Hydroxy thermal energy is _______ BTU/liter ?

[shomas]

Thanks,

Considering that the efficiency of an electric motor would be over 85% there is no justification at all for using a Brown's Gas generator and an internal combustion engine. An electric motor would do better at less cost and with far greater reliability."

BoyntonStu

That would be true if you only looked at browns gas as the sole source of energy, But when browns gas is added to diesel or gasoline it helps burn the primary fuel more completely during the engines power stroke. I have seen, browns gas added to diesel improve the overall fuel efficiencies by as much as 65%, but most often I see 20% to 30% increase in MPG.

[koya1893]

Well,If I get one gallon of gas in my truck I can make it to town.If I have my hho unit turned on I can then make it to town and half way back home and then have to hitch hike the other half way back home.Now this makes more sense to me.I have to only hitch hiked 5 miles instead of 10.Now if I put in 4 gallons of gas I can get one free trip to town and back with my hho unit and I dont have to hitch hike at all.Mr Stratous and Mr Smith I think your are right.This is what this forum is all about.

WOW. Everyone who posted a means to describe the benefits of HHO being induced in an ICE has taken the mathematical approach, hence their conclusion is does not work because they also say you are consuming more energy than what it is being produce.

Sorry for a winded agreement to your analogy. I like simple.

[Roland Jacques]

Frist off Is all HHO the same? Id say no. The question "Can HHO be made having more energy than used to create it?" Maybe

Quantity and quality could be 2 different ways this could be reached. Im just a backyard experimenter so take it for what it is worth. Here is my 2 cents as far as quality goes

In order to really answer this question, Part of the discussion has to be "What is HHO"? Or what is what we commonly refer to as HHO? It really Browns gas and if you look at a true Gas analysis you find HHO is just a part of the picture.

Bob Boyce and many others smarter than me, say that there is quite a difference between "HHO" gases being produced.




Here is a few points about the different types of the hydrogen we can make. This is just one part of HHO that may need to be considered.
In order of least to most powerful/ reactivity.

1) Para hydrogen - normal spin of electrons
2) Ortho hydrogen - different spin state
3) Mono atomic hydrogen -
4) Deutruim gas - ( Heavy water gas ) ionized gas ( Herman P Anderson Gas)
5) Tritruim gas - most powerful phases of hydrogen

Then when you see all the other gases involed in Browns gas it really can muddy the water.
http://i575.photobucket.com/albums/s...ssAnalysis.jpg

Here is another good link about Browns gas
http://www.eagle-research.com/browng.../watergas.html



I understand the effects of HHO on the combustion of Hydrocarbons and agree this interaction of most any HHO Gases in a ICE can create gains... But I personally believe the Gas we refer as HHO varies greatly.

CAN it have a greater energy value than whats used to create it? I think yes, but I cant prove it.

[ElectroNut]

If I may be so bold as to interject on an earlier argument:

One liter of hydrogen gas does not contain any energy at all. The data value you have for hydrogen is the energy released when one liter of hydrogen reacts completely with oxygen. Two hydrogen atoms react with one oxygen atom to release 285.83kJ per mole of water formed. Since hydrogen is diatomic, that means burning one liter of hydrogen in oxygen at STP will release (285.83/22.4) = 12.7kJ.

One liter of oxyhydrogen contains 1/3L of oxygen and 2/3L of hydrogen. Therefore, reacting that 2/3L of hydrogen with the oxygen evolves (285.83/22.4)*2/3 = 8.47kJ

Here's a good example:

Which has more energy, one kilogram of TNT or one kilogram of gasoline reacted with air?

When exploded, one kilogram of TNT releases roughly 4.7 million joules.
When completely burned, one kilogram of gasoline releases 44.4 million joules.

This seems rater contradictory, since a kilo of TNT is probably a lot more dangerous than a kilo of petrol.

Like the oxyhydrogen, the TNT seems more powerful because it is explosive. In reality, these explosive things usually don't contain very much energy since they carry their own oxygen. The same is true for the oxyhydrogen.

Follow?

[myoldyourgold]

Electronut, Hear is a question. How much horse power does one liter of good dry HHO have? I would like to see the math on that.

[Roland Jacques]

Electronut, Hear is a question. How much horse power does one liter of good dry HHO have? I would like to see the math on that.

The power of HHO is not the same as H2 + O2. H2 + O2 can not melt the same things that Browns (HHO) gas can. But some of the energy comes from the "water vapor" So "dry" HHO...

http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/abstract...racts_5440.pdf
http://keelynet.com/energy/oxyhyd3.htm

[myoldyourgold]

Yes I agree, but still not an answer to my question to Electronut.

[Roland Jacques]

I just don't know how anyone can answer that.

I know a true HHO Guru who has a device (the name of it slips my my) that measures the thermal value of Gases. He says different HHO electrolysers gases can vary by many times. So how can any one answer that question? I guess we can get a ball park on the the most conventional Cells but that may be it

[ElectroNut]

Horsepower is a unit of energy per time and cannot be associated with an amount of gas. However, a flow rate of gas can be associated with horsepower.

One horsepower is equivalent to 0.746 kilojoules per second. Since one liter of oxyhydrogen contains 8.47kJ, that means that one liter per second is equivalent to 8.47/0.746 = 11.35hp. Keep in mind that the internal combustion engine is not 100% efficient. With petrol, the modern ICE stands at about 19% chemical-to-mechanical efficiency. 19% of 11.35 is roughly 2.2 horsepower for a 1-liter per second gas feed, assuming the engine is running on pure oxyhydrogen.


To address Mr. Jacques' concerns regarding the energy content of the gas itself:

"Believe" is a strong word. If you're going to believe anything, believe me when I say that anyone with a firm grasp of physics can easily tell that neither the Eckman paper nor the KeelyNet article show any sort of credibility. If you follow the references, you will quickly find that the Eckman paper is simply a collage of shaky claims which have been tied together with physics the author obviously has little understanding for. If you wish, I am prepared to write a piecemeal rebuttal of the paper a capite ad calcem should you choose to entertain an opinion closer to fact.

Cheers,
ElectroNut

[myoldyourgold]

Horsepower is a unit of energy per time and cannot be associated with an amount of gas. However, a flow rate of gas can be associated with horsepower.

One horsepower is equivalent to 0.746 kilojoules per second. Since one liter of oxyhydrogen contains 8.47kJ, that means that one liter per second is equivalent to 8.47/0.746 = 11.35hp. Keep in mind that the internal combustion engine is not 100% efficient. With petrol, the modern ICE stands at about 19% chemical-to-mechanical efficiency. 19% of 11.35 is roughly 2.2 horsepower for a 1-liter per second gas feed, assuming the engine is running on pure oxyhydrogen.

Electronut Sir, Is this taking into consideration monoatomic or diatomic oxyhydrogen? If not what would be the difference if any? Thank you for your contribution.