Author Topic: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use) (Read 6475 times)

silverdragonrs · « **on:** April 03, 2006, 12:49:17 AM »

I have spent the entire night and half today drawing this up. could anyone take a look at this and see what you think..... i am no scientist i have just begun to study methods of creating/manipulating energy in the last few months. a few questions i am expecting so just email me or IM me on yahoo.

danny

silverdragonrs · « **Reply #1 on:** April 03, 2006, 05:21:23 PM »

i am sorry if this comes off as a wine.

11 file veiws and 40 some thread veiws...... how come no replies? I didn't spend hours thinking this thing out to just give it away.... I would like a little feedback even (especially) negative.... I can't work out glitches without feedback. not to mention i am still working on it and if you know for a fact that it would never work then let me know so i am not waisting my time on it.... (lots to learn so little time) anyways not mad just would like somebody elses oppinion on this thing.

danny

Duranza · « **Reply #2 on:** April 03, 2006, 06:15:24 PM »

This is hard to explain, so lets start with some questions.. Why the 2 separate chambers?.. From my experience the farther away the electrodes are the less gas you will produce. I'm working with 1/4 rods and i have them at .020 thousands of an inch appart. This works best for me. Also I see that the bubbles come off easier from the rods than using plates.

silverdragonrs · « **Reply #3 on:** April 04, 2006, 03:44:52 AM »

2 seperate chambers because its an "inline" system. this is what makes it safer than intank production. there is very little storage and very little raw hydrogen sitting around in tubes or tanks.

the reason you are getting low production at longer distances is low amps a car battery will have plenty of amps i think to bridge the distance in this case.

the plates are actually screens i left that part out (oops) the larger surface (yet wire like makup) of the screen should allow for more hydrogen production

the distance between chambers should be greater than two inches.

the fact that the water is not sitting still and is flowing through the system constantly should help with the electrical part of it as well. the currant will "carry" the charge through to the next chamber.

remember as i said i am no scientist just a creative mind. let me know if this works and let me know of any problem you find with it so i can find answers. i would like very much to develope my ideas into realities. I do not have the tools or rescourses to create or test my ideas. if you do please send me confermations or additions. and please check out my other ideas for i have the same problem with them.

raburgeson · « **Reply #4 on:** May 29, 2006, 08:02:30 AM »

I don't know about your idea you'll have to try it. There is more in your head than what is on this diagram I suppose. Give you a couple words of encouragement on low cash though, improvise, sew your screen mesh together with thin wire, see if a few parts, air conditioning, from the junk yard will work. A few of the parts in the diagram look close, seal well and can take some pressure. Be careful hydrogen explodes put a sheet of metal between you and your experiment.

d3adp00l · « **Reply #5 on:** April 22, 2007, 07:28:19 AM »

its a fairly complicated design, and given the fact that I can't see the whole thing at once, is kinda like looking at building plans through a spyglass. however if the is a large distance between plates then there is a problem. Car batteries are only about 50amp/hrs and if you are gonna rely on amperage of the battery to get the work done, I don't think the system will work. Higher voltage seems to do better for producing h2, rather than high amperage. Try building a small test cell to get a feel for what if going on in these cell. Also I haven't seem a single person project how much H2 it would take to run a car engine. what the stoich mixture would be, how that would translate into gas production needs, which would transistion into electrical input needs. In fact I haven't seen any water cell guys hook their projects up to any motors? Even if it was a massive ineffiecent cell, I haven't seen anyone hook it up to a motor. The closest was some whahoos on youtube who ran a hose into the aircleaner of a generator. They Blew their cell apart somehow. Lets get a fixed system running before we jump into cars.

pg46 · « **Reply #6 on:** April 23, 2007, 08:38:43 PM »

d3adp00l -

There is plenty of information all over the web about how much hydrogen is required to run engines and there are lots of guys hooking up their cells to cars all over the world.
Plenty of information of actual cells and performances over at magdrive people for example at www.fuelfromh20.com .
stoich mixture as you called it is already just right at HHO in other words no additional air needed at all for hydroxy gas. However it can be leaned a way out but you would lose in HP. For booster cells not much is required if any for adjustments to the engines.
To figure out your HHO gas requirements you can use the cc sizes of your cylinders and the number of them and calculate what is needed for a particlar engine and at what RPM's etc.

Best Regards,

d3adp00l · « **Reply #7 on:** April 23, 2007, 11:29:58 PM »

@pg46 if the case is that everyone plans to connect their cell directly into the intake of a motor with no outside air to enter, I would say its a fools errand. Heres why, let take a small motor about a 2.4 liter. At a moderate rpm for said motor 3000 rpm. And with an assumed volumetric efficiency of 80%. Now let see how much hho you would need,
2.4L x .5 (a four stroke engine fires everyother rotation)
1.2L X 3000rpm = 3600L per minutes
3600 X .8 = 2880 liters per minutes to run a car!!!!
So to put it simply, You Can't Produce That Much Hho.
So a mixture of air and hho would be needed.
Everyone I have seen on the web is using hho in conjuction with hydrocarbon fuels.

pg46 · « **Reply #8 on:** April 24, 2007, 11:11:25 AM »

Sorry silverdragonrs -

I didn't mean to cut in and hijack your thread. I was just trying to respond to our friend d3adp00l 's negative comments about the possibility of using hydrogen and /or hydroxy to run ICEs.
I wanted to point out that there are actually already commercially available booster units that are easy to obtain. Magdrive claims and provide's a video clip where he supposedly is running a 460 Ford engine alone on his HHO generator. Mind you it is only idling after all and with no load on it. Still, it's not a bad start and it's running a rather large engine after all.
Our friend d3adp00l could look at the research and discover just where this technology in this field actually is today. People like Bob Boyce for example have designed and built cells that do produce enough fuel to run engines. Most recently American Paul Zigorous did the same thing.
Most people do just use cells as boosters to augment their existing fuel. That's not a bad place to start afterall. Perhaps one might look to converting say a 100 cc motorcyle over to run on hydroxy rather than a 2400cc engine to start with.
Check out what ironhead and Moab and others are up to in this field on this forum. There are some good experimenters out there trying their best and sharing their results for all of us to learn from together.

Best of Luck,

raburgeson · « **Reply #9 on:** May 21, 2007, 09:46:52 PM »

Aluminium and Galium was tried with success as far as producing Hydrogen. The Gallium keeps the surface of the Aluminium from producing the capacitance Oxide layer. However the Aluminium is used up in the process becoming completely Aluminium-oxide. Redigestion of the Aluminium is a fairly expensive proccess. This still then is not the answer. We need a process the has an oxidizer that removes the Oxygen from the water and have the Oxygen easily removed say by combustion or catalyst to return the oxidizer to it's original form to be used again. I actually tried using Aluminium-oxide to try to perform the secound part of a process. Well, a billion ways to try to succeed in our quest and that one failed. plug on people. Sooner or later we are going to get lucky.

Super God · « **Reply #10 on:** June 12, 2007, 03:54:25 AM »

Wow this is quite a nice drawing. It's going to take me awhile to understand everything but it seems pretty promising to me!

News:

User Menu

Author Topic: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use) (Read 6475 times)

silverdragonrs

hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

silverdragonrs

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

Duranza

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

silverdragonrs

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

raburgeson

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

d3adp00l

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

pg46

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

d3adp00l

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

pg46

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

raburgeson

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)

Super God

Re: hydrogen from water (inline and safer to use)