Run your car on water??????

[CAP1]

Absolutely agree, 100%.

I just have a tremendous skepticism, and those trying to sell this idea seem so utterly convinced, I have skepticism about their scientific objectivity as well.

Mav, if you remember 18 cents a gallon, you may remember the cow magnet phenomenon of I think it was about 1983 or so...

Tape these magnets to the fuel line and polarize your fuel and it will add 5 mpg.

There were those who swore up and down they had carefully measured and it did work:  It did squat for car milage, but it caused problems in the beef and dairy industry.  They feed their cows magnets so nails and barb bire fragments stayed in their 1st stomach.  No magnets, problems with the guts of their cows.

Outstanding results need outstanding proof.

well, the magnet thing...i think i remember hearing about that around 79 or 80 too. that's when i started driving, reg. leaded was 89 cents. but to magnetize the gas.......nah.........


holden.....not that you care........but i wanted to mention that my comments earlier were not intended insultingly. i was kind of having sarcastic fun.

 i realize you guys know a bunch more than i do.......basic simple math is my limit.  i know that. i try to take in and understand what you guys are putting up here.

i still think it will work, and looking at the combined systems working together it makes sense. if i look at only one system then it doesn't.

 i will also gladly admit to being wrong...if i am.

friggin makes me feel old. there was a day when i was too stubborn to do that.

[Gunslinger]

You can increase (or decrease) the voltage, or amperage, you cannot increase power without feeding more power in.

your statement makes no sense to me.

You can increase power by increasing either voltage or current.....

P = I x E

Any increase in voltage applied to the same amount of current would show an increase in power.  The increase in voltage can be acheived through a step up transformer quite easily. 

[gunnss]

Lamont Generator

http://www.stanleysteamers.com/lamont-1.htm

Doble steam car

http://ghlin2.greenhills.net/~apatter/doble.html

http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=213453

more steam,

http://www.stanleysteamers.com/


Doble Bessler steam plane,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw6NFmcnW-8


Lots more but this is a start.

Regards,
Kevin

out of curiosity, i'd like to see those links.

[SD67]

your statement makes no sense to me.

You can increase power by increasing either voltage or current.....

P = I x E

Any increase in voltage applied to the same amount of current would show an increase in power.  The increase in voltage can be achieved through a step up transformer quite easily. 

Power= Volts x Amps.
An increase in Volts will mean a decrease in Amps if the same amount of power is to be retained.
2KW = 240Vx8.333^rA
2KW = 100Vx20A
2KW = 2KVx1A
2KW = 10Vx200A
However, if the output is pulsed then it is entirely possible using a capacitance discharge system for a system working off a 12V 25A (300W) power supply to put out short bursts of 4KW.

[Kermit de frog]

EDITED...

[RTHolmes]

got to say that Holden's posts have been absolutely spot on, theres 100s of years of experimentation and proof to back up what he's saying. might be a good time to summarise:

the booster will draw current, which increases load on the engine.

the hydrogen burnt in the engine provides less energy than the fuel used to produce it.

if the burning fuel is converted into kinetic energy at the same efficiency as pre-hydroxy, the engine will be less efficient than before and mpg will decrease.

so for this to work (ie increase the engines efficiency,) the fuel -> kinetic energy stage must be more efficient to overcome the losses from hydroxy production, and then some to provide a net increase in efficiency (more mpg)

so what we're looking for is the hydroxy improving the efficiency of the combustion stage, by quite a margin


modern engine designs use a range of techniques to achieve better efficiency in the combustion stage (direct injection, combustion chamber/port/manifold design, ECUs to control fuel/air mix, timing etc under specific loads)

older engines by comparison can be very inefficient, so there may be room for improvement. If by chance the engine would benefit from a faster burn, you'll see an improvement.


btw I've reduced my fuel costs by switching from 95RON standard to 97/98RON super unleaded, costs 5% more and mpg improves by 15-20% ymmv

[SD67]

I've used premium for many years now. Since I run LPG for 3 out of 4 weeks (I always run for about a week on ULP) the actual overall savings are negligible but the engine likes it much better.

[RTHolmes]

yeah improvements all round with 98RON - mpg, power, response and a bit more fizz at the top end. I ran a 1.4l civic for a while (great car ) and the effect was really noticable, especially the improved torque low down.

[LYNX]

got to say that Holden's posts have been absolutely spot on, theres 100s of years of experimentation and proof to back up what he's saying. might be a good time to summarise:

the booster will draw current, which increases load on the engine.

correct

the hydrogen burnt in the engine provides less energy than the fuel used to produce it.

correct if in comparison with like for like

if the burning fuel is converted into kinetic energy at the same efficiency as pre-hydroxy, the engine will be less efficient than before and mpg will decrease.

you do realise your adding hydrogen / oxygen to a leaner fuel air mix and not replacing petrol?

so for this to work (ie increase the engines efficiency,) the fuel -> kinetic energy stage must be more efficient to overcome the losses from hydroxy production, and then some to provide a net increase in efficiency (more mpg)
getting there

so what we're looking for is the hydroxy improving the efficiency of the combustion stage, by quite a margin

and there we have it


modern engine designs use a range of techniques to achieve better efficiency in the combustion stage (direct injection, combustion chamber/port/manifold design, ECUs to control fuel/air mix, timing etc under specific loads)

efficiency err well perhaps as for economy don't you kid yourself

older engines by comparison can be very inefficient, so there may be room for improvement. If by chance the engine would benefit from a faster burn, you'll see an improvement.
older engines and diesels are easier to work with for sure

btw I've reduced my fuel costs by switching from 95RON standard to 97/98RON super unleaded, costs 5% more and mpg improves by 15-20% ymmv

Now bolt the booster on for even more economy

[Holden McGroin]

Power is power right? 200 watts = 200 watts? Can't get out more than you put in right? RL-70 sure as hell does it.

And that is where your understanding lacks.

The 2nd law is baically, -- The best you can do is break even, and you cannot even do that.  You will always lose.

If the RL 70 puts out more power than it consumes then it violates the law.  A law that cannot be violated. 

Any conversion of energy includes a loss .  There can be no energy conversion with 100% efficiency and by your statement that this radar puts out more than it consumes shows a lack of understanding.

[Hornet33]

Copied right out of the manual. I used these on 12 and 24vdc vessels with the exact same results on both.

4D 24" Radome Scanner Unit
General
Approvals
CE - conforms to 1995/5/EC, EN60945
FCC - conforms to Part 80 (47CFR) and Part 2 (47CFR)
Dimensions Φ599 x 227 mm (23.6 x 8.9 in)
Weight 7.5 kg (16.5 lbs)
Input Voltage 8.7 - 32 V DC (from display unit)
Power Consumption 34 W (10 W Standby)
Environmental Waterproof to CFR46
Temperature range: -10° to +55°C
Humidity limit: up to 95% at 35°C
Maximum wind speed for satisfactory operation: 100 Kts
Maximum Range Scale 48 nm
Transmitter
Transmitter Frequency 9410 +/– 30 MHz
Peak Power Output 4.0 kW (nominal)
Transmitter Solid-state modulator driving Magnetron
Pulse Length/PRF
Range (nm) Pulse Length (μS) PRF (Hz)
0.25 or less 0.065 3000
0.50 0.090 3000
0.75 0.150 3000
0.75 expanded 0.250 3000
1.50 0.350 2000
3.00 0.450 1500
3.00 expanded 0.600 1300
6.00 or greater 1.000 740
Standby Mode Magnetron heater and control left on, all other services off
Duplexer Circulator


So if this things consumes 34 watts of power at the input and produces 4 kilowatts of power out the array how does it do that?

[RTHolmes]

you do realise your adding hydrogen / oxygen to a leaner fuel air mix and not replacing petrol?

well leaner-mix/same-power and same-mix/more-power are both indicators of increased efficiency, I find it easier to visualise the 2nd. assuming no physical changes to induction or exhaust you should have roughly the same volume charge of fuel/air mix for either combustion cycle. assuming you want a stoichiometric mix in either case, you will be replacing some of the petrol with hydrogen.

Now bolt the booster on for even more economy

almost 100% sure that wouldn't work for my engine as it has well designed heads, fuel injection and ignition controlled by a pretty sophisticated ECU with feedback from MAF, lambda etc sensors. the burn cycle is already well optimised. I'm sure I could improve it by having a rolling road custom remap for the fuel I use, as the default map is a compromise for vehicles to be sold worldwide and used in temps from Arctic to Saharan, alts from Dead Sea to Tibet and fuel between 90-100RON.


hint for Hornet: "Peak Power Output"

[Hornet33]

That's right Peak Power Output. Every pulse is peaked at 4kw for a 34 watt power consumption and this things peaks for .065 microseconds at 3000hz in short range.

[Bones]

Hornet, a capacitor can output more power as a pulse, but it cannot sustain that power output.  Between pulses, the capacitor charges up.

If you average the power output, then you will find it is slightly less than the input.  It is always less then the input.  Most of the loss is in the form of thermal energy.

It always has to go some place, but you cannot get more out than you put in.  Energy is funny that way.

[Hornet33]

well leaner-mix/same-power and same-mix/more-power are both indicators of increased efficiency, I find it easier to visualise the 2nd. assuming no physical changes to induction or exhaust you should have roughly the same volume charge of fuel/air mix for either combustion cycle. assuming you want a stoichiometric mix in either case, you will be replacing some of the petrol with hydrogen.

And there you have it. With the EFIE installed along with the booster we are leaning out the fuel mix and replacing what is leaned out with the HHO. Leaner mix=less fuel used for the same power output from the engine=mileage gain for fuel used. This is possible because we are tuning the engine to use that HHO gas.

These are NOT a bolt on and forget about it item. They mst be tuned for the vehicle to achieve optimum effect.