Gas from water? - A delusion, or maybe not.

[alchemysa]

Before you totally dismiss this concept I highly recommend you go here and click the 'Booster rally' link that takes you to some great videos. These are real cars and real people.

http://www.smacksboosters.110mb.com/


YouTube - Booster Rally part 1

 

[alchemysa]

I said no such thing....

I will be more concise....

There is no, widespread, LNG delivery infrastructure in the US, one of the Big Three's largest markets.

OK but the point I'm making in answer to the original question is that just because a particular technology is not widely used by the big makers, doesnt mean thats it doesn't work well. LPG is an example. Its widely used here but not in the US. I guesss it developed here because our petrol has always been expensive.

 

[ericstac]

There is a mechanic in the houston area that has this developed and on his cars. he was on the news with it about three weeks ago..

 

[Tig]

its to provide an additive that can boost the efficency of the petrol from the normal very low point of about 30%.

Correct me if I am wrong but the combustion levels achieved these days are in the order of 97%
In-efficiency is in the energy that is lost as heat. If you can harness that you may be on to something.
I did not do the math on this next point but while I was researching the Smack device I came across a detail that stated that you need to run 20 AMPs through the device. Another thing that bothered me and maybe someone can explain this to me is; If I use 20 AMPs to separate H and O2 and then let them mingle in the same chamber why would they not just recombine as water vapour?

 

[alchemysa]

I'm not an engineer so I don't have the answers. But I guess that 97% is simply how much of the petrol is burnt. But only 30% of that burn results in propulsion. The rest is wasted as heat and light. Better engine design (and additives) aim at reducing the wastage by getting the petrol to burn smoother, faster, slower, cleaner, cooler, hotter, at higher or lower pressures, or whatever else the designer wants. Thats how I see it anyway.

I assume most of the H and O2 gas is drawn off too fast for it to mingle. 'Smack' has an FAQ on his website that addresses that I think.

 

[DocHeb]

If I use 20 AMPs to separate H and O2 and then let them mingle in the same chamber why would they not just recombine as water vapour?

There is a energy threshold needed to start the reaction - once it is reached, the reaction will be self sustaining. Sort of like gasoline and diesel. The temperature (energy threshold) for gasoline to oxidize in air (i.e. burn) is lower than diesel. That's why you get different results if you were to throw a match in a pan of gasoline and a pan of diesel.

 

[Tdog]

I was at my mechanics garage today & he showed me one of these gizmos he has installed on one of his old trucks, just to test it out. It looked like a quart jar strapped to the side of the engine compartment. As soon as he started the engine, you could see the bubbling begin in the jar - - tubes ran from there to [I guess] the fuel injector. I did not study it, but wish I'd taken a picture - - I had not seen this tread till today. He says he is skeptical, but is giving it a test - - initially, he says it is encouraging, getting close to 40 mpg in the Ford Ranger. He invited me back in a couple of months to see how it's doing.
It does seem too good to be true. But I am an empiricist - - you can argue all day & night about how it can/cannot work, but the proof is in its performance. We'll see.

Jack

 

[MossRoad]

The electricity in your battery comes from burning gasoline. Recombining the split water molecules (or using them for combustion) will never create more energy than what is needed to split the water apart. If you claim you are getting more energy from the combustion than what is required for the electrolysis, you have a perpetual motion machine.

If one of these units can decrease gas consumption 20%, why not install 5 and decrease gas consumption 5x20%?

They are not claiming it is a perpetual motion machine. They are claiming that the hydrogen makes the engine run more efficeintly, thus using less fuel. Just like cleaning your air filter, using synthetic oil, regular tune ups, less restrictive exhaust, turbo, etc...

 

[MossRoad]

No no no!!!

The thing uses electric current run through water with a chemical in it to release hydrogen gas from the water. The hydrogen gas is routed to the air intake after the mass air flow sensor and before the throttle body. The hydrogen gas is not put into the fuel system.

Please go read the smack guy website thoroughly. He explains it very well.

Think of a nitrous oxide system. You shoot gas into the intake and the engine goes VROOM. This thing generates hydrogen instead of nitrous oxide and not in nearly the amount that would make it a race car. Just enough to make the engine a bit more efficient.

 

[alchemysa]

No no no!!!

The thing uses electric current run through water with a chemical in it to release hydrogen gas from the water. The hydrogen gas is routed to the air intake after the mass air flow sensor and before the throttle body. The hydrogen gas is not put into the fuel system.

Please go read the smack guy website thoroughly. He explains it very well.

Think of a nitrous oxide system. You shoot gas into the intake and the engine goes VROOM. This thing generates hydrogen instead of nitrous oxide and not in nearly the amount that would make it a race car. Just enough to make the engine a bit more efficient.

By the way, the chemical is nothing special or secret. Its just a little bit of sodium hydroxide (caustic soda) added to the pure water to increase the conductivity so that more current can flow between the electrodes. Common salt would achieve the same thing but it has some messy side effects. Pure water is almost non conductive so you have to add something to the water that will raise the conductivity without sludging up the system.