Thread: V8 Discovery on Hydrogen

My above reply was written before i finished reading the second page of replies. The guy who made the hydrogen generator used it and it worked. Other people that I have met ran their cars on generated hydrogen. those who do not think it works can still believe that if they wish. But I have met many who know it does work. However these guys were using it as fuel, not a fuel supliment to increase efeciency of petrol, but to replace petrol. they used it like we use LPG in the car. As far as the coment you would just get CO2, those people I know did not use baking soda as a catylyst, they used sodium hydroxide.

Last week when i was trying too find a Vortex muffler supplier i found this on Hydrogen systems.

Hydrogyn Oxygen Generation Systems - NDM Tyre Auto Services

Baz.

Originally Posted by JohnF

My above reply was written before i finished reading the second page of replies. The guy who made the hydrogen generator used it and it worked. Other people that I have met ran their cars on generated hydrogen. those who do not think it works can still believe that if they wish. But I have met many who know it does work. However these guys were using it as fuel, not a fuel supliment to increase efeciency of petrol, but to replace petrol. they used it like we use LPG in the car. As far as the coment you would just get CO2, those people I know did not use baking soda as a catylyst, they used sodium hydroxide.

Please do me a favour and read the rest of the posts, this has already been delt with.

PROOF PROOF PROOF.

Any one can write anything they want on a forum, Im asking for proof that these systems work.

I have explained why I think they cant work as has many of the highly educated members as well as many of the not so highly educated but highly skilled as well as the ones that are just interested in this stuff but to the 3 that are getting all torn up over us aparently bagging their systems.......


SHOW US SOME BLOODY PROOF THAT AT LEAST 1 OF THESE SYSTEMS HAS EVER WORKED.........PROPERLY

Originally Posted by mcrover

PROOF PROOF PROOF.

WHO MADE YOU THE PROOF POLICE???

PULL YOUR HEAD IN FOR ONCE - AND MAYBE A VALUABLE DISCUSSION CAN BE HAD BY ALL

You're also making some wild assumptions about educated

Originally Posted by JohnF

My above reply was written before i finished reading the second page of replies. The guy who made the hydrogen generator used it and it worked. Other people that I have met ran their cars on generated hydrogen. those who do not think it works can still believe that if they wish. But I have met many who know it does work. However these guys were using it as fuel, not a fuel supliment to increase efeciency of petrol, but to replace petrol. they used it like we use LPG in the car. As far as the coment you would just get CO2, those people I know did not use baking soda as a catylyst, they used sodium hydroxide.

John, what you are talking about breaks the first law of thermodynamics (law of conservation of energy). I.e. it takes MORE energy to split water into H2 + O2 (or brown's gas) than you get back out when you combust it. This holds true despite any catalyst or other method you use to electrolyse/dissociate the water.

This law has held since it was first stated by Rudolf Clausius in the mid 1800's. None of the "water powered car" inventors and the like will be taken seriously by the science community, until they can disprove the law of conservation of energy.

The fact is, all the guys you mentioned were either misguided or frauds. I can thoroughly reccommend a book called "voodoo science" by bob park, which goes through all these sorts of inventions.

The fact that Joe was fooled doesn't mean anything. Politicians are not scientists and certainly not geniuses. Peter Beattie recently announced (with reference to the pipeline from FNQ) that he was planning to both pump water uphill whilst generating hydro electricity...

The closest we came to a REAL water powered car was an engine that ran on water and welding wire (the engine actually ran on hydrogen) - from another thread on here:

Originally Posted by isuzurover

Originally Posted by Michael2 View Post
I saw a video on the www a couple of years ago, but haven't been able to find it since.

There was a small motor (lawn mower motor I think) that was powered by hydrogen gas. The motor drove an alternator which powered a small welder and it turned an aluminium drum. The drum was submerged in a tank of water and the welder electrode touched the aluminium drum and arced. The spinning drum stopped the electrode from sticking to the aluminium. The arc bound O2 to the aluminium, falling to the bottom of the tank as an aluminium oxide residue, and the liberated hydrogen bubbled to the top and powered the motor.

Was it real? I don't know.

It is quite real.

There is a patent on this and apparently BMW did some experiments to look at feasibility (BMW since went on to develop cars with high-pressure hydrogen storage instead - so that should say something).

Hydrogen supply unit - US Patent 4702894

Hydrogen supply unit - US Patent 4702894

Quote:
A unit substantially as shown in the drawings has been used to drive a 500 cc motor cycle engine. The wire 22 had a diameter of 1,6 mm and was of commercial purity (98% Al). The unit produced over 1000 cc of hydrogen a minute, with an aluminium
wire consumption rate of 140 to 180 cm per minute. The rate of deposition of aluminium oxide was about 4 kilograms per 500 kilometers travelled.

Conventional modifications were made to the carburettor to enable the engine to run on a mixture of hydrogen and air.

The wire 22 carries a voltage of about 18000 volts with a current of about 1 amp.

The invention may equally be used to power stationary industrial engines, as well as motor vehicle engines.

Taking those claims at face value, the system requires 18kW of electrical energy, to power a 500cc (petrol) engine.

An average 500cc motorbike engine back then could be expected to produce a maximum of about 36kW of power. However, running on hydrogen produces about a 20% loss of power (based on real-world data). For simplicity, lets say 8kW are lost.

So it takes 18kW of energy to run an engine that produces 28kW. So assuming your alternator and drivetrain are 100% efficient, you now have a maximum of 10kW at the wheels, instead of 36.

Now with a rate of aluminium MIG wire consumption of 180 cm/min (or 108m/hr). What's the best price you can get a 7kg roll of 1mm mig wire for? $150ish? So that means just under $5/hr to run at current prices.

If the same engine averages 3l/100km, it would also cost about $5/hr to run, but you would have 3.5* the power at the wheels.

http://www.aulro.com/afvb/general-ch...en-fuel-4.html


Some REAL research on water injection:
http://homepages.cae.wisc.edu/~rutla...00-01-2938.pdf
http://delphi.com/pdf/techpapers/2008-01-1190.pdf

Originally Posted by sschmez

WHO MADE YOU THE PROOF POLICE???

PULL YOUR HEAD IN FOR ONCE - AND MAYBE A VALUABLE DISCUSSION CAN BE HAD BY ALL

You're also making some wild assumptions about educated

You finished?

I take it your still sore at me then?

What do you have to add as far as the discussion goes other than a dig at me?

What is it that you expect to accomplish by posting that Stevo?

So far there has been a lot of discussion but absolutely no proof from the pro side of the camp.

It's not hard, if it does work then someone has to have some proof that it works, people have been building these systems since the 60's from the research I have done and still no proof that it works.

Theres proof that it can produce a small amount of what could be hydrogen but deffinatly I have not seen any proof that any system like the one shown that can produce enough to make the slightest difference.

So who are you saying are not educated, Im not saying me, I was saying that other more educated people were of the same thoughts as me.

I think Isuzurover kinda beats most of us on the educated side of things, JohnE is fairly well up there as well I believe but I may be wrong, I am a lot you know.

Maybe we should move the bickering to another thread...


OK how about a "back of the envelope" analysis of these hydrogen electolysis systems (talking about the add-on systems to a petrol or diesel here).

You have an engine running on petrol or diesel, let's say it produces 100kW or power.

The engine is fitted with a 100A Alternator. 100A x 13.5V = 1.35kW (power produced) - it would probably take at least 1.5-2kW of engine power to turn the alternator.

So let's say all of the 1.35kW is available for electrolysis.

Water electrolysis has a theoretical maximum of about 80-90% efficiency (efficiency at converting the electrical energy to H2 + O2) - note that that is theoretical, most systems are much worse.

However let's say we have 80% efficiency. So we get 0.8*1.35 = 1.08kW.

Now a typical engine is at best about 30% efficient at turning fuel into power. So we would really have about 0.3kW of power generated by the fuel.

So - bottom line, is that even if the power of the alternator is "free", and the alternator was ONLY running the electrolysis. We could expect <1% difference in fuel consumption. (also assuming the fuel metering was adjusted to compensate).