you, but I still think this could work... NO proof yet...
 

·
Jaw-Juh Stroker
Joined
·
91 Posts
Thank you!

I'll admit I'm no guru when it comes to performance mods for the PSD (I'll probably never join the 400HP club), but I love learning new things and try to keep abreast of technology and physics.

I believe I know the solar "foil" you are talking about. NASA has been experimenting with it for some time. The idea is to have a huge solar panel that can be folded up to take up very little space in the shuttle, then unfurled once up in space to cover a very large area. Basically like an umbrella solar panel. Very neat stuff.

On edit: My posts above were simply to explain that all energy is essentially coming from the sun (with few exceptions such as geothermic energy generated by gravity induced friction deep in the Earth's core), so if you're going to find an alternative fuel to oil, it'll basically have to come from the sun. Ethanol is basically solar power generated by plants, then turned into a condensed liquid form. Oil and coal are basically the same thing. So if you're going to generate HHO by harnessing solar energy, you'd be better off just directly harnessing that solar energy if you can.
 
1 - 20 of 64 Posts
Top