Discouraged by 'NAY SAYERS'

[Roland Jacques]

“It is a common misconception that the power you get from the alternator comes for free. IT DOES NOT.

It takes GASOLINE to run the alternator - with the resultant 20% efficiency of the gasoline engine, and another loss in the alternator output.

The electricity splits the water into oxygen and hydrogen with yet another loss of efficiency.

The oxygen and hydrogen are recombined in the internal combustion engine, along with the burning of gasoline and oxygen. This is a further loss of efficiency.

Adding oxygen and hydrogen to the input gas stream DOES NOT improve the efficiency of the gasoline burn, and CAN NOT produce more energy than is put in.

Throw a solar panel on the roof and use THAT to crack the water, but do not think you will get any improved efficiency from cracking the water with the alternator.

You have thrown your money away if you think this will work. The law of conservation of energy will beat you every time. It's the same as trying to make your car levitate - the law of gravity is your enemy on that one.

I look forward to seeing how you convince yourself that this is working, but I predict that you will be rather disappointed.”[/QUOTE]

This is a true statement. I had to read it three times just to be sure.

He just does not understand how the engine uses energy, and or Why the engine is only 20% efficient.

This is the only questionable statement he has but it is correct.
"Adding oxygen and hydrogen to the input gas stream DOES NOT improve the efficiency of the gasoline burn"

Yes, technically HHO does not improve "the efficiency of the gasoline burn" /IE creating any extra energy. It does however change the characteristics of the gasoline burn. The new fuel mix can now makes the energy of the gasoline be transferred to rotary power of the engine better than without HHO (less wasted energy). So the "ENERGY" of the gasoline is not "more efficient", but the engine can use the energy more efficiently. No law of conservation is broken with this concept.

As far as being able to Break the law of conservation that’s a different subject.

[bigapple]

Dane,

Please rethink this statement.

Have you ever seen a generator lug when power was turned on?

BoyntonStu

what hes saying is alot of the alternator's energy is there and isnt being harnessed. when will u ever see a hydrogen generator pull 70-100 amps and stress an alternator? if u ever see a generator that pulls much power than that, its not used in a car. we're using very little of the energy supplied by the alternator to use more of a less expensive "gas" for the engine. just using excess energy from the alternator. thats it

obviously u know this though. maybe just a mistakenly worded statement

[RMForbes]

I use a post like this one to counter the 'it can't possibly work' 'the numbers don't add up' arguments. This was actually a from several post that I had made on several forums that was combined into one.

I agree that the Water4Gas type sites are promoting their "E-Books" in a way that any many believe smells like a scam. They use email blasts, and MLM type promotional style. Their designs are poorly designed and dangerous. But because some people are selling poorly designed dangerous products does not mean that hydrogen injection is all a scam. In fact it does work for scientific reasons that most of the nay-sayers ignore. Hydrogen is the smallest, lightest, and most reactive element, that is why it is at the top left side of the periodical chart of the elements. Hydrogen ignites easier and burns many times faster than any other element. Adding hydrogen to an internal combustion engine is like adding charcoal lighter fluid to your Bar-B-Q, it gets things started faster. This was the conclusion of the JPL and NASA studies from the 70's. Hydrogen injection has nothing to do with adding or transferring additional energy to the combustion, the Second Law of Thermodynamics is therefore not being violated.

Without hydrogen injection gasoline is ignited by the spark plug several degrees before the beginning of the combustion/power stroke and is still burning when the piston reaches the bottom of this power stroke. The remaining unburnt fuel is then forced through the exhaust system to the EGR system to be recycled or to the catalytic converter to be incinerated (wasted). With hydrogen injection the combustion starts much faster because the hydrogen burns quickly, it ignites the primary fuel from all sides at once. When proper engine timing and mixture adjustments are made, the peak of the resulting pressure wave created by the combustion is higher (more energetic) and closer to the beginning of the power stroke. Since most of the energy is released when the piston is near the top of the combustion stroke more energy is absorbed by the piston and converted to torque. Less energy is lost as heat through the exhaust. There is no unburnt fuel to be recycled by the EGR system or incinerated by the catalytic converter. This is the mechanism that creates increased system efficiency. Faster more efficient burn that converts more energy to torque and less lost energy out the exhaust.

What the 1977 NASA study does show conclusively is that hydrogen injection does reduce ignition lag and increases flame speeds. Therefore, designing systems for optimum fuel efficiencies, requires the energy released from the combustion to be focused at the very beginning of the power stroke, where the piston has the maximum time and travel to absorb the energy of the resulting pressure wave. In their summary the NASA engineers concluded that this would be possible with fuel reforming systems controlled by a closed loop computerized control system. Unfortunately, they did not have these systems readily available to them in 1977. But we have this type of technology in common use today. While, electrolysis based hydrogen injection may not be the answer to reach optimal fuel efficiencies, they are the easiest to produce and test. Modest fuel economy gains are being produced by individuals and companies around the world with well designed safe units. But, Steam reforming systems are where near optimal fuel efficiency gains are currently being realized.

Steam reformer systems utilize the waste heat from the exhaust system to produce hydrogen in higher concentrations than electrolysis and reform the gasoline (or any primary fuel) to faster burning smaller components. By using the hydrogen to reduce ignition lag to lowest possible time and processing the fuel to be fully consumed in the shortest period possible, near optimal fuel efficiencies are being reached. At the same time greenhouse gas and hydrocarbon emissions are greatly reduced. While most of the steam reformer systems available are using fossil fuels, it has been shown that some alternative fuels work even better. Fuels that contain large amounts of water work the best, with the added advantage that they do not require any additional storage/delivery system for water. The water to produce hydrogen and steam for the reforming process is available directly from the fuel.

[Cadillac]

Less energy is lost as heat through the exhaust. There is no unburnt fuel to be recycled by the EGR system or incinerated by the catalytic converter. This is the mechanism that creates increased system efficiency. Faster more efficient burn that converts more energy to torque and less lost energy out the exhaust.

In a lean burn at least:

Yeah less heat is losed in the exhaust system. This is because it has moved internally. You then lose any efficiency gains to the car's cooling system.

"My car runs cooler since I have installed HHO." Well yeah, at least according to the gauge. That is also because the coolant is circulating more because of the extra internal heat generated by a lean burn. With more resistance against the water pump impellor on a constant basis you then lose the efficiency gained. While the water pump is not circulating you are losing the efficiency because the metal temperatures are hotter and the air entering the combustion chamber is less dense due to the extra heat.

Keep in mind water transfers heat very well. Coolant does not. Adding more water to your ratio of water:coolant would counteract some of the lose. It would absorb more heat when circulating through the engine and transfer it to the radiator to be cooled more effectively.


I do agree with the orginal posting. There is no real way to improve overall efficiency with the addition of hydrogen but that is not the point of the addition of the hydrogen. It is using less of something that cost a lot of money in lue of something that is free (at least in terms of price). The goal is not to improve overall efficiency. It is to improve the lean operation in order to save money.

The only form of hydrogen that is useful for true power is liquid hydrogen. Liquid hydrogen only exist at -473*F so it seems pretty unlikely to be making its way to my car anytime soon.

[H2OPWR]

500 years ago the same person that made the quote you refered to qouted that the world is flat. 100 years ago the same person that made the quote that you referred to said that a human could not breathe at speeds of 1 mile per minute or higher. 75 years ago the same person that made the quote you refer to said that splitting the atom would destroy the world. GET OUT OF THE TEXT BOOKS AND LET YOUR MIND WANDER AND TRY THE IMPOSSIBLE. IT JUSST MAY LEAD TO PROGRESS. SOMETIMES THE PEOPLE WRITING TEXT BOOKS AND TEACHING PHYSICS ARE WRONG!!!!!

[tbhavsar]

You're more than welcome!

One thing I would definitely encourage you (and everyone else) to do is to start your own experiment thread, along the lines of 'smith experiment in hho' and my own 'painless experiment in hho'. This is a great way to:

A) Share your experiences with others, no matter how trivial they are.

B) Get input on your thought processes and problems, everyone can get all the history from your thread and be in a better position to help and learn.

C) Keep a clear diary of your experiments and results. It's been a help to me, more than once, to go back over my own thread and find new direction.

We're all here to help each other and we all, hopefully, believe in the capabilities of what we are doing. There may be some here thaty don't fall into that catagory, but they are more 'interested parties observing from the fence' than ignorant tunnel visioned 'nay sayers'.

Go ahead and share your work with us and we'll all do our best to move you forward to some great results!

Painless,

I liked your idea, I will create a new thread to track my experiment, what I am doing with results obtained so far.

[Roland Jacques]

In a lean burn at least:

Yeah less heat is losed in the exhaust system. This is because it has moved internally. You then lose any efficiency gains to the car's cooling system.

This is not accurate. The heat is not moved anywhere. It is just more fully converted into mechanical energy like RMForbes explained

"My car runs cooler since I have installed HHO."
Well yeah, at least according to the gauge. That is also because the coolant is circulating more because of the extra internal heat generated by a lean burn. With more resistance against the water pump impellor on a constant basis you then lose the efficiency gained. While the water pump is not circulating you are losing the efficiency because the metal temperatures are hotter and the air entering the combustion chamber is less dense due to the extra heat.

This is not accurate ether. The same response the heat/energy is just more fully converted into mechanical energy like RMForbes explained

The goal is not to improve overall efficiency. It is to improve the lean operation in order to save money.

The goal IS to improve over all efficiency. The leaning of fuel mixtures is not necessary to see gains from HHO use. HHO MPG benifits are just enhanced by leaning.

It is using less of something that cost a lot of money in lue of something that is free (at least in terms of price).

This is wrong, and is bad information. Spreading the myth that alternator energy is without extra fuel cost is un-true, and it is counter productive to helping people understand how HHO boosting works.

HHO Boosting is great for us, our country, and the world. But we really need to get the FACTS right. It needs to be explained correctly. RMForbes did a great job and is spot on.
(Not sure about the steam reforming system)

[resago]

simply put, its an additive that works.
it enables you to lean off the petrol.

[DaneDHorstead]

Rolland Jaques;

Although the above responce was not aimed at my statement, it is nonetheless alligned with my former comments on wasted alternator energy.

Note that I do not claim the rotation of the alternator is free energy! But I do claim that not propperly using it, to aid a situation, is wasted energy. With a simple it's "on", or it's "off", situation, it in most cases produces enough energy to power several HHO generators, simply by utilizing energy that is already produced (and consequently, already paid for, through your gasoline dollar).

Because Albert E=MC2 also teaches, that everything it relative, it becomes somewhat comparitive to utilizing cold, or sub freezing temperatures, to protect foods in a refrigerator/freezer........

It is more expensive to freeze two boxes of vegetables, and a quart of Icecream, than to to freeze a unit crammed full of stuff. Plus, consider the fact that in a power failure, a freezer that is 90% full, will keep far longer, than the freezer with 10 percent capacity utilized.

There are those that would argue that the cost is the same, to freeze either condition, but divide that cost among all the items contained within, and that argument is blown out of the water.

Getting back to HHO, all I am claiming is that the alternator is already running (like the freezer), lets use it to it's fullest ability, to ease our situation.

[BoyntonStu]

It is more expensive to freeze two boxes of vegetables, and a quart of Icecream, than to to freeze a unit crammed full of stuff.

I disagree.

Your claim is that it takes more energy to make 1 tray of ice cubes than to freeze an entire freezer filled with water.

It takes a 12,000 BTU A/C running continuously for 24 hours to cool the equivalent of a ton (2,000 pounds) of ice that melted.

That is why A/C's are rated in tons.

It certainly takes a lot more energy to freeze a pound of water than a ton.

However, once you freeze up the entire freezer, it will keep cold longer than if it was just a tray of ice.

You do not get something from nothing.

BoyntonStu