Any busnuts heard of this ???
http://www.water4diesel.com/
There are many other web sites too!
bassfid pd4106
I have been researching this subject for a while. The experts say it doesn't work. The people using it say it does. I personally don't know a soul who has a working model.
There is a member of the board who is also researching this and has a friend who claims to have a working vehicle with many many miles on it. He is going to convert a vehicle this summer and test it for himself. If he chimes in he will give you more info, if not..
While the theory is sound the detractors say you can't extract enough gas to run your vehicle with the materials and amount of electricity available.
I hope it does work I could use the break on the fuel costs. Time will tell......
Frank
bullshit!!!!!!!!!!!
water will ruin injectors...thats why they invented water seprators and drygas etc.
http://www.todayinsci.com/Books/MechApp/chap23/page56.htm (http://www.todayinsci.com/Books/MechApp/chap23/page56.htm)
The problem being that it takes as much energy to break the hydrogen/oxygen bond as you get back in recombining them.
Remember Newton's three laws:
1. You can't get something for nothing.
2. You can't break even.
3. You can't even come close.
P.S. Many of the machines listed on that link were granted patents by the U.S. Patent Office.
Your absolutely right, it doesn't work, and because it doesn't work a very close friend of mine has almost 4,000 miles logged on a dodge caravan entirely on hydrogen now, and the injectors are performing like a champ, the only major difference is the exhaust system has been changed to stainless. And because it's not logical to be viable, I'm going to have our jeep converted next summer. Remember the bumble bee that can't fly? I can't say specifically how it works because he is currently appling for the patent on his process but I have seen it run and it runs flawlessly.
Quote from: tekebird on March 25, 2008, 04:39:32 PM
bullshit!!!!!!!!!!!
water will ruin injectors...thats why they invented water seprators and drygas etc.
They aren't talking about mixing water in the fuel. They are cracking the water molecule using electrolysis and directing the hydrogen and oxygen into the intake air, theoretically enriching the fuel charge. In some ways, it is similar to adding nitrous oxide, just not as potent.
As for Lee's concerns about the laws of Physics, this process isn't trying to create energy from nothing (can't be done). It is about increasing the efficiency of combustion by enriching it with oxygen and hydrogen. Assuming a significant improvement in combustion efficiency, it would offset the electric requirements of electrolysis. Keep in mind that most gasoline engines operate at less than 30% efficiency and even the best diesels are under or around 50%.
That was a poorly done website and had way too much hype for my taste. I don't trust that site's business, but I am intrigued by the process. If it works for Cody, I will certainly be interested in it for my pickup, and eventually even my bus.
"has almost 4,000 miles logged on a dodge caravan entirely on hydrogen now, and the injectors are performing like a champ,"
So he has injectors injecting pure hydrogen into the cylinders.
Certainly amazing stuff.
Since Cody is out making sawdust I will step in and make a fool of myself.
I believe he is trying to point out his friends set up does not use gasoline when it is running on the hydrogen generator.
The byproducts from the separation are hydrogen and oxygen, this is fed into the fuel injection system as the primary source of energy.
And yes it is amazing, almost magic to some of us :)
Frank
I would like to let everyone know (being a fuel chemists) the only way to enhance diesel fuel combustion is 2-ethyl hexel nitrate.
This is the same product that is put in at the refineries. The higher % of this product in your fuel will result in improved fuel
mileage.
Steve 5B.........
Easy Teke, you'll have a stroke. ::) High Tech is right.
Steve, not sure what that is. But if hydrogen is a combustable gas, like NOS or even Nat. Gas, couldn't that help in the burning effeceincy of the fuel? Just curious.
If any of you are also interested in the hydrogen thing, Purdue has done some pretty cool stuff recently. Search Purdue Hydrogen for a bunch of articles or click here for an interesting one: http://news.uns.purdue.edu/x/2007a/070515WoodallHydrogen.html
I hope this becomes viable. We - the world - really needs it. They already are marketing Hydro (gen) cars and building a Hydrogen Highway in CA. (I guess that just means hydrogen fuel stations every so often) And if it does pan out that the introduction of hydro helps with fuel consumption in my "baby", what a great deal!!!!
Chaz
p.s. In the imfamous words of Teke, the site originally posted "water4diesel" is B******t! At least it seems to have that written all over it. There are charlatans everywhere, but I hope hydro is still viable.
Quote from: steve5B on March 26, 2008, 06:36:10 AM
I would like to let everyone know (being a fuel chemists) the only way to enhance diesel fuel combustion is 2-ethyl hexel nitrate.
This is the same product that is put in at the refineries. The higher % of this product in your fuel will result in improved fuel
mileage.
Steve 5B.........
So adding additional oxygen to combustion is useless? Doggone it, turbos are a waste of money. ;)
Keep in mind, we aren't talking about adding water to the fuel, but rather cracking the water molecule using electrolysis and adding the resulting hydrogen and oxygen to the intake air. Not via the injectors, but rather just adding it to the intake air flow. The oxygen aids the complete combustion of fuel and the hydrogen adds yet another combustible to chamber. I suspect the oxygen is the more important factor here.
My main skepticism is whether enough oxygen flow can be generated on demand that way to make a difference given the volume of air flow we are talking about for a 92 series DD. But if Cody's friend is running an entire engine (gasoline based engine I believe) on the flow, then surely enough flow could be introduced to a diesel to improve combustion. In fact, perhaps the bigger concern is not to inject too much oxygen and create a cutting torch effect on the exhaust ports.
Assuming the process does significantly improve combustion efficiency and hence power per stroke in the form of increased available torque, then to get the most mpg gain, it seems to me that the rear end ratio should be changed to reduce the engine rpm at any given speed.
for all those who immidiatly dismiss the thought of hydrogen or any other fuel source please read the qoutes on the following web page and immagine where we would be today if everyone believed them or as my favorite states:
"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
--Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899
http://www.langston.com/Fun_People/1995/1995BKM.html (http://www.langston.com/Fun_People/1995/1995BKM.html)
steve
Framers did this during the great depression. A friend of mine install a system on his car in the mid 70's, 68 Valiant with a slant 6 cylinder. Did it work .... well yes in a way ... it works best if it is hot outside with low humidity, the engine has to be up to operating temp.
He had a 5 gal water container on the floor on the pass side with a 1/4" plastic line running from the water container to the intake manifold and he had a petcock valve and a vacuum gauge. He regulated the flow of water with the petcock value, vacuum gauge and the engine temp gauge, a balancing act.
He could get as high as 15% water for some significant fuel savings ... but the down side is the loss of power, which was not that much of a problem with a light car but a heavy bus would be a different animal.
Ron
As an innocent bystander I am having a difficult time getting my head around what goes on inside the engine cylinder with this H2 + O injection.
In the cylinder you have put air (about 16% O) and some fuel in quantities that will give complete combustion of the fuel (you don't want black smoke). If you have also added some H2 and additional O (that were the component parts of water) does the additional oxygen become selective and combine with a carbon atom instead of a hydrogen atom (which then has to go find an oxygen atom from the air)?
Since you have added more fuel and oxygen to the cylinder, you should get more power, but the additional power from the hydrogen and oxygen will be less than the power required to break the bond in water.
As to this comment
QuoteSo adding additional oxygen to combustion is useless? Doggone it, turbos are a waste of money.
. I don't think a turbo adds any horsepower to an engine, but it allows you to burn more fuel in the same displacement cylinder. Without increasing the fuel, there is no increase in power.
QuoteI believe he is trying to point out his friends set up does not use gasoline when it is running on the hydrogen generator.
The byproducts from the separation are hydrogen and oxygen, this is fed into the fuel injection system as the primary source of energy.
And yes it is amazing, almost magic to some of us Smiley
More amazing than you have even considered. He has invented the "PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE"
The world will bow down to this great inventor. Water in - water out plus unlimited horsepower.
Quote from: prevost82 on March 26, 2008, 09:33:09 AM
Framers did this during the great depression. A friend of mine install a system on his car in the mid 70's, 68 Valiant with a slant 6 cylinder. Did it work .... well yes in a way ... it works best if it is hot outside with low humidity, the engine has to be up to operating temp.
He had a 5 gal water container on the floor on the pass side with a 1/4" plastic line running from the water container to the intake manifold and he had a petcock valve and a vacuum gauge. He regulated the flow of water with the petcock value, vacuum gauge and the engine temp gauge, a balancing act.
He could get as high as 15% water for some significant fuel savings ... but the down side is the loss of power, which was not that much of a problem with a light car but a heavy bus would be a different animal.
Ron
Ron, this approach is
not water injection. It is not about adding steam pressure to the cylinder like water injection was. Electrolysis doesn't make steam or water vapor. Water molecules are made up of two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen. Electrolysis breaks the bonds between the atoms resulting in the release of hydrogen bubbles at one electrode and oxygen bubbles at the other. In most uses, these are collected separately. In the proposed system, they are collected together and piped to the air intake just inboard of the air filter. This enriches the air flow with increased oxygen to support more combustion of the fuels and hydrogen which is itself combustible.
Quote from: Stan on March 26, 2008, 09:57:39 AM
In the cylinder you have put air (about 16% O) and some fuel in quantities that will give complete combustion of the fuel (you don't want black smoke). If you have also added some H2 and additional O (that were the component parts of water) does the additional oxygen become selective and combine with a carbon atom instead of a hydrogen atom (which then has to go find an oxygen atom from the air)?
Since you have added more fuel and oxygen to the cylinder, you should get more power, but the additional power from the hydrogen and oxygen will be less than the power required to break the bond in water.
In a gasoline engine (which I know better than diesels), there is always unburned fuel, hence the need for catalytic converters these days to reduce hydrocarbon emissions. Increasing the oxygen in the cylinder aids more complete combustion. My RTS has a catalytic converter in the muffler, so I assume (don't "know") that this is to complete combustion of unburned fuel.
You raise an interesting point about the addition of hydrogen causing there to still be a shortage of oxygen. Perhaps more would be achieved by just adding the oxygen. Of course if it went large scale, the venting of all the stray hydrogen might be a problem, especially in high density traffic.
Quote from: Stan on March 26, 2008, 09:57:39 AMQuote from: Slow Rider on March 26, 2008, 05:58:39 AMI believe he is trying to point out his friends set up does not use gasoline when it is running on the hydrogen generator.
The byproducts from the separation are hydrogen and oxygen, this is fed into the fuel injection system as the primary source of energy.
And yes it is amazing, almost magic to some of us
More amazing than you have even considered. He has invented the "PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE"
The world will bow down to this great inventor. Water in - water out plus unlimited horsepower.
Interesting point and amazing indeed. But, Cody has seen it run. I doubt it is "unlimited horsepower", and I imagine it functions on the differences of the energy required to crack the molecule via electrolysis vs. the energy released upon combustion. All matter contains phenomenal quantities of energy, the trick is coaxing it to give up some of it.
I haven't seen any of this in person. The use of the oxygen as a supplement to the air stream of a traditional combustion engine is the easiest for me to understand. Beyond that though, I am open minded, intrigued and awaiting with great anticipation Cody's personal experience with it.
I've been reading this thread and am surprised by the commitment people have to the idea that it doesn't work, I've seen it work and know it does, how it does is a different matter, I don't understand it either but that doesn't change the fact that it does work, hydrogen powered cars are a fact and many are being used by different experimenters today. I'm only familier with one of them but I remember these same arguements when people were experimenting with propane fired cars and now there are many of them out there. As far as a diesel application of the hydrogen process I don't know, but in a gas engine it works well. Michigan Technilogical Univercity has has a hydrogen powered car for over 5 years now and it has been featured in many trade shows, Purdue has been involved with the process for a long time too as others have been. Anytime a new technology emerges, a lot of people will step forward and say it's not possible, thats ok, but the program still moves forward, not too long ago it was imposible to implant musical or voice data on a small plastic disc but now we have cd's, so be patient and open minded about it. I still can't figure out how I can type on a keyboard and it magically goes somewhere and the words emerge on someone elses pc, remember what everyone said about that a few years ago?
It looks like GM thinks it works.
Quoted from the GM web site http://www.gm.com/explore/fuel_economy/altfuel/vehicles/overview/
"No petroleum is needed to power Chevrolet Equinox Fuel Cell. With hydrogen as the fuel, this real-world vehicle emits only water vapor. That means zero tailpipe emissions. This helps remove the automobile from the environmental debate and reduce our dependence on petroleum. "
After seeing the Stan Meyer's water feul dunebuggy video...ok seeing is believing.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6955825702030656411&total=43&start=20&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=6 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6955825702030656411&total=43&start=20&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=6)
Struck me as odd to see his co-pilot half standing constantly checking the equipment.
I don't think I could get my wife to hang on to the back of the buss checking gauges :)
For me this is more than this DIY'er would want to tackle but I wish you luck Cody (and good engineering).
Skip
How did this get so confused - Some of you are talking about hydrogen fueled vehicles (which certainly exist and work), some of you are talking water vapor (steam) injection, and some of you are talking about changing the molecular structure of water (using minute amounts of energy).
* Brown's Gas, H-H-O, or whatever you wanna call it, has been around in some way for probably 50 years - most recently introduced as "new' by a co. in clearwater fl. trying to sell it to the DOD
* H-H-O as explained by it's discoverers (new word) is not breaking the valent bonds of H2O resulting in H2 and O2 - but the "alteration" of H2O, ergo something called H-H-O
* No one has proven H-H-O to be a competent technology
* Conservation of mass/energy laws have never been proven to be incompetent
>>>>> Cody, Can you tell me where or if I can see this vhicle? Thanks
The plan at this point is to convert my jeep grand cherokee over to hydrogen this summer, because I fulltime and pull my grand cherokee as a towed, I'll have it with me. I attend bus rallys and the jeep will be there for anyone that wants to see it run or to check it over, right now the format for it is being used in a dodge caravan and is operating nicely, my vehicle will be much more accessable for the busnuts to check out. The dodge caravan is owned by a friend of mine, a retired engineer from boeing, he is in the process of getting the associated patents on the system he developed. I think the confusion was based on the idea that this stems from the idea's from the 70's that were supposed to boost gas mileage by injecting water vapor into the fuel mixture, this isn't the case, the process here involves separating the hydrogen from water and using the hydrogen as the fuel, this is proven technology that has existed for quite a while, just hasn't been viable in the past because of the cost of the process, that has been streamlined conciderably and can be done now. The debate now is between hydrogen cell useage and hydrogen on demand, hydrogen cell is a storage system fed from an outside source like a service station and stored on board the vehicle to be used as needed, this is extremely dangerious because of the volital nature of hydrogen under compression, the new system is hydrogen on demand where it is produced as needed for the engine, eleminating the compression factor needed to store it.
"Keep in mind, we aren't talking about adding water to the fuel, but rather cracking the water molecule using electrolysis and adding the resulting hydrogen and oxygen to the intake air."
There are at least three threads going on here.
One involving WATER INJECTION that has been around since the year dot and one that gets resurrected occasionally when some of the old-timers are having a lucid moment and remembering the good old days when you could actually see a real engine under the hood and not only see it, but actually touch it and work on it.
Another involving running cars on hydrogen. No problem - take your pick between fuel cells producing electricity to turn an electric motor or run an internal combustion engine in the conventional way. Only problems are where to buy the fuel. The others involving safety and weight of the pressure vessel are significant but not insoluble. Transit buses are doing it and non-production cars are doing it. Maybe use nuclear power or solar power to generate electricity to produce the hydrogen. Hmmmm.
The third one - involving the use of electricity - presumably generated on board as you drive - to generate hydrogen and oxygen by electrolysis of water - also carried on board - which is then added (by whatever method) to the combustion process to produce higher output power and/or increased torque ....... is just pure drivel.
Quote from: Tony LEE on March 26, 2008, 02:04:51 PM
The third one - involving the use of electricity - presumably generated on board as you drive - to generate hydrogen and oxygen by electrolysis of water - also carried on board - which is then added (by whatever method) to the combustion process to produce higher output power and/or increased torque ....... is just pure drivel.
Suit yourself. The next time you're using a cutting torch, just turn off the oxygen since it is just pure drivel. ::)
Adding oxygen to a combustion process definitely improves combustion efficiency of the fuel. Adding hydrogen is arguable, but not outrageous.
Quote from: HighTechRedneck on March 26, 2008, 02:27:01 PM
Adding hydrogen is arguable, but not outrageous.
Does the "Hindenburg" ring a bell; hydrogen + Oxygen + flame (or 900+fah.) = big wampum fire :)
"valent bonds of H2O resulting in H2 and O2" hydrogen peroxide I believe.
Of the systems I have read about H and O are not seperated but co-mingled
:)
Skip
You guys all crack me up!
Methinks you need to do some studying on electrolysis, specifically how much energy it takes to break water molecules apart.
Energy in->water molecules break apart->combust them and join them back together again->energy back out, minus some due to process inefficiency.
Basically the [really stupid] laws of physics that the majority of the world agrees on say that the energy doesn't come from nowhere.
If you break enough water apart to get enough gasses of whatever you want to call them in order to recombine them again to get power out of your engine, that very same power just came from your alternator, which got it's poo from the engine....
It don't come from nowhere.....
It's all about poo I think...
Someone out there who's a real believer in all of this: Do it to an engine on a Dyno and let's see some "brown's gas on" vs "brown's gas off" numbers. And power the brown gas thingie from the alternator of said engine. And monitor the fuel going in, and the barometric pressure, and the phase of the moon, and whether Mercury is in retrograde or something. Maybe then you'll finally begin to understand the power of snake oil....
:)
Here do your own dd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyhydrogen_flame
Granted I have not seen power input versus power output charted and graphed.
It is an interesting concept (niave hope maybe)
It is not always power in = power out case in point: the atomic bomb output <> total input of energy to make it work.
Of coarse that is an overplay on what is truly stored in kinetic energy at the molecular bonding level.
I ain't no physisist thank goodness I ain't no chemist thanks but no thanks.
Don't really know of the hocus pocus that is out there but what was portrayed was 2 watts with 12 volts
for the electrolysis to produce (at what level I know not) is it feasable I know not
Will Cody do it I hope so then we can all look; if it is a bust I am sure Cody will be the first to let us know.
If You show me a process to convert my bus to snake oil and it is cheaper than WVO I'm all for it.
Of coarse would it be feasable to gather up enough snakes to sqeeze out the oil to fill a tank. :)
Skip
I can't help but wonder if anyone has told GM that the prototype cars powered by hydrogen that they have been field testing for the last 3 years don't run, or the research team from Purdue that they are wasting their time, even tho they have a working car, or the one from Michigan Tech that has been featured at trade shows? I can't help but wonder if some sort of mass hypnosis was used to convince them that the figments of their imagination that they have designed and ran don't really exist lol. Gentlemen, the world is changing and we don't have to understand the new technology, just enjoy the fact that it exists and will probably at some point relieve some of the grip OPEC has on us and that alone is a good thing.
Cody - I didn't see where anyone is saying that there is no such thing as hydrogen fuel or vehicles - the claims made about oxyhydrogen are what is at issue - and yes we MUST understand new technology so as not to be hoodwinked by those who would fake the science - there is a horrendous amount of math and science that says it is not new technology for vehicles (although it is used succesfully for welding and a few other uses) - as Boogie humorously points out, the laws of thermodynamics (or POO as he calls it) are still intact - unfortunately so are the wishes of free clean fuel - FWIW
Niles,
I think you are correct in:
QuoteI didn't see anyone is saying that there is no such thing as hydrogen fuel or vehicles - the claims made about oxyhydrogen are what is at issue - and yes we MUST understand new technology so as not to be hoodwinked by those who would fake the science
but I thought this thread was originally talking about hydrogen as an "assist" such as propane. ??? ??? ??? In that case, the small amount of hydrogen that the on board electricity can produce [u
]"could"[/u] help with fuel mileage............ not?? My guess is that we will need fuel cells to power a vehicle completely.................at least for now, but who knows.
I, personally, know that I would be VERY happy to have a unit that would help with "diesel fuel" mileage. Do you all think that is impossible?? I think not.
But if Cody has a friend who is actually running a vehicle on hydrogen that it produces as it runs....... EXCELLENT!!! I can't wait to see it. And will be looking forward to it as soon as possible. But I'm not going to tell him he is wrong. I would rather encourage him. Just seems like the right thing to do.
Chaz
FREE FUEL!!!! What a concept (I'm hijacking the thread here a bit). Heavens, could you IMAGINE the global warming and air pollution us humans would create if we had free fuel to burn and let it's energy loose in our environment? Wheee!!!
Now HERE's a technology that works. Poo in a big tank, let it rot for a while, and out comes free methane. They heat houses in India these days with just such a thing.
SO, Modify your engines to run on the stuff, put your sealand potties over a big sealed tank with a hose running to the engine, instead of hassling all the restaurants for their WVO, just pump their daily bathroom spoils to your bus and voila! Free driving!!!
To heck with Hydrogen... that takes water to make and we all know water is scarce in lots of the USA. For heck's sake we certainly fight over the stuff a lot!! Now Poo, nobody wants it. Horse poo, cow poo, human poo, and maybe even pig poo (gawd knows there's lots of it around)- people LOVE to give it away every moment of the day!! Let's all run out and put these systems on our buses, and we'll ALL have as much free fuel as we want forever!!
Oh. you'll only be able to drive a few feet per poo....
Oh well, yet another good idea maybe notsogood...
:)
while yes it seems there are several topics going here the facts are that hydrogen as a fuel works. GM, the universities and BMW have them running around and those that have driven them say they are no different running than when on gas. Jay Leno drove the BMW for a month and wrote about it in Popular Mechanics and other than there not being fueling stations availible right now he loved the car.
now as far as producing it on the fly in your car and being efficient I dont know much about and have not seen one firsthand but I am open minded enough to think it could happen. while some say it would take as much energy to produce usable hydrogen to run as it could create in energy well that is assuming you know how much energy is really availible in the item. maybe we just havent learned to release all the energy stored.
as far as laws of physics, thats great if you want to compare written sheets of paper but remember that that paper says a hummingbird cant fly. lucky for us he is to dumb to know that and flies anyway. If something like this becomes a reality it will be because of those to dumb to know it wont work and makes it happen. after all Einstein failed most of his classes in school and was considered a lost cause by his teachers and yet if it were not for him we wouldnt have power to run these computers that are supposed to weigh 1.5 tons so we could sit and discuss how nothing is possible.
just my $.02
steve
Hightechredneck:
QuoteIn a gasoline engine (which I know better than diesels), there is always unburned fuel, hence the need for catalytic converters these days to reduce hydrocarbon emissions. Increasing the oxygen in the cylinder aids more complete combustion.
Notice that I said to put the proper amount of fuel and air into a cylinder to get complete combustion. The Japanese car companies did that for years and did not require catalytic converters. You can even run a gasoline engine so lean that there is oxygen left over, but that tends to burn holes in piston heads (when the aluminum becomes fuel).
Bumblebee myths
Buff-Tailed bumblebee, Bombus terrestris
Bombus vosnesenskii
[edit] Flight
According to 20th century folklore, the laws of aerodynamics prove that the bumblebee should be incapable of flight, as it does not have the capacity (in terms of wing size or beat per second) to achieve flight with the degree of wing loading necessary. Not being aware of scientists 'proving' it cannot fly, the bumblebee succeeds under "the power of its own arrogance".[23] The origin of this myth has been difficult to pin down with any certainty. John McMasters recounted an anecdote about an unnamed Swiss aerodynamicist at a dinner party who performed some rough calculations and concluded, presumably in jest, that according to the equations, bumblebees cannot fly.[24] In later years McMasters has backed away from this origin, suggesting that there could be multiple sources, and that the earliest he has found was a reference in the 1934 French book Le vol des insectes by M. Magnan. Magnan is reported to have written that he and a Mr. Saint-Lague had applied the equations of air resistance to insects and found that their flight was impossible, but that "One shouldn't be surprised that the results of the calculations don't square with reality".[25]
It is believed that the calculations which purported to show that bumblebees cannot fly are based upon a simplified linear treatment of oscillating aerofoils. The method assumes small amplitude oscillations without flow separation. This ignores the effect of dynamic stall, an airflow separation inducing a large vortex above the wing, which briefly produces several times the lift of the aerofoil in regular flight. More sophisticated aerodynamic analysis shows that the bumblebee can fly because its wings encounter dynamic stall in every oscillation cycle. [26]
>>>> There is your answer to Bumble Bees - I've never heard that Humming birds can't fly ?????
That is why we stick with science and document it on written sheets of paper - we need to remember it!
It's all in Da Book so to speak!
well see, there ya go. with time science proved that science was wrong all along :). so whos to say that with time science wont prove that not being able to produce hydrogen to run your own car was wrong all along. ;D
Hey Guys,
I know we have now all determined that cars do drive on Hydro(gen). To what end is probably the question. I'm just hoping for a nice "assist" to my diesel loving big hunk of joy.
But.......... here is a neat little article that you might like to read. http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/may2007/id20070508_055560.htm?l
Altho it is a rather small and light little thing, it seems to remind me of the 1.5 ton computer. But this has the potential to "grow" where as the computer shrunk.
Enjoy it!
Chaz
p.s. by the way, have you noticed the way topics about "fuel" REALLY get people going?!?! Interesting. I wonder why.
I really like that approach Chaz. I'm even more glad to see a company other than big oil backing it.
Quote from: Chaz on March 26, 2008, 07:14:05 PM
p.s. by the way, have you noticed the way topics about "fuel" REALLY get people going?!?! Interesting. I wonder why.
frustration, anger, financial drain, etc. I would imagine.
I wouldn't know which molecule is what. Not my thing.
I will say that anyone who tries to improvise a way of doing something and it fails they should just keep trying. It took Einstein a lot of failures before he got it right.
Kuddos to those that have the means and foresight to think ahead, because the fossil stuff will run out someday. They said we couldn't go to the moon, guess what we did. That's the positive thinking that changes the world we live in.
Good Luck to any and all who persevere!
Paul
My mother is into jewellery making, and she has an electrical device that produces hydrogen from water to supply fuel to her soldering torch - apparently hydrogen is far superior than propane when doing fine detail work because with hydrogen you can have a much smaller and more delicate (but still sufficently 'hot') flame than you can with propane. I believe that the device that produces the hydrogen doesn't consume much electricity, but of course it is only producing minute amounts of the gas compared to what you would require to run an engine.
Incidentally, even if you 'do' have a viable supply of hydrogen on board, it would need to be correctly metered into the engine using an arrangement similar to an LPG system. You cannot simply fed it into the induction air flow as was implied by the original website link at the start of this thread - not only would the mixture control be completely screwed up (which would shut everything down on an EFI engine), but you would be inviting a 'blowback'. These occur when the burning LPG (or hydrogen) gets past the inlet valves and proceeds to burn all the gas in the inlet manifold / hose / air cleaner etc - basically it is like a backfire in your induction system that sets fire to the top of your engine.
Jeremy
PS. Regarding the 'bumble bee' issue - it's well known in model aircraft circles (another thing in which I have an interest) that the sophistication of flight that evolution has given birds is still way beyond anything that can be properly understood, much less reproduced, by man. The whole area of ornithopters (flapping-wing craft) is still in the steam-age, relatively speaking.
I have been looking at this for some time, and am somewhat sceptical. I am pleasantly surprised at the volume of replies! Another website: http://www.nationalvapor.com/
bassfid ::)
Better than HHO!
I am starting my own company and promoting my own free energy discovery. I found that I can take rocks from my driveway and put them in my fuel tank. When I drive my vehicle, instead of putting gas in, I found that when I add these special rocks that by some unknown phenomenon, the tank stays full! The closest thing to a miracle I know. I am in need of volunteers to demonstrate my discovery. I will send you a kit at no charge, because I look out after my bus friends. All I need is for anyone interested to send me a small shipping and handling fee. After you discover that your tank stays full you can post testimonials on my soon to be web site. For doing so I will send you more free rocks that you can give your friends. My only worries is that big oil will try to suppress this and do me bodily harm. I might have to go underground and use your bus conversions to hide in. I could probably hang out for no more than a month at a time, but with so many conversions to hide in, you would only have to hide me once.
I looked through the hype on the National Vapor site and like most "Improve your Mileage" things you have to be sceptical. This quote from the site caught my eye and it is obvious the inventor doesn't understand basic electricity so he can come up with any theory he wants.
QuoteYou see, the engine alternator keeps turning whether or not the engine and battery use all of the electricity it produces. ENERGY IS WASTED CONSTANTLY TURNING THE ALTERNATOR, THAT IS CAPTURED TO POWER THE HYDROGEN GENERATORÒ WHICH, IN TURN, PRODUCES HYDROGEN AND OXYGEN GASES USED TO IMPROVE COMBUSTION.
Like I said in a previous post, the world will bow down to the inventor of the "Perpetual Motion Machine".
QuoteI looked through the hype on the National Vapor site and like most "Improve your Mileage" things you have to be sceptical. This quote from the site caught my eye and it is obvious the inventor doesn't understand basic electricity so he can come up with any theory he wants.
Quote
You see, the engine alternator keeps turning whether or not the engine and battery use all of the electricity it produces. ENERGY IS WASTED CONSTANTLY TURNING THE ALTERNATOR, THAT IS CAPTURED TO POWER THE HYDROGEN GENERATORÒ WHICH, IN TURN, PRODUCES HYDROGEN AND OXYGEN GASES USED TO IMPROVE COMBUSTION.
Like I said in a previous post, the world will bow down to the inventor of the "Perpetual Motion Machine".
OK, correct me if I am wrong here, but it was my understanding that the alternator would continue to produce electricity, as long as it was spinning, if there was a need for it. IE. charge the battery/run the system. If there was no need for electricity it would regulate itself and not overcharge.
If there is such a need that the alternator actually does produce electricity all the time - cause it's needed - then one could always install another alternator specifically for the production of Hydrogen.................. not??
And, I am in agree-ance that it probably won't produce enough hydrogen to completely supply an engine, but if set up correctly, why couldn't it be an assist to the fuel and there by at least give us better mileage?? I know I would LOVE to get more MPG!!
I don't know, maybe it's just me..............but I REALLY want to see things persued and be invented to not only help us enjoy ourselves more and save money and help the earth, but also be able to benefit YOUR kids and grandkids and great grandkids in the future.
When I'm gone, ehhh, it's over for this bloodline, (and maybe some would think that is a good thing ;)) but I would still like to have the people of the future not judge us TOO harshly for not doing more. We surely can, if not just by giving a little encouragement and maybe just trying something once in awhile. (I and 5 other guys are working on building a corn burning furnace that will DRY corn for the farmers. By our estimates, it will save a farmer 4/5ths the amount of money he would spend on propane. And it doesn't have to be "good" corn. It can be old moldy corn or stuff that would be thrown away. Will it work?? I don't know, but I think so. I am at least willing to try, to spend my money and time in hopes that it will. Will there be a gain for me if it does? Well, I'd certainly like to make a little something. But if not, so be it. It's something I can do so there for, I should. I'm not completely altruistic, but I try. :) ) Oh, and just in case any of you think I'm some hippy left over tree hugger........................well, ok maybe a little. But, I also did well enough to create a business, run it well enough to retire at 40 and NEVER rip anyone off.
But don't get me wrong, personally, and this is just my opinion, I think charlatins, con-men and people just out to rip others off should be shot. Period. I have ZERO use for them except target practice.
So anyway, like I said, it's just my opinion, but encouragement and maybe helping weed out some of the P.O.S. who would rip people off would be a little nicer than bad mouthing stuff that has potential.
Sorry for the editorial.
Chaz
Chaz: Maybe a explanation that you understand. As a welder, I expect that you have used an engine driven welder. When the engine is running the welder is putting ut full voltage but no current so almost no power is being used from the engine. Strike an arc (drawing current) and you hear the engine lug down and the governor open up.
Same thing on a vehicle. If the vehicle does not require any current (no electrical load) The alternator is producing full voltage but with no current drain, it presents a small mechanical load on the engine. Any current being used, whether to run your headlights or produce hydrogen increases the load on the engine.
Claiming that the hydrogen produced, and used as fuel, produces more power than what was used to make the hydrogen is the basis of a Perpetual Motion Machine. You just start with a tank of water, break it down into hydrogen and oxygen which you use for fuel in the engine and then use the exhaust (water) to replace the water used out of the tank. No matter how you slice it or dice it or hype it, that just doesn't fly.
I've had about 4 beers dult beverages.. of low end quality, even though JR and I both like it ;D , but here is a thought.....
If like we learned in Chem 101 and Chemistry in high school, you add sulphuric acid to sugar, the result is oxygen, hydrogen and carbon, why couldn't you recycle batteries, creating useful stuff from old batteries, by overcharging them, (creating hydrogen gas), obtaining sugar in whatever form and adding excess battery acid to it, since if you put distilled water into a battery you end up with more sulphuric acid? Another source of acid would be from various strip mines. Peabody Coal Company produced coal for well over 100 years and at the same time destroyed 100's of thousands of acres of land in Kentucky, Tennessee, Montana and Wyoming by poisoning them with the by product of the strip mine process which as far as I know is sulphuric acid.
The state of Kansas Ag dept. some years back published a pamphlet that said that if they grew corn in the median of the freeways, "only" they could supply all the needs of the United States. Simple math tells me that if this is possible, then adding a few more states like Nebraska, SD, ND, Iowa, and any others that want to join in, could grow enough corn for to make a sweet corn syrup, available to any who wanted it to be able to make a viable vehicle propulsion.
OK, I have a couple of beers left, let the flames begin.. I need the tan.
Understood, Stan. But I was thinking more along the line of the Hydro improving the effeciency of the diesel by being an additive, not by standing on it's own merit. That would not be the PMM.
I got some info off the net about producing Hydro and Jerry L. looked it over. There was something in there that got his attention. What? .......... well I don't know. I'm not that technical. But it made an impression on him. I will have to take a look. But I think it may have been something about 2 kinds of hydrogen.
And, just for grins, there could also be solar panels in the quation.
Dallas,
I've often thought about that "Corn Highway" thing, but before we go to that length, and since corn is becoming such a comodity, how about the government quit paying farmers to NOT grow crops?? (I think they call that "set asides" ??) Just a thought.
Chaz
I don't recall anyone suggesting that the water exhausted from the engine could be recycled and reused as the power source for the engine, if it could, then it would be a perpetual motion machine. The water has to be replaced just like gas has to be. Bob's caravan is averaging 50 to 60 miles per gallon of water, on gas it averaged 22 to 24. I don't expect people that arn't familier with hydrogen production to understand the process, it's much more involved and complex that most people realize, to read the many articles dedicated to this is one thing, to actually understand the process is another, I've been neck deep in the process for the last 10 years but only from a spectators standpoint. Bob is a retired engineer from Boeing, his knowledge of the process is probably second to none. He was instrumental in the developement of not only several forms of jet propulsion, he was also neck deep in the research and developement of the team responsible for several adaptations of ignition systems for not only solid fuel and liquid fuel propulsion systems for a lot of the rocketry that the military uses today. For me, it's all greek, but for someone with that type of background, it's just another day in the lab. I'm asking again for people to keep their minds open to what could be possible and not to discount an idea, just because it's new and different. Just a few short years ago, the very thought that a person could launch a rocket at a target, then with a few key strokes on a computer, change the target, have the missle change direction, head off in a different direction and then dive down the exact ventilation shaft, that the guy at the computer 2,000 miles away wanted it to hit. Think about it, anyone see that possiblility a few years ago?
I should have added in my last post that I sincerely hope that the hydrogen people are right. As much as anyone else, I would like to see the cost of energy go down. "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is".
That said, until a month ago I maintained that it was not feasible to cool a bus engine with electric fans. Then a bus owner on the BNO board explained how he could cool his 6V92 on a 5% grade in 90 degree ambient with one 1/2 HP electric fan. See the explanation of his system near the end of this thread by Mark Renner.
http://www.busnut.com/bbs/messages/11/20829.html?1205026599 (http://www.busnut.com/bbs/messages/11/20829.html?1205026599)
Since it is generally accepted that a bus engine fans uses more than ten HP, just by changing to the 1/2 HP electric fan would give you a increase in fuel mileage with more than a 3% increase in HP to the wheels.
Quote from: cody on March 30, 2008, 11:46:59 AM
Just a few short years ago, the very thought that a person could launch a rocket at a target, then with a few key strokes on a computer, change the target, have the missle change direction, head off in a different direction and then dive down the exact ventilation shaft, that the guy at the computer 2,000 miles away wanted it to hit. Think about it, anyone see that possiblility a few years ago?
The world would be a better place if that idea had remain a possibility no one belived could happen
Jeremy
I agree, we didn't need that advancement, if it were up to me, when 2 countries had a disagreement, instead of going to war, the 2 leaders of the countries would get their wives into a wet T-shirt contest and the winner would be judged by me lol. How about the internet for doing the impossible, I'm continually amazed by the fact that I can type a word into a keyboard and it will instantly appear on a screen on the other side of the world. Or my GPS system that can instantly tell me exactly where I am all the time, even when I'm hopelessly lost, who would have thought that was possible. lol
Quote from: Jeremy on March 30, 2008, 01:58:10 PM
Quote from: cody on March 30, 2008, 11:46:59 AM
Just a few short years ago, the very thought that a person could launch a rocket at a target, then with a few key strokes on a computer, change the target, have the missle change direction, head off in a different direction and then dive down the exact ventilation shaft, that the guy at the computer 2,000 miles away wanted it to hit. Think about it, anyone see that possiblility a few years ago?
The world would be a better place if that idea had remain a possibility no one belived could happen
Jeremy
I'm afraid I would have to disagree. Now they can pinpoint the exact target and adjust if it moves. Minimal collateral damage. Before, it required multiple bombs or even saturation bombing, resulting in substantial collateral damage. In the Iraq war, people were upset when a "uninvolved" building next door to the actual target was significantly damaged. Imagine if those same people were magically able to go back in time and antiseptically assess damage from WWII bombing of targets in the same way they do now.
The world would be a better place if violence and war had never came into the human mind. But contrary to what some people believe, violence and war have been around much longer than guns and bombs.
Somewhat going back to topic, some decades ago, nobody would have believed you could level a city with a small quantity of hydrogen. Sadly, inovation proved they could.
OK folks. I got kind of tired of all the "Can't be done" posts. I am stubborn that way. So I spent the last few days setting out to prove it using my 1986 Toyota 4x4 Pickup. It has the 22R gasoline engine in it. It is light weight for a 4x4 pickup and has some extra space under the hood, so it makes a good candidate.
As some of you know, I am at the Choo Choo Express Bus Garage for a while getting some things done on my bus. Here I have access to a couple very experienced mechanics, a couple fabricators and several busnuts that enjoy a challenge and are in their element when thinking out of the box. Plus an almost unlimited supply of scrap metals, wire and just about everything you can imagine.
The fabricators built the electrolysis tank and water storage tank. Mike, Jay and I built the electrolysis components using information I found for free on the internet. We developed our own approach to routing it into the intake air that eliminates the need to dual lines for idle vs non idle. We got it all fit in under the hood with some help from Joel. I also decided we should go for the gold and try to reclaim the water vapor from the exhaust. To test the idea we took a small AC evaporator and switched the AC lines over to it. When in hydrogen mode, the exhaust is diverted through this evaporator and the condensation is sent back to the water supply tank. HHO (I don't really like that term, but will use it for convenience) production, is controlled using a heavy duty rheostat attached to the throttle linkage. A lever on the dash opens a flow valve for the HHO in to the intake air and then as you push it further, cuts off gasoline flow.
Now the big test. A little apprehensive, I started it up on gasoline and let it warm up. Then moved the lever over to hydrogen. Well, it turns out it takes a little practice to move the lever at just the right speed (slowly) to make the switch over smoothly. But IT DOES WORK! So, we set out in a procession (just in case it didn't go well). At first we stuck to neighborhood streets going slowly and gradually increasing speed. No problems. So We took it onto I75 and headed north to SR153, up to US 27, then South on 27 to I24 East back to the shop. I was able to attain 65mph and had good throttle response. All total the maiden voyage was about 25 miles and when we checked the water tank we had used slightly less than a pint of water. So based on the water usage Cody has mentioned, I would say the water vapor reclamation is working. 200 MPG on water! Not perpetual motion, but dang close!
I'll post pictures in a couple days. But first we are documenting it all for patent filing. As the pickup is my toad, you will get to see it in person as I will start attending rallies as soon as the current work on my bus is done. (guess I better paint the pickup if I'm going to show it off, those who have seen it understand)
Since this is April 1st, I assume the next step will be to power a 500 kw generator with your 22R engine.
I'm trying to figure out if that is an April Fools post as well. If not, whoever offered to pay for the dyno run should pony up now and have this contraption put on the dyno and include full fuel meetering to determine the exact amount of hydrogen and gasoline consumed for a given horse power setting. As they say, the proof is in the pudding. Lets see the test results.
Dallas got me earlier. April fools!! So I imagine High tech is blowing a bit of smoke. ;D ;D ;D
Chaz
Hydrogen as a fuel is the only fuel that is readily available in nature. There are no crops that need to be taken out of production or changed over to other processing to make fuel. This source grows naturally all over the world. It cleans the environment and it separates and releases oxygen and hydrogen in its growth cycle. When fed gases from the power plant smoke stacks and flues as well as diesel fired steam generators and heaters, it reduces the CO, HC, and NOx emissions. When this crop is at the end of it's life cycle it can then be pressed and the oil is used in some restaurants to cook our food. To find out more go on the web. And research hydrogen production you might find what I am talking about.
Don
Guys, Guys, don't you understand. We are in a major drought in many parts of the country. We cannot be wasting precious water just to be fueling our vehicles.
Len
The fact that many parts of the country are in the midst of a drought is a very serious arguement, water is indeed scarse in many parts of the country, no single answer will bring us magically out of this mess. The advent of biofuels has shown that our crop production is drastically low at this time, partly because of the availability of water for the farmers. Many farmers have diverted cropland to produce crops that are destined to be used in the biofuel industry, for the first time in history we have had to import wheat. At the same time our government in their infinite wisdom is continuing to pay farmers to not grow crops, somehow this logic escapes me.
Cody,
I am hoping Len was being facetious. I mean, come on, fuel doesn't rain down from the sky now, does it? The rain might be a little sparse in places, but they can sure have some of what I have been getting!! Fill up one of those tankers and ship it!
Chaz
Quote from: Chaz on April 01, 2008, 05:06:23 PM
Cody,
I am hoping Len was being facetious. I mean, come on, fuel doesn't rain down from the sky now, does it? The rain might be a little sparse in places, but they can sure have some of what I have been getting!! Fill up one of those tankers and ship it!
Chaz
There are indeed many places where fresh water shortage is a real problem. I know the Midwest is getting flooded with rain right now, but at the same time, they still say Georgia will take years to overcome the water deficit they suffered due to continuing to poor their drinking water into the gulf to maintain some fish. So now they are bent on trying to realign their border with Tennessee to get access to the Tennessee River.
One thing that always amazes me is that way back, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries where drinking water was very sparse, paid U.S. companies to come set up massive desalinization plants to convert sea water to fresh water. The equipment is expensive both initially and to maintain. But drought is expensive too. Perhaps it is time for the U.S. to build some of those plants and pipe the water inland to the farm country and other areas of need. Hey, since we are reportedly going to cause the sea level to rise via global warming, then perhaps we can alleviate some of that by using it inland and for HHO production. ;D
BTW, as most have already decided, my HHO success story was an April Fools tale. But, I do hold an open mind for it based on some credible stories, including Cody's friend's experience with it. It is easy to condemn an idea that is new and radical. But many of our accepted inventions now, were once thought to be impossible based on conventional wisdom of the time. I think it is a much better thing to support those trying to invent something radical.
I'm with ya all the way around on that, High Tech, but "IF" we could get the "on demand hydro" to work, instead of trucking fuel, we could keep the truckers busy hauling water! ;D It certainly wouldn't be as dangerous!! ;D
But really, if it were to happen that we could use water for fuel, do you honestly think it would cause a water shortage even in drought areas?? My guess is that would probably help things out as desalination would be a far cry better deal that refineries and oil rigs, etc. Even in places like "Hot-lanta". Companies would see a need for fresh water, on a "regular basis", and build pipelines, etc. as there is profit in it. A once every 50 year drought is not going to get companies interested in water pipelines. But fuel would.
And that's not even considering all the other benefits.
Chaz
I don't see hydrogen production as having a major impact on drought area's. Water is one of the more common items, we have oceans filled with it. Lake Superior alone has a greater volume than all the oil that has been found to date and is continually being replenished by the hundreds of feeder streams and major rivers around it. Oil takes eons to produce but it rains every day somewhere lol. Another area that is being explored in regards to hydrogen generation is called "heavy water" that shows promise toward being more friendly in regards to molecular division, a lot of interesting studies are being conducted in this field and I'm sure some facinating information will come out of it.
If water could be used as fuel, Americans would pay $4.00/gallon for it while an attendant pumped it into their tank. Read the numbers on how many people pay $1.00/pint ($8.00/gal) for water that is almost free out of the tap.
The water shortage thing was a joke guys.
Actually, water shortages are not a joke in some areas. There are predictions by experts that fresh water could become as big an issue as oil or even a bigger issue in the future. This is likely to be a bigger issue in other parts of the world, but it could become a problem here in the USA too.
The southwest area of the United State has some of the largest population growth yet they have very little water. Water is often pumped hundreds of miles to cities. Las Vegas has lush green grass on boulevards and such, but they are in a desert. All that grass is being irrigated with lots of water that has to be moved long distances. The grass wouldn't grow naturally in their climate.
I suspect some areas of the USA will eventually have to go to water rationing if they don't find new sources for fresh water. Fresh city/well water has traditionally been so plentiful and cheap that hardly anyone conserves water. My water costs 77 cents per thousand gallons for the just the water plus a service fee and charges for sewer. We all might have to start using water like we are boondocking in an RV.
Now, we do have plenty of salt water that could probably be used for hydrogen, but doesn't really help those of us that live vast distances from salt water.
Some Southwest Florida municipalities are instituting strict restrictions on lawn watering (may also limit washing of vehicles) with stiff fines. Between sufferinng extended drought conditions and increasing demand with an ever increasing population, water is becoming a big concern. Pumping large amounts from the Florida aquifer has resulted in an increase in sinkholes, which some home insurance policies are now listing as an exemption. Jack
And it's going to get worse jack, lol if the aquifer eventually fills, the state will be taxing everyone for the inground swimming pools.
A few more years of global warming and Las Vegas will be ocean front.
Len