well no sh*t. it does require more energy to turn the alternator, but not in any significant amount. anyone who says that the mpg increase possible from adding the H+HO to the combustion will be negated by the energy used to turn the alternator to supply the current to the generator has little to no experience with adding increased loads to a vehicles charging system and its effects on mpg.
ok ok, you're right. You can get free energy from the alternator, you win.
Can't we just skip all this hydrogen mess and just put some electric motors on the wheels then?
__________________
~Michael
2008 Toyota Tundra 5.7 2WD - Toy Hauler / 2006 Toyota Sienna Limited - Kid Hauler / 1993 Toyota MR2 - Autocross Car
Mods: Tekonsha P3; Tow Mirrors; TRD Wheels; TPMS Pipe Bomb
Like how did they ever create an electric hybrid car to make an engine more fuel efficient with electric motors if they cannot get more energy from a gallon of gas?
They took the 'excess energy' and make it storable in the form of electric power stored in batteries. If there was no excess energy available to change into electric then hybrids would not be driving on the road today.
As in the hho generator its anouther step its taking that stored battery power that is in excess and using it to free anouther type of energy that must be helping catalyze the fuel or something. I see this is where things are getting confusing.
One thing I know is the engines today are nowhere near 100% efficient and 100% of that power is not used 100% of the time ,there is room in the ways of science to improve that efficiency.
I believe the whole theory behind this and I will still call it a theory is changing forms of energy into usable energy, not creating free energy. But it is really cheap being able to use water as one of the changing forms.
Like how did they ever create an electric hybrid car to make an engine more fuel efficient with electric motors if they cannot get more energy from a gallon of gas?
They took the 'excess energy' and make it storable in the form of electric power stored in batteries. If there was no excess energy available to change into electric then hybrids would not be driving on the road today.
You're misunderstanding how hybrids work. There's not something special getting more energy from gas. They charge the batteries through regenerative braking. Normally the motion of the car gets converted to heat by the brakes, hybrids use the motion to power a generator. The resistance to spinning due to the generator load slows the car down instead of (or in addition to) the brakes. This is why they work great in the city but have little or no effect on the highway.
__________________
~Michael
2008 Toyota Tundra 5.7 2WD - Toy Hauler / 2006 Toyota Sienna Limited - Kid Hauler / 1993 Toyota MR2 - Autocross Car
Mods: Tekonsha P3; Tow Mirrors; TRD Wheels; TPMS Pipe Bomb
This should be easy to figure out; How much energy is stored in a gallon of gas that's released via combustion? Now figure out how much energy the hydrogen from one gallon of water brings to the party, and how quickly that hydrogen can be liberated via electrolysis.
You're misunderstanding how hybrids work. There's not something special getting more energy from gas. They charge the batteries through regenerative braking. Normally the motion of the car gets converted to heat by the brakes, hybrids use the motion to power a generator. The resistance to spinning due to the generator load slows the car down instead of (or in addition to) the brakes. This is why they work great in the city but have little or no effect on the highway.
Ok so where does the intial energy come from? The gasoline?
Then it would be getting more energy from gallon of gasoline by changing the energy, instead of heat, into electric therefore storing it as usable energy.
This is because you don't understand an alternator or generator works. As load increases it takes more energy to turn the alternator.
This is because you don't understand how combustion works. It's a chemical process where you end up with the compound and heat or heat & light (flames).
I wonder how many people have one of these things, a tornado air intake, fuel magnets, and acetone in their gas. They must really get a lot of MPG
Well, yeah, I understand how both things work, but thanks for the condescending attitude just the same!
You did make me sit down and think things through for awhile, instead of just shooting from the hip on my posts, though.
The standard automotive alternator is capable of a relatively high electrical output at idle. This is why the lights on a vehicle with an alternator don't pulse brighter as they often do in a vehicle with a generator at idle. Now, I know that the voltage regulator is responsible for controlling the amount of voltage coming from the alternator and going to the battery and accessories. If I recall correctly, it does so through adjusting the strength of the electromagnets inside the alternator. If more voltage is needed, the electromagnets are strengthened, and so on. This is the basic reason underdrive pulleys can be used to "free up" more power from the engine, if I understand correctly.
Now, it is the "load" on the electromagnets that you refer to that should increase to power a hydrogen generator. Your argument is that the amount of load should be greater than the power derived from the generator. Here is where I run into problems. It seems to me that despite the voltage regulator or perhaps because of it, the alternator should end up with what is essentially "wasted" electricity much of the time, because we aren't using accessories, etc., that actually taxes the alternator's abilities. I would assume that much of that electricity ends up being dissipated as heat, or wherever. IF that is accurate, or at least if the alternator is not being pushed beyond its normal operating range, then I don't see that the hydrogen generator would tax the load of the electromagnets enough to effect normal engine performance, as seen through a lowered mileage.
Now, onto combustion.
We all know how that an internal combustion engine used in our vehicles is a four stroke design, meaning there are four different processes that occur within the cylinder: intake, compression, combustion, and exhaust. We are focusing on what happens during the combustion cycle. During combustion, our air/fuel mixture is compressed, and when ignited, explodes. The fuel reacts with the oxygen, causing a chemical reaction. The reaction results in heat, flame (light) and expanding gasses (which drive the piston down within the cylinder). The gasses include water vapor, incompletely burned fuel, etc... The law of the conservation of energy states that energy can not be created or destroyed, only that its form can be changed. The energy goes from potential in the fuel, to kinetic, in the combustion, if I recall correctly.
Now, if the introduction of hydrogen and/ or 02 into the mix allowed a more complete burning of the fuel, or simply a better stoichiometric (sp?) ratio, wouldn't that increase efficiency and mileage?
At any rate, I think I am done with this thread. I don't plan on adding one, it was just a simple exercise in scientific discussion until people decided to be rude and insulting of the intelligence of others.
__________________
If Buddha is burning in hell, I'd better pack my summer clothes.
"Courage is being scared to death… and saddling up anyway." - John Wayne.
"A lot of people run a race to see who is fastest. I run to see who has the most guts." Steve Prefontaine
Now don't you think the power generation stations would use this technology as they have huge generators. They could cut costs considerably. The energy to produce hydrogen and its return from combustion is 4 to 1. Not too effecient in my estimation.
Now don't you think the power generation stations would use this technology as they have huge generators. They could cut costs considerably. The energy to produce hydrogen and its return from combustion is 4 to 1. Not too effecient in my estimation.
Am I missing something? The power generation stations are there to produce electricity, not fuel combustion, and I would assume they are usually running their generators at close to peak power output, as that is their purpose. I don't see how one translates to the other.
Where did you get the 4:1 ratio information? I'm not doubting it, just curious.
__________________
If Buddha is burning in hell, I'd better pack my summer clothes.
"Courage is being scared to death… and saddling up anyway." - John Wayne.
"A lot of people run a race to see who is fastest. I run to see who has the most guts." Steve Prefontaine
Once again to produce Brown's gas through electrolysis it takes roughly 3 times the electrical energy that the hydrogen would net in return through combustion. The negligible amounts of hydrogen this system would produce from an alternator on a car by loading the alternator would probably result in a loss of MPGs. Sorry there is no free lunch.
We took a large electrical load of the generators to produce oxygen on the submarine. Also when your do this it is very hazardess as oxygen and hydrogen are extremely flamible together. Of course on the car system this would not be a problem as you are producing very little if any brown gas. I can't believe this discussion keeps coming up. I shut technosteve up pretty quick as I knew I would see no pictures or results.
I may just say , you are not using this to burn pure hydrogen and oxygen there is already a mix there in fuel and an atmospheric mix. Now hho bring created , not becoming a pure source of energy, more than likely just a catalyst to enhanceor efficize a process that is already going on.
Now if we had to create enough to burn on pure hydrogen and oxygen then I would agree the process is a losing process.
I still haven't seen anyone explain how a few parts per billion of added hydrogen (and oxygen) in the air/fuel mix is going to "catalyze" or do anything else significant to all those molecules. The role of a catalyst is to start a reaction that would not otherwise start on its own OR to accelerate a reaction that is normally too slow. In the first case we don't need anything to start the reaction - a spark plug does that nicely. In the second case the catalyst has to have a *significant* number of molecules to affect the reaction. I seriously doubt the trickle of hydrogen produced here in the OP's setup meets that requirement. Besides, you don't want the gas to burn *too* quickly because you get nasty side effects that can cause damage in a gas engine. So all the other problems addressed above are moot until someone explains how the basic chemical reaction can work here with the ratios of molecules involved.
I'll tell you -- your 3 years of chemistry and physics were wasted on one thing -- textbook knowledge and not practical knowledge.
Sanosuke!
You have no idea how much practical knowledge I have so your statement is what is *wasted*. And when you're going to insult someone or put them down (since you have nothing constructive to add here) you shouldn't be such a chicken sh!t and tack a smiley face on the end to hide behind. Nobody including me took your post as a light-hearted joke. I'm very tired of this kind of useless crap on forums.
I'll tell you -- your 3 years of chemistry and physics were wasted on one thing -- textbook knowledge and not practical knowledge.
Sanosuke!
You have no idea how much practical knowledge I have so your statement is what is *wasted*. And when you're going to insult someone or put them down (since you have nothing constructive to add here) you shouldn't be such a chicken sh!t and tack a smiley face on the end to hide behind. Nobody including me took your post as a light-hearted joke. I'm very tired of this kind of useless crap on forums.
I agree with quarque here.
Some people don't realize that textbooks are written from practical knowledge. Stuff that works so well, or is just basically fact (chemistry, math & physics), that it must be retold; therefore it is written into a book and taught. Until someone comes along and disproves the textbook knowledge, the book is rule.
If you learned this stuff the hard way, from day-to-day work and trial/error, that's fine. But we learned it from another route, school. Someone that already did whatever it is you are saying is "practical knowledge" and they threw it in a book, and we're learning from it without looking like we reinvented the wheel.
Let's keep this a respectful debate and leave the smartass BS comments at the door. Thanks everyone.
__________________
My Truck: 2005 Tundra, 2UZFE. 4WD. AccessCab. Spectra Blue Mica (8M6). TRD. AT. CC. CK. DZ. FE. AW. LD. OF. TO. VP.
You have no idea how much practical knowledge I have so your statement is what is *wasted*. And when you're going to insult someone or put them down (since you have nothing constructive to add here) you shouldn't be such a chicken sh!t and tack a smiley face on the end to hide behind. Nobody including me took your post as a light-hearted joke. I'm very tired of this kind of useless crap on forums.
I don't put on a chicken sh!t face. Tundradrenalin has met me in person and knows what kind of a person I am. So leave that comment at home please! I was just pointing out one very subtle thing and you jump all over me like its a hack to your profession. If you look at the other posts in this thread, they can be construted to be worse.
But I'll defer to PM's if you wish to discuss this further, quarque.
I have a 2007 Double Cab with the 4.7. Last night I successfully installed a hydrogen generator all for about $30.00. After topping off this morning and driving around and refueling I have averaged 23mpg.
There ya go. I believe that puts the score for those that have actually installed the system to:
Increased MPG = 3
Naysayers = 0
Another point on the conservation of energy argument that I would like to make relates to the amount of energy needed to create the spark through the ignition system. By some accounts, it takes more energy to create the spark than you will get back in return. Ok, I won't argue with that but what happens when you add the spark to fuel and air. Might it be possible that the introduction to Hydrogen to the air fuel mixture will some how create a more efficient burn, creating more MPG ?
BTW pass the popcorn DPKTM. That's what I love about this board, 90% entertainment 10% usefull.
Re: 23MPG Hydrogen Generator 4.7
Re: 23MPG Hydrogen Generator 4.7
Linear Mode
