yep, and i dont believe it.
i think your on about the ones that use electrolysis to split hydrogen and oxygen from water and then feed them into the inlet manifold, if it was that easy it would have been done by major manufacturers, or at least a bunch of students
it takes a lot of power to split water, more energy than you would get out it, although enstein would disagree with that statement
HHO is pseudoscience, especially with electrolysis.
[ please don't call it Brown's gas, named after an Aussie conman ]
The only way to get more mileage [ or power ] from a fuel is to increase the BTU content.
which explains the drop in performance when using Bio and the increase when using WMO
The only way to use water to increase the BTU content is to "hydrocrack" crude oil [ also known as steam reforming]
Hydrocracking is where H2 is added to long chain hydrocarbons when it is split into short chain hydrocarbons [ it is done at very high temps in a controlled environment ]
A crude example is steam reforming [ gasifying ] coal to make syngas at 1000c
H20 + C = [ H2+CO ] or syngas
Age: 52 Zodiac: Joined: 05 Jul 2004 Posts: 15702 Location: Wolstanton Newcastle Under Lyme Staffs a little sleepy Hamlet full of drunks and OLD PEOPLE!
If it could work, it would solve many of the planet's pollution issues in one go ...
This is incorrect - water vapor which is what is left after burning HHO, is also a green house gas. So if every car in the world run on water, the planet would be in more *beep* than it is now.
I also have played around with browns gas/HHO. Its easy to produce, its easy to plumb into your car (although my saab wont take it as its too new). I did quite a bit of research into the theory behind it and from what i have messed around with it is something that you can get some good results from. From what Ive learned about it you have to do a few things to your car.
1. Lean out the engine, by piggyback the sensor in the exhaust pipe and making sure you tap the HHO in to the air inflow AFTER the MAF sensor.
2. Make sure your altinator is up to scratch, you can even swap the *beep* magnets out of it for neo magnets giving you a lot better current.
3. Use a PWM unit (which you can buy off eblag dirt cheap) this pulses the unit which will give it a good start up production.
There a few different types of units you can make very cheaply, one of the best is a dry unit which can be all different shapes and sizes. Ive posted links of a video of a tabletop experiment I tryed (just to see if it worked) and some pictures of dry cells I have drawn up in cad.
If I had found out about this HHO I would never have sold my shogun. I was paying 130 a litre at the pumps and it cost too much to run.
Age: 46 Zodiac: Joined: 09 Oct 2002 Posts: 3724 Location: S/W New Forest Border
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 23:18 Post subject:
gareth01422 wrote:
administrator wrote:
This topic keeps coming up ...
If it could work, it would solve many of the planet's pollution issues in one go ...
This is incorrect - water vapor which is what is left after burning HHO, is also a green house gas. So if every car in the world run on water, the planet would be in more *beep* than it is now.
So ... if we get rid of the oceans ( the largest producers of natural HHO emissions - clouds - and the supporter of the planet's largest natural CO2 vacuum (algae) ) - then we can solve global warming!
2/3 of the planet is covered in water ... clouds are made of water - they are NOT a 'greenhouse gas' but support the planet's fragile ecosystem by trapping pollution, bringing it back to the surface of the planet and, in 67% of cases help to send it to the bottom of the ocean AND have the double bonus that they reflect the sun's rays back out of the atmosphere.
Seems like somebody's been stringing you along and caught you hook, line & sinker
all I am saying is replacing CO2 with H2O in the atmosphere is not going solve anything. Also water vapor is a green house gas due to the molecules and how they stick together. Its the bonds between the molecules that vibrate and stretch which hold the infrered radiation, causing the atmosphere to get warmer, as the atmosphere gets warmer it radiated infrered radiation back down the earths surface, which in turn gets hotter, and then radiates more infrered radiation back up to the atmosphere.
To simplify this, Earth is a machine with lots of moving parts (cycle) if one part of the cycle stops working a new "steady state" will be achieved which can be either a cooler or hotter GMST (global mean suface temperature. as for CO2 this is a big part of the carbon cycle on earth, Carbon = energy.
the point is, If you increase the amount of one part of the cycle earth will always balance itself out (creating a NEW steady state) by counteracting it. one of the ways in which it does it is by increasing the GMST.
You can see how this works by looking at climate models.
Im not here trying to be a smart *beep* or anything, its just im doing a degree in physics and I have covered global warming in one of my assignments. Personally I think its one of the biggest lies ever, as earth isnt the only planet warming up in The Solar System, they all are. What is the one of the biggest money earners for the goverment which has been in the news for the past weeks? Carbon Tax...........
Age: 46 Zodiac: Joined: 09 Oct 2002 Posts: 3724 Location: S/W New Forest Border
Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 9:16 Post subject:
gareth01422 wrote:
No you have read into this the wrong way...
Yes and no ...
and maybe a topic for a different thread ...
Yes - H2O IS considered to be a greenhouse gas but, while all greenhouse gases have similar properties, not all greenhouse gases are the same.
In simple terms, a bit like good and bad cholestrol
Probably the most interesting consideration with regards to one greenhouse gas compared to another is their like-for-like contribution. That is to say, for example, 1 molecule of methane is about eight times stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
In addition, it is considered to be man-made greenhouse gases, such as CO2, CFCs etc that are the major contribution to warming of the atmosphere, which has a knock-on effect of the atmosphere holding more water-vapour (warmer air holds more water vapour) - thus creating a downward spiral
Further, you have to consider how long different greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere ...
Water vapour typically remains in the atmosphere no more than 9 days hence, is not considered to be cumulative. 'man made' greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for many years.
Sure, the planet IS self regulating, but on a catastrophic way, such as ice-ages.
Bottom line, human produced pollution will NOT destroy the planet, but you can be sure, it will eventually destroy humanity.
Finally ... something that seems to be being ignored by the money makers ...
over millions of years, without any human interferance, the planet has 'regularly' warmed and cooled to levels that would make it uninhabitable (by most!)
Yes - H2O IS considered to be a greenhouse gas but, while all greenhouse gases have similar properties, not all greenhouse gases are the same.
In simple terms, a bit like good and bad cholestrol
Probably the most interesting consideration with regards to one greenhouse gas compared to another is their like-for-like contribution. That is to say, for example, 1 molecule of methane is about eight times stronger greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
In addition, it is considered to be man-made greenhouse gases, such as CO2, CFCs etc that are the major contribution to warming of the atmosphere, which has a knock-on effect of the atmosphere holding more water-vapour (warmer air holds more water vapour) - thus creating a downward spiral
Further, you have to consider how long different greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere ...
Water vapour typically remains in the atmosphere no more than 9 days hence, is not considered to be cumulative. 'man made' greenhouse gases remain in the atmosphere for many years.
Sure, the planet IS self regulating, but on a catastrophic way, such as ice-ages.
Bottom line, human produced pollution will NOT destroy the planet, but you can be sure, it will eventually destroy humanity.
Finally ... something that seems to be being ignored by the money makers ...
over millions of years, without any human interferance, the planet has 'regularly' warmed and cooled to levels that would make it uninhabitable (by most!)
Simon
I agree with you on most points.
Not only has the weather been colder and warmer but also there is evidence of pole shift, which can have a catastrophic effects on earth.
But yes, I think this is for another thread.
Back to topic.
just as a side note, from what I have read on the net petrol engines do not have as good effect with HHO. Diesel engines are better due to there higher compresion.
On youtube there is a guy who has made hundreds of videos about HHO and he is very methodical in his approch. search for Zerofossilfuel on youtube.
I hope some one gets this working to a good effect as it would save on the fuel bill.
i'm planning to put a hho generator in my paj but first i want to get a few months of data like fuel consumption and under bonnet temperatures so i can see how well (or badly) it works, i've looked on the net a fair bit and i think most of these " run your car on water" sites are total hairy ball thingeys, i was thinking of making one out of 5 stainless steel cylinders inside each other, as far as i can find out thats a similar design to the ones used in ww2, but i'm interested in gareths dry cell, how does that work? if it does work i'll post my before and after consumption figures but don't expect anything for 6 months
i'm planning to put a hho generator in my paj but first i want to get a few months of data like fuel consumption and under bonnet temperatures so i can see how well (or badly) it works, i've looked on the net a fair bit and i think most of these " run your car on water" sites are total hairy ball thingeys, i was thinking of making one out of 5 stainless steel cylinders inside each other, as far as i can find out thats a similar design to the ones used in ww2, but i'm interested in gareths dry cell, how does that work? if it does work i'll post my before and after consumption figures but don't expect anything for 6 months
The dry cell works more or less the same as a wet cell, But it has a seperate tank that holds the water in, so you can fill it up while the unit is running. But not only that you get more hydrogen out of it than a wet cell. I would work the figures of 12V at 30 amps max. Also another good idea is to change the magnets out of the altenator for neo magnets. This will give better electrical charge (or so I am led to beleive). there are a lot videos on the net of how to do this.
My dads friend has 3 jam jars under his bonnet and he tells me he gets about 30/40% better fuel consumption(I have no proof of this).
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
FAQ
Watched Topics
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your personal messages
Log in
Calendar
Club Shop
Chatroom
