Klein/Brown's/HHO Gas

Washburn · Coal Joined: May 13, 2008 Posts: 4

Unfortunately because of certain individuals apparent education in science or physics many "sheep" will assume they know better than us ordinary folk. People, I have nothing to gain, just please try it and then spread the word. Figure out for yourself why the recent spike in gas prices has brought this 100 year old technology to the forefront. Enough people actually care now that they are searching for any way to save money on fuel prices. As to why big companies have no apparent interest in developing this further is up to the conspiracy theorists. I just know it WORKS.

gnm · Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 5:01 pm Post subject: Re: Klein/HHO Gas

Me? A Sheep? Laughing

That's rich....

OK Washburn. Prove it.

Show me the calculations. Just list each conversion and its relative efficiency. Then list you compression ratio/type of engine/fuel mix etc. Consistent load on a dyno.

You're dead wrong. I don't know if you are just seeing results because you want to or something else but there is no way it can be working as you have described. Maybe you are just going light on the pedal or something. Or skewing the results. It JUST CAN'T WORK. Find me a reputable scientist who will back up your results. Or any detailed testing of it.

If it is working as you have described then all science has just been turned on its head.

-G
_________________
All right, you primitive screw-heads, listen up!

RMForbes · Tar Sands Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 41

I guess that I look at things a bit differently. If a small electric unit can yeild a 10 to 70% inprovement in gas mileage, why do we have to build these in our garages? If moving away from foreign oil is a matter of national security, why isn't our government educating the public to the benifits of this technology? My thinking is that they really don't want anyone to use it because they can't profit from it or tax it. The only need for more effective hydrogen cracking technology is for engines that would run on nearly 100% hydrogen. We need something we can use now.

The altenator is creating a drag on the engine even when it's not producing any current. Using this minimal loss in power to create more fuel can only increase efficiency.

gnm · Posted: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 pm Post subject: Re: Klein/HHO Gas

RMForbes · Tar Sands Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 41

gnm

Again you are spouting BS and calling it fact. I worked for eight years in an Auto Supply Store as an ASE certified technician where we tested batteries and alternators for free. We had a tester that used a small one and a half hp electric motor to spin alternators as we added progressively higher loads. The motor would not bogg down until excessively high loads were applied. There was no noticeable difference between no load and normal operating loads. Even the smallest alternators would easily handle 50 amps without changing rpms on the motor. Most older cars use 95 amp alternators and most newer cars, including my Lexus have larger 135 amp alternators. Operating my stereo (20 amps) or opening my sunroof (40 amps) do not change the rpm on my engine at all. The HHO generator is fused at 30 amps and did blow the fuse twice but every time it has been tested it pulls much less. Normal operating voltage for automotive is between 14 1/2 volts to 15 1/2 volts, so my unit has a max output of 450 watts and must drop down to around 120 watts at idle.

I'll say it again, it's not the science that's wrong, it's your model. You are not accounting for all the factors involved. It works, I topped off my tank again today just to make sure. I did slightly better than last time with a mpg of 26.99. Nothing has been changed except adding the HHO generator, I haven't even changed the oil yet.

perf · Coal Joined: May 13, 2008 Posts: 17

you know, if i was an oil company that wanted people to think they could not do this, i would hire someone to talk a lot of trash on a few websites all day to get some negative publicity out there.

it would be a prudent thing to do, considering that they're making such a killing on gas sales.

oh, and with all the record profits they're making these days when gas is supposedly in such high demand, they'd certainly have some extra cash laying around to do it.

seems like there's only one person on here that has any "evidence that it doesn't work"

and that person hasn't put a single bit of said evidence on the table. just spouting pure bollocks.

allll day long.

where does he find the time?

oh, and to said gentleman.

since when is the car you put gas into every day a closed system?

RMForbes · Tar Sands Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 41

Thanks Washburn for the link, I know it works now I can understand why.

Quote from A recent study at the University of Calgary by G.A. Karim

Recently I took part in the highway test of a vehicle driven twice over the same 200-kilometre course, on
cruise control, at the same speed, once with the system off and once with it on. A temperature sensor from
an accurate pyrometer kit had been inserted directly into the exhaust manifold, to eliminate thermal
distortion from the catalytic converter. On average, the exhaust manifold temperature was 65°F lower
during the second trip when the Hydrogen Generating System was switched on. The fuel consumption
with the unit off was 5.13253 km/li. and 7.2481 km/li. with it on, giving a mileage increase of 41.2% and a
fuel savings attributable to the unit of 29.18%
From the forgoing, the near absence of carbon monoxide and unburnt hydrocarbons confirms a very
complete and much faster burn. Cooler exhaust temperatures show that more work is taken out during the
power stroke. More torque from less fuel at the same R.P.M. verifies that higher pressure from a faster
burn, acting through a longer effective power stroke, produces more torque and thus more work from less
fuel. The considerable reduction in nitrous oxides (NOx} was a surprise. I had assumed that the extreme
temperatures from such a rapid intense burn would produce more NO.,. Time plus high temperature are
both essential for nitrous oxides to form. As the extreme burn temperatures are of such short duration and
temperature through the remainder of the power stroke and the entire exhaust stroke, will, on average, be
much cooler. With this in mind, it is not so surprising that less NOx is produced when the HGS is
operating.
Assume a fuel-air mix is so lean as to normally take the entire power stroke (180°) to complete
combustion. Educated estimates suggest the presence of nascent hydrogen and oxygen decreases the
burn time of the entire mix by a factor of ten (10). If a spark advance of 4° is assumed, the burn would be
complete at about 14° past top dead centre. Such a burn will be both rapid and intense. The piston would
have moved less than 2% of its stroke by the end of the burn, allowing over 98% of its travel to extract
work. The lower exhaust manifold temperatures observed when the Hydrogen Generating System was in
use can be viewed as evidence for this occurrence.
Power consumed by this model of the electrolysis cell is about 100 watts. If an alternator efficiency of 60%
is assumed, then 0.2233 horsepower will produce enough wattage. Even on a compact car, a unit would
use less than 1/4 % of its engine's output, or about what is used by the headlights. The energy regained
from burning the hydrogen in the engine is so small that virtually all of the power to the electrolyser must
be considered lost. That loss should not, however, exceed 1/4%, so that any increase in the engine's
thermal efficiency more than 1/4 %, is a real gain.

gnm · Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 5:05 pm Post subject: Re: Klein/HHO Gas

Not a closed system? Ummm, OKay. Downhill with a tailwind maybe.

So alternators don't use any fuel/HP mister ASE? Yeah sure.

So alternators use barely any fuel/HP Forbes? Fine, what part of that makes you think the resulting generated H2 is going to make up 30% of your in use HP requirements?

None of you have addressed the violation of the second law being touted. That alone refutes your claims.

I saw an earlier post which may have the answer - positing that the car was simply using less fuel by interfering with the fuel stream and therefore running really lean. So news flash, using less fuel (=less power) uses less fuel. Sort of like plug in prius owners claiming they are getting 100mpg. Whoohoo electric car uses less gas. So whoopee your car has less power. Why not just skip a few cylinders? But then a dyno would reveal that.....

An oil industry shill? Laughing

You noobs crack me up. There are enough here who know better so I have no need to defend that...

Did it ever occur to you that if this actually worked that maybe Toyota would have included it in their hybrid to REALLY kick Honda's ass?

But I guess all those highly paid ICE/efficiency development and research scientists are just holding your super secret back. Rolling Eyes

Ya'll have fun with your silly toy...

-G
_________________
All right, you primitive screw-heads, listen up!

WatchfulEye · Tar Sands Joined: Jun 07, 2007 Posts: 51

The big boy automakers have already tried this. They researched it, seen what it can do, and what it can't.

They've spent big bucks on the R&D, and they've come to the conclusion that while it does do something, it's of marginal benefit only - and if you're going to do it, then electrolysis is definitely not the way to do it.

While the auto market in the US doesn't promote fuel efficiency particularly aggressively, and legislation in the US is relatively lax - this is not the case in Europe. There are punitive taxes to buy, and punitive annual registration fees for cars over a certain fuel consumption (25 miles per US gallon on mixed cycle). E.g if your car gets has a fuel consumption worse that 25 mpg then you pay an additional annual penalty fee of $200 to register the vehicle. Believe me, the manufacturers are trying all sorts of things to get fuel consumption down, because the Euro governments put crippling taxes on their cars otherwise.

DET · Coal Joined: May 11, 2008 Posts: 2

Check this link out http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/index.htm this company makes fuel cells and featured a generator at the consumer electronics show that uses water electrolysis and a fuel cell to produce electricity. This company has a number devices including electrolysis powered by a solar cell that fuels a hydrogen toy car that uses a fuel cell that powers the electric motor car check this link. http://www.horizonfuelcell.com/store.htm imagine the possibilities of supplementing your car with hydrogen.

RMForbes · Tar Sands Joined: May 05, 2008 Posts: 41

gnm

guess you missed the point,

We are both right, no more energy is gained in producing HHO gas. What is happening according the engineers that actually studied it;

.... the near absence of carbon monoxide and unburnt hydrocarbons confirms a very complete and much faster burn. Cooler exhaust temperatures show that more work is taken out during the power stroke. More torque from less fuel at the same R.P.M. verifies that higher pressure from a faster burn, acting through a longer effective power stroke, produces more torque and thus more work from less fuel.

in the previous post when they were using a stock un-modified engine for the test. When they were referring to ultra-lean it was in the context of modern high-compression, ultra-lean stock engines.

you totally missed my point about alternators too.

It takes horsepower (not much) to power the drive belt and spin the alternator even if it's not producing current. When you turn on your headlights and add a load to the alternator, yes you are right that more horsepower is required. But it’s not going from zero hp required to point two hp. It’s more like going from point one to point two. Even on our one and a half hp tester this is not noticeable.

perf · Coal Joined: May 13, 2008 Posts: 17

that's a fantastic article.

and it comfirms what i was imagining.

how else would you have so much cleaner emissions unless more of the hydrocarbons were burned more completely?

the only question in my mind is how much of this gas is the top out in the mix for efficiency?

if we can make 3 liters per minute with a spare alternator built in will it still be beneficial? or does it top out somewhere?

i'm already starting experimentation on this.

i'm installing a system that gets just over a liter per minute, and getting ready to tweak my computer so i can adjust my fuel/air mix and test the results on that too.

too bad a mileage calculator costs what it does.

have you noticed that gnm always writes,

"puagh! bullshit! "

every single time, regardless of what someone posts?

perf · Coal Joined: May 13, 2008 Posts: 17

also gnm asks that someone addresses the second law of thermodynamics.

great. that would be me.

i lecture on theoretical physics, and emerging theories.

one that i find particularly astute is that many of the primary laws of physics are based on a make believe scenario.

note the part about a "closed system."

have you ever seen a closed system?

supposedly there is no "over unity device" in the world

but one has to take into consideration that there is no such thing as a closed system. only a system that we put in a box to study it.

let's be really simple here for clarity.

a hydroelectric dam.

overunity device or not?

well, let's see.

the dam works because water come down behind it, goes through the turbines. but where does it come from?

well, it rains. but where does the rain come from?

well, the oceans!

okay, well where does the energy come from that gives the water the ability to get from the oceans to the mountains?

well, the sun! okay fine.

but that means that we have to take the sun's power into consideration when we're extracting power from water.

but we describe this as a "closed system"

we're ignoring everything but the fact that there's a certain amount of stored water behind the dam.

so if we take this to be true, the dam is indeed a over-unity device, because it does absolutely nothing to get the water behind it.

that just happens by magic.

in this closed system.

the only closed system is in the mind of man. all systems are open to many many variables and inputs.

a car is much much simpler to point out.

what the hell kind of closed system do you have to put fuel into?

a closed system has no entry no exit.

yet a car has both.

a closed system is s circular loop.

a car is a vector.

a straight line that needs energy injected into it to do anything at all.

how efficiently we use that energy is another matter entirely
and has nothing whatsoever to do with the second law of thermodynamics.

smart guy. *

Shock

perf · Coal Joined: May 13, 2008 Posts: 17

quoted from wikipedia.

A closed system is a system in the state of being isolated from the environment. It is often used to refer to a theoretical scenario where perfect closure is an assumption, however in practice no system can be completely closed; there are only varying degrees of closure.

In physics, a closed system can exchange heat and work, but not matter, with its surroundings. In contrast an isolated system can exchange neither heat nor matter with the surroundings. For a simple system, with only one type of particle (atom or molecule), this amounts to a constant number of particles. However, for systems which are undergoing a chemical reaction, there may be all sorts of molecules being generated and destroyed by the reaction process. In this case, the fact that the system is closed is expressed by saying that the total number of each elemental atom is conserved, no matter what kind of molecule it may be a part of. Mathematically:

\sum_{j=1}^m a_{ij}N_j=b_i^0

do you homework gnm.

and in the meantime, maybe hold your peace. you offer no productive service here, and you confuse people with your ignorance.

SolarDave · Heavy Crude Joined: May 19, 2005 Posts: 374