Hydrogen Fuel Cell

Gold Refining Forum

Help Support Gold Refining Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Buzz

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
303
Location
Wakefield, England
I always thought that these were off topic but as someone mentioned them on a different thread, I thought i would share something i bought off eBay the other day.

It's a pdf and about 1.4mb, so the analogue modem guys might need to give it 5 mins to download.

http://tinyurl.com/5gqqoy

Nice project if you ever get stuck with nothing to do! :D

Have fun
Buzz
 
Thanks Buzz :)

This is one of my other projects. The design is similiar to what was going to use except for physical layout and a few electrical specs. Will analyze and pick best features from both. The use of a toroid coil is interesting. I may finally find a use for that spool of 28,000 feet of #28 enameled copper wire in the garage. :D

When complete I hope mine will generate Brown's gas as well as hydrogen and oxygen. If so, then I can tweak it to generate more Brown's gas and less seperated H2 & O. Normal electrolysis rips apart the water molecule into 2 gases. I think Brown's gas is something like ionized water molecules. Still H2O but just in an altered state. I compare it to popcorn. In either state it has the same mass but different physical properties.
 
I have a Cell ,Which i can easily seperate H2O and then do with it as i wish. Now im working on the hydrogen fuel cell which i will use, then invert it to voltage for my shop and house but i thought of getting one of those japanese cars as well.
Cerise.
 
Well,

If you look on ebay.co.uk and search for hydrogen cell, you'll see one for sale at £65.

I bought one of these about 3 months ago and fiited it to my 1400cc petrol.

I can say, hand on heart that the cell has got me a 30% increase in mpg.

The only problem i've had with it is that the lid is starting to warp due to the heat in the engine bay. They say that a newer version is coming out soon to remedy that.

I bought the plans i posted in this thread to try and build my own cell that would prove to be more robust. Problem is the measurements are all in US imperial. I just cannot work in imperial anymore.

With petrol in the UK running at $2.30 ish a litre, i'll take the 20% thanks.

Do they work? it does for me.

In this day and age, you absolutely must not believe everything you read in the papers or watch on the TV.

Regards
Buzz
 
Buzz I agree.

The T.V. show on Mythbusters could have easily been sponsored by "big oil". Most of the things on T.V. are completely controlled. Now you can call me a conspiracy nut if you want to but I can put 2 and 2 together. Fox News tells me that 2 and 2 is 5. See?

Thanks for the information.
 
Myself and a few enginners from GM's onstar program have been fiddling with this idea for almost a year now. The concept is entirely possible but we have come to observe that it would be a waste given how a car works.

A typical gasoline engine is only 16% efficient because of the "E.G.R" (Emission Gas return" Valve. This valve is controlled by the down flow O2 sensor. The purpose of the O2 sensor is to open the Egr valve when the O2 sensor detects a diminishing amount of Hydro carbons. The exact amount which is programmed into your (E.C.M) Engine Control Modual.

What is the purpose of this system? To reduce the amount of harmful emissions produced by excess hydro carbons in the exaust.

Your catalytic converter(creates back pressure on engine through exhaust gas's), and e.g.r system all drastically effect your Average fuel economy.

In short the computer will reexplode partially ignited gas so the catalytic converter has enough hyrdo carbons to react within the catalytic converter, doing this destroys fuel economy.

Now! Why does browns gas preform poorly in a modern engine? The EGR System is present in all cars/trucks dating from 1975 - present.

Alternative fuels like browns gas, and Ethanol or propane are clean burning fuels and do no create many hyrdo carbons, thus are forces to be re burned on every cycle which causes them to be less efficient.

:roll: - now

These fuels are more efficient then gasoline in engines designed to run them instead of flex fuel engines. Myth busters never tested browns gas in a engine designed to use browns gas.

also Current ways of creating browns gas are ill contrived because of the following.

Current thoughts on electrolisys are two stick a anode and cathode in a bucket of water and forcibly destroy all the molecular bonds within. This takes a Humungus amount of energy to do. This currently process is inefficient because electricity is being applied to much water at any one time. Because of of electrical leakage half of the overall energy is lose on molecules which have failed to split do to being exposed "to little current", those molecules that fail to split because of under exposer lose that energy through heat.

How does one fix this?

A batch system of electrodes which is designed to break down smaller amounts of water is the key.

if your interested Goto youtube and search for a man named "Stan Meyers". He was killed in the 80's for inventing such a system.

Copies of his patents have been released on the internet. They are for his conceptual device and have been sterilized severely.

The exact details of Stan Meyers production device have never been released.
 
Looking further into this it seems the latest designs are moving away from the two stick anode cathode setup into fancy spiral shaped systems.
I've also seen a very "frilly" type setup.

It also seems that if your engine is newer than 1996, you need to fit something called a MAP gas enhancer which fools the engines computer system.
No idea how though.

Regards
Buzz
 
I've also seen a very "frilly" type setup.

the shape of the anode hardly matters. By doing that you increase the amount of water that can be electrolyzed at one time but, it still doesn't change the fact that 90% of your energy is lost through heat. its lost through heat because of water molecules are "underexposed" those further away from the electrode.

Thus only slightly increasing the cells efficiency.

The mapp enhancer is used to keep the EGR valve from activating. It is a replacement for the upstream o2 sensor.

It tricks the engine's computer into acting as if loads of HC is coming down through the engine, then the downstream o2 sensor confirms those "HC" molecule were properly catalyzed by your converter.

in reality your car leans back on the fuel, and the browns gas which burns hotter makes the explosion more efficent. this way you get almost 100% of the power from your gasoline, and an addition 10 - 30% off the top with browns gas.

Also on a side note, engines with high compression tend to see much greater percentages then a typical 8:1 engine

10:1 and 13:1 engines typically see 40 - 50% increases. :wink:
 
Jdwisnie, as an engineer working in the auto industry, I have to disagree with with you on the purpose of the EGR. EGR stands for Exhaust Gas Recirculation. The purpose of it is not to recirculate unburned hydrocarbons back into the engine to be burned, but to lower the temperature of combustion.

See most of the air we breath is nitrogen. That nitrogen usually passes through the engine with no change, unless the combustion temperature goes above 2900 deg F, at which point the nitrogen can chemically react with oxygen to form oxides of nitrogen(NO, NO2, NO3, ...NOx). Nox is also known as smog as it hangs in the air and is an irritant. One way to reduce the temperature of combustion is to recirculate some exhaust gas back into the engine. Most cars do it this way, some use only computer control of spark timing and fuel to do it.

Unburned hydrocarbons are burned off in the cat. If you ever had an engine apart and looked at the EGR, you would also see that it's a very small tube which recirculates only a small portion of the exhaust gas. With the EGR open, the other 90% of the unburned HC would continue on out of the exhaust. So that right there tells you it's purpose is not to recycle unburned HC.

Al lot of misinformation in here about hydrogen. Think about this: no reaction is 100% efficient. There is always a penalty to convert energy from one form to another. If you spend X amount of energy to break down water into browns gas, you can not recover 100% or more of that energy. The amount of available energy from that gas is now maybe 70% of X(the other 30% escaped as heat). So then you combust the browns gas and release maybe 70% of that available energy. You've used more energy to make your fuel than you can ever get back from it.

Where does the energy come from in HC fuels? Well, like everything else, it came from the sun, this time millions of years ago and is stored in the bonds of the molecules. When HC fuels are burned, the bonds are broken and the energy released. We have the technology to make our own gasoline or propane. But we dont make it because the process would involve adding energy to form those bonds. When that fuel is burned, the energy released would be less than the energy used to initially make the fuel. It is no different with hydrogen.

Al
 
dear fellow inquistive humans i'm new to your form i have a friend who has builed a hho cell for his car & it works quit well it boosted his gas milage about 25 to 30%
 
I've read about "free energy" machine demonstrations where observers discovered that the machine was actually plugged into a wall outlet somehow, and thus it was shown to be a hoax.

But a car driving down the road is a "closed system."

If you have two proven-to-be-identical cars with identical amounts of gasoline, and one without the modification goes 100 miles but the one with the modification goes 125 miles over the same road conditions, then how could that not be a gain?

I guess additional costs for using the modification would be in adding water, and the electricity to run the cell might put a strain on the alternator and regulator, but those could be remedied and wouldn't be a fuel supply cost factor.

I can see when people point out that there is an electricity cost to making the cell gas in your garage or plant, and that cost competes with any gasoline cost savings achieved by it; but when cars driving down the road are used for the test, everything is contained within the cars, so they are closed loop systems, and the pluses and minuses of the power tradeoffs all cancel out---so in that case, overall, a gain is a gain.
 
eeTHr said:
I guess additional costs for using the modification would be in adding water, and the electricity to run the cell might put a strain on the alternator and regulator, but those could be remedied and wouldn't be a fuel supply cost factor

The above quote is the problem. The greater the current you draw from the alternator the greater load on your engine consuming extra gasoline with several inefficiencies in-between that are losses before you get your hydrogen.

There is one way around this that I believe I mentioned earlier in this thread. You need to generate your electricity for producing your hydrogen from a waste product that will not put a load on your engine such as exhaust or radiator heat. A Peltier device would serve well in this capacity and actually give you a boost generating electric to split water from otherwise wasted energy.

In very general terms most internal combustion engines that are water cooled use the fuels energy as 1/3rd mechanical output, 1/3rd wasted as cooling, and 1/3rd wasted as exhaust heat.
 
The problem i see with it is you are using electrons to split the bonds. Power consumption is based on electrons. The more gas you produce the more electrons it takes, the more load is placed on the engine and alternator. By them rules of physics it will never work. Plain and simple.

Now there is another way to control the electrons. Voltage. Voltage exerts pressure on electrons. Voltage and amperage are two separate items in electrical circuits. I've studied the break down process (Dielectric) thoroughly. The most interesting was in oils that insulate power transformers that hang on a pole and feed your home. It can also be found in the field of pulse power switches that use water as a temporary storage device. If a field had potential to work i would say it could be found here.
 
Oz;

That quote is not the problem at all.

This quote is actually the problem---
eeTHr said:
If you have two proven-to-be-identical cars with identical amounts of gasoline, and one without the modification goes 100 miles but the one with the modification goes 125 miles over the same road conditions, then how could that not be a gain?

Specifically the "If." In other words, if it works---it works.

My conclusion depends on whether or not it actually works. We have had some statements here that it works, stated as percentages of extra gas milage. These are what I was referring to.

I have never tried it myself.

I appreciate your technical analysis as I have thought about the same things, and your ideas may very well be more efficient.


Palladium;

I appreciate your detailed analysis, also, and your ideas may lead to some good things.

I understand that the "extra" energy must come from somewhere. But please see the quote above. Again, if it works---it works.

If this were actually scientifically tested, and found to repeatedly show a significant gain in milage, then the only question left would be why it works.
 
eeTHr said:
If this were actually scientifically tested, and found to repeatedly show a significant gain in milage, then the only question left would be why it works.
No question at all. If it works, it's because you have provided a method of converting energy that has been wasted to useful energy in propelling the vehicle. There is a finite amount of energy contained in any given fuel. How you use it makes the difference.

If you, and all others will keep one thing in mind, these things become self evident. It's pretty simple, although there are factions that don't want to accept the fact that "there is no free lunch". There is no perpetual motion, and one can never operate a vehicle without expending energy. If there are no other losses, there's always friction, such as the tires in contact with the road.

Harold
 
I looked up "Brown's Gas" on Wikipedia, and found this: "Oxyhydrogen is often mentioned in conjunction with devices that claim to operate a vehicle using water as a fuel. The common counter argument is that since the energy required to split water exceeds the energy recouped by burning it, these devices reduce, rather than improve fuel efficiency."

So it would seem that the only way that burning it with gasoline would increase milage is if the combination of the two somehow released more energy than the sum of their individual energy releases.

I have no idea if that would be the case or not.
 
An alternative to using a Hydrogen cell for increased mileage on your vehicle would be to use the cell to produce fuel for your Hydrogen torch.
I recently bought a torch kit from a UK supplier, and although I have no connection to the company that supplies them, I would whole heartedly recommend them to everyone on the forum that wants a simple no nonsense torch capable of melting platinum group metals.
Not being very computer savvy I would struggle to produce a video of the torch in action but you can have a look at their website where they have a video which was enough to convince me to give one a try.

http://www.emissionsbusters.com

If this post breaks any of the rules on the forum I will gladly remove it
 
Back
Top