hmm, I couldn't find much infos in this thread. Could somebody explain to me what this is all about? What is the goal?.
Lektor
5 posts · writing between Jul 2011 and Jul 2011
An identity on IonizationX as it was harvested, not an account on this site. Nobody here has claimed it, and nothing connects it to a person by name.
By now there are many ways available to produce HHO but which is best? Meaning, which method produces the most HHO consuming the lowest energy.
Is Stan's Water Fuel Cell with its electronic best or is there a better method?
What is your best result concerning HHO production vs. energy input and how did you achieve it?
Am reading through many documents and am not sure which way to go.
Is Stan's Water Fuel Cell with its electronic best or is there a better method?
What is your best result concerning HHO production vs. energy input and how did you achieve it?
Am reading through many documents and am not sure which way to go.
Maybe using both hho and water......
#11 · date not recorded
Molecular friction? Microwave. You can "overheat" water in a microwave so it will instantly turn into steam without starting to boil first.
You could increase the power of the engine by injection water mist into the intake air. As CrazyEwok said, it had been done during WW2. Due to the expansion the engine gets some extra torque.
When injection HHO into the combustion engine it can cause backfire because of the hot inside. A way to reduce the heat would be to add some water mist but it will also increase corrosion unless the surface of piston, valves etc. are made out of ceramic. So binding the hydrogen in some kind of fuel would be a good idea since it will eliminate timing problems because of slower combustion and would reduce the heat. But using carbon compound it will lead us to the problems we got today and that fuel would have to be made in advance. Hydrogen alone could be made "on the road". So sticking with the HHO as fuel leaves the problem of water in the engine, increasing corrosion. Someone here in this forum mentioned an additive for the oil to reduce the water.
You could increase the power of the engine by injection water mist into the intake air. As CrazyEwok said, it had been done during WW2. Due to the expansion the engine gets some extra torque.
When injection HHO into the combustion engine it can cause backfire because of the hot inside. A way to reduce the heat would be to add some water mist but it will also increase corrosion unless the surface of piston, valves etc. are made out of ceramic. So binding the hydrogen in some kind of fuel would be a good idea since it will eliminate timing problems because of slower combustion and would reduce the heat. But using carbon compound it will lead us to the problems we got today and that fuel would have to be made in advance. Hydrogen alone could be made "on the road". So sticking with the HHO as fuel leaves the problem of water in the engine, increasing corrosion. Someone here in this forum mentioned an additive for the oil to reduce the water.
Start here your topics on the water injector & ambient airgasprocessor system
#38 · date not recorded
"and power development was also in the lower region due to the fact that the flame front burned too fast - the same problem as many others have. Tests was done with compressed and pure H2 but the problem remained"
I can think of two other reasons for that.
-chamber walls are too hot and ignite the h2 uppon contact..... too early. Add some water vapour to the intake air to cool the engine down. Google that.
-ignition timing has to be changed because h2 combusts more rapidly than gas/patrol
read page 55-61
I can think of two other reasons for that.
-chamber walls are too hot and ignite the h2 uppon contact..... too early. Add some water vapour to the intake air to cool the engine down. Google that.
-ignition timing has to be changed because h2 combusts more rapidly than gas/patrol
read page 55-61
Comments please
#1 · date not recorded
today I found the following link and I am not sure what to think of it.
Could you pls take a look at the schematics and maybe even the text and tell me what you think about it. Is it worth a try? Is it maybe a kind of a SM or AP solution etc.
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2_carplans_fig1.gif
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2_carplans_fig2.gif
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm
P.S.: spiritofmaat is a really weird site but the schematic looks not as weird.
Could you pls take a look at the schematics and maybe even the text and tell me what you think about it. Is it worth a try? Is it maybe a kind of a SM or AP solution etc.
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2_carplans_fig1.gif
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2_carplans_fig2.gif
http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/feb2/carplans_doc.htm
P.S.: spiritofmaat is a really weird site but the schematic looks not as weird.