Actually, my opinion is backed up by scientific facts, not speculation. As I have stated earlier, I built one of these Hydrogen generators back in the 70's in a Quantitative Analysis class when I was at A&M. I wish they would work. Chemical analysis unfortunately says it won't. Let me know when you have changed the laws of chemistry.

 

The effects of combustion with gasoline in an engine?

 

Producing Hydrogen with an Engine driven system, introducing the resulting Hydrogen into the fueling system, and doing this while producing a net increase in energy.

 

I never read that study. Funny all the university studies I read about ADDING hydrogen showed that it worked.
Are you talking about ADDING hydrogen or running on hydrogen?

 

Tree - your splitting hairs, just so we know what you mean. Can you please give us data showing the flows you are talking about that work. Where is the line between running on H2 and adding it for some benefit?

Just so you know I would love for a system to work but I have already posted the math showing how impossible it would be to get the flows required to improve mileage just 10% but you down play those numbers by saying I am replacing fuel and your not doing that.

 

I make no bones about the benefit of adding Hydrogen. It just isn't cost effective if you produce it with the engine or add it from an out side source........it cost to play either way. You can't find me any research sanctioned by a University. Any Professor or group of Professors that could prove they can produce Hydrogen with an engine driven cell, (as you claim)and the results could be reproduced ,would win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry. You know how much any University covets having a Nobel Laureate on their staff? So no, no University has claimed the results you are trying to achieve.

 

Camp I'm not a scientist, and I don't play one on this forum. Are you a scientist? Oh you'r just playing one on this forum. Must be why your " research doesn't add up. Show me the research done at a university or privatly that's published. There are lots of links early in this thread giveing university studies as references for hydrogen working. Yet I have not gotten one in return from you " scientists that goes beyond your or someones opinion.
Annabelle thanks for at least recognizeing the benifit of adding hydrogen.

 

There wont be any published papers on the failure to produce Hydrogen by an engine driven cell in an energy effective manner. My wife is a published Professor in her field. Do you realize how difficult it is to get a recognized publication to publish your findings. Negative results are not going to be accepted, or submitted for that matter. You are the one who needs to show proof that your hypothesis works. It's not up to anyone to prove a negative. Show me one article published by a recognized source that has passed pier review and pasted all the steps necessary to be published and then you will have a leg to stand on. I don't want anyone's "claims" which have not been shown to have been replicated by their bonified piers.

 

I never said hydrogen would not work in an engine. It is just that one of the problems I see is you cant produce enough to make a difference. You insist that you are not replacing the primary fuel but adding just enough to make a change in the combustion process. That's fine but without data to show what that flow is there is no way to corroborate the results. I just want to know how much that is, that you say works, so I can try to validate or invalidate the data from independent studies.

You have been doing this for more then 5 years, you must have done flow rate calculation in that time.

 

Annabelle: There were several studies mentioned early on in this thread doing exactly what you are asking for.
Camp: I'm not a scientist and I don't have equipment to check flow rates. I have done some very generic flow/volume rate tests. Some of the studies mentioned early in this thread mentioned flow rates. There are studies that show what the effects are on the gas or diesel when you add hydrogen to the mix. Simple logic: If the emissions are reduced the fuel is being burned and used not sent out the tail pipe.

 

Actually it is not simple as it depends on the emissions components that are changed.

Reduced combustion temps will typically increase CO but reduce NOx. Conversely increased combustion temperatures will decrease CO and increase NOx. Neither condition guarantees an improved combustion efficiency and an increase in MPG. As you maybe able to see it is not that simple.

As for measuring the flow there are some inexpensive flow meters but you can build your own with a bucket and a 1 liter bottle. Fill the bucket and bottle with water. Invert the bottle so the opening is at the bottom. Insert your supply tube into the bottle and run your system. The gas will displace the water out the bottom and the bottle will rise in the bucket. Use a stop watch to see how long it takes to displace the water.

 

After going trough the complete thread, I can't find any from a recognized publication in the chemical or physics field

 

TreeDr,

Why is it that people who have used bottled hydrogen can't see any improvement in mpg yet somehow you seem to be able to with your homemade HHO set up? BTW we all know that with bottled hydrogen you can adjust the output so we can rule out the excuse they used to much or not enough.

 

So they are building cars useing the ADD hydrogen on demand science. Dang I hate research. Maybe you guys should try it sometime.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-99...ml?tag=cd.blog
http://www.engr.wisc.edu/alumni/pers...reenmoped.html

 

Funny, neither one claim the reaction to be efficient......only that it increases the burn of gasoline. Still waiting for a published paper showing the concept is efficient. Not anecdotal evidence that you construe in your favor. Research.....you find me some.