+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50

Thread: Is it realy possible to make enough hho to run 100%hho

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Diego, California.
    Posts
    337

    Default It is not I who needs to defend myself.

    Quote Originally Posted by HawkNo1 View Post
    Okay, then you prove to me mathematically that this is not so. I have "?" and asked for you to correct me if I am wrong. I do not see any corrections in your rude comments. So who you working for first off? What makes you the expert if you can not do the math. I am going by what I have read on the net from other HHO sites? Then I am using simple deduction. How much does a liter of water expand too in HHO? I know one thing, 1 gallon of water has more energy in it than a gallon of gasoline. If you can get 200 miles per gallon of gasoline or for the sake of argument even 100 MPG then it is easily obtainable in water to do the same once it is broken down to Hydrogen and Oxygen. So lets see the math. Put your money where your mouth is in other words. What you have been showing me so far is a bunch of bull. Show us all the truth since your are suppose to be the expert I am suppose to believe on your say so alone? Yea right. Let's see it. You saying that for over a century that all the scientist who claimed there was a inexhaustible source of power in water that is far superior in every way to gasoline is now all the sudden a myth? I want to see the math to prove it? Not the math used on electrolysis either because Meyer's did not use electrolysis. This is not electrolysis and you are not including the extra EMF coming from the shut down of electricity to the WFC or capacitor that also could be used to charge batteries and supply more energy. I took electronics and this is basic info in electronics. Show me the math? Show me how much HHO comes out of a gallon of water? I was told it was 30 times whatever the amount of water is. Show me the truth here? Correct me! Then I will recalculate it correctly if I am wrong.

    Also the patents office refused to patent Meyer's patent until he took the machine into the office and demonstrated his claims. They freaked when they saw he was producing HHO in the building at that volume.

    The only reason Meyer's was judged as committing fraud is because the Judge was bought and paid for and his hired expert added something into the tap water which made it a electrolytic solution thus removing the properties of the experiment as it was meant to be. He appealed also and won from what I learned.

    Also he was assassinated. That is more than enough to tell the truth. You do not get assassinated unless you are a threat to someone with money and power. He was!

    Also if you try to use the theory of thermodynamics on this you are out in lulu land. This is more to do with electronics and how many times has the theory of thermodynamics been changed in the past 50 years? It keeps changing because it is only a theory and not a fact. Just like the theory of evolution is not a fact and they keep changing it also to fit their goal to make people think there is not a creator. They do not want to be held accountable to that creator is why. Of course that is going to happen wither they want to believe it or not.

    So show me the math just for how much HHO is produced from one gallon of water? We will start from there.
    People who have lost an argument often go into attack mode simply because they have nothing. The Meyer's supporters are often in attack mode simply because Meyer's work may have had some merit, but as a whole, it does not perform as they want it to. Simply give me ONE working example of the Meyer device, and I will be a true believer also. To be exact, I have investors that can bring it to market. They don't need belief, they just want it to WORK. I have reviewed literally dozens of inventions for them and that is all they seek - something that they can make money on. They didn't make their money by simply buying inventions just to shelve them. They buy tech to use their money to make MORE money! If they are so evil, and the root of all evil is the love of money, it follows that these evil money bags will do whatever they can to take a tech like Meyer's device and make money off of it! I challenge YOU. If you have a working device, let us meet, you demonstrate it, and you can save the world from the coming oil collapse while making enough money to make saving the world worthwhile. This is an honest offer I extend to anyone and all Meyers' supporters. If you have gotten hold of a working Meyers device, let's meet. I'll review the device under a NDA to determine that it does indeed work and we will have you meet with investors to negotiate a purchase of the example device.

    Please do not send me internet links to "prove" Meyer's devices work.

    Remember, it is you who needs to prove your Meyer device. Use your electronics background. Use good math. Use your electronics degree, and produce a Meyer device. That is the bottom line.

    And Thermodynamics is a set of LAWS that is added to constantly. It is proven everyday in it's application. It flat out WORKS!

    As to your last challenge for calculations, I'll give you the start, and you can furnish the answer as an exercise in learning.

    Take one Mole of water molecules. It can be dissociated to form one mole of oxygen and two of hydrogen. Both form diatomic pairs. Run this molar mass into the gas laws at STP and you will get the volume of HHO produced from one mole of pure water ( 18.02 grams). Divide the 18.02 into a thousand to get the result from a liter stand point. It is a surprisingly large number.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Diego, California.
    Posts
    337

    Default

    By the way, I'll take a gallon of gasoline for propulsion anyday. It works. Water is one of the very ASHES of gasoline combustion.

  3. #13

    Default

    so what's your take on this guy's video and the stepper gen one?

    http://www.youtube.com/user/o2baener.../2/Iwd6ulPkXHQ

    what do all ye enlightened ones thinK?
    2000 ford focus zx3 2.0L Zetec, dual o2 extenders, volo-fs2. scanguage2 ; mountain driving. base ~26, now ~30mpg.

  4. #14

    Default

    uhh.... anyone?
    2000 ford focus zx3 2.0L Zetec, dual o2 extenders, volo-fs2. scanguage2 ; mountain driving. base ~26, now ~30mpg.

  5. #15

    Default

    Not impressed by the video. On the other hand, he's doing a lot of work on his design & I hope it works well for him.
    I noticed in your signature that you're pumping 2LPM with no gains. Ford's can be tough!
    First off, with a 2L engine, you should only be injecting a max of 1LPM. Anything more may be just wasting amperage. If you can dial it down so it's only drawing half the amps.(12 or so), this will be less strain on the engine.
    Next, the O2 extenders won't do much, if anything. Get rid of them and install a single O2 EFIE to the signal wire. This way you can control what the ECU see's and cause it to shorten the pulses to the injectors. A MAF enhancer will help, but it has to be left way-low or codes will be thrown.
    Gains will be small unless you address the timing. Since your timing most likely can't be adjusted, the only way to retard it is by making the ECU think the coolant and incoming air are hotter than they really are. Run wires across both leads on the ECT to a switch connected to a 3.9 ohm resistor. This will send a false value of about 10 degrees to the ECU. Next, connect a switch and 500 ohm resistor with a 20k pot in series to the signal wire of the IAT.
    Both of these will retard the timing and make the HHO do it's job properly.
    1998 Explorer 4x4, 4.0
    14 cell / 2 stack 6x9" drycell reactor 28%KOH dual EFIE, MAF enhancer, IAT & ECT controllers, 2.4 LPM @ 30 amps. 6.35 MMW http://reduceyourfuelbill.com.au/forum/index.php

  6. #16

    Default

    thanks for the info, similar to the dualfuelhho.com site, I'm re-plumbing my gen, so thought I'd get baseline again, and then just the volo without gen. we live on top of a 1300 ft. hill so all trips go down and up the mt. so far the volo seems to be going pretty good. see signature. ??? it stalled only once throughout 2 tanks, but does seem a little more anemic on the accel and up the slopes. fair trade I suppose. I'll put the gen back and hopefully get the oomphff back,,, well it's only a 4 banger...hah.
    2000 ford focus zx3 2.0L Zetec, dual o2 extenders, volo-fs2. scanguage2 ; mountain driving. base ~26, now ~30mpg.

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Philldpapill View Post
    A simple proof of a ballpark figure is to look at the combustion process of an internal combustion engine. Every second, the engine goes through X cycle. At idle, this "X" cycles might be 600 rotations per minute, or 10 rotations("cycles") per second. That means the engine cylinder sucks in fuel, compresses it, combusts it, and expels the exhaust. For normal 4-stroke engines, the number of cycles is actually half the rotations per second, so in this example the engine sucks in a full cylinder of fuel 5 times per second.

    Now, assuming this is a small 2.0 liter engine, this means that it will suck in 2 liters of fuel mixture 5 times a second. That is 10 liters of fuel mixture per second, or 600 liters per minute.

    Of course, this is an oversimplified example, but it should give you an idea of the magnitude of gas that you are wondering about. There are more complicated models involving HHO to air ratio, gas expansion at the given speed, etc. etc., but this should give an upper bound for just an idling speed - ~600 liters per minute.

    Good estimate, but you're forgetting something. After the throttle body, you see a vacuum. The air the engine sucks in isn't at 100% atmospheric pressure, so the amount would be less. Sometimes much less. At idle, it may be 1/20th just to pull a guess out of my head. Of course, it would go up quite a bit as the throttle opens and the rpms increase.

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HawkNo1 View Post
    You know from what I have learned One Liter of water expands into 30 liters of HHO, correct? So one gallon should make 30 gallons of HHO, correct? Now Meyers already demonstrated over and over that his car was able to produce enough gas to run that Dune buggy engine off straight HHO and from his mileage he estimated 22 gallons of water could get him from LA to New York, correct? So 22 gallons X 30 = 660 gallons of HHO Now according to a conversion site "About 3.79 liters make a US gallon" so Multiple 660 gallons X 3.79 = 2501.4 liters. Some people are trying to say to run a small car engine it would take close to 150 liters per minute of HHO? so divide the 2501.4 liters by 150 liters and that means in 16.676 minutes you would have used up all of the 22 gallons of water? That does not figure right at all! There is no way you could drive from LA to New York in 16.676 minutes of HHO production according to some of the stuff I read out there. So from my simple deductive reasoning and from the fact that many scientists and people in general saw Meyer's invention work and work good I believe there is a lot of false propaganda out there on the internet trying to dissuade anyone else from working on Meyer's WFC type HHO production. The distance from LA to New York is roughly 2443.79 miles. So divide 2443.79 miles by 22 gallons and you have the miles per gallon of 111.0813636363636 MPG of water roughly and remember Meyer's motor was a 1.6 liter engine in that Dune Buggy of his is a small engine. I have a 5.0 liter engine. I would need about four of those large WFC's of Meyers at least to run that thing. If my math is wrong please enlighten me?

    Oh and from what I learned also the more SS 304 Tubes Sets you add the more efficient the WFC becomes. So adding 3 more sets of tubes would not take much more juice to power it than just the one set took.

    Also Ravi was suppose to have got a high output using the small 4" tubes so using a whole bunch of those seems like it would be enough to run a car or truck as in my case on straight HHO.

    One other simple deductive reasoning point. The US Patents office is reluctant to give patents to these types of inventions that produce or claim to produce 1,700% efficiency as Meyer's claims. Yet they did! The only way they would have is if he proved it beyond a reasonable doubt to that office which he did otherwise it would not have happened!
    You can patent pretty much anything unique, doesn't mean it's functional. And do we all agree that Wikipedia can be considered the foremost source of actual facts? (you should be nodding yes) Now, look up Stan Meyers on Wikipedia.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Live in San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    1

    Default NEED ANSWER FROM RustyLugNut!!!

    Dear RustyLugNut,

    I think HawkNo1 has asked you a simple question, since you seemed to be the Expert! He just wanted to know "How much HHO can be produced from 1 gallon of water?"

    As we all know, the Forum is design to HELP the common folk; not to discourage or put down anybody. So, please let us be productive and help each other find answers for the HHO Community.

    Thanks.

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Caveman2010 View Post
    Dear RustyLugNut,

    I think HawkNo1 has asked you a simple question, since you seemed to be the Expert! He just wanted to know "How much HHO can be produced from 1 gallon of water?"

    As we all know, the Forum is design to HELP the common folk; not to discourage or put down anybody. So, please let us be productive and help each other find answers for the HHO Community.

    Thanks.


    According to:http://www.panaceauniversity.org/Hydroxy%20Boosters.pdf
    On page 329
    1 US gallon of water = 1860 gallons of HHO gas.

    Also most of your HHO questions can be answered on the Panacea PDF
    Last edited by hg2; 01-14-2011 at 06:04 PM.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts