with da right design... u can get more than that....


but hav not try yet....

me neither, I am going to need some help in getting started...

 

It's amazing how so many seemingly educated people can be so blind . I have a hydrogen generator on my vehicle . It has improved my mileage by roughly 50% (12 mpg up to 18 mpg). A friend of mine has nearly doubled his mileage . The better mileage does NOT come from using more hydrogen than gasoline . It comes from the tremendous boost in the efficiency of the gasoline that the hydrogen causes . We run what is called hybrids , this should not to be confused with the people who have hydrogen generators in their garage and purify and compress it and then run pure hydrogen in their cars , which is my next goal .

 

It's amazing how so many seemingly educated people can be so blind .

We're not blind. We are, however, skeptical of a great many seemingly wild and far-fetched claims that have been made with no substantiation; no before/after test results published by a truly reputable source.

Mere "testimonies" published on a random Internet site is purely heresy, and in no way, shape or form credible.

I have a hydrogen generator on my vehicle . It has improved my mileage by roughly 50% (12 mpg up to 18 mpg). A friend of mine has nearly doubled his mileage .

So, why don't you publish the schematics and plans that you used to build your device? If you purchased a "kit" from somewhere, please do not post links to the vendor, as that would be construed as advertising, which is not allowed.

The better mileage does NOT come from using more hydrogen than gasoline . It comes from the tremendous boost in the efficiency of the gasoline that the hydrogen causes. We run what is called hybrids

This is understood. However, without significant modifications to various portions of the engine control systems, severe engine damage will result. Additionally, improperly made modifications will also result in severe engine damage, with additional hazards such as VERY hot fires due to catalytic converter light-offs, and fire/explosion hazards due to the creation of hydrogen and oxygen gasses within confined spaces.

This should not to be confused with the people who have hydrogen generators in their garage and purify and compress it and then run pure hydrogen in their cars , which is my next goal .

You should publish your location, as I would not wish to live next door to someone who built a hydrogen generator in their garage, and was storing quantities of the gas onsite.

It is one thing to generate very small quantities of hydrogen and oxygen for use on demand. However, storing even moderate quantities of it is extremely dangerous. It really isn't something for an amateur to attempt.

 

Part of the problem is to anyone with a scientific background (which describes most of the experienced techs here) not finding any experiments is very disturbing. It screams fraud. If it wasn't fraud then someone would publish hard data. This isn't a catch 22, it's pretty straightforward. Hard data is not emperical evidence. Emperical evidence, BTW, is hearsay.

Screaming IT WORKS only hardens points of view, which is what is happening here. I have an open mind on the subject, but to date no one has done the work of collecting data.

 

the strange thing here is that the alternator produces a tremendous amount of unused energy.. wind generators mounted on a moving vehicle, extra altenators.. all seem retty much the way to go.. i have read all that nasa research stuff.. the 1.2 volt drop for each plate.. tried to measure a resistance across the heated solution and plates...We made plates of 3 square inches and mounted them 5mm apart.. .. at 40 amps the solution boilted out hydroxy... we used 10 plates to getthe right volt drop and i know that with a bit of time and work .. this can be produced efficiently.. i am not trying to get rich.. just get back at oil companies and government.. but already they are trying to tax those who use bio diesal for using veg oils and alcohals.. sheesh

 

the strange thing here is that the alternator produces a tremendous amount of unused energy..

No, it produces the energy required to recharge the battery after the engine has been started, and to run the vehicle's electrical system. While there may be some degree of excess capacity after the battery has been replenished, operating an alternator continuously at full capacity will reduce it's life span.

If one really wished to power additional accessories that drew a good deal of power, retrofitting an additional alternator(s) would be necessary. However, the power to generate the electricity would increase the power output necessary from the engine in order to maintain the vehicle's speed.

wind generators mounted on a moving vehicle,

For a commuter vehicle, this suggestion borders on ludicrous.

extra altenators..

That is do-able.

all seem retty much the way to go.. i have read all that nasa research stuff..

What "NASA research stuff" are you referring to?

the 1.2 volt drop for each plate..

What are you talking about now? Nickle-iron batteries?

tried to measure a resistance across the heated solution and plates...

What is the chemical makeup of your "solution"?
What temperature was the solution heated to?
What were the plates made of?
Since R=E/I, you could measure the resistance by placing a voltage potential across the item to be measured.

We made plates of 3 square inches and mounted them 5mm apart..

OK, 3 square inches, so roughly 1 3/4" on a side? Or did you mean 3"x3" plates, for 9 square inches?
What material did you use?

.. at 40 amps the solution boilted out hydroxy... we used 10 plates to get the right volt drop

OK, if you had 40A flowing through your array of plates with a 1.2v potential, then you had a resistance of 33.333... Ohms - that is, if your plates were connected in parallel. If they were connected in series so that you had 12v to 14v across them, then you would have 12/40 to 14/40 (0.3 to 0.35) Ohms of resistance

and i know that with a bit of time and work .. this can be produced efficiently..

Cmdr Scotty to Kirk: "Cap'n, I canna' change the laws of physics!"

am not trying to get rich.. just get back at oil companies and government..

You're not going to "get back" at them.

but already they are trying to tax those who use bio diesal for using veg oils and alcohals.. sheesh

It costs money to maintain roads/highways, and the Highway Patrol also needs to be funded. Money doesn't grow on trees, you know.

 

Wookie pretty much summed it up, but I can't help myself, being a verbose sort.

Alternators and generators do not produce excess power. If you load them down (draw more amps) their shaft becomes harder to turn. This is how the laws of thermodynamics exert themselves, energy in = energy out (minus conversion losses as heat).

You can test this using a small DC motor, which also acts as a generator if you spin the shaft. Turn its shaft, is should spin freely, because there is no load. Now short the power leads, it won't be quite so easy.

Assuming you set up wind generators on your vehicle the power generated comes from your engine, same as the belt from your engine to the alternator. In this case the drag generated by it would reduce your milage accordingly.

The ONLY advantage of wind power is it is a natural resource that is way under utilized, same as solar power. Actually wind power is a form of solar power, the sun powers weather on earth. Both are free only because no one is using them.

Something had to create that energy. Anytime you create energy from your car's movement the source was the gas being burned in your engine. The internal combustion engine is already inefficient, you don't need to add more chains of inefficiency.

 

It's amazing how so many seemingly educated people can be so blind . I have a hydrogen generator on my vehicle .

Excellent! Here's an experiment for you to try:
1)Install an on/off switch for your hydrogen generator where a passenger can use it, but you can't see it. Have a passenger set it randomly.
2)Travel at an exact speed on an open stretch of highway, say 60mph.
3)While maintaining the gas pedal at a steady position, have the passenger toggle the magic machine either on (if it was off) or off (if it was on). Have them do this when you are not sure if they are doing it or not. (Make them keep their hand on the switch.)
4)Repeat at least a half dozen times.
5)Report back to us on what happens.

Until then, it is you who are blind. (Pun deliberately intended!)

 

Its good to see others out here working hard, spending their time trying to find a way to do what others say is not possible. To help rather than sitting back, providing out dated data and formulas that history continues to show, formulas often needs to be modified to include additional new revised data. If those that criticize, would stop and realize, they are putting themselves in the same category of the stone throwers that criticize Tesla, Madame Curi, the Wright Brothers and so many others, that worked very hard to find solutions that add to the betterment of mankind. When working together to make it possible much more can and will improve life for everyone. Don’t limit your knowledge to what others thought they knew, keep searching beyond what they have taught you, findind a way to improve what they failed to learn is much more rewarding. With that said, I would like to ask for assistance to improve a circuit I believe could be of value once improved a bit. Has anyone here built the current regulated PWM on Zero fossil fuel site? Or can anyone recommend how to improve the current control. It has problems driving the Mosfet gate when setting a max current level you kick.
Scope shows peak voltage levels decline leading to higher temp of Mosfet. Manually changing duty cycle works but hard to fine tune and doesn’t hold at set level due to load changes as HHO cell worms up . Getting to old to relearn everything that was lost after severe head injury yet still trying ……could use a hand.
Thanks Oldtech2

 

The material at this link - http://guns.connect.fi/innoplaza/energy/story/Kanarev/electrolysis/index.html - should make for interesting reading by people on all sides of this.

Please to note that electrolyzing water always takes more energy to do than can be produced by burning the hydrogen and oxygen made by the electrolysis.

In automobiles, it takes more energy to drive the alternator than the power it produces. These combined losses mean that no matter how much Brown's gas gets produced by some under hood gadget, it will never be able to increase the mileage of that car. And there is just not that much extra capacity in an alternator to spare for electrolysis.

Another thing to keep in mind - nobody here has any irons in this fire. We stand to benefit from energy breakthroughs, so any idea with merit would get a warm reception. This particular idea (and its several variations) simply lacks any such merit.

We would eagerly welcome something like numbers and methods being published. A truely reproducible experiment that could be independently confirmed. That is the basis of science - everybody does the same thing under the same conditions and gets the same results.

 

Its good to see others out here working hard, spending their time trying to find a way to do what others say is not possible.

Difficult can be done right away. Impossible just takes a bit longer.

To help rather than sitting back, providing out dated data and formulas that history continues to show, formulas often needs to be modified to include additional new revised data.

And that's exactly the problem we're seeing nowadays. No accurate, reliable data from experimenters in this field.

If those that criticize, would stop and realize, they are putting themselves in the same category of the stone throwers that criticize Tesla, Madame Curi, the Wright Brothers and so many others, that worked very hard to find solutions that add to the betterment of mankind.

I'm not categorizing myself. However, I have yet to see one single, solid piece of scientifically documented proof that any of these circuits are viable, or repeatable.

When working together to make it possible much more can and will improve life for everyone.

True, but it can also result in a lot of very broke people from buying gadgets that don't work.

Don’t limit your knowledge to what others thought they knew, keep searching beyond what they have taught you, findind a way to improve what they failed to learn is much more rewarding.

Like, magic?

With that said, I would like to ask for assistance to improve a circuit I believe could be of value once improved a bit.

There's always that "slight bit of improvement" necessary. In reality, everything is a trade-off. About the best you can hope for in electronic circuits is 97% efficiency, and that's a handful of hoping. Usually, it's much less.

Has anyone here built the current regulated PWM on Zero fossil fuel site? Or can anyone recommend how to improve the current control. It has problems driving the Mosfet gate when setting a max current level you pick.

Made a small correction; I believe you meant "pick" instead of "kick". However, problems abound with circuits found amongst the HHO crowd.

Scope shows peak voltage levels decline leading to higher temp of Mosfet.

Check the gate voltage. If it's not >=10v or <=0v, you have a problem.
MOSFETs have a positive temperature coefficient; as they get hot, their Rds increases, which might account for your peak voltage decline. Use a higher-rated MOSFET, increase cooling (water cooling works great!), use multiple MOSFETs in parallel, etc.

Manually changing duty cycle works but hard to fine tune and doesn’t hold at set level due to load changes as HHO cell warms up.

You seem to have a number of issues going on here; MOSFET heating, PWM needs changing, etc.

Here's something that is common knowledge, and should be quite helpful:
Water has a higher dielectric constant than air. As water heats up, it's dielectric constant lowers. At room temperature, pure water has a dielectric constant of about 80. Near boiling, it's dielectric constant drops to around 55.
Air has a different set of dielectric properties. It's values may range from 70 down to 30, or perhaps even less. This is standard "air" that we breathe in/out every day, and not specifically HHO. I don't know offhand what the dielectric constant of HHO is.

So, at room temperature with no current applied, you have one dielectric constant; that of pure water. Then you apply current, and your dielectric constant changes, because you begin to get HHO bubbles in the water.

As temperature increases, the dielectric properties of the water changes (decreases), and as HHO production increases, the dielectric properties again decrease (this is pure speculation on my part.)

Getting to old to relearn everything that was lost after severe head injury yet still trying ……could use a hand.

Look, I'm not a complete skeptic. I AM skeptical when wild claims are made with incomplete/nonexistant documentation is supplied.

However, I have given you what I believe to be reasonable and rational explanations for the variations you are seeing, with what sparse input you have provided. I am not a miracle worker.

However, if you do some research, you will likely find that my suggestions/assertions are within reasonable limits of practicality.

What I would like from you is much better documentation on what you are doing, schematics, circuit layouts - basically, facts. As many facts as you have.

What this whole area is lacking is facts to back up claims. Claims without facts backing them up are simply lies.

 

An LM324 is being used to charge/discharge the gate of an IRFP064N via a 100 Ohm resistor, with an additional load to ground from a 1k resistor. Abysmal waveforms on the gate should be expected.

An LM324 can only source/sink about 30mA (practical limit) to begin with. If you want your MOSFET to keep cool, you will need a much higher source/sink capability.

I'm quite unimpressed with the circuit.

 

Has anyone here built the current regulated PWM on Zero fossil fuel site? Or can anyone recommend how to improve the current control. It has problems driving the Mosfet gate when setting a max current level you kick.

Try adding a driver (totem pole or some such) between R9 and Q1. Get rid of R13. Tie the free end of VR2 to the wiper arm of same (engines are electronically very noisy environments.)

I also wonder if C4 might be more useful connected to the junction of R10 & R12 instead of R10 and the Op Amp i/p.

 

There does need to be a pull-down resistor on the gate of Q1, for when there is no power applied to the unit (if power is not completely removed from the cell). Otherwise, the gate could float, turning on Q1, resulting in an accumulation of HHO.

My complaint about R13 was based on it's small value of 1k. Increasing it to 10k or 20k would still allow it to perform it's power-off function, and the gate turn-on times would be improved.

As it is, with the 10v regulator, the output of an LM324 can range from 0v to Vcc -1.5v with a 2k load, meaning the gate's max voltage is <8.5v - when the opamp is at room temp; if Vcc=15v, typical source= -30mA, typ sink= 20mA. Those numbers go way down over the full temp range; -10mA and 5mA - and as everyone should know, automotive environments are among the most severe. As Vcc is 10v instead of 15v, those numbers should be further de-rated.

So, as the opamp heated up, the MOSFET would be operating in the linear region much of the time. As Thingmaker3 noted, a gate driver is a must.

The LM324/LM324A is only rated for operation from 0°C to 70°C, thus is not appropriate for automotive applications. The LM2902/LM2902Q is rated for -40°C to 125°C, and would at least satisfy the temperature range requirements.

 

My favorite quote from the zero fossil fuel site - "All plans shown are intended for educational purposes or off-road use only."

Something like the PWM electrolyzer would be easy to set up on a bench and actually measure the quantity of gas evolved over time. Be easy to demo the truth or falsity of the "magic frequency" or "resonant electrolysis cell". Anything will work as an electrolyte, although current should result more form electrode area than from saturating the water with vinegar or salt. Be a good idea to monitor cell temp, too, to account for evaporative loss. Also a good idea to vent the puppy outside.

 

My favorite quote from the zero fossil fuel site - "All plans shown are intended for educational purposes or off-road use only."

Well, of course they had to include that. I'm sure they didn't want to get sued. I'm surprised that the disclaimer wasn't much more lengthy.

Something like the PWM electrolyzer would be easy to set up on a bench and actually measure the quantity of gas evolved over time.

What would be much more meaningful would be gas_qty/power_consumed.

Be easy to demo the truth or falsity of the "magic frequency" or "resonant electrolysis cell".

Not as easy as you might think. I've already mentioned in this thread (yesterday, 2:55am) that the dielectric constant of a "cell" will change considerably over temperature and even more when HHO (forgive the shorthand) is generated. Quite frankly, I do not know what the dielectric constant of "Brown's Gas" is. I only have a "hunch" and a comparison to known statistics on the dielectric properties of a random atmospheric sampling.

In the "purely speculative" department, I've heard "rumors" that this "magic frequency" is in the vicinity of 40kHz under certain conditions - but it doesn't involve an electrolyte, and the water must be absolutely pure.

Anything will work as an electrolyte, although current should result more from electrode area than from saturating the water with vinegar or salt.

Many electrolytes will result in hazardous or harmful gasses being emitted, and/or will be very destructive to the equipment. I don't know of an electrolyte offhand that is "perfect" and "inexpensive" to boot. There are disadvantages to both electrolytes that you mentioned, but I am not a chemist.

Be a good idea to monitor cell temp, too, to account for evaporative loss.

Along with cell temperature, the level of the water in the cell would be critical to maintaining efficiency. I suggest that water should be added at the same rate as it is turned into Brown's Gas, in an attempt to minimize temperature fluctuations in the cell.

Also a good idea to vent the puppy outside.

Even with small amounts of "HHO" generation, it would be quite foolish to attempt an experiment like this in any kind of enclosed space. A breezeway with two open sides, an open carport (3 sides open), or a garage with the main door wide open and a large fan exchanging air with the outside would likely be sufficient. It would not take much "HHO" gas accumulation to produce a large (and very potentially fatal) explosion.

SAFETY must be the primary consideration.

If you like danger, I have a phone number for you.
1-800-MARINES

 

1. get a cell generating Brown's gas with DC applied to the electrodes. use the same voltage as for the PWM. Measure evolution of gas over time.

2. set up for PWM. Try frequencies around the 43 KHz region (given as the magic freq). Measure rate of gas evolution.

3. This is purely for experiment - long term damage to electrodes due to use of not-so-good-over-the-long-term electrolyte not too significant. The purpose is to see if the claim that PWM beats DC for electrolyzing water is true or false.

4. Wouldn't sweat the outdoor aspect too much - I don't see much gas coming out of the cell with 12 volts applied and a reasonable current. You don't want to pull the battery down with this setup under the hood, so try to figure how much capacity is left over with the lights and defroster full on. Maybe 20 amps? That's only 240 watts.

5. There is a convenient method to measure quantity of gas produced and also lead the gas outside safely. Anybody wants to set up for the experiment let me know and I will describe the apparatus (clear plastic tubing, a wood clothes pin, an IR diode, and a phototransistor).

 

For precision I would suggest a flow meter, which will measure Cubic whatever/sec. Basically it is a ball enclosed in an acrylic body in a very slowly tapering funnel. The ball moves according to gas flow.

I found this one here.

Many of them come with an needle valve built in, you just adjust if for max and use the meter part.

 

Well, not to suggest that this be too crude, but the experiment I have in mind is to see if some form or frequency of PWM has a positive effect on the rate of electrolysis of water.

The method I am putting forth for tracking the rate of gas flow uses a water filled U bend in tubing and a phototransistor & IR diode to signal the passage of each bubble. More bubbles in a given period means more electrolysis. The bubbles are remarkably uniform, so the results are accurate (we used this to track methane formation in hog waste digesters). All you need is a counter and a time base.

My hypothesis is that interruptions in current mean reduced electrolyzing.

Now I may have to set up a cell. At least doing the PWM might be easier with my old Heathkit signal generator - I can tweak the square wave output above 10 volts and the frequency scan gets easy with all the adjustment knobs. Hopefully it's not something odd like 42,841 HZ for the magic frequency.

 

Interesting about the U-shaped tube bubble-counter. It'll make for a good backfire preventer, too. Do you have a tubing size in mind?

Back to the PWM thing; the story I'd read about that is some fellow (who's name I forgot) had this race boat that had a HHO generator in it, that was of course supplied by the alternator. It normally wasn't producing a great deal of gas, but then one day he noticed that a particular engine speed, the volume of gas being produced went way up, and he had no clue why.

He later found out that one of the rectifiers in the bridge of the alternator had failed, so he was actually feeding his gas generator a more-or-less square wave, and it seemed to cause the gas output to increase a great deal somewhere in the low 40kHz range.

That's basically the story. I don't recall what he was using for an electrolyte, or if he even mentioned it. Anyway, I've seen some pretty wild claims and outlandish schematics, but that story might actually have a chance of being more than merely wishful thinking.