Ford Focus Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,317 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Found a link to this site cruising CL looking for Focus part outs (need black no cruise control steering wheel and sriver's seatbelt retractor, also instrument cluster for MK 1.5 manual with tach), http://newhorizonshydrogengenerators.com

Looks like it might work, but its pretty pricey.

Thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
I like the idea in general, but I'd be concerned about the O2 sensor/ECU driving the injectors in some weird way. I think it would be a fabulous idea on a carbureted engine... that way you could re-jet the carb and lean it out, then let the H O take up the slack for power, and the water vapor should quench any knock that might occur (probably have to retime it, too). I bet you could really extend the mileage on a carbed car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
I'd be most concerned about violating the laws of thermodynamics, which this kit has to in order to work.
Yeah, if you tried to run the car on Hydrogen alone you'd be getting into the realm of "perpetual motion machine", but the H is just an augmentation for the gasoline that is still the primary power source of the engine. On a carbureted engine the introduction of H should just extend miles per gallon of gasoline, that's all that could be expected.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,317 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
So this wouldn't work with fuel injection?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
It would take more tuning, but it could probably be made to work with ECU driven fuel injection... it's just that, IMO, it would be a lot easier with a carbureted/distributor type arrangement. I just think the O2 sensor feedback would make a bit of a mess out of tuning with an ECU.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Total waste of time, effort & $ to try that crap.

Been around for a long time now, still just a "perpetual motion" type idea.

Just read the START of that outfit's description, about using the "excess" energy from the car's electrical system. "Excess" capacity isn't 'free' when used, the ENGINE has to power it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
...
Just read the START of that outfit's description, about using the "excess" energy from the car's electrical system. ...
That means, when you turn the sub-woofer "off".

But seriously, there is a tiny bit of merit in the idea. That said, it would take a dynamo many times the output of a car alt, hooked up to a water tank the size of a milk truck, to supply all the fuel requirements of a small engine, if it were to be powered by hydrogen alone, on the fly.

You need exotic storage of liquid hydrogen to have enough on-hand to power a small engine for any distance... except, that is not what this is designed to do. This little device is just adding a little bit of "extra" fuel to the air mix that's coming into the carb (or TB), and adding a little bit of oxidizer at the same time. In a carb application it should allow you to retune the engine a bit and gain a couple(?) miles per gallon of gas used. I don't think the additional drag on an engine that's already turning would be enough to cancel out the gain. I know nitrous comes prepackaged in a bottle, but even without the extra fuel dumped in, you wring a lot more power out of gasoline just by increasing the rate of oxidation with nitrous, adding actual oxygen would be better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
C'mon, you're smarter than to believe their flim flam BS.

You can't run an engine to power an alternator to run a hydrolysis cell to make hydrogen & oxygen to run the engine that powers the ..........

Power is lost at every step due to inefficiencies of conversion, the fallacy of every perpetual motion scheme EVEN IF no power is used for anything else but keeping it moving.

The 'cheat' that makes it sound reasonable if you don't look at it close is that other schemes to collect & use power actually wasted CAN have a positive effect if done well. "Regenerative braking" with an electric motor drive system is one example of a system that DOES work to recover 'lost' energy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
5 min. run time is a bit short to be useful beyond the Bonneville attempt.

Cool article anyways, tx. Steve. Wish they had posted an actual run to see if they got the record.

Reminds me of a College propane car built at SUNY Buffalo long ago, they used a Bug eye Sprite for a small car test subject to make it more interesting. That one was actually practical as a low emission road car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
...
You can't run an engine to power an alternator to run a hydrolysis cell to make hydrogen & oxygen to run the engine that powers the ..........
...
Correct, but that's not what's happening here.

The engine is already turning, powered by gasoline (it wouldn't run at all if you waited for the generator to make electricity to make H & O, etc,). The fact that it is already powered by gasoline, and that you are bleeding off current to do the hydrolysis, and that the combination of free H & free O (free = uncombined) is added to the air charge in the intake, means that you will get more "bang" per amount of gasoline. I'm just saying that since the engine is already expending energy to turn the alt, and since the amount of drag added by bleeding current from the alt is likely negligible, then it might be true that the added H (would increase octane) and added O (would increase oxidation) could allow the carb to be re-jetted to leaner mix and save gas per mile... simply increasing the efficiency of the gasoline that is powering the engine.

Or not... I'd really like to see test results.
 

·
Don't Call Me Gaga!
Joined
·
30,267 Posts
The draw on the alternator wouldn't be negligible, it would be more than you'd get from the H&O combustion. It's Chem 101.

Looking at the numbers, a liter of water makes 1857 liters of gas (H2 and O2) through electrolysis.

Say your engine draws 25 CFM or 708 liters per minute at cruising speeds. That means that your engine can consume the entire contents of that one liter container in 2.6 minutes at cruise if it ran on nothing by that container.... or 26 seconds at full throttle.

...but that container doesn't empty that fast with a teenty 12V electrolysis source. Say you refill it every 1000 miles at 60MPH. That's 6000 minutes of driving at 708 liters per minute. Your engine consumed 4,248,000 liters of airn during that time, which would include the 1857 from that one liter container. That's .04%, 2/3s of which is hydrogen. That's not enough to make a measurable difference. Changes in temperature and barometric pressure are more significant.

Nevermind that my theoretical engine is getting like... 7MPG, but it's in the ballpark.

Anyway... I'm sure my numbers are crap anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,090 Posts
^Phew!!! Good show. That's a lot of number work... which explains why I went with "dynamo" to describe the power output needed, and "milk truck" to describe the amount of water needed to fuel a small (I was thinking 2.0L) engine on the fly... as well as my reference to "liquid hydrogen" for the real world ...(bread crumbs).

However, it has been a fun discussion, even though I knew my "argument" would eventually, inevitably, crumble.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,177 Posts
Yeah, the fundamental problem with this system, is that the alternator cannot make 'extra energy that it wasted', the energy it produces must be consumed, in the same way your electrical meter on your house doesn't spin when the lights are off. When you do electrolysis, which is a thing, inefficiencies in the system don't produce as much potential energy (hydrogen) as it takes to create that potential energy. Then, when you burn the hydrogen (chemical reaction) you have inefficiencies again. Damn you Newton!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Reminds me too much of Jr. High Science - didn't get a lot of output from that lab setup either, even plugged into the wall with a transformer.
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top