Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

[MikDee]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Just don't get hurted, it ain't wurted

You probably know this from the posts here, but your alternator gets harder to turn, to drive, the more electrical load that's put on it, up to it's maximum rated (regulated) output, so it's eating HP or fuel. I wonder how much it would put out, unregulated? before it burnt up, & disintegrated

 

[QC]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

One last try with the electrical thing and then I am done . . . In my .9 example, yes you are already burning the gasoline for the 1 to make the .9 . . . Buuuuuuut you have now ADDED load, so now you need to burn 2 bhp worth to make 1.8 . . . there is no "free" electricity floating around, the alternator only makes as much as it needs, and the fuel burnt to do so changes when that load goes up or down . . . you have made it go up . . .

 

[BoatBuoy]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

I just had a revelation. Why not build power plants near the ocean. Pipe in ocean water, separate the hydrogen and oxygen, burn the hydrogen to turn electric turbines/generators, use the electricity produced to separate more ocean water, etc. Only problem is that falls into the category of perpetual motion machine and the U. S. Patent Office won't entertain applications as such, so there will be a lot of competition with everybody building them, but competition means lower prices, but the main cost of electricity is the cost of fuel, but in this case the cost is FREE, but then there's the environmental concerns, and what are you going to do with all the dead fish carcasses caught in the process. Huh? Huh? I'm afraid excess fish carcasses will kill this idea totally. Better stop. I'm almost into politics.

 

[rob711]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

hey man good for u...where are u going to hook up the hose comming off the bottle...directly to the manifold?...i guess as long as the bottle is up-right it won't suck any of that water...just free sweet hydrogen!! and as stated.. i always thought as electrical demand grew so did the resistance on the altenator...what the fu*& give it a go...i doubt u will seriously damage any thing...let us know how it worked...but it it helped even marginally would'nt this be some what commom place?..good luck!

 

[angus63]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Reread my quote . . . Yes your alternator charges the battery, but there is a loss between the energy that your alternator needs to replace the amount your battery needs to be recharged. Basically you cannot have an electric motor run an alternator to recharge your battery for the loss of energy to run the alternator? See. If the alternator just sits there and spins with the same resistance with all electrical loads, then why not run your house off of your car's alternator while it idles in your garage? Everything adds load, the alternator reacts to that load and increases it's resulting load on the engine driving it harder to address that increased electrical load. Buuuuuuut, it takes about 1 horsepower derived from your gasoline to create .9 horsepower of electricity . . . or something like that, but you don't get ANY electricity for free . . . None.

The engineer geek in me compels me to ellaborate on QC's response. There is a direct conversion from Horsepowr (hp) to Watts (w). 1 hp = 746 watts. Since w= volts x amps in a dc system, an 18 amp alternator in a 12vdc system will "generate" appx 216 watts. 216w/746w = 0.29 hp. This is all neglecting mechanical losses, friction losses, resistive losses, etc......

If we make the efficiency of the system 50%, it would take appx 1/2 hp to drive your alternator at max rated 18 amp. If we assume it takes appx 50hp to cruise at highway speed, your alternator is pulling about 1% of your total hp. If this Rube Goldberg set up gains you 5% better gas mileage, I'd say you're a winner!!

Two other quick observatons: Distilled water a must or corrosion will kill your setup in short order and be sure your copper helical "springs" will remain isolated from each other as they heat up or the sparks generated from the dead short will ignite the hydrogen gas trapped in the mason jar. The bulge in the hood wil be a clear indication this occured.

Also, be sure the amperage draw from your contraption does not exceed the max rating of your charging system, or strange smells and idiot lights are in your future! Inline 15amp fuse will be advisible.

Best of luck and keep me informed please.......

 

[SgtMaj]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Ok, Well I just finished with the first initial test... and I can unoquivically say that it doesn't work. Apparently copper is not a viable metal to use... here's what happened.

I mixed in baking soda with distilled water, then hooked it up to the battery. I didn't hook it up to the manifold yet. It definately produced a good amt. of "gas", however, I'm quite certain that gas was not electrolyzed Hydrogen and Oxygen as it wouldn't explode or even burn when I attempted to light it with a blow torch. The water also quickly turned a cloudy deep blue (almost iceburg blue) color.

Other mistakes: The reaction chamber was not well sealed, as I quickly detected 4 leaks, however as long as it wasn't under pressure, it did a halfway decent job of pushing the gas through the tube.

Other things of interest: Within a couple of minutes, the jar was really hot. This brings into question weather a plastic reaction chamber/lid would be feasable. However, since the reaction wasn't the correct one, I have to assume the possibility that the correct reaction may not significantly raise the temperature.

Here's a pic of the water after about 1 minute...

Yumm, looks refreshing, doesn't it? Reminds me of that glacier water from that movie, the water boy.

Just for giggles, I'm going to re-attempt this without the baking soda to see if I get the same or similar reaction.

SgtMaj

 

[SgtMaj]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

I just had a revelation. Why not build power plants near the ocean. Pipe in ocean water, separate the hydrogen and oxygen, burn the hydrogen to turn electric turbines/generators, use the electricity produced to separate more ocean water, etc. Only problem is that falls into the category of perpetual motion machine and the U. S. Patent Office won't entertain applications as such, so there will be a lot of competition with everybody building them, but competition means lower prices, but the main cost of electricity is the cost of fuel, but in this case the cost is FREE, but then there's the environmental concerns, and what are you going to do with all the dead fish carcasses caught in the process. Huh? Huh? I'm afraid excess fish carcasses will kill this idea totally. Better stop. I'm almost into politics.

Wow, your mastery of what is being attempted here is astounding...

I'm also expecting this to turn the vehicle invisible, and make it fly all the way into outer space, and I expect it to become a time travel device, too.

By your logic, fly wheels don't work.

SgtMaj

 

[jameskb2]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Hello all,

First, this is possible. You will be feeding hydrogen gas and oxygen through the engine's air intake, making a more powerful combustion mixture than simple air.

I have done this (make H2 and O) as a science experiment way back in Jr. High. I took two D cell batteries and coupled them in series to produce 3v. I took a lead from pos and neg and fed them into a mason jar (heh) filled with water. Each lead was wrapped around a carbon element, and a test tube was placed just over the top of each carbon element to catch the gas. The tubes where filled with water and then held higher than the static line of water using the vacuum induced. As the gas was produced, water was forced out the bottom of the tubes.

You can tell which is which during gas production, because twice as much H2 is made than O.

Hydrogen is lighter than air, so you can remove the test tube without "spilling" the gas. Put a flame under it and POP! it will ignite with a surprising force for just a test tube's worth!

So, can you make a rig for your car? Well, that depends. Yes, the 12V is more than enough to create the gases. Entrapment of the gas produced, and the feed system to meter it to the engine might be a trick. You can locate some plain carbon rods (the bigger the better to produce maximum gas) at a salvage / scrap recycling center (where you take scrap metal or aluminum) or they could tell you where to get one.

I would create a tank that is large enough to hold at least five gallons of water. The rate of change to gas is actually fast...depending on size of rods and voltage of course. Be safe, hydrogen is extremely explosive!

Could be worth playing around with....for fun. You might actually build a prototype and rig it to a lawn mower or other small engine to get a feel for it before you try the car though! A small engine with a 10 amp charging system could do it.

There is truth to the fact that you won't net any gain as far as energy produced as the engine has to make electricity to power the gas induced which is fed into the motor. Energy lost in the transfer points due to resistance and transfer of gas to engine. However, you are creating a more explosive mix...so some fuel should be saved. The water is "giving" energy to the engine even though it takes energy to extract. Energy as you know can't be "destroyed" only transferred. There is "stored" energy in the water, just a burning wood or any other fuel is a release of stored energy into a different form. (heat or light...even smoke is a transferred form of energy) The loss is due to the fact that you have to "spend" energy to change the water to gas.

It's intriguing for sure!

JamesK

 

[BoatBuoy]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Wow, your mastery of what is being attempted here is astounding...
SgtMaj

Yep, I've got you dialed in pretty good SgtMaj.

By your logic, fly wheels don't work.

I understand flywheels too. Can you say "Newtons First Law"? But I fail to understand the relevance.

 

[jameskb2]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

To address the alternator quandary, you stated:

"I'm thinking about it like this... imagine that the alternator was disconnected from the electrical system for a moment here... the engine and electrical system are running off the battery alone in this hypothetic situation, but the alternator is still physically installed. Even though there is nothing drawing current from the alternator it still spins because it's physically connected by a belt, which costs engine hp for it to be connected, right? And even though there's nothing using the current, the alternator is still generating electric power, but that power is completely wasted because there is nothing using it right? So if you then use that electricity to power an electric motor that somehow aided in propelling the vehicle forward, any hp that the electric motor added, would be an increase in efficiency, right? Ok, so that's basically what I'm thinking will go on here, except instead of an electric motor, I'm going to be using a chemical reaction to create some minute extra bit of hp."

Now, using that logic, I see what you are saying. What you are not understanding is that the larger the load on your alternator, the more energy required to spin it. An alternator is an AC (alternating current) generator. The alternator's regulator / rectifier changes the AC to DC to feed the car's 12v system. WHEN A LOAD of current demand is increased, the alternator DEMANDS an increase in power to turn it. You know how when you jump start another vehicle with your car running? You hear the "draw down" on the engine when you finish connecting the cables? That's the power demand on the engine to produce the amperage to charge / start the other car. You rev the engine a bit to get higher revolutions to produce more power.

YOU WILL BE DRAWING ADDITIONAL CURRENT TO CREATE THE GAS in your extractor. It will require more power. It will load the alternator a bit. That's why everyone's saying you don't net an energy increase. The alternator is loaded more because of the power requirement. Yes, you're argument is correct IF there was "no load". The alternator always produces a bit of power needed or not. The factor is how much power is needed to run the gas extractor vs the power created from running it.

Clear as mud?

 

[SgtMaj]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Ok... here's attempts 2 and 3...

2, with tap water, no baking soda..... no reaction whatsoever.

3, with distilled water, and salt instead of baking soda... again I got the blue reaction.

I think #3 shows that baking soda wasn't the culprit in the reaction, it had to be the copper. Now, either I can re-make the whole thing, using something else, such as stainless steel chain, or platinum chain... or I can simply say that I don't have the materials needed to make the proper reaction and give up... I think I'll try the stainless steel chain... just for giggles.

 

[SgtMaj]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

But I fail to understand the relevance.

AYUH, that's clear. In fact that could probably be nominated for an understatement of the year award.

I'm not going to bother explaining the relevance, again. If you haven't figured it out by now, the amout of energy it would take me to get you to understand, isn't worth the amount of energy that your understanding would generate.

 

[SgtMaj]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

To address the alternator quandary, you stated:

"I'm thinking about it like this... imagine that the alternator was disconnected from the electrical system for a moment here... the engine and electrical system are running off the battery alone in this hypothetic situation, but the alternator is still physically installed. Even though there is nothing drawing current from the alternator it still spins because it's physically connected by a belt, which costs engine hp for it to be connected, right? And even though there's nothing using the current, the alternator is still generating electric power, but that power is completely wasted because there is nothing using it right? So if you then use that electricity to power an electric motor that somehow aided in propelling the vehicle forward, any hp that the electric motor added, would be an increase in efficiency, right? Ok, so that's basically what I'm thinking will go on here, except instead of an electric motor, I'm going to be using a chemical reaction to create some minute extra bit of hp."

Now, using that logic, I see what you are saying. What you are not understanding is that the larger the load on your alternator, the more energy required to spin it. An alternator is an AC (alternating current) generator. The alternator's regulator / rectifier changes the AC to DC to feed the car's 12v system. WHEN A LOAD of current demand is increased, the alternator DEMANDS an increase in power to turn it. You know how when you jump start another vehicle with your car running? You hear the "draw down" on the engine when you finish connecting the cables? That's the power demand on the engine to produce the amperage to charge / start the other car. You rev the engine a bit to get higher revolutions to produce more power.

So the slower the alternator turns, the more current is produced? Doesn't sound right...

 

[Kenneth Brown]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Sarge I love your enthusism and WANT this to work for you. Their right about the alt using hp and the loads though. I too am hopeing that your contraption produces more power than it uses. The copper is (again my opinion only) your problem. It is making copper sulfate or something very similiar. You can buy this in a cheleated form (powdery flakes) to put in ponds to kill out vegitation. Switch to SS and see what happens. I admire the heck out of you for trying this.
As a side note I saw a Dodge Dakota in Waco Texas over the Christmas season that said water powered on it. In the bed he had a hydrogen setup. I wish I would have been able to get some info from the guy.

 

[jameskb2]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

No, the faster the alternator turns, the more power produced. The Alternator is (somewhat) opposite of an electric motor. A magnet is spun inside a coil of wires to produce a field of electricity. The bigger the magnet, the more coils of wire, the larger the charge.

I understand what you're saying. You think that since the alternator is spinning anyway, producing "waste" power that perhaps is not being used, that it could be put to use in this instance. You could be right, depending on the amount of current draw that is needed to run the extractor. If the alternator is not loaded any more than it is when just handling the engine's requirements (excess capacity) then your theory is correct. You are using the excess alternator energy (waste) to create more fuel which would increase mileage.

Want to go a little further? Ever notice that you get better mileage on a rainy day? You get even better mileage on a really foggy day? Why? Because the moisture in the air allows for a denser combustion mix. There is more oxygen in each charge creating more power.

How could you "inject" moisture into the air charge on a dry day? Try running exhaust gases through a heat transfer system submerged in water. It has to get hot enough to boil (or at least heat the water to a vapor). The water vapor is allowed to be "inhaled" into the vehicle's intake, creating a denser charge and increasing power...which increases mileage.

This is a proven system that works. (You get about a 1 to 3 percent increase in mileage) The exhaust system is looped through the exchanger and then run back to conventional exit points. It's a "poor man's" turbo system if you will....

 

[jameskb2]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Water injection is also a possibility.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_injection_(engines)

Water Injection

 

[jameskb2]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Or....one more..... hybrid!

Just kind of dawned on me, what if you used the exhaust system's velocity to run a turbo like vane that powered a small generator that ran your extractor? Then, you would be using waste energy, (the exhaust) to run your system with no power loss.

That's the ticket! LOL

Or, if you live in a sunny climate, you could use a solar collector (photo voltaic) to run your extractor. Use the sun's energy to produce the electricity. That's "free" energy.

Since we are dealing with supplemental systems, and not primary.....

 

[waterinthefuel]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Want to go a little further? Ever notice that you get better mileage on a rainy day? You get even better mileage on a really foggy day? Why? Because the moisture in the air allows for a denser combustion mix. There is more oxygen in each charge creating more power.

Water injection was used in airplanes, and it had nothing to do with the mixture, well, it did, but only in supercharged engines. It will not help in a normally aspirated car, which is why it isn't there! It was to cool the engine when operating at max power. You are so confused about what water injection is and how it works, or more importantly why it works. That being said...

I have no idea about this contraption this guy is making, but I do have to step in here. You are incorrect about this. A humid or rainy day would make for less horsepower. There is not more oxygen in each charge, there is less. The air is not denser, as air density depends mostly on temperature, not humidity.

On each intake stroke a certain volume of air is taken in. If there are water molecules in that air, it is taking the place of oxygen molecules, and water DOES NOT BURN. Therefore on a humid or rainy day your vehicle will get LESS mileage and less power, as the space taken up by the water is wasted and thus not helping to create power on the power stroke. Basically, the water is displacing the oxygen. Without a supercharger, mother natures water injection will kill power. Water injection does not increase oxygen or make it more dense, it simply cools the incoming air. In order to overcome the reduction in oxygen from the water, you have to supercharge the engine.

Cold air, however, WILL produce more power and cold air is more dense and thus causes an increase in oxygen available with every stroke. The cold air injection systems, if they work, in theory, should produce more power. You can't get something for nothing. You will gain more power on a cold day, but, since more fuel is needed to make the correct mixture because the air is denser, your gas mileage will actually fall a bit.

http://www.racecarbook.com/pdfs/9.pdf

 

[jay_merrill]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Wanna borrow some of my magic banana peels?

 

[SgtMaj]

Re: Crazy gas saving scheme, will it work?

Sarge I love your enthusism and WANT this to work for you. Their right about the alt using hp and the loads though. I too am hopeing that your contraption produces more power than it uses.

That's not possible though. Nothing can create more energy than it uses.

Jameskb2 got it when he said:
"I understand what you're saying. You think that since the alternator is spinning anyway, producing "waste" power that perhaps is not being used, that it could be put to use in this instance. You could be right, depending on the amount of current draw that is needed to run the extractor. If the alternator is not loaded any more than it is when just handling the engine's requirements (excess capacity) then your theory is correct. You are using the excess alternator energy (waste) to create more fuel which would increase mileage."

See, it's not about creating more energy, it's about recapturing some of the energy already created, just like a flywheel does. DANG IT! I said I wasn't going to explain that again, and there I went and did it.

The copper is (again my opinion only) your problem. It is making copper sulfate or something very similiar. You can buy this in a cheleated form (powdery flakes) to put in ponds to kill out vegitation. Switch to SS and see what happens. I admire the heck out of you for trying this.

That very well could be... will have to go get a little 1' section of SS chain, cut it in half, and try it out.