So does it mean that the extra burden on the electrical system (caused by the electrolyzer) is being compensated for?

Since adding more oxygen increases reaction output.

Thks

garthr your fuel mileage is quite impressive . if you make a electrolizer with ss plates gas production will be increased because of the added surface area .With netral plates you will get less power drain for the same gas production and this stops the sludge build up. your fuel figures put the power drain on the electics to bed, 30 percent is 40 + cent a liter saving got to luv that. hydrogen is not a fuel but an energy carrier but the O2 from the process will increase the fuel burn giving more power and better economy .water injection makes steam but dosn't help conbustion but HHO is very reactive it will make some water but will aid combustion . Remember your not running your car only on hydrogen and oxygen but other hydrocarbons (fuel) .HHO can reach 2700 C used for under water welding and cutting .It will cut tungsten . google "brown's gas " for more. Chin up mate the world is full of knockers .

on the weekend have built a couple more cells with different designs, 1 of which shows promise of extra gas with less amps, - already produces a bit more than the coffee jar but needs to be conditioned yet.

it is plate style, housed in pvc pipe

will try and add some pics later.

also am going to try injecting gas into snorkle rather than the manifold or maybe both places, - need to do lots more testing/experimenting.

but i have seen enough from my 1st attempt to convince me that there is potential with this idea. Just need to make system a bit more reliable to take advantage of it with least amount of headaches.

While you are adding more oxygen, you are also adding more fuel (in the form of hydrogen). The amount of oxygen is exactly the amount required to react with the hydrogen (assuming losses effect both gases equally), since hydrogen has a lower activation energy than petrol, the oxygen will be used before the petrol begins to burn.

The more I think about this the more it appears that it is simply an inefficient water injection system.

The fact that these gases are displacing normal air that would otherwise enter the engine would explain better economy (a dyno would show a slightly reduced power output to match).

Heydonms,

Yes the oxygen input matches the hydrogen input ratio but the the volume reqired for the spark plug to ignite it is to low so it is the petrol reaction which is igniting the hydrogen. this means that some of the oxygen is being used by the initial reaction of the petrol.

With the increased efficiency of the petrol burn it compensates for the extra load on the electrical system.

sounds logical, - and along those lines maybe there would be more to be gained from separating oxygen output from cell and simply injecting that into intake? (discard all or some of the hydrogen?)

People I think this is all about the fact that hydrogen is an extremely volatile fuel as is oxygen (and petrol) and is a supplement fuel in the fire triangle, ie. fuel, air and heat.

After all if you run out of petrol you have no bang. If your air cleaner is blocked or substantially restricted once again little or no bang and if there is no heat (spark) your fuel air mix will not ignite, so no bang.

The engine management system combines the exact measurement of air and fuel for most power and igintes it with spark (heat) at the optimum moment. Without one of the three components or too much of one and not enough of another you will not have an engine the works.

The Hindenburg was a good example of the bang Hydrogen produces.

This principle produces and hydrogen oxygen from relatively inexpensive materials to supplement the petrol at about $1.50 per L The more kilometres for less petrol amounts to some savings in the hip pocket.

Remember you are leaning out the petrol mix for the same amount of power. You can use less petrol because the hydrogen and oxygen is burning to assist in keep the motor going.

If you are a non-believer don't do it and pay more, no problems. If you do believe make a device and save money, or keep reading about the results from the Garthr's of this forum.

The facts are the some people have tried on behalf of all of us with some very promising, actual true results and I sincerely thank those pioneers particularly Garthr for their efforts.

It's disappointing that there are sceptics who "appear" to criticise those who are simply giving it a go for the better of all. Keep up the good work and please reply to correct any errors that I may have made in my above comments.

sincere regards to all.

i would think that maybe plumbing the gas in to the elbow right before the butterfly would be the best spot for it


i think your mistaken. the skin was the thing that burnt the most there.

And what of all this hydrogen spliting? are we going to see falcons roaming the country with outragous fuel economy and dramaticly increase power soon?

here are couple of pics of newest cell, still may need to incorporate a level indicator.
still doesn't produce the sort of quantity that i had hoped for and needs fairly strong electrolyte, so i think i need closer plate spacing (at present this cell is 3mm gaps

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Hey nice pix Garth, looks a bit like a spud gun I once built , hahahhaha.can,t wait to get mine going, hahaha.

Who knows where this little experiment will end up? I'm sure the first bloke to think of NOS was bagged. Then there was LPG. What about the first bloke to develop petrol? Remember the power reduction stink that unleaded petrol conversion caused in 86-87-88.

This hydrogen power is a very real alternative. BMW has already developed a high powered hydrogen vehicle.

So far Garthr has increased his hilux fuel economy remarkably as has hundreds of people around the world with vehicles using this system. All those who actually use one believe their vehicles run much better.

Just maybe when petrol disappears with crude oil, some will be driving Falcons on Brown gas whilst others can't get there cars going because they have no petrol. Enjoy your electric golf buggies. Interesting thought hey!!! The experts say it is going to happen....sooner rather than later.



It was static electricity igniting the hydrogen gas that exploded the Hindenburg. Yes the fabric burned but it was only there to hold the hydrogen in place for the lift as hydrogen is lighter than air. The volatility of hydrogen eventually stopped passenger transportation of the Graf Zepplin airships because it was to dangerous. It is a reason why helium is used in party balloons. Helium is also lighter than air but does not ignite.

I understand this system produces only small amounts of Hydrogen and Oxygen, however does anybody know what are the chances of engine fire and therefore total loss of vehicle in the event of a malfunction, backfire or leak? I would expect your insurance company would be quick to dump your insurance claim for a fire. Is there anyone in insurance who could help with that query?

Keep the dream alive!!!
sincere regards


[/quote]

Here is a link to a you tube video test drive and interview of the BMW Hydrogen 7. It runs for about 10 mins and actually refers to splitting of water by electrolysis and other points of interest that are regularly discussed in this topic. The BMW dude says twenty years before commercial hydrogen supply at fuel stations. You'd think you are twenty years ahead of time but according to some literature on this subject, we are nearly a century behind in this technology.

here is the link if you are interested

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N675mHss_uQ

sincere regards,

to get the plates closer together, you could try something like poly spacers

on the surface area thing, i would recomend thinking about getting some long strips and coiling them 'parallel' (for lack of a better word) in a spiral inside that poly tube you got there. effectively you'd more than double the area by having the outside of the inner strip the inside part of the next outer electrode. the only thing is the alignment of it would make it quite hard to get the spacing and all that right.

as for the spacing itself, the closer they are the easier it is for the molicules to get ripped apart or what ever. so closer = more efficent i think?

btw, did i mention we need DYNO FIGURES!

thanks for the input, fiftyone. i think i have seen the type of element of which u speak somewhere on the net, but couldn't work out how they maintain the spacing without losing efficiency, - u see the limiting factors are : close enough to get current flow, but far enough apart to allow the gas bubbles to leave the surface freely.
Also too close and u get a dead short which will kill production altogether (blown fuse)

As for the dyno figures, i agree. i would love to see some. but i cannot afford the time or the cost that would require, so we need someone with access to dyno to put something like this on a vehicle and offer their services. any takers?

if u can build a spud gun then u have all the technology needed to build one of these. hurry up & do it. let me know how u go.

The way i see it is this. Even an inefficient cell (like mine apparently) still produces enough gas to make a difference, as it doesn't seem to require very much at all - it is just a supplement after all. So just throw something together with whatever u have available.

and any difference whatsoever is still a saving