Already a member?
Sign in
Welcome! Wikis are websites that everyone can build together. It's easy!
Location: Official MythBusters Fan Site
Discussion: water to gas
Keyword tags:
buster
discovery
Discovery Channel
home
myth busters
myth_buster
Mythbuster's Fan Site
mythbusters
Mythbusters wiki
quotes
the busterboy
Watch
|
Dikaiosyne Dikaiosyne |
water to gas
Jun 23 2008, 10:05 AM EDT I'm wondering if the MYTHBUSTERS would be willing to take on this assertion that a few simple changes to an engine can convert H2O to "brown gas" and fed into a internal combustion engine delivering increased MPG. The brown gas being hydrogen. In today's gas crisis this could be one of those ideas that could be put to use easing the demand for gasoline. I'd like to have this thoroughly tested and brought into the public domain in case there is something to it. For those of you that are interested in this kind of stuff I will supply the link. GPM@dasmet.com I would really like to hear what you all think. My address is: harrypath@aol.com Thanx 50 out of 52 found this valuable. Do you? |
 weaponsboy |
RE: water to gas
Jun 23 2008, 5:49 PM EDT How does changing the engine change the fuel? Also, hydrogen gas has a ridiculously low density, only 0.08988 grams/cc. So, in order to be able to store a sufficient amount of it you'd have to liquefy it, which requires chilling it to -253°F. Also, I would not want to drive around in a car with a fuel tank full of the most efficient rocket fuel known to man. 0 out of 7 found this valuable. Do you? |
 martiandrifter01 |
RE: water to gas
Jun 23 2008, 9:46 PM EDT Mmm. The type of fuel can affect the engine, or vice-versa. A lot of engines have to be modified before they can use fuels that don't contain any lubricants (or lack lubricating properties). Usually it involves improving cylinder lubrication, which may be something as simple as drilling small holes in the piston skirts. You need a scale or balance accurate to 1 gram (or less) before modifying your pistons, and the crankshaft will need to be rebalanced too. Best leave it to a good engine (or engine balancing) shop. There are low-volatile solutions to high-density hydrogen storage, usually it requires converting it to a hydride for low pressure storage. Not that the EPA will allow them, since they are usually toxic materials (stored in very safe pressure tanks) that allow the conversion to/from the gaseous state. Dikaiosyne, that link, GPM@dasmet.com, is a bit too suspicious to follow as it will attempt to log people in under the Username GPM, on dasmet.com. You can do better than that. 3 out of 4 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Dikaiosyne Dikaiosyne |
RE: water to gas
Jun 24 2008, 6:13 PM EDT My understanding is that there is very little gas to be stored. The gas created is quickly used to supplement the gasoline as it burns. One question might be this.... Does using hydrogen gas which burns at around 1100 degrees affect the engine which is designed to use gasoline which burns at around 600 degrees? I did receive one reply from a guy who claims to be using this system and his view is that it definitely works. Nearly doubled the mileage on his old Ford and the same for a diesal powered motor home. The guy seems to be sincere with his claimed results. So far he is the only one I've received that has actually claimed to use this system. I still would like the MYTHBUSTERS to take thisw one on. 9 out of 9 found this valuable. Do you? |
 crsauls |
RE: water to gas
Jun 24 2008, 8:29 PM EDT I believe you are refering to the products promoted by (principally) water4gas.com and other affiliated sites. While the device they are marketing does in fact produce hydrogen (and oxygen) thru electrolytic decomposition of water, there is no way you could ever run a vehicle solely on one (or a dozen or a hundred) of these. Mythbusters already tested this premise, though it was poorly done. This was Episode 24, Free Energy Devices. http://mythbusters-wiki.discovery.com/thread/1101166/Electrolysis+producing+hydrogen+to+run+a+vehicle.?t=anon They didn't bother to investigate the product before doing their tests. No one (not even the people promoting these devices) maintains that you can actually run your car on it, the gases it produces are incorporated in the combustion mixture along with gasoline. The presence of small amounts of hydrogen in the mix promotes a much faster flame propagation in the cylinder resulting in a cleaner, more complete burn. The net gains are in the order of 10-30%, though I have heard claims of much higher. The simplest incarnations of these devices can be made from readily available materials. You can buy a kit from several vendors on eBay. I've built one from a kit (very easy) and installed it on my car (also easy). I've only just begun to test it, but so far I'm seeing a 10% improvement in mpg. 8 out of 8 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
n7okn n7okn |
RE: water to gas
Jun 26 2008, 6:33 PM EDT Another thing I haven't found mentioned is that when mixing the fuel/air mixture with Brown's gas, the oxygen content becomes much higher in the exhaust gas. Through the O2 sensor, the computer thinks the mixture is too lean, so the computer richens up the mixture, making the mixture too rich, thereby offsetting any efficent burn. The fuel econimy can actually go down. Also it's been found that if you pulse the water/vinegar solution with around 20Khz square wave instead of using DC from your battery like most of the systems available, you can get three times the gas output for the same current input, or the same output for a third of the current. If you have an engine in good shape, and yur Brown's gas generator has the right amount of output, and the correct compensation is achieved with the computer, then you'll get the 40-60 percent increase. All those variables need to be met though. I'm about to put one together in the next few months. I will post here the results. 4 out of 4 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
crsauls |
RE: water to gas
Jun 27 2008, 9:17 AM EDT After doing some in depth thinking, I started doing some checking and calculating. A little research revealed that the lower flammability limit of hydrogen (lowest concentration in air that will sustain a flame) is 4%. My engine is 1.6 liter, so at 3000 rpm it pumps 2400 l/min (3000/2) x 1.6=2400. I divide the rpm by 2 because a 4 cycle engine intakes air every other revolution. To achieve a sufficient concentration of hydrogen to sustain a flame you must be generating .04 x 2400=96 l/min. I doubt that the electrical system in a car can produce enough power to generate that kind of volume and I know that none of the units I have seen come even close to half that much volume. This doesn't necessarily mean that these devices don't work, it may mean that the introduction of hydrogen has a much more complicated effect on the combustion chemistry. Will report more test results soon. 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
n7okn n7okn |
RE: water to gas
Jun 27 2008, 1:39 PM EDT A Brown's gas generator doesn't produce enough to even run a lawnmower. We're talking only Brown's gas ability to atomize the gas into finer vapor so that there is a complete burn. 1 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
 NODOUDT |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 10:21 AM EDT Hi, I am enjoying reading your posts here, concerning hydrogen fuels for automobiles. It is a very interesting subject and each of you are making great contributions to the content. I hope all of you will continue working together to keep the discussion going at this current quality. I started driving in 1973. Just in time for the first Arab oil embargo. I think that eventually, OPEC will kill the goose that lays their precious petrodollar golden eggs. I look forward to that day. My issue is not if we do or dont drill offshore or in ANWR. I just believe that it is way past time to think much further outside the box than the temporary fix of more drilling to increase oil supplies. As gasoline prices continue to skyrocket out of control, I am willing to try just about anything as an alternative. Hydrogen seems to be a big step forward, both to break the links to the past and to make a fresh start with numerous valuable benefits for all of us. My fingers are crossed! We do need to realize that it will take a generation or more to make any transition. I saw a commercial on TV last night by BMW, about their limited production prototype Hydrogen 7 hybrid car, that burns either conventional gasoline or liquid hydrogen. Wanted to share a link to it and a few other links on the subject in general. http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/09/12/bmw-officially-announces-the-bmw-hydrogen-7/ http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/25/magazines/business2/futureboy_bmw.biz2/index.htm http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/index.htm Best regards to all, Jim in Texas –aka- NODOUDT 5 out of 5 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
crsauls |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 11:56 AM EDT "A Brown's gas generator doesn't produce enough to even run a lawnmower. We're talking only Brown's gas ability to atomize the gas into finer vapor so that there is a complete burn. "Actually, its not about atomization of the fuel, it's about increasing the speed of the flame propagation, resulting in a cleaner more efficient burn. Check these studies. http://www.ntpefs.com/idaho_national_laboratory_hydrogen_study.html http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/2000-01-2791 1 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
crsauls |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 12:05 PM EDT "I am enjoying reading your posts here, concerning hydrogen fuels for automobiles.Please remember that these devices are NOT about using hydrogen as a fuel for automobiles. This is about an additive to the gas/air mix (which happens to be hydrogen) that enhances the combustion process. Much of the controversy over this process arises from this misunderstanding. The overblown advertising claims of misinformed (or unscrupulous) vendors only serve to discredit a valid and valuable technology. 2 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
n7okn n7okn |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 1:27 PM EDT You are right. it's the speed of the burn. I looked at that article, that's the closest to an "official" study I've seen. They were using straight hydrogen, while we are talking about oxygen addition as well. But again, this will throw off the air/fuel ratio because of the extra O2 in the exhaust. The article didn't mention that. I don't know if straight hydrogen needs mixture adjustment, but Brown's gas does. 1 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
crsauls |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 2:02 PM EDT "They were using straight hydrogen, while we are talking about oxygen addition as well. But again, this will throw off the air/fuel ratio because of the extra O2 in the exhaust. The article didn't mention that. I don't know if straight hydrogen needs mixture adjustment, but Brown's gas does. "Remember that the hydrogen and oxygen are in exact stoichiometric proportions, they cancel each other out in the combustion equation. I am not sure what causes the 02 sensor to read a lean condition but I don't think it is actually caused by higher levels of O2 in the exhaust. I think the sensor is being fooled. Fortunately for me, cars prior to '96 don't need to have any special adjustments made. 1 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
Dikaiosyne Dikaiosyne |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 4:04 PM EDT I'm with you brother. My view is that for the short term we should be drilling everywhere we think there may be oil. Just the very act of exploration and drilling by American oil companies would bring down the cost per barrel. We should simultaneously start a "Manhatten Project" to bring new technologies online as quickly as possible such as bio-fuel from waste products and wind and solar. The problem with hydrogen cars is the very cost in energy to produce the gas in large quantities and the ability to store the gas safely. For now though........ DRILL HERE!... DRILL NOW!... PAY LESS!! 1 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
 mediasmith |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 4:50 PM EDT Two observations: My nature is to be skeptical when something appears to be an effort in deception. In the first link, it seems they want you to think this is a government operation since idaho national laboratory.gov takes you to a US Government facility website while idaho national laboratory.com takes you in quite a different direction. It may not be bad but it sure looks bad. As to the SAE paper, I didn't have enough curiosity to pay $14 to read the whole thing but I did not find evidence it had withstood or been subjected to peer review......... another "uh, oh!" in my book. In any event, I sure hope I am wrong. wds 1 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
crsauls |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 5:36 PM EDT I've found many links to the various departments of inl.gov and inel.gov but none with .com domains. Please post what you've found. As for the SAE document http://volunteers.sae.org/authors/faq.htm The peer review process preceeds publication. I appreciate you questioning the validity of thes cites, it's easy to be mislead. Craig 0 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
mediasmith |
RE: water to gas
Jun 28 2008, 7:54 PM EDT Dang right it is!!!! And, often you do it to yourself. I haven't been a member since around 1964 and that is way too long for me to trust what little memory I have left. I may be old and forgetful but I have been tricked to enough "See naked Russian ladies," websites that I always look for a potential spoof or trick before I click. :o)) 0 out of 1 found this valuable. Do you? |
 DJofCA |
RE: water to gas - conspiracy?
Jul 1 2008, 6:31 PM EDT OK, so I am not GENERALLY a conspiracy theorist, but when someone from ANY car manufacturer can stand up and explain why most new cars don't get the MPG of a '70's diesel rabbit (41 mpg) or my old 80's Jetta (30+ mpg) I'll listen! Check out FuelEconomy.gov - they've been "updating" (lowering) the old mpg numbers, to make it more "realistic". No "conspiracy" here -- they just somehow, "suddenly" realized that as gas got more expensive that we hadn't "really" been getting as many mpg with our cars as they thought...or something like that. I've always gotten the ORIGINAL listed mpg (or better). This year's ads introduce, with great fanfare, the new "fuel efficient" cars that get 30+ mpg (the same as my '85 Jetta ), or even 33pmg (Yawn. '97 Saturn got 33-37). Sooo... 23 years of research, onboard computers, plastic body parts, and they can now match the mileage (but not the performance) of the car I bought used 15 years ago....but of course there is no "conspiracy" between car makers and oil companies! Over the years car makers kept introducing higher MPG cars, then "improving" them by making them larger, faster (and more expensive & less fuel efficient!), then discontinuing them when they "didn't sell" ( but the original high mpg versions sell in minutes on the internet ... if you can find one). Volkswagon produced a car that got 75mpg ( the "Lupo". Limited production, never sold in the US. Dicontinued because...no one wants a car that gets 75 mpg????). 10+ years ago Honda produced cars with conventional engines that got 50+mpg (then discontinued them), The Honda CRX was high mpg, popular --discontinued (inexpensive=low profit margin? ). Gas is $4.50, so new Saturn MPG plummets to all time low. GREAT planning guys (but no "conspiracy", of course). 5 out of 7 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
mediasmith |
RE: water to gas - conspiracy?
Jul 1 2008, 11:11 PM EDT What? Are you saying it kinda makes you wonder? Go figure. 1 out of 3 found this valuable. Do you? |
|
RedRat RedRat |
RE: water to gas - conspiracy?
Jul 3 2008, 11:02 PM EDT "OK, so I am not GENERALLY a conspiracy theorist, but when someone from ANY car manufacturer can stand up and explain why most new cars don't get the MPG of a '70's diesel rabbit (41 mpg) or my old 80's Jetta (30+ mpg) I'll listen!Well if you take a look at the weight of that old 70s diesel rabbit you will find that car is basically a very light weight car. No magic there. You increase weight and you will decrease fuel efficiency. I remember back in the 70s oil embargo, the Automotive Engineers did a study and basically found that for every 300 lbs you add to a car, you decreased the mileage by 1mpg. Over the years, Detroit and even Japan, have been building bigger and bigger cars. Over the past 30 years we have also added emission control devices to the car that also tended to decrease mileage, safer bumpers and construction has also increased weight. At the same time the car makers have redesigned and added computer controls that also help to off-set some of these liabilities. But in the end, your mileage comes down to two things: weight and speed you drive. 1 out of 2 found this valuable. Do you? |