Gas From Water?

dagr51dagr51 Solar Expert Posts: 72 ✭✭✭✭
www.runautowithwater.com/?hop=isstest I have a friend who wants me to buy into this. I'm just a carpenter and many of you are engineers, so; Fact or Fraud?

Comments

  • mike95490mike95490 Solar Expert Posts: 8,653 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    fraud

    Ask your friend how much gas he still puts in his car ! He's been using this a week or so already, right ?
    Powerfab top of pole PV mount | Listeroid 6/1 w/st5 gen head | XW6048 inverter/chgr | Iota 48V/15A charger | Morningstar 60A MPPT | 48V, 800A NiFe Battery (in series)| 15, Evergreen 205w "12V" PV array on pole | Midnight ePanel | Grundfos 10 SO5-9 with 3 wire Franklin Electric motor (1/2hp 240V 1ph ) on a timer for 3 hr noontime run - Runs off PV ||
    || Midnight Classic 200 | 10, Evergreen 200w in a 160VOC array ||
    || VEC1093 12V Charger | Maha C401 aa/aaa Charger | SureSine | Sunsaver MPPT 15A

    solar: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Solar
    gen: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Lister ,

  • BB.BB. Super Moderators, Administrators Posts: 30,177 admin
    Re: Gas From Water?

    If this is a classic water injection system (simply spray water into the air intake), then this is "real" in several senses:
    Water injection used on internal combustion reciprocating (piston) engines has a long and interesting history. Some WWII military aircraft used water injection to boost horsepower and increase performance. Water injection is still used today on some aircraft and high-performance automotive engines for the same purpose.

    It seems counter-intuitive for an engine to produce more power when water is sprayed into the intake. The key is that the water doesn't actually increase the engine power directly. It works two ways: delaying detonation onset, and cooling the intake charge.
    ...
    These days water injection seems to be most popular in forced-induction engines. Forced-induction (FI), as opposed to normally aspirated engines use some sort of pump, such as a turbocharger or supercharger, to compress air into the engine. Added air means more fuel can be injected, and more power can be produced. The problem is that detonation is more of a problem on a FI engine, and limits how much boost can be used without causing damage. This is due not only to the added compression caused by the pressurized air, but also the act of compressing the air causes it to heat up. The hotter air makes detonation more likely. Using water injection on a FI car not only takes advantage of waters' anti-detonation properties, but also cools the compressed air by a considerable amount. Cooling the air decreases the tendency to detonate and increases the air density, allowing more air to be packed into the cylinders. Some engines use intercoolers to do this instead of water injection.

    Water injection is used to a lesser extent on normally aspirated engines to control detonation in hot weather, under heavy loads (such as towing or drag racing), and when high compression and/or advanced spark timing are used. Most modern fuel-injected engines use ping sensors and continually tune the engine to get peak performance. This is usually done by retarding the spark timing when detonation is sensed, which helps reduce or eliminate the pinging but robs power from the engine. When water injection is used on a modern engine, since the pinging doesn't occur, the ping sensor doesn't signal the computer, and the computer keeps the full spark advance applied, running the engine at peak power. The amount of power increase this causes is highly dependent on a number of factors such as air temperature, engine load, fuel octane, altitude, etc. There is considerable debate as to whether or not the power gains on normally aspirated stock engines are worth the bother and expense of water injection.
    50% increase in fuel economy for the average car? I would what more information/proof before I spent my money.

    -Bill
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • CariboocootCariboocoot Banned Posts: 17,615 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    Back in the 1920's this concept was first introduced: water injected into the fuel/air stream would turn to super-heated steam when the gasoline ignited.

    Didn't work then, doesn't work now.

    Added moisture will increase the density of the mixture and prevent pre-detination: Oldsmobile used it on the very first production turbocharged car, the Olds Jetfire (1961).

    What will it do for a modern, compuer-controlled engine? About as much as driving on a rainy day. 50% fuel savings? Does that come with a $1 million guarantee? No, I didn't think so.

    Put air in your tires. Don't tromp on the accelerator. Anticipate your stops. Don't be in such a hurry. That saves gas. Gizmos, doo-dads, and magic fluids don't. There's never been one single case of any such thing proven by independent testing to work.

    Fraud. But not as bad as the ones that claim you can generate hydrogen through electrolysis while you drive.
  • blackswan555blackswan555 Solar Expert Posts: 246 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    Fraud, have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water-fuelled_car

    In addition to claims of cars that run exclusively on water, there have also been claims that burning hydrogen or oxyhydrogen in addition to petrol or diesel fuel increases mileage. Around 1970, Yull Brown developed technology which allegedly allows cars to burn fuel more efficiently while improving emissions. In Brown's design, a hydrogen oxygen mixture (so-called "Brown's Gas") is generated by the electrolysis of water, and then fed into the engine through the air intake system. Whether the system actually improves emissions or fuel efficiency is debated.[35] Similarly, Hydrogen Technology Applications claims to be able increase fuel efficiency by bubbling "Aquyen" into the fuel tank.

    A common fallacy found in connection with this type of modification is the mistaken assumption that cars generate excess electricity via their alternators that normally goes to waste and therefore is available for electrolysis. The amount of force required to turn an alternator or generator depends strictly on the electrical resistance of the circuits it is supplying, and residual heat lost due to friction. If an electrolysis unit is added to a car, the amperage it draws from the car's electrical system will make the alternator harder to turn, which will put additional drag on the engine. As a result more fuel will be required to maintain the same rotational speed (RPM.) [36]

    A number of websites exist promoting the use of oxyhydrogen (often called "HHO"), selling plans for do-it-yourself electrolysers or entire kits with the promise of large improvements in fuel efficiency. According to a spokesman for the American Automobile Association, "All of these devices look like they could probably work for you, but let me tell you they don't."[37]
  • notsobrightnotsobright Solar Expert Posts: 247 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    many including myself have found water injection is certainly effective in reducing spark-knock (detonation) and as a result it allows you to dial in more advance in the ignition and as a result of that you get an increase of power output in turbocharged as well as normally aspirated engines on the same batch and amount of fuel. this increases efficiency except its no where near 50% and Im just guessing but probably less than 5%

    it also allows you to get by with running standard pump fuels to a certain extent in engines that would otherwise meltdown with it and it is much cheaper and effective than "octane booster" additives which from my experience are snake oils. Ive never been able to achieve with those (and Ive tried almost all of them) what I have with just plain old water! BTW even moth balls are more effective than these snake oil octane boosters.

    I think that the water works for three reasons, one is that it cools the mixture and two is because water contains oxygen and three because water takes up space in the mixture aiding the compression of the mixture.
  • mike95490mike95490 Solar Expert Posts: 8,653 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    OP is not talking of a water fog/mist system, but a "browns gas" system, which consumes more electricity than it gains from the little bit of hydrogen boost you get.
    Powerfab top of pole PV mount | Listeroid 6/1 w/st5 gen head | XW6048 inverter/chgr | Iota 48V/15A charger | Morningstar 60A MPPT | 48V, 800A NiFe Battery (in series)| 15, Evergreen 205w "12V" PV array on pole | Midnight ePanel | Grundfos 10 SO5-9 with 3 wire Franklin Electric motor (1/2hp 240V 1ph ) on a timer for 3 hr noontime run - Runs off PV ||
    || Midnight Classic 200 | 10, Evergreen 200w in a 160VOC array ||
    || VEC1093 12V Charger | Maha C401 aa/aaa Charger | SureSine | Sunsaver MPPT 15A

    solar: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Solar
    gen: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Lister ,

  • cpetkucpetku Registered Users Posts: 22
    Re: Gas From Water?

    You have to love the concept of a car that runs purely on water. So the system breaks down the water into Hydrogen (H2) and Oxygen (O) which when using electricity is an endothermic reaction (uses energy). The system then burns this mixture (exothermic) to provide torque. The tourque then drives an alternator to produce electricity and close the loop.

    Perpetual motion if there are no losses (i.e., the engine block is not allowed to increase in temperature to provide heat in the passenger compartment or drive wheels or...).

    But there are and thus without petroleum there is no way this system can work (energy can neither be created or destroyed) The only potential is to increase the efficiency of the air-petrol mixture by forming a different exhaust output. If they ever properly document the chemical reaction, then take note and make sure it's not more toxic than CO. Until then save your money.
  • russruss Solar Expert Posts: 593 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    The guys selling the hho units and the poor suckers that swear by them couldn't possibly document combustion of a Bic lighter flame let alone combustion in an engine.

    The entire group is 'science & engineering free'. Generally a bunch of shade tree mechanics that think they have discovered something or plain & pure shyster types.

    The mixture of hydrogen and oxygen would have any self respecting process engineer (Chem Eng normally) looking for a place to hide.

    When handled correctly hydrogen is perfectly safe - but as with any combustible material if it is handled in an unsafe manner you can have a disaster.

    Russ
  • CariboocootCariboocoot Banned Posts: 17,615 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?
    russ wrote: »
    When handled correctly hydrogen is perfectly safe - but as with any combustible material if it is handled in an unsafe manner you can have a disaster.

    As in "The Hindenburg Disaster". :cry:

    (Sorry; couldn't resist. :p )
  • SCharlesSCharles Solar Expert Posts: 123 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    Amazing how roughly a century can go by and someone(s) will either buy into something like this or think about it. Again.
  • russruss Solar Expert Posts: 593 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    Correct - As in "The Hindenburg Disaster"!

    Mix a combustible with a strong oxidant and looky see what happens.

    The Hindenberg should have never been built. If anyone suggested that today they would be stuffed into a funny farm. That is exactly where the hho supporters belong.

    At my last plants we recirculated about 1,000,000 NCMH of a H2+CO mixture into our furnaces. That was over 650,000 NCMH of H2.

    Quite safe when you follow the rules! We didn't go around mixing it with O2 at unintentionally places either.

    Russ
  • mike95490mike95490 Solar Expert Posts: 8,653 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    Hindenburg was fire caused by static spark and aluminum powder paint burning. Pure hydrogen, even when sparked, does not burn, you have to mix o2 with it to get flame, and then, that flame is invisible. to get it to explode, you have to mix the right amount of o2, THEN add spark.

    When we run out of heilum, then we'll see Hydrogen blimps again.
    Powerfab top of pole PV mount | Listeroid 6/1 w/st5 gen head | XW6048 inverter/chgr | Iota 48V/15A charger | Morningstar 60A MPPT | 48V, 800A NiFe Battery (in series)| 15, Evergreen 205w "12V" PV array on pole | Midnight ePanel | Grundfos 10 SO5-9 with 3 wire Franklin Electric motor (1/2hp 240V 1ph ) on a timer for 3 hr noontime run - Runs off PV ||
    || Midnight Classic 200 | 10, Evergreen 200w in a 160VOC array ||
    || VEC1093 12V Charger | Maha C401 aa/aaa Charger | SureSine | Sunsaver MPPT 15A

    solar: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Solar
    gen: http://tinyurl.com/LMR-Lister ,

  • russruss Solar Expert Posts: 593 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?
    mike90045 wrote: »

    When we run out of heilum, then we'll see Hydrogen blimps again.

    No chance on that - people panic when H2 is mentioned! It should not have been done that time (for the blimps) - there is always static electricity available.

    Correct - there has to be an explosive mix - If you can maintain the local atmosphere O2 content at below 3% then no problem. I don't remember the other end of the envelope.

    However, at the edge of the cloud of the release of hydrogen or any hydrocarbon there will almost always be an explosive mix - most of the time nothing happens though static electricity is adequate to make it all go poof!
  • BB.BB. Super Moderators, Administrators Posts: 30,177 admin
    Re: Gas From Water?

    Hydrogen gas does have a very wide range of explosive mixture ratios in air (4-75%). Only Acetylene and Silane gases are wider.

    We are supposed to be out of "cheap" helium by 2015 or so... (has been privatized back in the 1990's by US government--the prior 70 years, helium was a strategic/military resource).

    One reason (major,, that I understand?) that Germany did not use Helium was because the US would not release/supply helium to Germany at that time.

    However hydrogen is not necessarily the worst for fires (Hindenburg Wiki entry):
    Hydrogen fires are notable for being less destructive to immediate surroundings than gasoline explosions because of the buoyancy of H2, which causes heat of combustion to be released upwards more than circumferentially as the leaked mass ascends in the atmosphere; hydrogen fires are more survivable than fires of gasoline and of wood.[6] The hydrogen in the Hindenburg burned out within about 90 seconds.

    And airships, filled with helium, have also been known for fatalities too.

    -Bill
    Near San Francisco California: 3.5kWatt Grid Tied Solar power system+small backup genset
  • nsaspooknsaspook Solar Expert Posts: 396 ✭✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    Helium is much too valuable to be wasted in balloons ;), we use it as a cryogenic refrigerant to make microchips in ultra pure vacuum systems.

    http://www.brooks.com/documents.cfm?documentID=4427

    We use a large amount of hydrogen with pure oxygen to make wet thermal oxides. http://www.processpecialties.com/thermox.htm

    It's not something I would store large quantities of near my house knowing the safety hazards.
  • russruss Solar Expert Posts: 593 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?

    H2 has a low ignition point and a wide range of inflamability - great stuff for process purposes in a variety of industries.

    If you vent H2 to the atmosphere it will occasionally ignite - easy to do but no big thing. That would happen to us once in a while in the direct reduction plants. Shutoff the vent and the flame is gone.

    A small leak on a process line is rarely a problem. Pipe/duct systems carrying H2 or a H2 mixture are very difficult to seal 100%. H2 will escape through the most minute of openings.

    The Hindenberg problem was a massive release over a large area - lots to burn and it happens instantly.

    H2 can collect in a high point in a structure if it is not vented well. Then should someone come along with a lighter or there is static electricity and the right conditions - boom! That is the reason for venting a battery room.
  • jagecjagec Solar Expert Posts: 157 ✭✭
    Re: Gas From Water?
    russ wrote: »
    Correct - there has to be an explosive mix - If you can maintain the local atmosphere O2 content at below 3% then no problem. I don't remember the other end of the envelope.

    So you just need to carry tanks of nitrogen in your hydrogen blimp which get constantly injected into the surroundings to reduce the local oxygen content...problem solved!
    :p
Sign In or Register to comment.