Major gains in fuel economy?

crashsite said:

Or an Isetta? One door, in front of the driver with the steering wheel attached. Bet an Isetta in primo condition would be worth something today.

I haven't thought about the Isetta in years. We used to have one in the neighborhood when I was growing up but, I never knew it was made by BMW (I always thought that it was some Italian company). Anyway, the link is some general info about that cute little car.

https://www.whirlingpool.com/isetta/history/history.htm

Click to expand...

Did I do that? Hehehehehe*SNORT*

mneary said:

Yes it clears up your post a bit. I was confused by the fact that this thread was almost exclusively about economy.

Click to expand...

Sorry, the only reason why I've mentioned that was because of this:
infusing something like gasoline with additional hydrogen or hydrogen and oxygen in such a way that will give a net increase in efficiency

The water-meth injection increases efficiency, thus allowing for increase in power over the normal max obtainable.
And here I use another funny term - normal max obtainable - just because I believe there must be other ways to also increase efficiency.

Hope it explains my thinking.

Crashsite I like your thinking on this, just wish my brain can put together something concrete. If you add more H molecules to something like gasoline, will we still call it gasoline?
But is that not what is done when gasoline is mixed with ethanol, like in certain parts of the US. Is this combination anyhow better for power delivery or economy?
If just the same, the theory has gone up in flames.

If you are talking about E85 then, yes, the theory is in flames:

Using E85 in a gasoline engine has the drawback of achieving lower fuel economy as more fuel is needed per unit air (stoichiometric fuel ratio) to run the engine in comparison with gasoline. E85 also has a lower heating value (units of energy per unit mass) than gasoline leading to a reduction in power output in a gasoline engine.

Click to expand...

Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85
But using E85 in a high compression engine might be another thing altogether.

Gasoline prices are determined by governments who tax it to death.
In Canada and in the USA the gasoline price is still reasonable.

In the UK and in Europe the gasoline is twice the price because the government is greedy.

Governments should highly tax the wealth businesses and weathy people, not the average low income driver.

The water-meth injection increases efficiency, thus allowing for increase in power over the normal max obtainable.

Click to expand...

It increases peak output power, but this is not the same as efficiency. If it increased efficiency (power out/power in), they would do it all the time.

MPG vrs HP

mneary said:

It increases peak output power, but this is not the same as efficiency. If it increased efficiency (power out/power in), they would do it all the time.

Click to expand...

I am not saying you are wrong, but I am not sure about this. Not using it all the time could have more to do with not wanting to carry the water needed to do so.

A smaller high compression engine that needed water injection all the time could be more efficient. However there would be no headroom for passing (car) or takeoff (airplane). It would be a good engine to have in a hybrid.

I have been thinking about what makes an engine both efficient and powerful.

Things that reduce friction qualify. Roller rockers, roller cams and crank scrapers are good examples of this.

Most things that get the charge in and out of the cylinder with less work/friction should provide higher effective compression which could result in higher mileage. There is some debate in my mind about this.

Cold dense air makes more HP but warm air help the gas atomize better and provides a higher MPG.

Other things like having both the exhaust and intake open at the same time produce a more powerful charge in the cylinder but reduces efficiency because some on the unburned intake charge goes out the exhaust.

Then there is the turbo. We know it makes more power, but does it make more MPG? It depends on how the engine is tuned. EDIT: Maybe also the turbo size relative to the engine and the engine turbo combo size to the application.

Which brings me back to water injection. You can only run an engine so lean or it will burn the valves. With water injection you can run in leaner. That should mean better MPG.

Except for frictional gains/losses any of this could be wrong. But there may be a few things worth talking about.

When are gullable people going to learn that HHO will not improve the fuel economy of their vehicle, unless it is compressed in a dangerous tank?

Sorry about the bad links

I've been away for a day or so. I'm not trying to sell anything here. I have tried to post the links to the data and files that I have been researching. The last link was a paper from a university in Iowa. Has anyone who has responded to the post.. Gone to the YAHOO GROUP Watercar???

You folks are talking about some very similar topics. There was a AP mechanic talking about how a mixture is injected at take off into Aircraft. My team leader at work was in the Air force on a flight crew and he mentioned this as well.

I must explain that I can't remember some formula or scientific law unless I have it right in front of me. I can fix a lot of things and catch on pretty quick
when I get my hands on it. I have a background in industrial maintenance, but suck at math. I am not trying to be misleading in any way. There are lots of guys out there selling plans for kits that you make in a mason jar. There are lots of safety items that must be followed before you start this project/experiment.

The Pwm is used to control the current going to the generator. If it over amps you can get into trouble. The generator uses lye (sodium Hydroxide)NaOH or KOH as an electrolyte . If you put to much in you over amp. The thing that every one is trying to do is produce enough HHO in Lpm to make a difference in the size vehicle they are using.

There are some great minds here, probably some grumpy old men too. I'm just researching and learning. I had a heat problem with my first build. I do know that when I ran it for the couple of days I had more power and pickup.

From the different things I have found in articles it is possible to install electronics on your vehicle that enable you to tune your vehicle to get better fuel economy. The thing is you have to be interested in the project before you will invest your time or money into such an endeavor.

Please Go to the yahoo group water car and find the FILE section go to a pdf file called chapter 10.. The paper from the school/university talks about combustion and how HHO has been utilized.

Later

The water injection thing: Wikipedia: Water injection

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy

Fuel economy can be improved with water injection, although the effect on most engines with no other modification, like leaning out the mixture, appears to be rather limited or even negligible in some cases.

Click to expand...

Water injection is fairly corrosive to the engine in significant quantities. Well, water is a normal hydrocarbon combustion product but this is a lot more with a potential for liquid phase to be present in the pipes.

Two potentials are here: one, compression ratio can be increased without detonation and mixture can be leaned out without overheating (more of a 2-stroke problem there). Or isolating the low pressure exhaust from the exhaust port (so as to not increase exhaust back pressure), inject water into the hot gases and have it turn into steam which raises the pressure and could then run a turbine. Neat, but while a great deal of heat energy from the gasoline is lost in the exhaust, keep in mind that the efficiency of adding water to make steam to run a turbine is probably fairly low efficiency.

BMW announced they'd created a turbosteamer, which seems to have a heat exchanger that boils water to drive a steam turbine without adding water to the exhaust flow, then probably uses a condenser (or the water cooling system) to recondense it as best I can tell. This is probably a far better idea since steam is more effective at higher pressures and the condensing loop returns it at just under the boiling point, not cold.

Oznog said:

Two potentials are here: one, compression ratio can be increased without detonation and mixture can be leaned out without overheating (more of a 2-stroke problem there).

Click to expand...

Water injection is gaining popularity on turbo systems. Not because it provides power itself but because it allows more boost (compression) on pump gas. It has even shown up on a production car but I do not recall which.

I hear people talk about the corosion problem but does anyone have any evidence that it is a problem.

O ye of little faith...

audioguru said:

When are gullable people going to learn that HHO will not improve the fuel economy of their vehicle, unless it is compressed in a dangerous tank?

Click to expand...

Are you sure techniques wont be developed which will allow the infusion of extra HH and/or O into the fuel in such a way as to make the fuel enrichment both possible and practical?

I don't know. That just seems like a rather pessimistic and short-sighted statement to me. But, I suppose time alone will prove if it's correct.

BTW: What do you suppose the odds of it working are if it's compressed in a safe tank?

Hard Data

curjones01 said:

The Pwm is used to control the current going to the generator. If it over amps you can get into trouble. The generator uses lye (sodium Hydroxide)NaOH or KOH as an electrolyte . If you put to much in you over amp. The thing that every one is trying to do is produce enough HHO in Lpm to make a difference in the size vehicle they are using.

I had a heat problem with my first build. I do know that when I ran it for the couple of days I had more power and pickup.

Click to expand...

Second item first. I don't think anyone here would expect you to put your engine on a dynomometer but, it would be good if you could collect some perfomance data before and then after your mod. How is the gas mileage affected after a few thousand miles of average driving through a couple of seasons of the year? How does your 0-60 performance change? How is starting and idling affected. Etc. Etc.

Regarding the PWM, that might be a bit of overkill if your intent is simply to control the current to your hydrogen cracking system to prevent overheating. Something as simple as an inline resistor would probably do the trick. If you are using the battery system in your car as the basic current source, the existing voltage regulator (which, if it's the mechanical type is sort of a primitive PWM device itself) and the battery, will maintain the voltage within a range that would make the resistor practical.

If you want to squeeze extra performance from the cracking device, I'd recommend a simple (Ha! nothing is "simple") OP amp that would receive a feedback signal from a thermister attached to the component that's overheating to control a series pass transistor which will control the current in a control loop arrangement used to hold the temperature constant. I mean, even with a PWM you'll still need some sort of control signal and the thermister would likely be utilized for a PWM, too.

But, maybe even that's over-thinking it. How about a little, adjustable bi-metal thermal switch, attached to the overheating device that, when closed, would cycle high current (either directly or through a small resistor (for max HH output) and then, when the switch is open, through a higher resistance (to allow the component to cool). That would be sort of a mechanical PWM system, too.

oh hec not another one

remember remember

energy (and matter for that matter) cannot be created or destroyed but only transformed

so if you find you should have unaccounted for energy in the equation to make it work then either find out where the hell its coming from or conclude it can't work !

crashsite said:

Are you sure techniques wont be developed which will allow the infusion of extra HH and/or O into the fuel in such a way as to make the fuel enrichment both possible and practical?

I don't know. That just seems like a rather pessimistic and short-sighted statement to me. But, I suppose time alone will prove if it's correct.

Click to expand...

It's just foolish to think you can take power from the engine to split the hydrogen/oxygen (where you make a loss), then burn the hydrogen/oxygen in the engine (where you make another loss), and then claim that two losses gives you an overall gain?.

BTW: What do you suppose the odds of it working are if it's compressed in a safe tank?

Click to expand...

Hydrogen is a fuel, you could run a suitably designed engine on it - I don't think anyone here has ever denied that?. The problem is how you obtain the hydrogen in the first place.

I think perhaps storage is a huge issue

Let me amplify on that concept a bit...

Nigel Goodwin said:

It's just foolish to think you can take power from the engine to split the hydrogen/oxygen (where you make a loss), then burn the hydrogen/oxygen in the engine (where you make another loss), and then claim that two losses gives you an overall gain?.

Click to expand...

But, see...that's not the question. For example, I could bligthly state that silicon can't amplify an electrical signal. To back my claim up, I cite that silicon is basically an insulator with no "special" or "magical" properties that allow you to apply an input signal and get a bigger one out.

But, that's not the question either. The question is: If one can infuse the silicon with specific impurities and then make an assembly with alternating layers of silicon infused with extra electrons with those infused with a deficiency of electrons...then...can you make the silicon amplify an electrical signal?

It's the same question with fuel. Is there a procedure or process by which you can modify the fuel such that it will release it's hydrogen more easily and/or more completely, thus giving an improvement in the very efficiency of the fuel?

I'm not a chemist and frankly, I don't know the answer to that question. But, I'm prepared to allow that it's likely that somebody will indeed figure it out in the future. Wouldn't it be a hoot if the discoverer were one of the progeny of Dr. Schottky's donation to the "genius" sperm bank....

crashsite said:

But, see...that's not the question. For example, I could bligthly state that silicon can't amplify an electrical signal. To back my claim up, I cite that silicon is basically an insulator with no "special" or "magical" properties that allow you to apply an input signal and get a bigger one out.

But, that's not the question either. The question is: If one can infuse the silicon with specific impurities and then make an assembly with alternating layers of silicon infused with extra electrons with those infused with a deficiency of electrons...then...can you make the silicon amplify an electrical signal?

It's the same question with fuel. Is there a procedure or process by which you can modify the fuel such that it will release it's hydrogen more easily and/or more completely, thus giving an improvement in the very efficiency of the fuel?

I'm not a chemist and frankly, I don't know the answer to that question. But, I'm prepared to allow that it's likely that somebody will indeed figure it out in the future. Wouldn't it be a hoot if the discoverer were one of the progeny of Dr. Schottky's donation to the "genius" sperm bank....

Click to expand...

to be blunt: ARE YOU STUPID ?

turning silicon into something else is no more than a chemical procedure and has nothing to do with or is comparable with getting energy from nowhere ! nothing magical is done to the silicon but you are expecting to magically get power out of thin air

you might as well as made as a comparison to the production of bricks from clay

I'm not going to argue one way or another but will point out that in science fiction all things are possible. I suggest that the second word in that genre name be considered closely. personally, I will wait for some researcher to present findings.

its like the magnetic fuel saver i have battled endlessly with a guy via email trying to get him to send me some evidence and all he had to offer were haphazard trial figures in the end i email the posts he made on a local message board where he was trying to sell them using the company name (utility warehouse) to the company who promply told me that they were asking him to remove the posts and thanked me for my cooperation

I don't know about the hydrogen "things" but in the case of the magnetic fuel savers they lie outrightedly on their website with no worrie because low and bhold the company that makes these things is one company and the website a company in itself now i wonder why they did that ? I wonder..............

A transistor does not amplify an input signal. It just modulates the power supply.
The power comes from the power supply.

Gasoline makes power when it is burned. If you add something to it that is also flammable then less gasoline is needed since the other item replaces some of it.

But it is crazy to use expensive gasoline to drive an overloaded alternator than makes electrolysis of water to produce a tiny amount of HHO that is insignificant to a car's engine.

People who believe it works simply press the gas pedal less often. That is not proof that it works. Nobody has proof that it works.