PWM - browns gas generator

Electric_EyE said:

Water injection will be perfect to cool down the burn. Hydrogen and oxyhydrogen burn hotter and I expect the engine to reach higher operating temps with HHO injection and gas alone. I've been looking into water injection kits. Summit has one for almost $500 that runs off of the MAF sensor. The kit was originally meant for additional horsepower and to get rid of knock, because the small amount of water/methyl alcohol effectively raises the octane and slows the burn. The methyl alcohol (windshield washer fluid) adds horsepower. All this is hypothetical. So far I've only made the electrode and housing. This weekend hopefully I'll start looking at injector waveforms. Here's a link for the water injection. **broken link removed**. The website also has opinions on HHO generators...

Click to expand...

Latent heat of vaporization, water requires a lot of energy to convert from a liquid to a gas. Injecting it into the airstream allows it to vaporize in the combustion chamber which allows for a lower combustion peak temperature which allows for advanced timing. More advanced timing allows for the burn to effectively push the piston longer, thus more power output, or requiring less throttle input/fuel for the same power output (better MPG).

It's not theory like HHO, it's a proven fact and has been done so in many laboratories and on race cars alike, along with WWII planes.

Stan Myers is a fraud and has been proven to be one, while his claims aren't.

Well just to clarify what I meant by hypothetical: adding HHO to supplement the gas would raise cylinder head/engine temps. To help cool this down, I would add a fine water mist. In addition the fine water mist would raise the octane level, i.e. slow the burn, since HHO also burns very quickly.

HHO is for sure not a theory. I've made several HHO balloons, back when I first investigating electrolysis. After lighting one off and feeling the pressure wave in my chest from a balloon 12in in diameter, I was skeptical no longer.

Electric_EyE said:

Well just to clarify what I meant by hypothetical: adding HHO to supplement the gas would raise cylinder head/engine temps. To help cool this down, I would add a fine water mist. In addition the fine water mist would raise the octane level, i.e. slow the burn, since HHO also burns very quickly.

HHO is for sure not a theory. I've made several HHO balloons, back when I first investigating electrolysis. After lighting one off and feeling the pressure wave in my chest from a balloon 12in in diameter, I was skeptical no longer.

Click to expand...

Nobody is saying that HHO is not real. What we're saying is that any buildable system for creating HHO for use in an engine, when said system is also powered by that engine, will not increase the overall efficiency of the engine. It will take more energy to produce the HHO than will be recovered through the use of that HHO in the combustion process. That's all.


Torben

Torben said:

Nobody is saying that HHO is not real. What we're saying is that any buildable system for creating HHO for use in an engine, when said system is also powered by that engine, will not increase the overall efficiency of the engine. It will take more energy to produce the HHO than will be recovered through the use of that HHO in the combustion process. That's all.


Torben

Click to expand...

Exactly, I don't see why he can't seem to accept the fact that a combustion engine won't be more thermodynamically efficient if it's burning Brown's gas rather than petrol.

You'd better off using the waste heat from the exhaust to run another heat engine like a steam engine than to mess around with electrolysis. This would actually boost the thermodynamic efficiency of the engine. I don't know how much extra power you'd get or if it's actually worth doing but it's certainly more worthwhile than Brown's gas.

Hero999 said:

Exactly, I don't see why he can't seem to accept the fact that a combustion engine won't be more thermodynamically efficient if it's burning Brown's gas rather than petrol.

You'd better off using the waste heat from the exhaust to run another heat engine like a steam engine than to mess around with electrolysis. This would actually boost the thermodynamic efficiency of the engine. I don't know how much extra power you'd get or if it's actually worth doing but it's certainly more worthwhile than Brown's gas.

Click to expand...

I agree. Have a 3 cylinder engine on gasoline and a resulting steam engine to absorb the heat energy from the 3 cylinder gasoline (or diesel) engine to create extra unused power. Provided the steam engine portion is not overly heavy. Use the converted exhaust from 3 cylinder engine and collect the water for use in a water injection system, allow for more timing and power. I'm sure you could make a very efficient engine and pack it into a 2000lb Honda Civic type package. I'm sure it'd get tremendous mileage.

I always see the "running on hydrogen" argument, eventually turn into "supplimenting gasoline" argument... I wonder why? Because it's easier to hide the losses of a hydrogen cell when you have gasoline as a power source. Why isn't there any engines on a dyno cell that can have a hydrogen cell tied into it and monitor the current drain and subsequent engine HP, then do the same without the hydrogen cell running? I am sure countless universities and colleges have engines on a dyno cells in the enginering dept's...now why wouldn't something as simple as connecting a +ve and -ve to the battery to power the cell and a hose into the TB be done yet?

Exactly, why hasn't it been done yet? We have to do it ourselves. There's some people over on youtube posting tests and experimentation and I don't think they're all scammers wanting you to buy their BS mason jars producing HHO. Some of these guys are serious electronic hobbyists. Check out a guy named zerofossilfuel. His work is inspirational.

Electric_EyE said:

Exactly, why hasn't it been done yet?

Click to expand...

Because nobody wants worse fuel economy, which is what the result would be.


Torben

If real testing has already been done and the concept has been debunked, then the debunkers would already be out their with their own scientific information and numbers. As for the naysayers with just opinions, I guess they're just as bad as me. No info, no numbers, no testing as of yet. Just hypothesi. Don't get me wrong, when I start testing I will post on a new thread and I may start debunking if it turns out to be BS. I'm done on this thread now...

Electric_EyE said:

If real testing has already been done and the concept has been debunked, then the debunkers would already be out their with their own scientific information and numbers. As for the naysayers with just opinions, I guess they're just as bad as me. No info, no numbers, no testing as of yet. Just hypothesi. Don't get me wrong, when I start testing I will post on a new thread and I may start debunking if it turns out to be BS. I'm done on this thread now...

Click to expand...

That's almost a good argument, except it ignores the fact that current understandings of physics and math side with the so-called "naysayers". Those who claim that these gains can be made are in fact claiming that modern physics may be wrong. They may well be right; we don't know everything. However, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and there has been none of that put forward. The naysayers' experiments have already been done, and those experiments are the ones upon which the Laws of Thermodynamics are founded.

It takes a lot of proof to overturn well-established rules. I hope you do your tests, and while I do not believe that you will find that the idea works, it would be nice to see physics turned on its ear--that's how the greatest advances in our understanding of the universe have been made. The problem here is that there is no great mystery to the maths involved, and for the proposed system to work, the Laws of Thermodynamics must first be proven wrong. Despite mighty efforts over the years, that has yet to happen.


Torben

This video just came up on Instructables.com, kind of made me wonder about this thread...

**broken link removed**

Not really detailed, and considering some of the hoax videos I've seen, hard to tell if this is real. It makes the Browns gas, using a 9 volt battery, which I wouldn't think it would last long enough to produce much gas. When the guy flipped the switch, sort of a fog started to form, few seconds later he opened a valve and lit it up. Not a huge explosive flame, like in chemistry class electrolysis.

Even as a 'naysayer', must admit to being a little impressed. Maybe a quart container, a 9 volt battery, and only a few seconds before a burnable amount of gas is produced. I can see how so many people get hooked on this crap...

HarveyH42 said:

This video just came up on Instructables.com, kind of made me wonder about this thread...

**broken link removed**

Not really detailed, and considering some of the hoax videos I've seen, hard to tell if this is real. It makes the Browns gas, using a 9 volt battery, which I wouldn't think it would last long enough to produce much gas. When the guy flipped the switch, sort of a fog started to form, few seconds later he opened a valve and lit it up. Not a huge explosive flame, like in chemistry class electrolysis.

Even as a 'naysayer', must admit to being a little impressed. Maybe a quart container, a 9 volt battery, and only a few seconds before a burnable amount of gas is produced. I can see how so many people get hooked on this crap...

Click to expand...

He never picked it up and only twisted the bottle. I think a hose or more electricity is coming from the bottom. The 9v battery isn't in circuit.

Just a guess kv

Edit: Did you ever HV that rat ?

killivolt said:

He never picked it up and only twisted the bottle. I think a hose or more electricity is coming from the bottom. The 9v battery isn't in circuit.

Just a guess kv

Edit: Did you ever HV that rat ?

Click to expand...

I just remember the discussion a couple of pages back about the AA batteries and converting a whole ocean, when I saw this video. Seemed to fit pretty well with those arguments.

Rats, never got even one on any of the homemade gadgets. Did get zapped changing batteries on one of the traps I bought. Unpleasant, but didn't feel life threatening. Fortunately just through my hand.

HarveyH42 said:

This video just came up on Instructables.com, kind of made me wonder about this thread...

**broken link removed**

Not really detailed, and considering some of the hoax videos I've seen, hard to tell if this is real. It makes the Browns gas, using a 9 volt battery, which I wouldn't think it would last long enough to produce much gas. When the guy flipped the switch, sort of a fog started to form, few seconds later he opened a valve and lit it up. Not a huge explosive flame, like in chemistry class electrolysis.

Even as a 'naysayer', must admit to being a little impressed. Maybe a quart container, a 9 volt battery, and only a few seconds before a burnable amount of gas is produced. I can see how so many people get hooked on this crap...

Click to expand...

That video has to be fake. I see no Bubbles being produced at the bottom of the jar where his plates are and I have never see a real working HHO system bubble in that way his did. Also I have heard that an arrester for a common torch is to slow to suppers a back fire from HHO.
Aslo in the video (the begging) it says "After 678 Differnts Endehavors"
I have no idea what a "endehavors" is

speakerguy79 said:

We should ban anything about Brown's Gas unless it's a fart joke thread. And we should probably ban those too.

Click to expand...

agreed why is every other thread on this section about making hydrogen in-car to run the car more efficiently

Thunderchild said:

agreed why is every other thread on this section about making hydrogen in-car to run the car more efficiently

Click to expand...

Because the price at the pump keeps rising, and will pretty much continue to do so. Even a slight improvement can be measured in dollars. I believe that the claims are unrealistic, but it does produce some burnable fuel, so I would completely write it off as useless. What is useless, is believe you can just hook up a couple of wires and shove a tube into the carberator, and you start saving money. Most cars on the road have computers controlling fuel mixture, doesn't know what to do with the new addition. Maybe if somebody comes up with a new engine to take advantage...

Don't for get the Global Warming crowd either. I'm mean we have to do something, can we really afford to not even try? (complete crap)

I do agree that there should be some way to separate the fringe topics, from the proven. Perhaps a 'experimental' Alternative Energy forum for the Joe-Cells and Stearon machines, leave this one to stuff already in use like wind, solar, and hydro.

One aspect often forgotten by advocates of HHO is its (namely hydrogen's) deleterious effects on the environment. It seems most of the advocates focus on what happens when one burns hydrogen and gets only water. Water is good is all that is considered, but that doesn't mean hydrogen itself is a non-pollutant. By analogy, consider ordinary table salt (NaCl), which is essential for life, but chlorine gas itself is a poison.

In fact research reported from Stanford shows that hydrogen increases the effects of greenhouse gases and can lead to destruction of ozone in the upper atmosphere. Thus, the hydrogen you are producing may be as bad for the environment as outlawed aerosol propellants and greenhouse gases.

https://gcep.stanford.edu/research/factsheets/effects_climate.html

One effect of hydrogen in the stratosphere is that it increases water vapor in the ozone. H2O emitted near the surface does not readily penetrate to the stratosphere, but H2 can penetrate readily into the stratosphere, where it can form H2O by the reaction H2 + OH. This is one of the few sources of water in the stratosphere (e.g., Khalil and Rasmussen, 1990; Dessler et al., 1994; Hurst et al., 1999). Increased water in the stratosphere may increase the occurrence and size of Polar Stratospheric Clouds and stratospheric aerosols, both of which enhance stratospheric ozone reduction in the presence of chlorinated and brominated compounds.

And further:

One mechanism by which increases in H2 may enhance global warming is through a series of reactions that would produce O3.

And:

Since O3 is a greenhouse gas, the increase in H2 may slightly increase near-surface global warming.

And:

Another chemical effect of H2 is that its reaction, H2 + OH -> H2O + H, reduces the rate of the reaction CH4 + OH -> CH3 + H2O because both reactions compete for a limited amount of OH. As a result, the lifetime of methane, CH4, a greenhouse gas, increases.

Click to expand...

The quotation given above contains multiple excerpts from that one source. NB: The references to ozone may seem self-contradictory. The authors are studying the effects in the stratosphere and troposphere.

So, those of you making hydrogen need to carefully consider how much you are polluting the atmosphere, increasing global warming, and contributing to increased cancer rates by increasing the ozone hole.

John

Oil Companies hold everyone hostage.

here are the simple facts....

FACT: we are using oil from the earth that took millions of years to produce.

FACT: it will not be replaced once used so we will expend all the earths oil eventually. (what will oil companies sell when the oil reserves end ?)
* oil insurance? (which insurance is a legalized scam).

FACT: Global warming is a real threat, and will be experienced in our lifetime.

FACT: Hydrogen or HHO makes the engine run cooler, cleaner more efficent.

FACT: I.C.E (internal combustion engine) run dirty on carbon based fuels, diesel and gasoline. * look up ethanol, most gas is sold with 10 % so out out the 9/10ths of a gallon you pay for ... your only getting 7.73% of actual gasoline.
hydrogen can increase the burn rate of ethanol and gas so there is less heat and less loss of usable power eliminating the use of cat converters.

FACT: water has an electrical resonance of the oxygen and hydrogen electrons, if you cause a breakdown of the covalent bonded electrons they will separate or release the their shared magnetic attraction because the shared electrons are replaced by induced electrons from electrolysis. simple example is three magnets, the opposite poles attract two of the three but as soon as you add a third it changes the magnetic "hold" and attraction of opposite poles and the magnets break apart , so if you add electrons to the H2o molecule at the breakdown freq. it will separate.

TRUTH: hydrogen is the most abundance renewable resource in the universe, our sun uses it as its "MAIN" fuel and in that process it causes nuclear reactions or fission which regenerates a portion of the energy that is lost as heat.

what we should be researching is a way to chemicaly break down water into its atomic parts and burn the hho as fuel, and then the byproduct is H20 all over again.

my two cents.

see this thread
https://www.electro-tech-online.com/threads/hydrogen-for-hybrid-conversions.40324/#post328524 ( page 6 and after, the pages before it are interesting but I think you'll see why i said page 6 onwards

Ok where am I

karenhornby said:

see this thread
https://www.electro-tech-online.com/threads/hydrogen-for-hybrid-conversions.40324/#post328524 ( page 6 and after, the pages before it are interesting but I think you'll see why i said page 6 onwards

Click to expand...

What the .............. I've never seen this before.

Edit: I think I'm in the Matrix. kv

robfowlr said:

FACT: we are using oil from the earth that took millions of years to produce.

Click to expand...

Anyone knows that…

robfowlr said:

FACT: it will not be replaced once used so we will expend all the earths oil eventually. (what will oil companies sell when the oil reserves end ?)
* oil insurance? (which insurance is a legalized scam).

Click to expand...

Yes we consume oil and it will be depleted if we continue to use it. Thank you for clarifying. Likewise if I eat all the cereal in my cereal box it will be empty...

robfowlr said:

FACT: Global warming is a real threat, and will be experienced in our lifetime.

Click to expand...

Prove it. You are one side of the camp, there is a whole other side that disproves it as well.

robfowlr said:

FACT: Hydrogen or HHO makes the engine run cooler, cleaner more efficent.

Click to expand...

Prove it. Earlier I believe I read that HHO burns hotter so water would have to be injected to cool it down… Now why such conflicting info from the HHO camp?

robfowlr said:

FACT: I.C.E (internal combustion engine) run dirty on carbon based fuels, diesel and gasoline. * look up ethanol, most gas is sold with 10 % so out out the 9/10ths of a gallon you pay for ... your only getting 7.73% of actual gasoline.
hydrogen can increase the burn rate of ethanol and gas so there is less heat and less loss of usable power eliminating the use of cat converters.

Click to expand...

“Up to 10%”, means the fuel in the tank could have “up to 10%” ethanol, so the remaining 90% must be from oil from the ground. Correct? Not sure where you got your 7.73%.

Prove that hydrogen can increase the burn rate. Changing the burn rate reduces the heat? Less heat means less expansion of gas, which means lower cylinder pressures, which means less power output. The catalytic converter used platinum and other elements to reduce CO, VOC and nitrogen oxide emissions… Burning fuel with hydrogen won’t reduce these emissions, since there is still fuel being burned.

robfowlr said:

FACT: water has an electrical resonance of the oxygen and hydrogen electrons, if you cause a breakdown of the covalent bonded electrons they will separate or release the their shared magnetic attraction because the shared electrons are replaced by induced electrons from electrolysis. simple example is three magnets, the opposite poles attract two of the three but as soon as you add a third it changes the magnetic "hold" and attraction of opposite poles and the magnets break apart , so if you add electrons to the H2o molecule at the breakdown freq. it will separate.

Click to expand...

“Water has an electrical resonance of the oxygen and hydrogen electrons” Please explain what the electrical resonance is…along with your education and experience (being on an HHO forum doesn’t count…sorry).

robfowlr said:

TRUTH: hydrogen is the most abundance renewable resource in the universe, our sun uses it as its "MAIN" fuel and in that process it causes nuclear reactions or fission which regenerates a portion of the energy that is lost as heat.

Click to expand...

Yes but the sun doesn’t need to use energy to split water molecules to burn it…