Waterfuel

Hi,

I fully agree with the fact that we should focus more on quality then on quantity. By upgrading the level of energy of the produced HHO, I believe you can reach the Gtnt status that Meyer mentioned and you would need less volume of HHO to reach a satifying result.

Unfortunately I'm not at the stage of creating the gasgun yet....

Waterfuel

Thanks for your input. I appreciate it.

I'm not sure that you are right. I believe it is still 20% 

I got my info from the following document "International Independent Test Evaluation Report" page 61. (you can find it in attachment a few posts earlier). there I found the formula used by Stan which says 20%.

In the attachment you find a printscreen fo that page.

Waterfuel.

I had a try in completing the calculation, hopefully without to many hickups. If you see one please let me know.

I took over the assumptions of Timeshell:

Assuming
Speed 60 km/h (constant)
Economy 10 L/100 km petrol
6 cylinder engine

We can arrive at 0.1 L / 1 min petrol consumption

If we divide the consumption of 0,1L/min of petrol by 6 cilinders we have 0,0166666 L/min Petrol for each cilinder

If we start from the principle that the Hydrogen in the Petrol is the real energy source of the fuel we need to calculate the amount of hydrogen in Petrol. Based on the wikisource (compositon of petrol) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum, i found out that petrol contains  between 10% to 14% of hydrogen. I will take the average 12% of hydrogen in pertrol.

This means 0,0166666 L/min Petrol for each cilinder x 12% of hydrogen => 0,002 liter/min hydrogen

Now lets calculate the amount of water we need to create the same amount of hydrogen. In the document "International Independent Test Evaluation Report" (see previous attachment) I found out that H20 has 20% of hydrogen in it.

So 0,002 Liter/min hydrogen divided by 20% gives you the amount of H2O needed : 0,01 Liter of H2O/min

Now that we have the H2O amount we can calculate the amount of HHO gas we need to procude:

I found on this site http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/chem07/chem07088.htm that you get 1334 Liter of HHO gas from 1 Liter of H2O.

So this means 0,01Liter of H2O/min x 1334 => 13,34 Liter of HHO/min (this is an approximate number!)

So for each cilinder you would need +/-13,34 Liter of HHO/min to have the same hydrogen energy values as Petrol.

In the document "International Independent Test Evaluation Report" Stan Meyer calculates how much HHO production he gets in ideal circumstances from one tube out of his tubular cell. That is 0,77L/min of HHO.

If we take this into concideration we would need 17 tubes in a tubular cell to produce the needed amount of HHO to drive one cilinder of our 6 cilinder engine. This tubular cell (17 tubes) would consume 952 watts of power to produce the gas.


All this makes me conclude that it's not enough to just produce great amounts of HHO and inject it into the engine to replace petrol. We should find an efficiënt way to use HHO/H2O as a fuel. For example we need to manipulate the HHO in such a way that you get a high energized fuel. So My proposal is to start experimenting with the energyzing of the HHO we already got and improve it's energy level. Just like Stan did. I think Hydrocars has a point in his post "Water is Fuel"  : http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,2646.0.html

What do you think guys?

 

Assuming
Speed 60 km/h
RPM 1300 RPM
Economy 10 L/100 km

We can arrive at 0.1 L / 1 min

Further assuming
0.1 L/1 min
RPM 1300 RPM

We can arrive at
0.1 L/1300 RPM
1 mL/780 RPS
1/780 mL/R for 6 cylinder engine
1/4680 mL/R per cylinder

Conclusion is that while running a 1300 RPM each cylinder would require 1/4680 mL of gasoline for each ignition stroke.

How does that compare to requirements for HHO?

If we have a HHO unit for each cylinder, couldn't we accomplish this for each cylinder now?

TS

Hi TS,

This is a good calculation to start from.. I believe the next step in your calculation would be to compare the amount of Hydrogen to gas you need to run the engine. This can be best done on atomic level. The document in attachment gives a good insite on that. It are the testresults of Meyers HHO Cells. I belevie that this document can help you in finalizing the calculation. I still need to finish the analyses of the document myself.

The interesting stuff starts at page 63

Waterfuel. 

Never heard about this software but it can indeed be helpfull indesigning the VIC cores.

Thanks for sharing

WF

I fully agree that we should duplicate Stans approach in a very detailed way. As you are the one with more experience then me, let's follow your approach :-).So we concentrate on the "VIC PWM" first. (Let's refer it like this to prevent any further confusion). For this i need to get more acquainted with the Overo technology.

On the other hand (as far as I'm correctly informed) Stans concept is based on the interaction of the VIC PWM and the VIC itself with the coils,.... The dimensions and positioning of the Coils are also important in this testproject. When we connec the VIC PWM with the VIC we should use the formulas/values of Stan to have his intended dimensions. Only in this way I see a succes.

Thanks for adding your Overo info. Let's also (maybe you already did) about the practical side of the testproject setup.
   

Hi Timeshell,

Thanks for the post. I had the same in mind. Only you already took a head start 
I'm convinced that PC testing will rapidly give away the secrets of the VIC.

About your project setup; I would like to know more about it and assist where possible.
Gumstix technology is new for me but programming and setting up a testenvironment shouldn't be an issue.,

I took already a look at the gumstix website but don't know which module you would use/are using? More details would be greatly appreciated.

Just one remakr about the setup you had in mind, instead of silmulating/mimicking the VIC properties I would in a first step suggest to monitor the vics behaviour. This would already reveal a lott of its functionalities. What do you think?

Looking forward for your answer.

Waterfuel

Hi Everybody,

I’m new in this forum and I’m impressed about the amount of information I could find here. Let me express my gratitude for this first. Then here is my question/thought:

I’ve been studying the Stanley Meyer WFC, water fuelled car (dune buggy),… technology for quite a time now, I’ve read the technical Memo’s of Stan, checked out You tube for HHO experiments …

But what keeps puzzling me is that (as far as I am aware off) nobody really uses a PC to help out with the testing/finetuning of the Stan Meyer concept. If you take a look at for example the Dune buggy of Stan. It had a home build PC to steer the HHO gas production, the VIC’s, the injection system,… And this was in the 80’s early 90’s. Nowadays we have easy programmable PC’s to support us in such difficult tasks. Did anybody of you already tried to integrate the help of the PC into his experiments with HHO (for example the monitoring of gas production, keeping track of results while doing the tests, steering the VIC, steering the pulse frequency,…)? Or maybe you use the PC to process the formulas Meyer explained in his technical memo’s to support you for getting the VIC settings right?

I already bought me some equipment to build my first HHO resonant cavity. But before I start I want to capture all the formulas Meyer has mentioned in his technical memo’s into an excel, link them and try to calculate the best dimensions for the VIC coils. My next step would be then to monitor the Resonant cavity with the PC for results, performance, pulse frequency,…

I don’t know (yet) what the obstacles are to start testing with the help of a PC but maybe you could already share your thoughts on this.
Thank for getting back to me, I appreciate all your comments.

WaterFuel

Correct 

The 20% Hydrogen comes from the comparison of Hydrogen and Oxygen in H2O (water) on a molecular level. That's the same calculation stan used in his testresults.

Hope this helps.

I just wanted to make a point that reaching the necesary amounts of HHO to replace Petrol is not an easy thing. Energyzing the amount of HHO we already are able to produce and converting it into a fuel (converting to Gtnt as Meyer stated) seems to me a faster way to reach our goals.

Waterfuel

Hi,

With H2O i mean water. Water contains 20% of hydrogen. That's what you can find in the doucment "International Independent Test Evaluation Report" page 61.

Mass Unit of a Water Molecule = (2H x 1Mu) + (1Oxy x 8Mu) = 10Mu's
2H Mu divided by 10 Mu's is 20 %

That's how I understood it :-)

Hi Guys,

I was searching the internet for new technologies when I came accros the Hidro+ technology http://www.hidroonline.com/ of James Kwok http://www.jameskwok.com/. This technology seems easy to understand, build and harvast green energy. Or maybe this is just wishfull thinking of my side

Does anyone have experience in this type of green energy systems? Or tried to duplicate one? I do not know if is even legal to try to build one but ok, I can always ask 

Maybe some of the Australian members can comment on this one because that's where the technology originates from. Do you maybe know James Kwok from the news or local newspapers.

Any comments are welcome.

Thanks,

Waterfuel