Thread: Hydrogen Generator

Originally Posted by damienb

Doesn't work - Just places extra load on the alternator, which then places extra load on the engine, which requires more fuel - 1st law of thermodynamics. We make hydrogen all the time using electrolysis, as OH&S issues now limit the use of H2 cylinders, but we put in power to do so.

Edit: There's even a wikipedia entry for it: Stanley Meyer's water fuel cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

/Damien

Correct, but in this instance the original poster is point out the claim that the addition of hydrogen enhances the energy released from the original fuel and is not a total replacement as your post is based on. The addition of hydrogen and the benefits are well known and documented, hence why the manufactures of some hydrocarbon flues add hydrogen as part of the possess. Diesel is one of those fuels.

Originally Posted by Dougal

Check out the names behind these systems and google for their other "interests".

Makes for a pretty good "avoid list", starting with Brown himself (deceased) who wasn't what he claimed to be and could never demonstrate his gas generators working as they claimed.

Then bring in stanley meyer (deceased) and those still alive who are also sellers of "free energy devices".
Avoid like the plague.

Electrolysis is well understood and painfully slow. These devices cannot produce hydrogen at a rate sufficient to make any difference to a healty internal combustion engine.

Correct with the exception of Brown, he did achieve some results that resulted in non automotive products being released onto the market ( and still being used today) Browns gas is not the strait H2O - H + H + O.
But that is splitting hairs. To get any sort of useful hydrogen production sufficient to come close to say a Dgas systems claims would require a unit that is much larger than the rip-offs seen on Ebay.
As an example just look at any salt pool chlorinator, they typically produce 6-12grams a per hour of chlorine gas ( I think) and an average water flow of about 200 ltrs per minute. A couple of bits of SS wire in an old bit of drain pipe will just not cut it.

Originally Posted by clean32

Correct with the exception of Brown, he did achieve some results that resulted in non automotive products being released onto the market ( and still being used today) Browns gas is not the strait H2O - H + H + O.
But that is splitting hairs. To get any sort of useful hydrogen production sufficient to come close to say a Dgas systems claims would require a unit that is much larger than the rip-offs seen on Ebay.
As an example just look at any salt pool chlorinator, they typically produce 6-12grams a per hour of chlorine gas ( I think) and an average water flow of about 200 ltrs per minute. A couple of bits of SS wire in an old bit of drain pipe will just not cut it.

What did Brown do that is still used today?

It's not the size of the unit that dictates gas production, it's the power put into it. To split water via electrolysis requires far more energy than you ever get out of it.

The problem is that the energy used to produce the gas is produced at an efficiency of about 15-20% by the time you take into account the energy efficiency of your engine, alternator and the electrolyser itself. This means that to just break even, the introduction of the hydrogen to the combustion cycle must add five or six times the energy it contains to the combustion process. To get any benefit, the combustion process must be improved by the equivalent amount. Modern engines (petrol or diesel) actually manage quite high combustion efficiency (thanks to emissions limits!) so there is little room for improvements in combustion - the lack of efficiency overall is because of thermal and mechanical limitations, and the addition of hydrogen to the fuel will not change this.

Sorry, the numbers simply do not, and cannot, add up.

John

Originally Posted by JDNSW

Sorry, the numbers simply do not, and cannot, add up.

John

And the complete lack of supporting evidence highlights this nicely. There is not one test result that is vaguely scientific to backup these devices. Probably because every vaguely scientific test results in no improvement.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

The problem is that the energy used to produce the gas is produced at an efficiency of about 15-20% by the time you take into account the energy efficiency of your engine, alternator and the electrolyser itself. This means that to just break even, the introduction of the hydrogen to the combustion cycle must add five or six times the energy it contains to the combustion process. To get any benefit, the combustion process must be improved by the equivalent amount. Modern engines (petrol or diesel) actually manage quite high combustion efficiency (thanks to emissions limits!) so there is little room for improvements in combustion - the lack of efficiency overall is because of thermal and mechanical limitations, and the addition of hydrogen to the fuel will not change this.

Sorry, the numbers simply do not, and cannot, add up.

John

A cell running at 500 amps would produce 364 liters of Brown's Gas at atmospheric pressure every hour. (A liter of gas is about as much as a quart milk carton will hold.) My guess is that a welding torch uses some tens of liters of gas a minute. A practical Brown's Gas welder thus either has to operate at currents higher than 500 amps or must be operated in bursts.
Normally the current passing through the cell comes from a step-down transformer. At DC it takes some 1.7 volts to cause an electrolytic cell to operate. That is, our 500 amp cell is operating with a continuous power input of 850 watts. The AC input will be somewhat higher than this, depending on the details of the construction of the generator. Let's assume 1000 watts. That is, to generate 168 grams of gas requires one kilowatt.hour of electrical input or about 10 cents worth of electricity.

so as you said

Originally Posted by Dougal

What did Brown do that is still used today?

It's not the size of the unit that dictates gas production, it's the power put into it. To split water via electrolysis requires far more energy than you ever get out of it.

UUMM sheesh i don’t know Dougal, maybe a browns Gas welder?? Cheep to run and no CO2 so all good in confined spaces.

Browns Gas uses a different catalyst than caustic soda. different catalyst will produce different gas types. IE salt will produce Chlorine and hydrogen etc etc.

As for size, well its just not a mater of pumping more power though a couple of plates. the more power the more Gas bubbles the less wet are there is on each plate, also diminishing the volume of water between each plate. solution more plates or pump the water over the plates dragging the gas off with it.

Originally Posted by clean32

UUMM sheesh i don’t know Dougal, maybe a browns Gas welder?? Cheep to run and no CO2 so all good in confined spaces.

Browns Gas uses a different catalyst than caustic soda. different catalyst will produce different gas types. IE salt will produce Chlorine and hydrogen etc etc.

As for size, well its just not a mater of pumping more power though a couple of plates. the more power the more Gas bubbles the less wet are there is on each plate, also diminishing the volume of water between each plate. solution more plates or pump the water over the plates dragging the gas off with it.

Can you show many anyone who uses one of these "browns gas welders"?
Call me sceptical, but I earn a living in the engineering industry and have never ever come across one. I don't think they exist outside the internet.

People who use caustic soda in their water jars are producing CO2. They don't have a good explanation for how that helps combustion.
As I've said before, the science behind these devices is completely missing.

Power is the determining factor for electrolysis. When you start talking about plate spacing etc, you're chasing red herrings, sowing confusion and doubt which are the prime marketing tools for these products.