I think I need to change my pants.

I'm a graphic design major, so y'all lost me at "I am currently in the process of building a 'hydrogen booster' for my V6 4WD 4Runner." However, I've enjoyed the thread thus far.

I managed to squeeze an average of 16mpg out of my last tank, and 60% of it was off-road. I think I'll buy a corolla for good mpg. Keep up the good work though!

 

followed this whole thread and WOW! I useally skip most and get the most important parts. I read this whole thing. Keep posting up!

 

http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/226...#comment239809

Someone has got to set up a drive schedule and at least try to test this under some controlled conditions.

Most cars will output their fuel consumption at the ALDL port which can be compared to load on a dyno to test efficiency.

Frank

 

*did not read whole thread*

there are too many variables at play when it comes to fuel economy on the street.......

most gains in gas mileage can be attributed to less of a lead foot, drafting, more downhills, better quality gas etc etc

personally I would not run hydrogen in a car that was not designed for it

1st conservation of energy
second un metered fuel entering the engine
thrid by-product of water which is bad in an ic gas motor

need way more testing to even consider this but in all honesty if a simple setup like this would boost fuel economy without detrimental effects at least one major manufacturer would have these on their cars.

I am in renewable energy engineering and was in mechanical engineering prior to that. I have messed around with fuel cells (hydrogen and nonhydrogen) and they are conceptually easy but in reality they do not produce much power in small scale using electrolysis of water which consumes large amounts of power.

just my 2 cents...

 

Well, it's been almost a year and a half since starting the thread. Have you found free energy or not?

 

x2, i would like to see some graphs and spread sheets over a year basis

 

Not sure if anyone read the link I posted but people are getting sued for scamming over these H2 kits.

So far, no one has stepped up to pay for some dyno testing which is odd since a successful test could make said person rich beyond the wildest dreams. We are talking beyond Bill Gates rich. Seems like a few grand for some dyno time is worth it.

On road testing can introduce a lot of variability but doesn't have to. For example, find your local sports stadium on an off day and use their huge parking lot. Accel to speeds, etc based on visual cues you set and can set up again. Make 30 runs (with and 30 w/o h2) and check your standard deviation to see if you results are significant. If so, and you are getting better MPG, you might be rich!

Frank

 

i did not check out the link as it was late last night but ill take a look. I agree that a dyno test would work great but, I love science. your parking lot idea sounds good. I am skeptical my self but not so skeptical that i would not be willing too try out a year long experiment my self. In time I just may do so and then we will all have real numbers to compare. If then it showed some sort of increase in mpg or may be but dyno power. I would then take it to a dyno.

i did check out the link finally that is a good link, im going to look up the popular mechanic test on the net, i hope i can find it.

 

utube is your friend

 

This interests me. Bump!

OP - did you get a result?

The alternator thing seems to me to be the catch. It seems to me as though any setup for increasing efficiency in an internal combustion engine pretty much has to do one of either two things:

1) Catalyze your existing fuel type more efficiently
2) Recover wasted energy (e.g. hybrid style regenerative braking)

It would appear to me that in order to make a setup for catalyzing hydrogen onboard your vehicle truly "efficient", you would need to address three areas:

1) Catalyze the hydrogen in the most efficient manner possible
2) Determine the proper hydrogen/gasoline/intake air mix
3) Recover under or un-utilized energy that is being produced by your vehicle, probably by creative means, in order to subsidize the energy use of the hydrogen system.

Does anyone have some actual data?

 

Here's the thing(s)...

1) modern engines have combustion efficiencies of over 99%, not much improvement there.

2) Lots of potential for improvement here. There is a lot of kinetic energy (brakes) as well as waste heat to recover from the engine. The H2 setup doesn't either though.

You are correct on the rest but the core problem is that highly efficient hydrogen generation is a small vs. a larger loss. But a loss is a loss. Engines can be calibrated to run on H2 but to even take advantage you need to have closed loop active boosting (supercharging) so no engine in production today can make use of this. Even then while you might produce more peak power, efficiency is in question unless comparing to a larger more powerful engine. But.... then you'd need to pull your engine and replace it with a smaller one... you get the picture.

Frank

All data says this is a scam.

 

What data? I have yet to see anything I would truly call "data".

10 tanks with "H2 booster" on
10 tanks with it off

Preferably random driving, keep track of each tank whether city or highway.

Check tire air pressure every tank.

"Normal" driving - no grandma takeoffs one tank, racing the next. Don't count tanks used while 'wheeling.

 

I mostly agree with you, and I certainly am not a proponant of hydrogen kits, or any other scam for generating free or virtually costless energy. Also, I tend to believe, as you somewhat stated here, that for a vehicle to efficiently use, store, and catalyse hydrogen, they would probably have to be engineered for this purpose from the get-go instead of merely refitted. With this being said though, I disagree with one point that you bring up.

no. Modern internal combustion engines have average combustion efficiencies of 15-20%. Much of the energy that your motor produces is transmitted as heat instead of linear force, that is an unfortunate constant of IC motors. Rocket motors, by comparison, are much more efficient, and achieve as much as 70% efficiency. This leaves us a LOT of room for improving engine efficiency...

Here's a link to more information on this subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...rgy_efficiency

 

The simple answer is that Hydrogen in a Internal combustion engine produces about 35% LESS power than the same engine with gasoline. On the Hydrogen ICE engines we have built and sold. We had to turbo charge them to get even close to the power output that the Petrol gave.

(My company builds and designs ALT fuel vehicles including Hydrogen burning Prius's etc.)

 

In order to run on Hydrogen of any quantity, you would also need a pressurized tank and regulator system to store the hydrogen. The same as trying to run on Propane or CNG...

 

Nope, compustion effiency is over 99%. Thermodynamic efficiency is in the low 20's. Some 4 bangers can get up to 24%. Direct injected engines are higher.

Engines do a great job burning the fuel, they just don't harness the heat and turn it into mechanical work so well.

Frank

 

We tested BMW's Hydrogen 7 vehicles and while they have very low emissions near zero, the low energy density of H2 made for short range.

You can boost a lot with H2 but with direct injection you can make up for efficiency with a much more power dense medium (gasoline).

There's something that works, direct injection spark ignited engine tech. It's lets one heat more air with a given amount of fuel thus increasing efficiency and power.

Frank

 

We designed the Hydrogen injectors for BMW (At least for the Prototypes) We have also designed and delivered Garage Hydrogen "Refuelers" and Fuel Cell Hydrogen vehicles.

I wasn't trying to debate your point merely stating that Hydrogen won't boost any ICE or act like NOS.

Kirk.

 

i wasn't debating yours either. I completely agree with you. Our observations go to show some reasons why replacing gasoline with H2 is not such a good idea.

Frank

 

I agree.

You can cure the range issue by using the Hydrogen tanks at 10,000 PSI, but that comes with it's own challenges. The injectors for gaseous fuels are also completely different from the injectors for liquid fuels.