Hydrogen System on the Jeep
#22
JK Super Freak
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep. But that doesn't mean that someone, somewhere won't hit on the right combination. If not with this, then with something that springs from it, or the next one, or the............ you get it.
#23
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lake Dallas,Tx
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#24
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mt Pleasant, PA
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The real issue is that these just can't work. If they seem like they do they are just fooling the computer. If you reprogrammed the computer to lean the mixture way out you would get the same results I bet.
The problem is that nothing is free. It takes power to turn the alternator and the power comes from the fuel so you need to burn more to make the extra power. lets look at it this way since basically this is more or less the same concept.
If this really worked you would not need to run gasoline in a portable generator. You just need a electric motor and generator. Once the generator is making power it will power the electric motor and keep spinning the generator. You all know this does not and would not work.
Why do you think this hydrogen supply system could EVER Really work?
If you made the hydrogen chemically not using electricity yeah this would help. However you need to purchase the chemicals to react to make the hydrogen and I bet it would just be cheaper to by the hydrogen commercially available.
The problem is that nothing is free. It takes power to turn the alternator and the power comes from the fuel so you need to burn more to make the extra power. lets look at it this way since basically this is more or less the same concept.
If this really worked you would not need to run gasoline in a portable generator. You just need a electric motor and generator. Once the generator is making power it will power the electric motor and keep spinning the generator. You all know this does not and would not work.
Why do you think this hydrogen supply system could EVER Really work?
If you made the hydrogen chemically not using electricity yeah this would help. However you need to purchase the chemicals to react to make the hydrogen and I bet it would just be cheaper to by the hydrogen commercially available.
#25
JK Freak
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Gilroy, CA
Posts: 641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UPDATE: I have built most of the system and it is looking good. However it looks like a 2-3 weekend project. :( I will be posting pictures soon and give an update once it is finished.
#26
JK Super Freak
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Deptford NJ
Posts: 1,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if you can produce sufficient quantities of hydrogen on board, I'm curious as to how you will pump gaseous hydrogen through your fuel injectors or do you have to modify the heads to accept a hydrogen inlet to each cylinder?
#27
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Newcastle - UK
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad to see you havent let all the people that speculate effect the progress and/or determination to build it to see!
Keep Up The Good Work - looking fwd to the updates and pics
#28
JK Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mt Pleasant, PA
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you not heard of one of the fundamental laws of Physics? The conservation of Mass and energy must be maintained.
Unless there is a particle accelerator in there and you are causing fusion if hydrogen atoms into helium atoms you can't get more energy out than you put in.
I am sorry but it is just not possible.
#29
JK Super Freak
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Coastal Bend
Posts: 1,769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From here. If you can get a study of 100 cars, 50 with, 50 without, blinded so that the drivers don't know what is in it, you will get no difference, I guarantee
Dear Cecil:
An auto mechanic friend claims to have a gizmo that makes his vehicles run at least partially on water. He swears it's true and has about five test vehicles running with this thing now. It will work best on vehicles with carburetors — fuel-injected vehicles need tweaking of the computer chips. He's got one on an old VW Bug and says he gets about 80 MPG — he's trying to win a prize for getting over 100 MPG. He installed one in a large diesel truck that originally got about 8 MPG; it supposedly now gets 20 to 22 MPG with lots more power. My friend says the gizmo uses electricity from the alternator to split water molecules into something called "Brown's gas" that gets input into the intake manifold. Is this true or another myth?
— Walt Bruun, Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Cecil replies:
I'll tell you one scientific reaction involving Brown's gas you can take to the bank: it makes my blood boil. Where miraculous fuel economy schemes are concerned, tricksters abound, preying on marks who distrust "the authorities" and can't tell good science from the pseudo kind. Some mutter of brave souls silenced because they knew too much — like the late Stan Meyer, inventor of the magical "water fuel cell" (ultimately shown to be bunk), who fans claim was poisoned in 1998 by operatives of the government and/or the oil companies.
The device you're talking about is similar to Meyer's but places the emphasis on hydrogen, thus piggybacking on the "hydrogen economy" meme President Bush brought to public attention in his 2003 State of the Union address. Newspapers and magazines subsequently devoted acres of unskeptical column space to on-board hydrogen-generation and -injection technology. In 2005, for example, Wired wrote that big-rig truckers were getting major improvements in fuel economy and power from hydrogen electrolysis systems.
Here's what happens. The gizmo is hooked up to a standard internal combustion engine. Like your pal says, it draws power from the car's electrical system to split water into a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen — so-called Brown's gas — which gets fed into the engine and burned along with the usual gasoline/air mix. Alleged result: big gas savings!
But how? On the most basic level, the technology makes no sense. Let's walk through the process:
1. Your car engine burns gasoline or diesel fuel to power the wheels and your alternator (among other things) at about 20 to 25 percent efficiency.
2. Your alternator generates electricity at about 60 percent efficiency.
3. You take said electricity and use it to turn water into hydrogen and oxygen at about 70 percent efficiency, tops.
4. Then you burn the hydrogen and oxygen, or just the hydrogen, in your engine at about 98 percent efficiency.
In short, you're converting fuel A, gasoline, into fuel B, hydrogen, which then helps power the car. Net efficiency of this complicated process: 10 percent. Efficiency of an ordinary car engine (see step 1 above): 20 to 25 percent. Conclusion: Hydrogen gizmos are a fool's bargain.
Advocates claim using hydrogen as a fuel increases combustion efficiency. Problem is, in modern engines combustion efficiency is already close to the max — 95 to 98 percent under optimal conditions in a gasoline engine, 98 percent or better in a diesel engine. Understand, this refers strictly to how thoroughly the fuel burns in the cylinders. Overall engine efficiency is, as seen, much lower, due to heat loss through the engine block and out the tailpipe. Switching fuels won't change that.
So why do hydrogen injector users report improvements? The same reasons people often swear by iffy technology — lack of appropriate comparisons, sloppy record keeping, wishful thinking, a sample size of one. The fact that fuel economy is partly a function of driving habits no doubt also plays a role. If you simply pay more attention to your speed when driving, you can often increase mileage even without a miracle device.
To be sure, a little water can improve internal combustion engine performance under some circumstances. Water injection helped WWII aircraft engines put out more power by reducing knock. BMW has been trying to increase fuel economy and power by using exhaust heat to power what's in effect a small steam engine attached to an internal combustion engine. A Honda hybrid uses a similar concept to turn a generator to recharge the battery packs while cruising. Although some bugs remain to be worked out, a six-stroke engine using water injection for power and cooling shows promise. Bear in mind, though, that water isn't being used as a fuel in any of these cases. If you really want to improve your fuel efficiency, check your tire pressure. Sexy? No. But it does have the advantage that it works.
— Cecil Adams
An auto mechanic friend claims to have a gizmo that makes his vehicles run at least partially on water. He swears it's true and has about five test vehicles running with this thing now. It will work best on vehicles with carburetors — fuel-injected vehicles need tweaking of the computer chips. He's got one on an old VW Bug and says he gets about 80 MPG — he's trying to win a prize for getting over 100 MPG. He installed one in a large diesel truck that originally got about 8 MPG; it supposedly now gets 20 to 22 MPG with lots more power. My friend says the gizmo uses electricity from the alternator to split water molecules into something called "Brown's gas" that gets input into the intake manifold. Is this true or another myth?
— Walt Bruun, Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Cecil replies:
I'll tell you one scientific reaction involving Brown's gas you can take to the bank: it makes my blood boil. Where miraculous fuel economy schemes are concerned, tricksters abound, preying on marks who distrust "the authorities" and can't tell good science from the pseudo kind. Some mutter of brave souls silenced because they knew too much — like the late Stan Meyer, inventor of the magical "water fuel cell" (ultimately shown to be bunk), who fans claim was poisoned in 1998 by operatives of the government and/or the oil companies.
The device you're talking about is similar to Meyer's but places the emphasis on hydrogen, thus piggybacking on the "hydrogen economy" meme President Bush brought to public attention in his 2003 State of the Union address. Newspapers and magazines subsequently devoted acres of unskeptical column space to on-board hydrogen-generation and -injection technology. In 2005, for example, Wired wrote that big-rig truckers were getting major improvements in fuel economy and power from hydrogen electrolysis systems.
Here's what happens. The gizmo is hooked up to a standard internal combustion engine. Like your pal says, it draws power from the car's electrical system to split water into a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen — so-called Brown's gas — which gets fed into the engine and burned along with the usual gasoline/air mix. Alleged result: big gas savings!
But how? On the most basic level, the technology makes no sense. Let's walk through the process:
1. Your car engine burns gasoline or diesel fuel to power the wheels and your alternator (among other things) at about 20 to 25 percent efficiency.
2. Your alternator generates electricity at about 60 percent efficiency.
3. You take said electricity and use it to turn water into hydrogen and oxygen at about 70 percent efficiency, tops.
4. Then you burn the hydrogen and oxygen, or just the hydrogen, in your engine at about 98 percent efficiency.
In short, you're converting fuel A, gasoline, into fuel B, hydrogen, which then helps power the car. Net efficiency of this complicated process: 10 percent. Efficiency of an ordinary car engine (see step 1 above): 20 to 25 percent. Conclusion: Hydrogen gizmos are a fool's bargain.
Advocates claim using hydrogen as a fuel increases combustion efficiency. Problem is, in modern engines combustion efficiency is already close to the max — 95 to 98 percent under optimal conditions in a gasoline engine, 98 percent or better in a diesel engine. Understand, this refers strictly to how thoroughly the fuel burns in the cylinders. Overall engine efficiency is, as seen, much lower, due to heat loss through the engine block and out the tailpipe. Switching fuels won't change that.
So why do hydrogen injector users report improvements? The same reasons people often swear by iffy technology — lack of appropriate comparisons, sloppy record keeping, wishful thinking, a sample size of one. The fact that fuel economy is partly a function of driving habits no doubt also plays a role. If you simply pay more attention to your speed when driving, you can often increase mileage even without a miracle device.
To be sure, a little water can improve internal combustion engine performance under some circumstances. Water injection helped WWII aircraft engines put out more power by reducing knock. BMW has been trying to increase fuel economy and power by using exhaust heat to power what's in effect a small steam engine attached to an internal combustion engine. A Honda hybrid uses a similar concept to turn a generator to recharge the battery packs while cruising. Although some bugs remain to be worked out, a six-stroke engine using water injection for power and cooling shows promise. Bear in mind, though, that water isn't being used as a fuel in any of these cases. If you really want to improve your fuel efficiency, check your tire pressure. Sexy? No. But it does have the advantage that it works.
— Cecil Adams
#30
JK Newbie
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Piscataway, NJ
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would like to see the results.
For all the people saying its impossible....
They also said flight was impossible, breaking the sound barrier, splitting the atom.
Can't hurt to try anything.
This technology can work.... It may not translate well on a single design, but if you want to see this stuff at work, search "Stanley Meyer"
He was able to get patents on his devices that produced crazy amounts of hydrogen while drawing less than a tenth of an amp.
Go for it man. I've heard both positive and negative results with such devices and would like to see what you end up with.
Most of the better results HAVE come from older non EFI engines since there is no computer trying to richen the mixture when it senses the change in output.
Keep us posted !
For all the people saying its impossible....
They also said flight was impossible, breaking the sound barrier, splitting the atom.
Can't hurt to try anything.
This technology can work.... It may not translate well on a single design, but if you want to see this stuff at work, search "Stanley Meyer"
He was able to get patents on his devices that produced crazy amounts of hydrogen while drawing less than a tenth of an amp.
Go for it man. I've heard both positive and negative results with such devices and would like to see what you end up with.
Most of the better results HAVE come from older non EFI engines since there is no computer trying to richen the mixture when it senses the change in output.
Keep us posted !