|
|
| Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | Air Dried Beef Dog Food | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
|
|||||||
| '88 - '91 Civic | CRX | Wagon | Shuttlee Partnership with: LadyNRedSi.com |
![]() |
Show Printable Version |
Subscribe to this Thread
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
Fuel from 'Burning Water' ![]()
![]() Figure 3OVERVIEW - Here is the suggested sequence of steps:1. Install the CHT (or EGT) gauge and measure your current operating temp range (gasoline), for comparison. 2. Build & test the controller to verify the correct pulse output. 3. Build the reaction chamber & test it w. the controller (i.e pressure out). 4. Install the tank, controller, chamber, and pressure fittings. 5. Run engine & Adjust the control circuit as necessary for best performance. 6. Install the stainless steel valves and get the pistons/cylinders coated with ceramic. 7. Coat the exhaust system with ceramic without the catalytic converter OR let it rust out and replace the whole dang thang with stainless steel pipe sections. ![]() NOTE : Figures 4 and 5 have been revised, click to see the large versionFigures 3 & 4 show a simple circuit to control and drive this mini-system. You are going to make a 'square-pulse' signal that 'plays' the electrodes like a tuning fork; which you can watch on an oscilloscope. The premise given by the literature is: The faster you want do go down the road, the 'fatter' you make the pulses going into the reaction chamber. Duty cycle will vary with the throttle in the vicinity of 90%Mark 10%Space (Off/On). ![]() There is nothing sacred about how the pulse waveform is generated; there are many ways to generate pulses, and the attached diagrams show a few. Figure 4 gives the NE555-circuit approach from the referenced patent. The output switching transistor must be rated for 1-5 amps @ I2VDC (in saturation). Go with a plan that works for you or your friendly neighborhood technoid or mechanic, and go get all the circuit elements from your local electronics store, such as Radio-Shack or Circuits-R-Us, including the circuit board, IC sockets, and enclosure/box. DigiKey has better selection, service, and knowledge; plus they have no minimum order crap. Be sure to use a circuit board with a built-in ground plane, and to accommodate room for mounting 2 or 3 of the gauges. Mounting the reaction chamber in the engine compartment will require running a stub to your pressure gauge where you can watch it. You can easily make 30-gauge wire-wrap connections between the socket pins and through-hole discrete components having wire leads. Also make sure to get spec sheets on any IC you use. More details of the best circuits to use will be announced pending prototype testing. You WILL want to get your chamber level sensor verified BEFORE you epoxy the cap on. ![]() THROTTLE CONTROLIf you have a throttle position sensor, you should be able to access the signal from the sensor itself OR from the computer connector. This signal is input to the circuit as the primary control (i.e. throttle level pulse width = vapour rate). ![]() If you don't have such a signal available, you will have to rig a rotary POT (variable resistor) to the gas linkage (i.e. coupled to something at the gas pedal or throttle cable running to the carb or Fl. If you make the attachment at the cart/Fl, be sure to use a POT that can handle the engine temp cycles. Don't use a cheezy-cheapy POT; get one rated for long life and mechanical wear; mount it securely to something sturdy and stationary that will not fall apart when you step on the gas. If you found this file useful or interesting, please consider a donation or a purchase to help keep KeelyNet online and providing free information. Even a dollar will help. Others sell it, we prefer to share it, thanks!
__________________
Honda-free since early 2009.Current ride: 1996 Ford F150 4.9L (300ci) 5MT 4x4. Rednecks will win. |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
Basically guys, I don't know half of the shit in here... but I found this while I was googling homebrew stuff... so, someone, or everyone, should check it out, and see what they can see in it... I know it's probably total bullshit, but I'd like to try it anyway... who can know for sure if you never check it out? Ya know?
So, I guess, if anyone else had the same thought, or would like to kill an old lawnmower, this might be the way to do it! Help me out here... see what you can come up with!
__________________
Honda-free since early 2009.Current ride: 1996 Ford F150 4.9L (300ci) 5MT 4x4. Rednecks will win. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
Its bullshit. Using electrolysis to create hydrogen or other vapor isn't nearly as efficient as people think. And wouldn't be able to produce the amount of gas needed to run even a small engine for more than a few seconds. It would take a large amount of energy to do that much. More than is currently able to fit in a vehicle.
Possibly if you ran the car on very small engines and the chassis was ultra light you could pull it off. Heres an example of the speed currently capable. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGR9JNH90_4
__________________
Cheap, Fast, Reliable..Pick two ![]() Current project: Rio Red 91 hatch. A6/Z6 build, Hondata S300, Tokico illumina/Ground Control. "I'd rather run 12's on steelies than 15's on rotas." |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
Actually, I was thinking more like a fuel additive, rather than using it as a prime fuel... just a helper of sorts...
Also, there might be more stock in an idea where we'd have to plug our tanks in overnight to build the necessary fuel, then have a smaller subsystem onboard to extend range... or something similar.. We know that H2 can run a car... it's a simple idea. It has more combustion energy than carbon gas does also, (petro fuels), So it (theoretically) would take less fuel to go the same distance... even when just being used as an additive to fuel in a pressurized secondary fuel cell... like Nitrous, or propane injection. The first problem I see with these plans is that everything refers to PSI being a normal measure... and it's not. Just as with turbos, it's not the PSI that matters, its the CFM.. just because you have 50 PSI in your fuel chamber doesn't mean jack... you could empty a 4 in^3 cylinder of fuel in seconds on a normal engine, so obviously, it wouldn't be effective... take that same pressure, and relate it to a 400 in^3 cylinder of fuel, and now it takes 100 times as long to empty it... it's not the pressure that matters, perse... it's the volume/time (CFM) that your setup could produce, and the energy drain induced to use it. You have to remember tho, back when twin-charged systems first came about... they said it couldn't be done, b/c the systems would be so inneficient, that the heat produced alone would contain more energy than the engines themselves would produce... they were obviously quite wrong. I'm not saying that anyone is right or wrong here, I just would like to dig further into the subject, to figure out why it won't work, and potentially find out if there is ANY way to make it work, or even make it work in some form, such as like an additive, or a helper system.
__________________
Honda-free since early 2009.Current ride: 1996 Ford F150 4.9L (300ci) 5MT 4x4. Rednecks will win. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
That video, by the way, made me understand why it's called "Brown Gas"... watch the cylinder as the plates vibrate... lmao.
__________________
Honda-free since early 2009.Current ride: 1996 Ford F150 4.9L (300ci) 5MT 4x4. Rednecks will win. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
My friend went to school with a guy who did something like this to his car (as a fuel additive & not as a sole source of fuel, like Dr0pZ0n3 is talking about). He said he got around 70mpg from it. Unfortunately for me, I was a little inebriated at the time he told me about it, so I can't remember what kind of car the guy was using. Also I think they tested this on the Mythbusters a couple years ago, using it as a sole source of "fuel", and it didn't work.
|
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
Well as far as twincharged setups..they arent as efficent as a simple turbo but they are possible. The same may be said here.
__________________
Cheap, Fast, Reliable..Pick two ![]() Current project: Rio Red 91 hatch. A6/Z6 build, Hondata S300, Tokico illumina/Ground Control. "I'd rather run 12's on steelies than 15's on rotas." |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Water for fuel... the longest single post I've ever made.
Not to be arguementative, but there are twincharged setups that are far more efficient than simple turbo setups.. several of them are still in use today, and I believe Nissan and Toyota have both used it, and I know Lotus has used it on the Toyota GTS engine in their Elise.
Twinscrew charger w/ an electrically dis-engaged clutch (like A/C system) and a large turbo charger (something that wouldn't spool until halfway through the normal ranges.) seems to be the best setup for it. The idea is to have the supercharger making up for the inefficiency of the turbo at low RPM's, then as the Turbo spools, the pressure differential causes a switch to open the circuit on the S/C, which also opens a bypass valve in the Intake... the S/C becomes excess weight, while the turbo, now spooled, pushes boost. The S/C is only there to keep the engine in boost at low RPMs.. it's more of a street technology in this config, although the weight and complexity of some systems has basically "outlawed" it in the minds of most dev's. Anyway, we're wayyy OT here... so back to water. As far as I'm concerned, with all the "clean" ways to produce electricity, this should be a VERY pheasible source of "clean" energy.. I mean, think about it.. if all electricity was near-to free as a result of 0 fuel costs to produce it, what would be the problem with running super-efficient water burning cars? Especially since you could leave your own distillation/electrolysis tank plugged in all the time (with safety features, obviously), so that all you'd need to do when you needed fuel, is plug your car into the tank, fill up with pressurized fuel, and take off again... Also, in the future, if everyone produced their own fuel, "vehicle range" wouldn't be an issue, since I"m sure we'd all be willing to just give some fuel away if someone ran out in front of our house... after all, it's free, and renewable in minutes.... think about it. World peace, much? Ok, maybe not from water fuel... but still.
__________________
Honda-free since early 2009.Current ride: 1996 Ford F150 4.9L (300ci) 5MT 4x4. Rednecks will win. |
|
![]() |
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
![]() |
|
|