Notice. New forum software under development. It's going to miss a few functions and look a bit ugly for a while, but I'm working on it full time now as the old forum was too unstable. Couple days, all good. If you notice any issues, please contact me.
Perry Senior Member Joined: 19/11/2009 Location: Posts: 190
Posted: 10:50am 06 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
I wish they would rename these HHO devices something else. Doing fuel cell research is hampered by all the posts of HHO generation.
Bob, it is interesting that you have been at these for that long. I worked in fuel cells for almost 10 yrs before wind. Too bad the technology is dead. It was fun seeing the gobs of money poured into them from the gov and auto companies. It was a rush like the dot com bubble. It burst though.
Perry
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 11:36am 06 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi Perry
It is my understanding that fuel cells are a different technology based on the absorbsion of oxygen and hydrogen or hydrocarbon to produce electricity the exact opposite of a hho cell that uses electricity to produce hydrogen and oxygen or browns gass depending on how the device is designed, both are quite innificent in reality except when using the product as a combustion enhancer and stabilizer in IC engines much the same as other enhansers added in liquid form some quite volitile.
I still feel there is work to be done on the design to increase efficency. The self resonant cell and various wave forms and high energy pulses that break the water bond easier.
I also feel that the high temp combustion in an IC engine already breaks atmospheric and injected moisture into a superheated steam as a pressure increasing agent in the combustion gas increasing its efficiency and reducing precombustion allowing the engine to produce extra power without destroying itself as in the aircraft engines in the 2nd war. This was the origional concept I started with and went from there.
All the best
BobFoolin Around
Downwind Guru Joined: 09/09/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2333
Posted: 04:44pm 06 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
One thing often over looked with using HHO as an enhancer is the "O" part.
For every volume of HHO 1/3 is oxygen, where a equal volume of air is a much lesser amount of oxygen.
I dont remember the exact figures but to burn 1 litre of fuel it takes something like 21,000 litres of air in combustion.
A small increase in oxygen to the volume makes a big difference.
If used in a late model car with "O" sensors the sensor will need to be recalibrated or the engine management system will see the motor as though it is running too lean and increase the fuel to compansate. Negating any small benifit gained.
Different story in diesel motors.
Later engine management systems can be effected, but only by the increase in engine temperture and again the fuel flow is increased to lower the temperture.
This dont seem to come into effect on large diesels (Trucks) but has been reported as a problem when used on small diesels like cars and 4WD's.
The darn things have gotten to smart.
I do believe the bigger the cubic inch motor the bigger the benifit gained for a simiular amount of HHO.
Which would make sense and offset the extra Hp required to run the alternator to generate the gas.
Giving a greater return in fuel savings.
Pete.Sometimes it just works
MacGyver Guru Joined: 12/05/2009 Location: United StatesPosts: 1329
Posted: 06:46pm 06 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Downwind
[Quote]You know i am going to have to test this theroy of implosion or explosion. When time permits i will fill a plastic coke bottle with HHO and stick a spark plug in the cap and blow the sucker up or in, and see what happens.[/Quote]
Don't do it! I tried a similar trick by placing HHO into a Zip-loc bag and tossing on a kitchen match. The explosion was so terrific, it rattled windows two blocks away. Some kind neighbor sicked the bomb squad on me and I had a lot of explaining to do a couple days after the boom.
VKRYAQ I'd be interested in seeing a comparison of test results between running HHO from your on-board hydrogen (brown's gas) generator and that of running water vapor. I think you'll find the results to be very similar if not exactly the same. I was a trained diesel mechanic in the Coast Guard, but don't really know much about them except how to repair one. That being said, injecting aqueous HHO into an already-hot engine will likely flash into steam and boost the ignition pressure.
As far as implosion goes, I tested this and when you ignite pure Brown's gas inside a closed system, the pressure goes way down. I imagine it's because the oxidation process uses up atoms of oxygen and hydrogen and therefore leaves a partial vacuum.
For The Rest of The Crew: I've dabbled with hydrogen generators all I want. I'm done. Don't let my apathy stop you, though. If you want to spend all you have on trying to make it work like magic, more power to you. All I'm saying is I traveled down that road and my take on the whole thing was my part was to post warning signs for those who intend to follow.Nothing difficult is ever easy!
Perhaps better stated in the words of Morgan Freeman,
"Where there is no struggle, there is no progress!"
Copeville, Texas
GWatPE Senior Member Joined: 01/09/2006 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2127
Posted: 09:48pm 06 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
No doubt you did not have a true closed system.[possibly volume was constant] Only after time had passed and the temperature equilibrated back to room temperature would the pressure be reduced. PV=nRT and all that. The combustion products will occupy less volume at the same starting temperature, as the water vapour will likely condense back to liquid, at room temperature.
I have seen video of the Joe cell, and the lighting of the bubbles produced, exploded with a loud bang. This was expansion of gas. The final combustion products, would produce a lower pressure at the same original volume and temperature.
Sounds like a calorimeter would be needed to test further.
Gordon.
become more energy aware
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 11:32pm 06 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi Gordon
I think what you are saying is that the initial burn / explosion creates expansion im a dynamic situation and as the energy / heat is realeased by the chemical reaction the resultant vapor cools to create implosion.
In a dynamic situation inside a motor at opperating temperature this couldnt happen due to stored heat in the mass of the engine and the time frame it has to happen in, but it does explain why we had so much trouble getting an engine to start on HHO alone.
We had to spin the engine up for a while {to get some heat into it ?}
Also under opperating conditions the water vapour would turn to steam at the pressure related to temperature of rhe mass, flash steam if you like due to low mass and the time constants involved.
And so goes forth the mystry.
All the best
BobFoolin Around
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 11:54pm 06 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi Macguyver
You have managed to confuse me all the more because you state in one paragraph that the explosion caused the bomb squad to appear as if by magic. And later you say that you found evidence of an implosion, very confusing, but was it the fact that you where getting both, but with a different time constant, initial explosion, release of energy and then a chain reaction as the resultant heat was absorbed by the surrounding enviroment leaving a very small amount of water vapor at that temperature / pressure constant.
I agree with your assesment of the water injection increase as that was phase one of my experiment and it gave useful gains in efficiency but the water molocules tended to erode the vanes of the turbo inlet turbine so I decided to go to the gas state. the converter was made from the innards of an old milk sepperater spinner many plates over 30 from memoery inside a piece of SS pipe made into the outer container 8"dia with a flange top and collector cone feeding into another piece of pipe as a pipestorage with flash stoppers either side.
That nearly doubled the effect compared with water injection.
ALLthe best
BobFoolin Around
MacGyver Guru Joined: 12/05/2009 Location: United StatesPosts: 1329
Posted: 04:03am 07 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
VK4AYQ (Does that stand for something? Just curious.)
Don't be confused; it's very simple (I think).
The BOOM came from the exothermic reaction of hydrogen oxidized at 200% with a little kick start from a match. Yes, it expanded rapidly and burst the bag with a very loud bang. All the neighbors ran out to see the carnage (I suspect).
The pressure test I did was with a 60-foot length of type "L" soft copper. There was a 600 psi ball valve soft soldered at each end.
Brown's gas was let into one end and a small fan drew it out the other end. I merely "guessed" at when it was filled and at that time, I closed the valve at the draw end and lighted the other end of the pipe with my turbo torch through a small opening in the valve at the other end of the coil. I did it this way in case it turned out to be a bomb.
What happened is, as soon as the stuff ignited, there was a loud hissing sound. I closed the remaining valve out of fright more than anything, then opened it up slowly and to my surprise, there was a vacuum inside the tubing.
I surmised that the Brown's gas had created water vapor as a byproduct of combustion and that water vapor had condensed on the cool walls of the copper tube, which in turn took up less volume than the gas, thus creating a partial vacuum. That was my take on it at least.
I tried running a small gasoline engine on pure HOH and it didn't work at all. I figured the hydrogen gas was too small an atom to be held in compression by the valves in the engine, but that may be incorrect and the reason may be something else entirely.
The arrival of the bomb squad guys the following Monday morning pretty much ended my hydrogen experimentation. Hope you have better fortune!Nothing difficult is ever easy!
Perhaps better stated in the words of Morgan Freeman,
"Where there is no struggle, there is no progress!"
Copeville, Texas
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 05:11am 07 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi Macgyver
Interesting experiments mate, I dont have a problem with neighbours here as I am in the bush and my nearest neighbour is 200 yards away and he is a drunk that likes shooting all the time so had a small discussion with him along the lines that if he keeps his mouth quiet so will I. No problems now.
I can see why you got a partial vacume in the pipe as the copper would very quickly absorb any heat generated by the hho burning and as you say the water vapour was all thats left.
The same thing happens when any gas is burned inside an energy absorbing chamber as the gas burns it creates heat and expands the non combustable parts of air {being about 80%} then as this mixture cools it returns to its natural state minus the gas and the oxygen burned in the process, hence a lower pressure, in hho it is more pronounced effect because the consumption of both gasses and a change of state to water vapour and not much of it at that, as it dosent take much water to make a lot of hho I think from memory and correct me if I am wrong it is 18000 to 1 by volume
I think that is why we had so much trouble running an engine on the hho from cold in the end we found that there needed to be heat in the engine to avoid the rapid charge cooling in the cylinder by contact with cold metal a start and run on petrol to get heat and then slowly go to hho when hot worked with some success it achieved more power than running on hydrogen alone but required spark timing to be altered advanced I think but it is a bit hazey now 30 years on.
The VK4AYQ is my Ham callsign
The comment on the small engine is the same as I found using a Briggs and Stratton motor, I put it down to the alloy bore absorbing the heat produced quickly and also noticed that the bigger the engine and the hotter the compression charge the better it worked, I tried it on a GM 892 TA engine in one of my trucks on the dyno normal it produced 450 hp abit over 365 at the rear wheels I then increased the hho mixture to saturation point {when the egt started dropping with subsequent power loss} and it produced 525 hp at the rear wheels all tests in top gear as we couldnt stop wheel spin in the lower gears speed reading 65mph engine revs 1950 rpm
I was going to go ahead with it at the time but warranty issues with the engines made it impractical.
Now 30 years on I am fooling around with it again on smaller engines and not getting the desired results, which I have put down to low continious hp requirements in passenger cars, My car is capable of 350 hp but I have done some calculations and my average hp at average usage is 33 hp less than 10% whereas the truck motors based on fuel consumtion was over 50% I think thats why it isnt viable in smaller motors.
Also small engines run high vacume in normal opperation so the mean effective compression ratio is low and therefore the temp of the compressed gasses is far lower, not so in a diesel motor though explaning why it works better in a diesel moter.
Better shut up now as I will bore everyone.
All the best
Bob Foolin Around
Perry Senior Member Joined: 19/11/2009 Location: Posts: 190
Posted: 07:47am 07 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hello guys,
What does 'hydrogen oxidized at 200%' mean?
Perry
Greenbelt Guru Joined: 11/01/2009 Location: United StatesPosts: 566
Posted: 04:00am 08 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
VK4AYQ; and all.
I believe this forum "MY TWO CENTS" is set aside for gripe's and opinions on matters of a general nature as well as ataboys, and compliments. I think this topic should be in OTHER STUFF.
That is where I Found it some months ago. I notice this it is titled, "Hydrogen Fuel Cell" which is a NASA developed electrical generator.
Rather than post it all again you can read the comments I have posted with other yea and nay comments. on the automobile adapted hydrogen generator in OTHER STUFF edit; Page 3 Home brew Hydrogen Generator Pages 5- 6- 7 Edited by Greenbelt 2010-01-09Time has proven that I am blind to the Obvious, some of the above may be True?
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 06:11am 08 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi greebelt
I take your poinf at it being in wrong place but it just started here and led on from their. I suggest that you contact Gismo about relocation if it bothers you. Will read your comments now you point it out, but it is also a round peg in a square hole as we arent talking about Hydrogen Fuel Cells as generally accepted they absorb hydrogen and Oxygen and produce electricity HHO production is the exact reverse of that and it is the use of the gasses that is the point of discussion as you no doubt realise from reading all our waffel on the matter, so now off to find and read your comments in the hydrogen fuel cell forum.
All the best
BobFoolin Around
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 06:16am 08 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi Perry
You will have to direct your question regarding the 200% to Macgyver to clarify that as I didnt pick up on it untill you pointed it out.
All the best
BobFoolin Around
MacGyver Guru Joined: 12/05/2009 Location: United StatesPosts: 1329
Posted: 06:27am 08 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Aaaarrrgh!
I've tried to bow out of this thread gracefully, but here I am again. This could go on forever, you know, and still go nowhere!
Okay; as for this:
[Quote=Perry]What does 'hydrogen oxidized at 200%' mean?
This was merely a stab at levity. Hydrogen "burns" rapidly (like faster than primer cord!) at 4% oxidation. I got that somewhere from my college chemistry days (40+ years ago mind you) and I was trying to emphasize that it does more than "burn". The silly stuff EXPLODES!
Okay, I'm really done. I'm all done with talking about hydrogen and hydrogen generators and magic stuff that doesn't work except on You Tube. This is it . . . done!
Re-post this thread anywhere it suits you; I'm done. It's been fun, but like I said . . . bye bye!
Nothing difficult is ever easy!
Perhaps better stated in the words of Morgan Freeman,
"Where there is no struggle, there is no progress!"
Copeville, Texas
oztules Guru Joined: 26/07/2007 Location: AustraliaPosts: 1686
Posted: 10:25am 08 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Well MacGyver, I'll bow in.
Gordon quite rightly stated Boyles Law where PV=nRT.
My vague recollection is that R=8.31 and n = number of molecules in the stated volume.
I'm assuming Browns gas is actually H2 gas and O2 gas in a 2:1 ratio from when they were electrolysed originally.
This makes it interesting, as the 2 H2 gas molecules that combines with the single O2 molecule has caused the number of molecules in the volume to depreciate by 1/3... ie the 2 x H2 molecules get oxidised by the O2 molecule and we get 2 molecules of H2O.... So n has decreased... leaving a partial vaccumme?.... and thats without the vapor pressure reduction from condensation....which will be proportional to temp and pressure. The new size of the H2O molecule will have to be taken into account as well???/ gets messy.... so I can't help much there....
But, it does explain why Browns gas given off from electrolysis won't burn in a combustion engine when used like propane but pure H2 gas does.... both work fine.
The browns gas itself is actually rocket fuel on it's own, and would burn without extra air perfectly.....So you will need no outside air.... just browns gas to fill the entire volume of the cylinder.... and it will burn very very fast.
So, if you introduce browns gas into the manifold, and expect it to behave like a pure H2 or propane gas.... it wont' It is already perfectly diluted to burn. By using it like propane etc, you just make it so lean it can't burn.... there are simply too many inert molecules getting in the way to stop the chain reaction... and it stops as soon as it starts.... or put another way, the flame front dies from lack of fuel.... too much O2 and N2 getting in the way.
It won't be the cold walls stopping it, it burns under water anyway.it put out enough heat to keep going with the correct rario...... it is snuffed out by poor mixing ratio's. Any gas added to the browns will dilute the "butter zone".
If you collected only the H2 gas without the O2, you could feed that in via a normal venturi and a normal demand propane gas converter, as it would get the oxidizing agent from the atmosphere as a normal gas conversion would.
I don't think anything is different. All the same rules apply. It is not special..... except you are severely limited with it as it is ideally pre mixed..... danger plus.... and you don't need/want any added air for best combustion..... which means to use it on it's own... you need gobs of it.
............oztulesVillage idiot...or... just another hack out of his depth
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 11:36am 08 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi all
I am going to be throwing the cat amongst the pidgeons here as following the comments by oztubes I am wondering if we are nissing the point of the discussion being that we are looking at an alternate fuel in a enviromental friendly package.
My points follow:
1. Hydrogen is a flamable gas fuel with known energy contents.
2. It has been used as a fuel in IC engines for more than a century.
3. Gas specific engines have certain design criteria well known to the industry and sience alike.
4. It burns clean and produces very little pollution.
5. The addition of oxygen in a combustion balanced state produces very fast burn.So the mixture has to be moderated to produce a controlled burn.
6. Browns gas produced from a gassing battery if highly explosive this I have experienced on several occasions and to say it implodes is not true, as the destructive force experienced as a result of sparking a gassing battery even in a semi enclosed state is very destructive,
To believe it will implode and dissapear into a bit of water vapour is beyond belief.
Read battery safety manuals all will warn against this.
7. The mixture requires inert gasses as in air to perform useful work as the heating and expansion of the inert gasses controls the burn and stores the heat energy released in the form of expansion to provide controllable power from the combustion process. This is lacking in a pure hho burn mixture as there is no inert gasses to absorb the energy hence an explosive reaction instead of a controlled burn, much like pinging in a IC motor caused by incorrect spark timing or the wrong octane rating for the specific engine .
THE ISSUE
Is to produce the gas in such a way to make a cost effective fuel all the other issues can be overcome with modern mixture control and high energy sparking ignition.
Hope I havnt singed to many feathers.
All the best
BobFoolin Around
Perry Senior Member Joined: 19/11/2009 Location: Posts: 190
Posted: 03:05am 09 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi Bob,
What is the efficiency of a BG electrolyzer? Power in to Power out based on the lower heating value of hydrogen? Maybe LHV of H2O2?
Assume a 65% effic for the Fuel cell and it will tell you the round trip efficiency and tell you how efficient of an energy carrier it is. That assumes you intend to electrochemically react it, not augment a combustion engine. If that is the case, assume a much lower back end efficiency.
Unfortunately it won't beat a battery.
Perry
VK4AYQ Guru Joined: 02/12/2009 Location: AustraliaPosts: 2539
Posted: 08:34am 09 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Hi Perry
My experimenting was dome before computers wher in vouge so info I gleaned from the experiment was analogue pencil amd paper collection.
Number5 one cell was mde out of bits to hand with no disign optomisation as I had noplans or internet ref asd we do now.
Unit one.
It was a pioce of stainless tube 8" in diameter with cone shaped seperator plates set up with insulation spacers between between made of acrilic reds saved grom a dumster, Plates wher set up as positive neutral negative three plate group repeated ten times for a total of 30 plates. power was fed in through a ineulated bolt through the side at he top of the stack water fed in the bottom with baking soder in solution.
It produced a little over 10 ltr min on a cig flowmeter for argon so may not be accurate due to different gas density.
Power in was 24 volts + at 100 amps monitored by amp and volt meter 2400 watts plus current limited by carbon pile regulator to max 100 amp.
Opperating pressure 36 psi.
Second unit was static for dyno use.
12" stainless tube 20 " long fitted with 12 concentric perferated plates made from old washing machine spinners cut and shut tp make 4 lots of three plates with poly pipe seperators.
It put my flow guage off the scale when working.
38 volt input from a DCwelder 220 amps 8000 wats approx
It supplied enough gas to saturate the motor and slow it down.
Both where brute force units
All the best
BobFoolin Around
oztules Guru Joined: 26/07/2007 Location: AustraliaPosts: 1686
Posted: 08:58am 09 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Well Bob,
Your an engineer..... I'm not. However I'll will try to show you why I don't understand/agree how your coming up with your numbers.... all of them.
This is the equation to get H2(g) from aqueous water
4 e- + 4 H2O(l)>> 2 H2(g) + 4 OH-(aq)
Now a Mole of something is actually avagadro's number or 6.02 X 10^23 (approx) I mole of Hydrogen atoms Atomic weight 1, will weigh 1 kg. 1 mole of any element will weigh the weight of it's atomic mass in Kg.
Now the stoichiometry from that equation shows us that 4 mole of electrons (e-) are required to get 2 moles of Hydrogen gas... or 2 moles of e- gets us 1 mole of H2(g)
At standard temperature and pressure we find that about 22.4 litres of H2(g) will evolve from 1 mole of H2(g) being released. We now have enough information to test your numbers.
[quote]
I speak from personal experience as I started down this road in 1980 when I ran 3 semies on a regular basis from Brisbane to Melbourne approx 200o KLM with an optimised HHO system it saved me 300 ltr of fuel each way 600 total and while distilate was 33 cents ltr then it was a significant saving I nearly made a profit even. It started out as a high pressure water injection system and led into a hydrogen cell capacity of 10 ltr min that was the limit of the excess power from the alternator 100 amp at 24 volt. I found at times it would do much better and didnt realise at the time it was going into a self resonamt state as its hard to drive and keep an eye on whats happening, the motor was 450 hp 12 ltr running 1.5 bar turbo pressure.[/quote]
Now we have 10 ltr/min or 600 litres/hour As thats browns gas, the hydrogen component will be about 400 litres/hour (200 litres of O2(g) )
For 400 litres of H2(g) we need
400 litres/22.4 (standard temp and pressure/mole)=17.9 mole of H2(g) needed. from the stoichiometry above we see we need 2 mole of e- for every mole of H2(g)...
So we need 35.8 mole of electrons or 35.8 faraday of electrons.
1 Faraday = 1 mole of electrons
96,485 coulombs = 1 Faraday
amperes x seconds = Coulombs)
So
35.8 farad X 96485 (to find couloumbs) = 3,454,163 Coulombs.(ampseconds)
Now 3.454,163/3600 (get per second)= 959 Amps.
So to get the fuel load you claim, you need to produce about 1000amps, which you claim at 100v.... or 100kw??
1000amps is a bit rich @100v don't you think?
100kw don't sound too good to me.
It gets worse really, we have turbo pushing your 12ltr engine up to 18 ltrs at STP (standard temp and pressure).
It's a 4 stroke so every second stroke. So 2000rpm becomes 1000rpm We displace 18000litres per minute. Your supplying on your figures 10 litre/min or 10/18000 gives you a mixture ratio of only 0.000555556:1 or 5 ten thousandths of the mixture is your browns gas.... or 5 hundredths of 1 percent .....so what..... not much to show for 958 amps is it.
I aint buying it at all. And that assumes you have power generated at 100%... I don't think so. The combustion driving the Alternator is only 20% efficient or so, and the alternator for 1000A is going to be well less than 100%.
It just looks impossible to me without changing the laws of the universe or at least covalent bonding and electromagnetic forces.
For your previous points.
1. yes it's a given
2. yes it has
3. Not really. Now most motors are unleaded, there is very little else different. Stellite valves are no longer a necessary addition to a gas conversion.
4. Yes and No. If water injection is implemented then true, else because of the high temperature burn, nitrates/nitroxides are excessive.
5. No. O2(g) introduced to an ideal combustive mixture denatures it.. it does not improve it... it's called running lean.... add more... until you actually have the H2(g) molecules so far apart that the chain reaction stops.. over lean. The explosion needs energy to start it, and continuous energy transfer to the next molecule to be self sustaining. To much O2(g) and it will stall
6. Yes it explodes just like it does in the space shuttle main motors. ...... But once the energy is expended, the negative pressure result Macgyver found in his pipe makes sense. Do the stoichiometry on it.
7. Yes a perfect H2(g) O2(g) mix, will burn with exceptional speed. Which is why they use it in the scram jets. If we add more material in the mix, we slow down the chain reaction and we can contain it physically.
I find it incredible that this browns gas hasn't been buried a long time ago.
If it worked, the big end of town would be using it as standard in every situation it was useful in. It is found to be useless by the auto industry engineers. MONEY TALKS. If efficiency improved as you claim... they'd be all over you for it.
Next utopia to be realised is this:
[quote] I still feel there is work to be done on the design to increase efficency. The self resonant cell and various wave forms and high energy pulses that break the water bond easier. [/quote]
Your right, anything is better than a 1000 amps to make 10 litres/min...... however
If you do some quantum mechanics or particle physics, we can see that the electron orbits are quite fixed. Self resonance is impossible if you drain the energy out of it.
Quanta of a fixed value are required to push electrons out of their "orbits" (more like a statistical
distance from the nucleus nowdays I think) into other orbits. So there are no bulk buys to be had, and no gradients that can be increased.
Resonance can only work where you don't take the pulses of input energy out of the circuit. As soon as quanta values are withdrawn, resonance stops I should think.
It's yours to play with, but I can see no positives in here at all.
I would be happy to be disproved using chemistry or physics. Practical is of no interest as the car industry has dumped it unanimously, and I believe them when they vote with their chequebook.
Being the village idiot ... my feathers don't ruffle as much as you may think.
.............oztules
Village idiot...or... just another hack out of his depth
Tinker Guru Joined: 07/11/2007 Location: AustraliaPosts: 1904
Posted: 12:12pm 09 Jan 2010
Copy link to clipboard
Print this post
Oztules, is there an university on Flinders Island?
You never cease to amaze me with that extraordinary knowledge of yours.
Ranging from expert chainsaw carving to stoichiometry, quantum mechanics, particle physics - my head is still spinning trying to read your post Klaus
Page 2 of 4
Print this page
The Back Shed's forum code is written, and hosted, in Australia.
Notice. New forum software under development. It's going to miss a few functions and look a bit ugly for a while, but I'm working on it full time now as the old forum was too unstable. Couple days, all good. If you notice any issues, please contact me.
Print this post
I notice this it is titled, "Hydrogen Fuel Cell" which is a NASA developed electrical generator.
