Run your car on water??????

[BaDkaRmA158Th]

granted most of these are prototypes or first generation still, we will not see much coming from them.
As the systems are more defined and understood "and a few more brake thrus are found" this will become fairly standard for "getting all she's worth" in the long run, our kids will most likely grow up with systems such as this under they're hood.

[DiabloTX]

"Runs on water."

[Nashwan]

You are getting hydrogen containing about 170 watt/hours to replace the gasoline that contained about 800 watt/hours that you had to burn to produce the hydrogen.

Ay what volume of each fuel are you basing your calculations on, and where did you come up with these figures?

Simple maths.

I believe you mentioned the figure of 20 amps, but of course the proportions would be the same if it was 40 amps or 10.

Gasoline engines are 30 - 40% efficient. So 800 watt/hours gasoline produces around 300 watt/hours of mechanical force.

Alternators are about 80% efficient, so the 300 watt/hours of mechanical force produces about 240 watt/hours of electricity.

I'd be surprised if your electrolysis unit is 70% efficient, but assuming it is 240 watt/hours of electricity will produce 168 watt/hours of hydrogen.

Every time you convert energy you lose, because the process is never 100% efficient. Running through 3 consecutive conversion processes takes most of the energy you began with.

Incidentally, how much gas is your unit producing? It's easy to calculate the energy in the hydrogen/oxygen mix if we know how much there is.

[Hornet33]

I'll ask once again, your 800 watt hours for gas, what volume of gas is that? A gallon? A Liter? It makes a differance.

[Nashwan]

It's about 0.09 litres, 0.06 kg.

[CAP1]

It's about 0.09 litres, 0.06 kg.

i believe this booster system produces 2 litres per minute of hho.

[Nashwan]

Oxygen is free in the air, so you don't gain anything by producing it.

As to hydrogen, by volume it sounds very attractive. But the energy content is determined by weight, not volume.

Hydrogen weighs 0.09 grammes per litre at standard pressure and temperature (iirc). Hydrogen contains about 3 times the energy of gasoline, by weight (again iirc). So a litre of hydrogen gas has as much energy as 0.27 grammes of gasoline.

Keep generating it at a rate of 1 litre a minute and in an hour you have about 16 grammes of gasoline equivalent. Keep it going all day and you have about 390 grammes, which is half a litre of gasoline equivalent. In other words, run it continuously for a week and you have a gallon of gasoline equivalent.

Of course, you'll have used more than 4 gallons of gasoline to do it. (in fact an EU report says 150 watts of power from the alternator takes 0.1 litres an hour of gasoline, which is a little over 4 gallons in a week).

[CAP1]

Oxygen is free in the air, so you don't gain anything by producing it.

As to hydrogen, by volume it sounds very attractive. But the energy content is determined by weight, not volume.

Hydrogen weighs 0.09 grammes per litre at standard pressure and temperature (iirc). Hydrogen contains about 3 times the energy of gasoline, by weight (again iirc). So a litre of hydrogen gas has as much energy as 0.27 grammes of gasoline.

Keep generating it at a rate of 1 litre a minute and in an hour you have about 16 grammes of gasoline equivalent. Keep it going all day and you have about 390 grammes, which is half a litre of gasoline equivalent. In other words, run it continuously for a week and you have a gallon of gasoline equivalent.

Of course, you'll have used more than 4 gallons of gasoline to do it. (in fact an EU report says 150 watts of power from the alternator takes 0.1 litres an hour of gasoline, which is a little over 4 gallons in a week).

this suplements the gasoline. period. it lets us use another source to stretch the gasoline. nothing else.

if you guys wanted, i'd think you all can prove nitrous oxide doesn't work either.

[Hornet33]

Well we'll see once and for all when I get the second dyno run completed after I install my operational booster in my truck. No way to fake the results of those tests since the computer controls the entire thing. The only time someone is even in the truck during the test is to start the engine and put it in gear. After that the computer controls everything in a timed sequence of events. I'm going to laugh really hard if it comes back showing a 20% or better overall increase in performance.

Anyway we'll see. Too many times in history scientific therories and mathmatical forumlas have hit the proverbial brick wall when faced with real world practical applications and results. Hell scientificly and mathmaticly a bumble bee can't possibly fly either, but someone forgot to tell the bumble bee that. History also shows that most new ideas are contested the most by the people that stand to loose money if the new idea works. I wonder what the nay sayers here do for a living? Work for the oil companies or auto industry maybe?

I've personaly seen several of these things in operation, and the guys I've talked to that are running them have shown me their data that they have collected on their own in real world application of the things. They're not selling them and have no reason to fudge the data and it all shows that the things work, so that's why I'm building mine.

[CAP1]

Well we'll see once and for all when I get the second dyno run completed after I install my operational booster in my truck. No way to fake the results of those tests since the computer controls the entire thing. The only time someone is even in the truck during the test is to start the engine and put it in gear. After that the computer controls everything in a timed sequence of events. I'm going to laugh really hard if it comes back showing a 20% or better overall increase in performance.

Anyway we'll see. Too many times in history scientific therories and mathmatical forumlas have hit the proverbial brick wall when faced with real world practical applications and results. Hell scientificly and mathmaticly a bumble bee can't possibly fly either, but someone forgot to tell the bumble bee that. History also shows that most new ideas are contested the most by the people that stand to loose money if the new idea works. I wonder what the nay sayers here do for a living? Work for the oil companies or auto industry maybe?

I've personaly seen several of these things in operation, and the guys I've talked to that are running them have shown me their data that they have collected on their own in real world application of the things. They're not selling them and have no reason to fudge the data and it all shows that the things work, so that's why I'm building mine.

well,
like i mentioned earlier, there was a time when it was considered impossible for man to fly. look at what we've accomplished to date.

 there was a time when it was asumed man could never travel to space. we've been there a lot.

 there was a time when it was assumed the sound barrier would never be broken. yet, we've had supersonic jets since the 50's.

 this is much easier than all of those accomplishments.


BTW,,,,,,,where'd you get the things to make yours look so good? i bought the nylon rod and the nuts /& washers so far. was cutting a pvc pipe for my casing. i didn't get the smaller tubes for my bubblers yet. also, i used stainless switch plates. it looks like you made your own plates?

[CAP1]

Well we'll see once and for all when I get the second dyno run completed after I install my operational booster in my truck. No way to fake the results of those tests since the computer controls the entire thing. The only time someone is even in the truck during the test is to start the engine and put it in gear. After that the computer controls everything in a timed sequence of events. I'm going to laugh really hard if it comes back showing a 20% or better overall increase in performance.

Anyway we'll see. Too many times in history scientific therories and mathmatical forumlas have hit the proverbial brick wall when faced with real world practical applications and results. Hell scientificly and mathmaticly a bumble bee can't possibly fly either, but someone forgot to tell the bumble bee that. History also shows that most new ideas are contested the most by the people that stand to loose money if the new idea works. I wonder what the nay sayers here do for a living? Work for the oil companies or auto industry maybe?

I've personaly seen several of these things in operation, and the guys I've talked to that are running them have shown me their data that they have collected on their own in real world application of the things. They're not selling them and have no reason to fudge the data and it all shows that the things work, so that's why I'm building mine.

i almost forgot....i have a customer tht bought one from a company in arkansaw. he's bringing it by the shop next week for an install on his buick lesabre 3800.

[Hornet33]

well,
like i mentioned earlier, there was a time when it was considered impossible for man to fly. look at what we've accomplished to date.

 there was a time when it was asumed man could never travel to space. we've been there a lot.

 there was a time when it was assumed the sound barrier would never be broken. yet, we've had supersonic jets since the 50's.

 this is much easier than all of those accomplishments.


BTW,,,,,,,where'd you get the things to make yours look so good? i bought the nylon rod and the nuts /& washers so far. was cutting a pvc pipe for my casing. i didn't get the smaller tubes for my bubblers yet. also, i used stainless switch plates. it looks like you made your own plates?

I orderd the cast acrylic tube and most of the fittings and hardware from McMasterCarr.com. I had the plates and straps custom cut out of 22 gage 316 SS sheet and got them from OnlineMetals.com. My bubblers I made out of 1" clear schedual 40 pvc pipe and I got that from McMasterCarr as well.

I'm in the process of writing a detailed construction manual for my booster complete with parts list and source of supply. My operational booster looks nothing like the pics I posted though, but it's still looks pretty cool. I've also changed the plate arrangment a bit and went to a duel 9 plate cell vs the duel 8 plate cell in the pics. The extra plate is installed on the outside of each cell so it's like this.

+ being the postive strap
- being the negative strap
I being a plate
/ being a nylon 1.4mm washer
[] being a 316 SS 4mm jam nut

[]+I/I/I[]I/I[]I/I[]I/I[]-I/I[]I/I[]I/I[]I/I/I+[]

I was able to use thinner washers and jam nuts than what the Smacks Booster plans call for since my plates don't have curved edges like the wall plates. I used a small grinding wheel to prep the plates and rough them up creating more surface area. The outer plates are 2" X 6" then 2.5" x 6" then 3" x 6" then 3.5" X 6" and the straps I had cut at 1" X 12" The entire core is also shrink wrapped using 4" heat shrink tubing and the starps are also heat shrinked from the top of the cell up to the screw cap. That helps to force the gas bubbles up to the top instead of leaking out the sides of the stack. It also creates more of a convection current inside the cell to aid in gas production and circulation of the electrolite and works really well. The duel 9 plate cell produces more gas at less current draw. Ran it tonight on the bench for about an hour and started with a 9amp current draw on a cold cell and produced 1.5 LPM in the first 5 minutes of run time. At 1 hour I was getting almost 2 LPM at a 12 amp current draw and I could still pick the cell up with my bare hands. The cell was hot but not too bad. I'd compare it to holding a cup of coffee in a ceramic mug.

[LYNX]

Nashwan

Stand alone I'm sure your figures would stand up to scrutiny...petrol/hydrogen/oxygen.  However all these elements are added together and ignited simultaneously.

Petrol when ignited by the spark plug burns from the spark plug out to the cylinder walls.  Because of the speed of the combustion process not all the petrol is ignited.  This wast is responsible for the majority of pollutants by the way.

Add hydrogen to the petrol air fix changes the burn process dynamically.  As your aware of the density, rapid escape and combustibility features of hydrogen you'll be intrigued as to it's effect on the burn process.  Hydrogen allows the fuel air mix to explode instantly within the chamber.  Very little wast with a hotter faster burn.

You end up burning more petrol.  You end up making an inefficient process a little more efficient....thermodynamics!  The bottom line of a long story = More fuel burnt = better MPG.

I tried explaining this to you before but we went off on some gawd forsaken tangent about alternators.  You can either take these lads words for their results or you can go make one and find out 100% for real and not slide rule theory.

edit  PS the opening threads booster cell is a load of bollocks.....where as the other featured by Hornet is spot on.

[Nashwan]

Petrol when ignited by the spark plug burns from the spark plug out to the cylinder walls.  Because of the speed of the combustion process not all the petrol is ignited.  This wast is responsible for the majority of pollutants by the way.

Even that doesn't account for the claimed fuel consumption improvements.

The MOT tests for unburnt fuel in a car's exhaust. Any more than about 2% and it fails. Most cars burn 99% or more of the fuel properly.

Add hydrogen to the petrol air fix changes the burn process dynamically.

Which is why I wouldn't categorically rule out the possibility of improvement. I just really, really doubt it.

[Hornet33]

Which is why I wouldn't categorically rule out the possibility of improvement. I just really, really doubt it.

So did I untill I met a couple of guys here local to me and they showed me what they had done, had detailed driving logs before and after they installed their boosters and took me out for a couple of drives to see first hand what was happening.

I was impressed enough to give it a go myself. Mark has a 1999 Pontiac Bonneville running on a booster. I used to own the exact same car, well it was my wifes car but I drove it often enough and worked on it so I know first hand what sort of mileage that cars gets. Mark is getting around 47mpg out of his. That's unheard of in a stock Bonneville. Best I EVER got out of ours was 29mpg

Seeing is believing. I've seen.