Hybrid water power technology

[Joker]

 Qwerty said:

Its not drawing more than the alternator - the engine is working harder to power the alternator.

you will have to explain that one to me in detail, the alt is always spinning & i fail to see the motor working harder to amp it up... (I imagine the kick you feel/see/hear when air-con engages at idle)

be no worse than some extreme DOOF DOOF (I run no capacitor and my lights do occasionally dim under load)

alt can (i assume) only output a constant charge, regulators and all that jazz, regardless of rpm's

(genuinely interested as Like i say I have an example installed in a car close to me - not overly trying to be more pedantic than I usually am)

still no proof it doesn't work...

link to wiki electrolysis saying it aint efficient didn't help, as mentioned the HHO is being added to the mix of air/fuel and at idle the car is requiring less fuel to do the same speed - that is a fact

[aim]

 ODB']

yes i realise this.

I was speculating, spitballing if you will, that you could continue to run your car on the petrol as per normal, with no greater reliance on the alternator and instead take the extra "something" required to charge battery and thus power this process from aero turbines, or solar power, or the heat from brakes etc.....

would it be more feasible then? I guess it depends on:

1. how much extra the whole rig required to do this stuff costs and weighs

2. how much power is required to run the system, independantly of the alternator.

anything aero will greatly increase drag, negating any benefits. solar could work, but is fairly inefficient and unreliable.

[quote name='JoKer said:

you will have to explain that one to me in detail, the alt is always spinning & i fail to see the motor working harder to amp it up... (I imagine the kick you feel/see/hear when air-con engages at idle)

be no worse than some extreme DOOF DOOF (I run no capacitor and my lights do occasionally dim under load)

alt can (i assume) only output a constant charge, regulators and all that jazz, regardless of rpm's

(genuinely interested as Like i say I have an example installed in a car close to me - not overly trying to be more pedantic than I usually am)

still no proof it doesn't work...

link to wiki electrolysis saying it aint efficient didn't help, as mentioned the HHO is being added to the mix of air/fuel and at idle the car is requiring less fuel to do the same speed - that is a fact

alternators put out a constant voltage, not charge, ampere's change. take that into account automotive alternators are of minimal efficiency (50% or something really low, they may be better in newer cars) then add all the weight, I struggle to see the benefits... You'd have to devise a system where it only uses the over head produced, I have no idea how much of that the average passenger car has... THEN add the inefficiency of the combustion engine and it seems to me like you're trying to get something from nothing by going round in circles. You're better off devising a method in which the alternator can raise and lower it's resistance according to how many amps you need, but why hasn't any automotive company done it? Well, it's probably not worth it.

[Guest]

Assume all systems are 100% efficient. Put 1kWh of electricity into some water and split some into hydrogen and oxygen. How much energy will you get back when you burn the hydrogen and oxygen you just produced?

(hint: Apply conservation law.)

Now

The Wiki links shows you can not convert water to hydrogen without having huge losses of energy in the process.

Your burning petrol which might be 20% efficient to turn an alternator which might be 50% efficient to make electricity which turns water to gas which might be 50% efficient.

When you burn hydrogen and oxygen the output = water + energy

Or energy + water = hydrogen + oxygen.

Its a closed energy cycle

[Joker]

well then would you like me to measure the amps then - system on and off... which wire haha

assuming nothing - if there's charge to keep battery topped up

mileage increased from 450km a tank to 700 ($100 fill aprox)

is it still a false economy?

I have the energy and time for facts - not theory

any data required I can get (he has him missus car at work today - pix tomorrow if you can wait)

[aim]

Joker, you're telling me a process that is a percentage (minus the power required by the ecu, injectors, stereo and lights etc) of a cycle that is ~48% (we'll be VERY generous and assume a alt is 60% efficient and that the hydrolysis reaction is 80%, .6 * .8 ) efficient can increase your mileage by 55%?

I call bull s*** and can't wait for these facts.

[Guest]

Sure send it to an independant tester for milage. AA, consumer whatever.

This idea has been arround for a long time and every time its tested the results don't pan out. Otherwise it would be used all the time.

Don't get me wrong i'd love it if it worked - cheap free energy is what the world wants / needs. You have many billions spent every year looking for it.

Occam's Razor

[jonboy]

These systems are absolute BS.

http://aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml

"Unfortunately, the first law of thermodynamics states quite clearly that the energy generated by recombining the hydrogen and oxygen through combustion can only ever be equal to the amount of energy it took to separate them."

[Guest]

Another way of looking at this

Lets be optimistic

A typical one of these systems would use 10amps. That = about 120 watts of energy

If we converted that with no energy losses to hydrogen then burnt that hydrogen again at 100% efficiency u still only have 120w of energy.

Most cars would have at least a 100,000w engine.

[Joker]

wait aim : what?

jonboy : cool a link! (I know it wasn't hard to find)

but please stop quoting the 1st law

Qwerty : I'm still lost

I's a sucker too at end of the day and seeking proof of failure not theory

still cant see how (claimed) 700km per tank over 450/tank savings dont/wont offset the loss of a few kw

aside from all that would f***up your ecu wouldnt it? if attempted in a Subaru... (supposed to be introduce post afm)

I will leave it a month and see what the actual mileage is - my Neighbour's mate who installed it went on about exhaust tip turning grey possibly and to be careful cos will have little to no engine-braking (already established like i mentions zero throttle cruises at 50kph)

[jonboy]

 JoKer said:

jonboy : cool a link! (I know it wasn't hard to find)

but please stop quoting the 1st law

Cool, just a quote from the article.

It is definitely easy to generate Hydrgen and Oxygen from Water, but for a system like this to just break even, all compnents would need to be 100% efficient. No friction in any engine components, an alternator that converted all input energy into electrcity and no resistance in any wiring.

Any electricity generated by the alternator puts a load on the engine, using more fuel. Due to all the energy losses of each component, the energy available from the hydrogen generated is far less than the energy (fuel) used in the electrolysis. There goes the fuel economy/extra mileage.

[Joker]

http://aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam2.shtml

 

Yes, the addition of H2 and O2 the intake of an engine does appear to improve the thermal efficiency by (in the case of the tests cited) an astonishing 15%.

However, the following destroys the claims of the HHO fans.

[*]The amount of HHO gas required is far, far greater than any of the commercially available or DIY electrolysis cells on the market can produce. Indeed, the amount of electricity required to create these gas volumes is once again beyond the ability of any conventional car's electrical system.

[*]The particulate output of the engine being tested actually *increased* significantly, whereas the HHO proponents are claiming lower emissions. In fact, particulate emissions are now being cited as a major health risk and cause of premature death

hehe

and

 

And if you're someone who's certain that you're getting improved mileage from your HHO system, here's an experiment for you to try... ...

simple enuff really - I'll give this a go

http://aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml is well worth a read, and simple enuff for me to under stand

[jonboy]

 JoKer said:

http://aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml is well worth a read, and simple enuff for me to under stand

And written by someone who knows what they are talking about.

[newsuba]

He really is a rocket scientist too.

The guy built a missile in his backyard.

[DRFVDR]

Well here is my take FROM SOME ONE WHO ACTUALLY BUILT ONE we built a HHO generator for shits and giggles things we found were

1/Weight - we built a 3 litre one it weighed in at 5 kg

2/Volts - at 12 volts the output was pathetic and it drew huge amount of power so you would have to run a bigger alt and more batteries

3/Water- does not run so good house water so you would have to either buy distilled water or distill your own

it did produce HHO,which we could ignite but by were we disappointed lucky it cost us less than 20 for the bits

[Joker]

update - car going well

600 km to a tank (was installed at the time of my original post)

 

Vehicle details

• Make: HOLDEN
  
• Model: COMMODORE EXEC
  
• Year: 1993
  
• Main colour: Silver
  
• Vehicle type: Passenger Car/Van
  
• Body style: Saloon
  
• No of seats: 5
  
• CC rating: 3,791cc
  
• Fuel type: Petrol
  
• Country of origin: Australia
  

edit damn this isnt my thread but yea

[Guest]

What a load of BS.

Physics at it's most basic.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/gas-mileage/4271579