|
Hunnt
Original Poster
4 posts
10 months
|
I have been introduced to simple hydrogen fuel cells. A simple sealed plastic tank with water and bi carb, with marine graded stainless plates. Connected to alternator power via a relay, gives hydrogen and oygen which is piped via brake piping, to the intake.
Modern ECU's cope with the new "bang" and reduce the petrol / diesel required.
Logic dictates that you cannot get more energy out than you put in, but believe me, it works!
Are there ay other nutters out there who have run anything similar?
My question to you is, how does this affect the life of the engine? Essentially it is a pure and clean fuel, and mighty efficient, but does a standard engine suffer from a bigger bang?
Interested to hear any experiences.
|
|
|
stevieturbo
8,383 posts
116 months
|
Not sure there is a muppets forum ?
|
|
|
Mr2Mike
9,488 posts
124 months
|
Hunnt said: I have been introduced to simple hydrogen fuel cells. A simple sealed plastic tank with water and bi carb, with marine graded stainless plates. Connected to alternator power via a relay, gives hydrogen and oygen which is piped via brake piping, to the intake. That is not a fuel cell. A fuel cell converts hydrogen and oxygen to water and electricity, and is a very complex device. What you are describing is a very basic electrolysis cell. Hunnt said: Modern ECU's cope with the new "bang" and reduce the petrol / diesel required.
Logic dictates that you cannot get more energy out than you put in, but believe me, it works! No it doesn't. Even strongly believing in the tooth fairy doesn't mean she exists. Hunnt said: Are there ay other nutters out there who have run anything similar? Yes, numerous delusional people with a tenuous grasp on reality. Hunnt said: My question to you is, how does this affect the life of the engine? Essentially it is a pure and clean fuel, and mighty efficient, but does a standard engine suffer from a bigger bang?
Interested to hear any experiences. The amount of hydrogen you get from one of these stupid DIY cells is very small so there's little chance of it causing damage and far less chance of it doing anything useful.
|
|
|
Hunnt
Original Poster
4 posts
10 months
|
Typically dismissive! I was sceptical also. 30mpg to 45 mpg takes some explaining!
|
|
|
Huff
1,130 posts
60 months
|
Oh gods, the HHO fairy strikes again  Please Google the laws of thermodynamics, consider, then post again. How, exactly, might the 1kW (1.3HP) or so you might conceivably pull from the alternator, even if dumped directly into the engine without the intervening floobydust, do enough to change 30mpg into 45mpg - without using more petrol? And no, 'improved combustion efficiency' in no kind of answer; Henry Ricardo would have uncovered it by 1926 (and yes, the book he wrote then is still a reference text)
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Mr2Mike
9,488 posts
124 months
|
Hunnt said: Typically dismissive! I was sceptical also. 30mpg to 45 mpg takes some explaining! What car and engine is it? Would you not think that manufacturers might express just a little interest in this if it can improve economy by 50%? If you figures are true rather than some BS you have just plucked out of the air, then chances are there was something wrong with the car to start with, coupled with the "placebo effect" of economy devices that inevitably make people drive more carefully.
|
|
|
Max_Torque
4,836 posts
86 months
|
We should also point out that a conventional "claw pole alternator" of the type that is fitted to your very car is only, at maximum approximately 60% efficient. This means that generating say 1kW of electricity is going to require 1.66kW of mechanical work from the crank (not include in the FEAD loss of course (another couple of hundred watts)
But the OP probably knew that, and has also fitted one of those custom "Over-unity" generators........... ;-)
|
|
|
Max_Torque
4,836 posts
86 months
|
And for the record, this is a hydrogen fuel cell:  This a jam jar with some home made electrodes stuck in it:  One of those devices is the product of a company with massive resources and a tens of millions of dollars budget who employ some of the best engineers in the world to carry out cutting edge research. The other is a jam jar with some bits of wire stuck in it..............
|
|
|
dnb
3,033 posts
111 months
|
It's all about increasing the amount of phlogiston the exhaust gas can absorb. The hydrogen stuff introduces greater quantities of dephlogisticated air into the cylinders, meaning more power from each firing event. You can't beat a good old alchemical theory 
|
|
|
Scuffers
10,418 posts
143 months
|
I might be missing something here but.... Hunnt said: I am on my second petrol 95, both with LPG conversions. Both bullet proof, cheap to run, v comfortable. Hugely cheap to buy. Last one under £6k at 26k miles
Beware risk of poor spares availability. For this reason NFU won't insure them! so, which is it, LPG or snakeogen?
|
|
|
Hunnt
Original Poster
4 posts
10 months
|
Petrol Saab 95 running on LPG not sure what is to be missed.
HHO is applicable to any engine fairy dust or not, and is a different post!
|
|
|
Scuffers
10,418 posts
143 months
|
Hunnt said: Petrol Saab 95 running on LPG not sure what is to be missed.
HHO is applicable to any engine fairy dust or not, and is a different post! certainly is! Hunnt said: Typically dismissive! I was sceptical also. 30mpg to 45 mpg takes some explaining! so, not on your Saab then!
|
|
