Hydrogen Biodiesel Sprinter...

[mgjessop]

Hello Guy's,

I just got my Hydrogen Boost kit from http://savefuel.ca/oxy-hydrogen/ I got the SL-25 which makes 25 liters oxy-hydrogen per hour. Took me about 2 hours to install... I was really scared to start it thinking that I might blow my sprinter up... I have a scan guage wich tells me how many gph I am using... At Idle with the ac on I use 0.3gph... I turned on the Hydrogen maker and nothing happened and first, then about 5sec later I noticed that I was only using 0.1gph at idle... Super cool... The engine idle was perfect and smooth... So I took it out for a spin with it turned on... I noticed that there was much power than I have ever had... I got on the freeway and at 55mph I would nomarmally be getting around 28mpg and I was getting right around 34mpg:rad: I took it up to 70mph which would normally be right around 20-21mpg and I was getting 23mpg... Then I put the petal to the metal and took it up to 80mph I would normally get 16mpg and I was get 17.5mpg... I run 99.9 Biodiesel... I took the sprinter on a side street and was doing 45mph and I was only using 1.0gph... 45mpg...:crazy: I can't believe what I was seeing...
At 35mph I was getting 50mpg.... At 25mph I was able to get it up to 62mpg... My conclusion is that this unit really works... At lower speed it is a huge improvement... At high speeds The unit can't produce enough hydrogen to keep up with demand... I am going to dyno the sprinter today and I will let you know just how much power it really makes...

[Scott_Mc]

:thumbup: Pretty slick...I'm interested in some real numbers! I've dynoed mine as well. I'd have to search for my results though..:thinking: I came in about mid pack with a bunch of stock and modified VW TDI's.

Should this thread be here in the Aftermarket Accessories and Modifications (http://www.sprinter-source.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=98)forum?

[tymbo]

:laughing: :laughing: You don't actually beleive this BS do you? Basic physics says that it requires MORE energy input to seperate Hydrogen from oxygen, than the inverse reaction. Therefore the claims they are making are IMPOSSIBLE!!! You my friend have been duped. :bash:

[tegimr]

:laughing: :laughing: You don't actually beleive this BS do you? Basic physics says that it requires MORE energy input to seperate Hydrogen from oxygen, than the inverse reaction. Therefore the claims they are making are IMPOSSIBLE!!! You my friend have been duped. :bash:

Chemistry/physics - science sometimes surprises us! If not, there'd be no new discoveries. :thumbup: Once 'science' thought that the world was flat . . .

I'd propose the following thoughts:

1. While the resultant energies from the direct combustion of oxy-hydrogen don't produce enough energy to continue the process indefinitely (what a wonderful discovery that would be!), there may be significant efficiency increases in the bio-diesel combustion - perhaps enough to be as beneficial as our good friend listed RESULTS.

2. He did list HIS results found with HIS Sprinter and contrasted with HIS performance before (see http://www.sprinter-source.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1141).

Not at all defending the link he provided, though. Seems to be interesting chemistry there. I'd like to see his thoughts of the chemical reactions posted. The fine fellow that makes this product may have stumbled on something profitable, but not because he understands the chemistry.

Regards,
Tim

[mgjessop]

This unit does work... I had a dyno run done today... Did it with it off and made 126hp---207lbs... Turned it on and made 134hp---229lbs... I got a 8hp increase and 22lbs of torque... I was amazed that it got that much... This is also on 99.9% Biodiesel...

At freeway speed I am getting about 8-10% better fuel economy... It is nothing huge but it is a gain... At slow speed and low rpm under 1500rpm I see a huge gain in fuel economy... The unit makes the same amount of hydrogen no matter what speed your at... I also think that because Hydrogen is so explosive it helps the Biodiesel burn better... At Freeway speed I am using around 5.0-6.5gph so the percentage of Hydrogen is very low compared to the amount of diesel being sucked down... But when I am doing 35mph buring less than 1gph the percentage of hydrogen has to be at least 5-6 times of that at high speed... In order for my sprinter to see 50%-75% better fuel economy at freeway speed, This unit would probably have to make 10 time the amount that it does now... Where you will save money is when your driving down city streets at slow speed... I am happy with unit and I will keep you guy's updated... Also if you don't like the unit or think it crap they will give you a full refund...

[tymbo]

The Hydrogen is produced by electrolysis. This requires energy. This energy comes from electricity produced by the alternator. The alternator is driven by the diesel engine. The net process is CONVERTING diesel/biodiesel fuel to hydrogen during a 3 step process:

1) diesel fuel combustion to mechanical energy, lets say 80% efficient
2) mechanical energy to electrical energy. lets say 90% efficient
3) electrical energy to hydrogen/oxygen seperation, 80%

Now the hydrogen is burned as fuel again in the engine, another 80% process.
The overall efficiency of this entire process is less than 50%! Where does the other 50% go? Waste heat.

The reason you are seeing INSTANTAEOUS results(Dyno) is because the conversion to hydrogen is kind of like slowly charging a battery or capacitor. Then when the unit is turned on it discharges much quicker than it took to charge.

The domestic v8 diesel hot rod guys use propane injection to get more HP and Torque. Or nitous oxide with additional fuel, for a burst of power.

Taking a snapshot of instantaneous fuel mileage is also a meaningless number. If I coast down a hill with the wind to my back- Heck I bet I could get 75mpg!!

People WANT to believe that there is a magic pill, but it just isn't there.

[jdcaples]

The domestic v8 diesel hot rod guys use propane injection to get more HP and Torque. Or nitous oxide with additional fuel, for a burst of power.


Amongst the Domestic v8 diesel hot rod guys, these kinds of air-intake assessory products are are also popular:

http://www.painlessperformance.com/webcatalog/catview.php?SearchField=32



-Jon

[tegimr]

The Hydrogen is produced by electrolysis. This requires energy. This energy comes from electricity produced by the alternator. The alternator is driven by the diesel engine. The net process is CONVERTING diesel/biodiesel fuel to hydrogen during a 3 step process:

1) diesel fuel combustion to mechanical energy, lets say 80% efficient
2) mechanical energy to electrical energy. lets say 90% efficient
3) electrical energy to hydrogen/oxygen seperation, 80%

Now the hydrogen is burned as fuel again in the engine, another 80% process.
The overall efficiency of this entire process is less than 50%! Where does the other 50% go? Waste heat.


Indeed - but in most engines, the torque curve is such that step 2 and step 3 are insignificant, thus the efficiency of hybrid cars is caused not by better combustion, but by more efficient energy utilization. If step 2 and 3 cost nothing - meaning no more diesel used - and if step 1 is has increased efficiency due to the increased oxy-hydrogen in the fuel/air mixture, then one can expect better diesel energy conversion (better mileage). So, mgjessop has claimed that the conversion of diesel is ~10% better.



The reason you are seeing INSTANTAEOUS results(Dyno) is because the conversion to hydrogen is kind of like slowly charging a battery or capacitor. Then when the unit is turned on it discharges much quicker than it took to charge.
. . .


so, if we're seeing more HP and torque, then there is an increase in performance in the diesel, and the question is only "Does the conversion consume more fuel than it requires to produce?" Now, since most internal combustion vehicles have excess power (typically converted to heat and dissipated in the environment), it would seem quite possible that recovering that 'lost' energy by converting to electricity and then to the electrolysis that separates hydrogen/oxygen, would have not fuel costs, regardless of the efficiency of the particular process. Again, the question to be answered "Does the conversion cost any fuel?"


Taking a snapshot of instantaneous fuel mileage is also a meaningless number. If I coast down a hill with the wind to my back- Heck I bet I could get 75mpg!!


You might do so, but mgjessop has been open about his mileage and has acknowledged the importance of the same. as below.

Thank you for the info... I average about 20-22mpg around town and with normal driving i get around 23-24mpg highway... If i do anyting less than 55mph on the freeway I get alot of bad looks and the a flip of the bird every now and then:censored: ... Last month I took a trip to washington state, took back roads all the way up and averaged about 28mpg... Then took interstate 5 back at about 75mph all the way and got about 18mpg... I think the big saving is around the town driving... I always get 20+mpg. I own a 2003 f150 which gets about 9-10mpg around town and close to 20mpg doing 65mph on the freeway. I also think the 3500 High roof and being 158" hurts fuel economy alot compared to you guys with 118-140" low roof... Thanks again for the info and help....


People WANT to believe that there is a magic pill, but it just isn't there.

LOL - magic pill would have to produce more efficiency and cost less. Perhaps the best way to disprove his results are to

1.) visit him and see what he has or
2.) purchase one yourself and tell us how it works.

:laughing: :laughing: You don't actually beleive this BS do you? Basic physics says that it requires MORE energy input to seperate Hydrogen from oxygen, than the inverse reaction. Therefore the claims they are making are IMPOSSIBLE!!! You my friend have been duped. :bash:

:rant: duped? maybe not. Until proven, rather than theorized, wrong, he might be seeing an increase of 10% efficiency of his diesel fuel usage overall. Anyone who does a lot of traveling might benefit from this device if it really works.

mgjessop - when you get another long drive - like the one to Seattle, tell us what you see by the tank. I've started converting WVO to bio-diesel, thus saving significant $$ on fuel, but this would be great for longer trips.

Regards,

Tim

[tegimr]

Hello Guy's,

I just got my Hydrogen Boost kit from http://savefuel.ca/oxy-hydrogen/ I got the SL-25 which makes 25 liters oxy-hydrogen per hour. Took me about 2 hours to install... I was really scared to start it thinking that I might blow my sprinter up...

Seems that those concerns are quite valid. Oxygen and oil combinations are usually assumed to be dangerous! :D Obviously this kind of thing was a concern, what helped you to overcome that concern?

Can you tell how the oxygen and hydrogen are 1) stored and 2) injected into the combustion process?

What safeguards are implemented to assure that there is no oxygen and hydrogen being produced when the engine is not running i.e., key turned on but the engine not started as opposed to key not in the run position?

Does the device appear to be well constructed and durable?

Thanks for the input - it would be great to hear if someone else has one of these installed or installs it -

Tim

[Altered Sprinter]

Today In History
MB was the first to test the Hydrogen cell technology back in 1994 using the MB transporter
I have not looked at the site in question as to which system is being used it depends on the unit involved as to raising the bar Psi bar and what influence there is on the intake system?
However the principle exists it's used world wide in Many vehicles, as such as Mercedes-Benz but of course more advanced
The Australian scram jet engines see a similar Hydrogen system by using forced intake volume to maximize the high end speed with Little fuel used as a result.
This thread is worthy of discussion! Thoughts being as to what the advertised site says about protecting the engine itself before possible self detonation 99.5 Bio Diesel, and forced air intake systems ! somethings going to give in the short term:popcorn:
Richard
2276

2277

2278

2279

2280

[mgjessop]

I think I can help clear up a few things... The unit does not store any Hydrogen... It pulses it out... The unit only works when my engine is turned on... It is hooked up the air intake tube right after the air filter... I took a ballon to the output tube of the hydrogen maker... It took about 30 seconds to fill it up to about 10 inches in size... I tied it up and put a 4 foot string around it then held it over a candle...:crazy: It exploed with such a bang that I thought I blew myself up:bash: What I was trying to find out if the unit really makes hydrogen... It does... After much testing with it on and off I have figured out that the unit lowers my fuel flow by 0.4gph...

No matter what the fuel flow was it lowered it the same... If I was driving and using 5.0gph with it off then I turned it on it would go to 4.6gph... Or if I was using 1.7gph it would go to 1.3gph... That is why at lower speeds I would see such a huge increase and high speeds not so much...

So Biodiesel has 130,000btu per Gallon...

The Hydrogen Maker lowers my fuel usage by 0.4 Gallons...

Which is 40% of a Gallon Biodiesel...

So that would be 52,000btu's....

So the unit produces 52,000btu's of Hydrogen...

Say I am using 4.0gph of biodiesel at highway speed which would be...

4X130,000btu's = 520,000btu's need to keep me going...

Then I turn on the Hydrogen which Makes 52,000btu's....

That is 10% of the total Btu's needed....

Then I get my 10% fuel savings...

Today I drove to LA and back I normally use 12 gallons of diesel for the round trip... It is the same route that I take for my business... Today I used 10.3 gallons... I saved 1.7gallons at $3.49 for biodiesel which is $5.93 in fuel savings... Nothing earth shaking, but I figured out that I will save around $90-$100 per month... So the unit will pay for it self in about 6-7months... It should last for 5 years... So it should work out... I will keep you guys posted as time goes by...

[tymbo]

lets see an independent test by a university research team, using strict scientific testing conditions. NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!! You guys keep convincing yourselves that this gadget is saving you money, while the guy that sells these is laughing all the way to the bank:laughing:

P.T. barnum said it best..."A sucker is born every minute"

I give up:crazy:

[BaywoodBill]

This quote from the ad for this product:
Supplemental Hydrogen is known by several names, some variations are HHO, Oxy-Hydrogen and Brown's Gas. We will use Supplemental Hydrogen or Oxy-Hydrogen most of the time"

My meager knowledge of chemistry doesn't have room for oxy-hydrogen other than water. HHO is H20, right?

Furthermore, in looking at the parts that come with the device, I don't see where it gets the water that it's supposedly using to liberate this HHO.

Where does the water come in? :thinking:

[sikwan]

Where does the water come in? :thinking:

You have to refill it every so often. From the site...

With the Oxy Hydrogen all you do is add one half ounce of koh (potassium hydroxide) as an electrolyte every 6 months (costs only $2-3 dollars per year), one half a pint of distilled water every 1000 miles and you’re on your way to great fuel savings.And this...

Q2: How exactly does the Oxy Hydrogen Work?

A2: How the Oxy Hydrogen works is actually pretty ingenious. The unit sends an electric charge through a liquid electrolyte comprised of water and Lye which causes the hydrogen molecules to separate from the oxygen molecules in the water. It then captures the hydrogen and channels it into the engine via the air intake system.

[tegimr]

lets see an independent test by a university research team, using strict scientific testing conditions. NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!! You guys keep convincing yourselves that this gadget is saving you money, while the guy that sells these is laughing all the way to the bank:laughing:

P.T. barnum said it best..."A sucker is born every minute"

I give up:crazy:

LOL - nobody is 'convincing'. mgjessop was only posting his RESULTS. And I was answering your challenge, to which you've neither responded or listed your results with the unit that you've tested!

Your hypothesis is that the device does not produce more energy than the extra energy that must be converted for it's operation. If the energy required to run the HHO reactor MUST BE CONVERTED (diesel >mechanical > electrical) first, then your hypothesis stands. However, IF the energy utilized for the water > HHO conversion is excess (recovered entropy) then your hypothesis is likely false. To prove your hypothesis, the burden of proof lies on you: install a system and post negative results.

Nobody would challenge that we don't have a perpetual motion engine with the devices; only that it can be beneficial UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS and that if there is surplus energy in the application at hand then the HHO device can increase fuel efficiency. In your post, you said that excess energy is spent in heat; this device simply utilizes some of that excess energy before expended in heat (mechanical/electrical/reactor) and thus in the equation at hand could quite possibly produce diesel fuel savings. << This is the question that begs to be answered - either by 'independent' university researchers, or by practical people who have nothing to gain. The latter would produce better results, IMHO as 'independent' university research is most often paid for by SOMEONE, and the money trail has to be followed.

Regards,

Tim (Thinking clearly, logically, and scientifically; speaking for myself, and I guess believed to be 'duped' and a 'sucker' by some)

PS Frank discussion is welcome in all relationships, but name-calling is rarely appreciated.

[tegimr]

I think I can help clear up a few things... The unit does not store any Hydrogen... It pulses it out... The unit only works when my engine is turned on... It is hooked up the air intake tube right after the air filter... I took a ballon to the output tube of the hydrogen maker... It took about 30 seconds to fill it up to about 10 inches in size... I tied it up and put a 4 foot string around it then held it over a candle...:crazy: It exploded with such a bang that I thought I blew myself up:bash: What I was trying to find out if the unit really makes hydrogen... It does... .

:laughing: I hope that my boys don't read that! They'll want one to play with.

It seems good to have a safety to make certain that it does not run unless the engine is RUNNING (air flow switch in the feed tube or something like that) because of the danger of oxygen coming in contact with oil (DANGER - OIL CAN SELF-IGNITE IF IN THE PRESENCE OF PURE OXYGEN WHICH THIS PRODUCES)

Does anyone know the volume of air required for air-intake while the Sprinter engine is running at x RPM? I'm interested to experiment with the volume of air and the volume of HHO (with formula, not to create 'explosions') and see what chemistry is actually occurring with this device installed.

As a matter of fact, the company that produces the machine has on their website some information that is factually incorrect (not to say that the device does not produce the end results of saved fuel). It is my hypothesis that the increased efficiency has little to do with burning hydrogen, but rather that the enriched air provides a better burning diesel fuel.

On the other hand, if there is actually a hydrogen combustion occurring in the chamber, I have questions about increased heat, etc. that seem to be potential concerns.

Best wishes for a successful experiment to both MGJessop and Tymbo (and not my sons)

Tim

[mgjessop]

I understand what your saying, that is takes more energy to make Hydrogen then what it puts out... I have the 200amp alt on my sprinter... I hooked an amp meter to the Hydrogen Maker and it pulls about 23amps of juice... So I migh be getting power that would normally be lost? If this unit didn't work I would be the first person to say it is :censored: What some people claim on there web site I know can't be true... The unit only makes a certain btu, in order to get the mileage some people are claiming the unit would have to make probably 20 times the amount of hydrogen... I thought that I would be seeing 25-35&#37; better fuel economy at freeway speed... Instead I am seeing around 8-10%... I drive about 200-300miles a day, so any amount helps... The reason why I got this unit was because I have a close friend who is a cross country truck driver... He has 2 large units installed on his rig... His average fuel economy is 4.5mpg... With it turned on he get's 5.0mpg... Doesn't sound like much but it saves him over $7,500 a year in fuel... What we should be asking.. What does hydrogen do the combustion process with diesel?:thinking:

[Scott_Mc]

.......I have the 200amp alt on my sprinter... I hooked an amp meter to the Hydrogen Maker and it pulls about 23amps of juice... So I migh be getting power that would normally be lost?
200A is the maximum rated output of the unit. The more you load it the harder it is to turn and the more energy is consumed by the Diesel engine to keep it spinning. It only puts out what it needs to. Also the more drag on it the more heat it generates, more losses there.

[BMA]

It is my hypothesis that the increased efficiency has little to do with burning hydrogen, but rather that the enriched air provides a better burning diesel fuel.

On the other hand, if there is actually a hydrogen combustion occurring in the chamber, I have questions about increased heat, etc. that seem to be potential concerns.

I'm also thinking it is providing oxygen to the diesel burning process. That in and of it's self can be a big boost. I'd expect that the hydrogen only partially burns with the oxygen as the hydrogen has this diesel competitor. Remember air is only 20ish percent oxygen. The unit would be outputting a gss mix that is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, or 33% oxygen.

[tegimr]

I'm also thinking it is providing oxygen to the diesel burning process. That in and of it's self can be a big boost. I'd expect that the hydrogen only partially burns with the oxygen as the hydrogen has this diesel competitor. Remember air is only 20ish percent oxygen. The unit would be outputting a gss mix that is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, or 33% oxygen.

Also note that the device has lye (NaOH) as well as part of their reaction. Still working out the process!

It would be great if there was a way to see emissions testing results with and without to see the components of the output gases.

In diesel engines, there is no source of ignition until the diesel burns. This is different than gasoline engines, where there is a spark plug (DUH, right). Well, hydrogen does not self-ignite until it reaches ~1050 degrees F, while diesel self-ignites at 437 F. Thus, the diesel is already consuming the oxygen before the diesel is burning, decreasing the amount of oxygen available for the hydrogen to burn. Now, it is possible that the diesel is burning more efficiently due to the increase in the oxygen in the air mixture.

In discussion and drawing this out with Dad, he asks what sensors the MB computer looks at to determine the diesel injection amounts. Is there a pre-burn (intake) oxygen sensor? Is the exhaust gas temperature included in the calculations for the diesel injectors? I guess the best open ended question for someone who knows well the engine (maybe Andy or Richard will respond) "what inputs impact the diesel injection amounts?" I've not delved into much more than maintenance on this engine yet, so I don't know the answer to these questions.

This is not a matter of simple chemistry/physics! Far more complex.

Most important, it works!

Regards to all!

Tim

[tegimr]

I'm also thinking it is providing oxygen to the diesel burning process. That in and of it's self can be a big boost. I'd expect that the hydrogen only partially burns with the oxygen as the hydrogen has this diesel competitor. Remember air is only 20ish percent oxygen. The unit would be outputting a gss mix that is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, or 33&#37; oxygen.

OK - did some research on this:

1. The lye causes a more productive electrolysis of water when heated (electrolysis of water heats the water) to produce the HHO (two parts hydrogen (H2 gas) and one part oxygen (02 gas) by volume). If you recall the statements of tymbo, he reminded us that the [simple] electrolysis of water produces less energy in a hydrogen/oxygen burning reaction than the energy required to break the bonds. In this device, they've added NaOH, which makes for a more productive electrolysis than simple electrolysis and remains unchanged during the electrolysis.

2. Though HHO in correct proportion and in a great concentration produces an incredible energy release, this energy release is not what is creating the efficiency.

Air volume too great in comparison to the HHO produced by this device - the mixture of the HHO produced by this machine when combined with the air from the intake is not enough concentration to see the HHO become H2O.
Hydrogen-Hydrogen bonds are harder to break than hydrogen-carbon bonds; and in the absence of a spark, the hydrocarbons will burn first in this dilute mixture of gases and petroleum.
The technical help desk from this site claims that the device only makes the fuel burn more efficient.
Re: Ticket 2713, Responded

Dear Tim Rich

A new message has been added to the service request #2713.
Hello Tim,
The HHO makes the fuel burn more efficient.
Thanks
John

You can view and update your inquiry here:
Ticket 2713 http://savefuel.ca/support/ttx.cgi?cmd%3dticket%26key%3d2713Z2942242176889255 246
ACCESS KEY: 2713Z2942242176889255246



Consider that our natural environment atmosphere contains hydrogen and oxygen. If the hydrogen was easily excitable to bond with oxygen every time that there was a fire (think camp fires, propane/natural gas stoves, industrial fuel consumption, forest fires, prairie fires, etc.) then we'd have the vocal environmentally concerned crowd include a decreased hydrogen content of the atmosphere in their reasons to not burn fossil fuels. We live in a balanced, safe natural world that is governed by a set of natural laws to maintain a safe, balanced, natural environment for us. If hydrogen were easily combined with oxygen, we'd have consumed all the hydrogen LONG ago. Its hard to for me think that the world we live in just happened without design. It's just too balanced.

I think that the inventor of this device stumbled on something without understanding the science that is involved.
I'm still concerned about the installation/operational issues with this device.


The device should only start on engine RUNNING and should stop before the engine stops to clear all concentrations of HHO for maximum safety. I'm thinking that somebody may leave the key on (kids to listen to the radio, etc.) and build up a concentration that would be enough to cause damage to people and property.
The plastics in the intake system where this device is connected should be expected to have decreased life, especially if the device builds up concentrations when the engine is not running. Concentrated amounts of hydrogen can cause early failure of plastic parts.


I'd still like to hear about others who've installed or had friends install these in their vehicles. Doing the math, I can't afford to install one to save fuel - as much as I drive, I don't drive enough to pay back in less than 2 years at today's prices ( especially since I'm producing more and more bio-diesel from WVO and should be free from the pump by the end of the year - except for long trips). My neighbor manages a few Sprinters for a company not willing to do bio-diesel and this might be a real benefit to them.

Regards,
Tim
PS - if you are environmentally concerned, don't feel that I've insulted you. A few of my friends think I'm overly concerned about the environment; however, I try to be balanced, prudent, and practical in my actions. It is sometimes amazing the bad science that is foisted onto the un-suspecting public. But that is another subject.

[Altered Sprinter]

In a few short years, many in the future will see a decline in world standards, based on mans greed. What will be! 'Will be',
With this particular site I see no real input or evaluations , I find no real creditability towards the site, to either evaluate or give a scientific back up , there is absolutely nothing.
On the other side of the coin , the principle exists If per say a cheaper version could be made or a Hydrogen conversion kit was to be supplied I would expect a little more than the site was offering.
[A] If the supplier to the site invented it there would be registered copyright and or design patients.
[B] I see no ISO standards
[C] I see no EPA evaluations
out of interest I goggled the first US site that has a similar system for sale Hydrogen-Boost (http://www.hydrogen-boost.com/order.html)
At least it offers information


Here is a local site from UTAS Tasmania where I have evaluations to standards certified and or qualified as to in house so called MSDs, safety and vehicle design rules for ADR regulations Australia. Look at this one it's not new
0715HydroDiesel_Engine.pdf (application/pdf Object) (http://www.utas.edu.au/prue/Media%20Releases/2005/0715HydroDiesel_Engine.pdf)
My concern is what damage can this do to a ten grand =Engine and how dangerous is it! if the pressure build on the fuel rails fails ??? way too many unanswered questions, Its relying on a pressure pulse boost, too similar to the principle of a ram jet , and that engine is not designed for it.
My thoughts are purely a safety factor.
Richard
2450

2451

2452

[BaywoodBill]

1. to produce the HHO (two parts hydrogen (H2 gas) and one part oxygen (02 gas) by volume).

As I asked previously, how am I to understand (with my limited grasp of chemistry) that HHO is different from H2O? :idunno:

[Altered Sprinter]

As I asked previously, how am I to understand (with my limited grasp of chemistry) that HHO is different from H2O? :idunno:
I'll post on Sunday Aussie time To find a more accurate way to explain this in layman's terms, it's not as simple as it looks ,, where I'm stuck is I'm not sure on how this particular unit runs. Unless someone else bothers to simplify it, sort of like a brain teaser
Richard
2463

[Altered Sprinter]

As I asked previously, how am I to understand (with my limited grasp of chemistry) that HHO is different from H2O? :idunno:
Good question ,
One can argue you this two ways in its pure form or by conversion of quantum Physics where the rules change.
HHo--->H2o
One mole of H0 gas forms one mole of H2o Steam due to elevated Temperatures.
essentially its the same element, but changes WITH THE INTRODUCTION OF thermo dynamics, when H-0-H is liquid the new specie is HxH-0 Gas What you have is the question of what it is and how CAN IT WORK
IT'S NOT PURE HYDROGEN AS SUCH OR YOU WOULD NOT REQUIRE THE fuel OF EITHER GAS OR DIESEL, BUT THE GAS CONVERSION UNDER PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE CREATES THE GENERATOR TO INCREASE THE FLAME ITS AS OLD AS GREEK FIRE A SOFT COOL BLUE FLAME.
Too MANY VARIABLES TO THE QUESTION AS TO QUANTUM PHYSICS AND THE INTRODUCTION OF THE POWER RATIO OF X=UNKNOWN WITH the Hydrogen BIO DIESEL THREAD.
RICHARD

[tegimr]

As I asked previously, how am I to understand (with my limited grasp of chemistry) that HHO is different from H2O? :idunno:


H2O is the typically the combined form - water, in one of it's states, while HHO is what some are using to say "two parts H2 and one part O2" - the gas forms of hydrogen and oxygen in the proportion two to one by volume. The difference is the non-combined forms. H and O are 'unstable' when alone. Thus they combine with themselves (H2, O2) when they are separated by electrolysis of water (as well as other ways that oxygen or hydrogen may be liberated from other substances).

[tegimr]

In a few short years, many in the future will see a decline in world standards, based on mans greed. What will be! 'Will be',
With this particular site I see no real input or evaluations , I find no real creditability towards the site, to either evaluate or give a scientific back up , there is absolutely nothing.
On the other side of the coin , the principle exists If per say a cheaper version could be made or a Hydrogen conversion kit was to be supplied I would expect a little more than the site was offering.

indeed - and the site lists several inaccuracies - impossibilities. Thus, if the device works (as our member says it does) the inventor may have stumbled on something good.


[A] If the supplier to the site invented it there would be registered copyright and or design patients.
[B] I see no ISO standards
[C] I see no EPA evaluations
out of interest I goggled the first US site that has a similar system for sale Hydrogen-Boost (http://www.hydrogen-boost.com/order.html)
At least it offers information


No standards, and evaluations, and sold from Canadian site, so the US EPA; however, some linked documentation says

A recent study at the University of Calgary by G.A. Karim on the effect of adding hydrogen [the remainder of the article says oxygen and hydrogen - HOH] to a methane-fuelled engine says

... What happens inside the combustion chamber is still only a guess.



The article reports boosted performance. Thus, though they found that adding the hydrogen and oxygen to the mix makes a better burn, they don't know what actually is happening.

However, again, the researchers at MIT say

Researchers at the Sloan Automotive Laboratory at MIT also discovered that both hydrogen and carbon monoxide (both products of the partial oxidation process of the reformer) act as octane enhancers.

So, though we're not really concerned about the octane enhancement, the claims to 'boost the octane' should say 'boost octane performance' rather than 'boost the octane'.

Past the actual chemistry, the research(university and otherwise) says that this type of injection to the system can be expected to


Such an ultra-lean-burn, high compression-ratio, turbocharged HECE[Hydrogen enhanced combustion engine] could exhibit the following characteristics:


Extremely low engine out NOx emissions requiring little or no exhaust emissions control
Reduced pumping losses (~5-10% efficiency gain)
Improved thermodynamics (~10-12% efficiency gain)
Reduced friction (downsizing) (~5-8% efficiency gain)




. . .
My concern is what damage can this do to a ten grand =Engine and how dangerous is it! if the pressure build on the fuel rails fails ??? way too many unanswered questions, Its relying on a pressure pulse boost, too similar to the principle of a ram jet , and that engine is not designed for it.
My thoughts are purely a safety factor.
Richard


Can't agree with you more; your experience with the engine can't be ignored. And one can't simply ignore the engineering of the engine. Especially when it is unknown 'what happens in the combustion chamber'. I'm glad that mgjessop is willing to take the risk. If after 50,000 miles, he's still happy and has no issues, then maybe some more will be installed for additional 'real-world laboratory' testing.

Safety with the controls - that is, under what conditions the HOH is produced - is a great concern from my experience and perspective. It seems that WHEN one is installed on ANY engine, there should be a minimum of an intake air-flow sensor that turns the system on and off to avoid build-up of explosive gas(hydrogen and oxygen) in a non-running engine regardless of the key position.

If one can install one, as mgjessop has, and overcome the safety concerns with the HOH generation when not needed, and see benefit long term (this is the risk) then we might be able to say this is a good thing. It would be nice to have some of the blanks filled in - answers to the questions of engine temperatures - any available coolant, oil, head, exhaust, etc.- answers about the oil contamination, questions about actual exhaust emission testing, and any other information available. It would also be interesting to see a separation of the oxygen from the hydrogen - each being introduced to the combustion process independently - to see which produces more effect - but then again I'm a very curious person. :bounce: I'd like to look and ponder over some of that kind of information.

Regards,
Tim

[mgjessop]

UPDATE...

I have put 3200 miles with the Hydrogen Kit on so far... I keep a log of the miles I drive and my MPG... I drive the same route for my business so the average is always about the same give or take 1-2&#37;...

3200 miles WITHOUT the system I used 135 gallons... 23.7mpg average

3200 miles WITH the system I used 122.6 gallons... 26.1mpg average

135.0 gal
-122.6 gal
----------------
12.4 gallons saved...

12.4 gal x $3.14gal = $38.93 savings
9% fuel savings....

The bottom line is this unit is saving me about $80 a month...
The fuel saving is 9% so far, nothing huge but it is a savings...
I am going close to 700miles on a tank wich I was never able to do before...

Also the unit only works while the engine is running and it shuts off when you turn the engine on... It will not work unless the engine running... So there is no safty issue what so ever... The engine temp stays the same I not see any change what so ever. As for the exhaust temps, I don't know... The oil seems to be the same change time of about 17,000miles...

I will say this... The unit does not give you the 20-40% increase in mpg that alot of people claim... It does give that 8-10% in real world driving... If you don't drive over 40,000 miles a year, this unit would be hard to justify... But if you dirve alot if is worth it... I will keep you posted as the miles rack up... We will see if the savings get's better or worse...

[jdcaples]

I'm also thinking it is providing oxygen to the diesel burning process. That in and of it's self can be a big boost. I'd expect that the hydrogen only partially burns with the oxygen as the hydrogen has this diesel competitor. Remember air is only 20ish percent oxygen. The unit would be outputting a gss mix that is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen, or 33&#37; oxygen.

mgjessop, BMA,

Thanks for this thread. I've been mulling over BMA's comment about embellishing the oxygen available for combustion. I read something about this a while ago, but I didn't keep it. After several days' searching, trying to recall... I found it.

From Argonne National Laboratory "Reducing Diesel Soot by using Late Cycle Oxygen Enrichment (http://www.transportation.anl.gov/research/engine/soot.html)

The trick is to reduce soot emissions in heavy-duty and light-duty diesel engines without increasing the formation of nitrogen oxides (NOx), a precursor to ozone that contributes significantly to smog. Argonne's approach is late-cycle auxiliary gas injection (AGI), which adds air or oxygen-enriched air. A high-velocity air stream from the air injector provides turbulent mixing of the combustion by-products. Increasing the oxygen concentration further enhances soot oxidation and helps burn up the soot particles as they form. Because NOx is formed early in the combustion cycle, adding air or oxygen-enriched air late in the cycle does not increase NOx.

Argonne's work focuses on modifying the in-cylinder air composition by adding oxygen-enriched air directly into the combustion chamber during the late stages of the combustion cycle. Specific projects include

Developing KIVA-3 computer simulations to help optimize the AGI and fuel parameters Setting up a single-cycle diesel engine test stand and conducting late-cycle oxygen enrichment experiments

A test matrix for computer simulations was developed, and parametric test results were obtained by using a central gas injector location. Simulation results indicate the following:

- AGI is effective in reducing soot.
- The duration of the AGI has little effect on soot formation.
- Late-cycle AGI does not significantly alter the amount of NOx emissions.
- Varying the AGI composition has little effect on soot oxidation, which suggests the mixing caused by AGI is the dominant mechanism that affects engine-out soot emissions.


I don't know if I understand all of this chemistry, or even Argonne's description of their efforts because it seemed self-contradictory in a couple of places...

Still, I'd like to know, am I correct in my interpretation: Argonne and mgjessop's Hydrogen Boost contraption are both aiming to achieve a more complete burn and reduce diesel combustion by-products, namely soot and NOx?



-Jon

[mgjessop]

I got up under to take a look at my exhaust pipe to see if still looked like it use to... I would normally have a layer of dark soot in the pipe... There still is soot but is much lighter in color?:thinking: It is not that deep, reck your white clothes black soot... I am not sure if this is a good sign or not? I do know that no matter how hard I punch it, there is no smoke what so ever coming out of my pipes...:D

[jdcaples]

I got up under to take a look at my exhaust pipe to see if still looked like it use to... I would normally have a layer of dark soot in the pipe... There still is soot but is much lighter in color?:thinking: It is not that deep, reck your white clothes black soot... I am not sure if this is a good sign or not? I do know that no matter how hard I punch it, there is no smoke what so ever coming out of my pipes...:D

Thanks. I think your gizmo might validate Argonne's notions and simulation-runs.

-Jon

[BMA]

From Argonne National Laboratory "Reducing Diesel Soot by using Late Cycle Oxygen Enrichment (http://www.transportation.anl.gov/research/engine/soot.html)

[I]The trick is to reduce soot emissions in heavy-duty and light-duty diesel engines without increasing the formation of nitrogen oxides (NOx), a precursor to ozone that contributes significantly to smog. Argonne's approach is late-cycle auxiliary gas injection (AGI), which adds air or oxygen-enriched air. A high-velocity air stream from the air injector provides turbulent mixing of the combustion by-products. Increasing the oxygen concentration further enhances soot oxidation and helps burn up the soot particles as they form. Because NOx is formed early in the combustion cycle, adding air or oxygen-enriched air late in the cycle does not increase NOx.

Argonne's work focuses on modifying the in-cylinder air composition by adding oxygen-enriched air directly into the combustion chamber during the late stages of the combustion cycle. Specific projects include


This is a big difference from what the hydrogen producer is doing. Argonne Labs is using a modified engine where they inject enriched air into the cylinder after part? or all? of the burn has completed. The hydrogen/oxygen gas producer is adding it's mixture to the standard incoming air supply and replaces some of the normal incoming air. Sounds like there may be an increased NOx production from doing that.

- Bryan

[tegimr]

. . . The hydrogen/oxygen gas producer is adding it's mixture to the standard incoming air supply and replaces some of the normal incoming air. Sounds like there may be an increased NOx production from doing that.

- Bryan

Sounds like it would be good to have emissions testing with/without the device running. Jon - are there still mechanics who have the equipment on that side of the mountains (been more than 20 years since I lived there)? I'm considering purchasing one along with a farmer friend of mine who likes to dabble in these types of things and I'd want to test on both ends (and I'd be testing the questions I've asked - temperatures, etc. as much as possible.)

Tim

[jdcaples]

Bryan, my reading comprehension could use some polishing. I get it now, though. Thanks for clarifying my confusion.

Tim, there are emssions tests required for the following counties:

Clark
King
Pierce
Snohomish
Spokane

State Certified emission specialists - small business/neighborhood SAE mechanics - have the equipment.

I've never considered calling one to see if they'd be willing to charge the nominal hourly rate + materials to evaluate tail pipe contents to promote an experiment; but people don't usually turn away easy money.

Then again, I live in Seattle. :)

-Jon

[svaric2]

I understand what your saying, that is takes more energy to make Hydrogen then what it puts out... I have the 200amp alt on my sprinter... I hooked an amp meter to the Hydrogen Maker and it pulls about 23amps of juice... So I migh be getting power that would normally be lost? If this unit didn't work I would be the first person to say it is :censored: What some people claim on there web site I know can't be true... The unit only makes a certain btu, in order to get the mileage some people are claiming the unit would have to make probably 20 times the amount of hydrogen... I thought that I would be seeing 25-35&#37; better fuel economy at freeway speed... Instead I am seeing around 8-10%... I drive about 200-300miles a day, so any amount helps... The reason why I got this unit was because I have a close friend who is a cross country truck driver... He has 2 large units installed on his rig... His average fuel economy is 4.5mpg... With it turned on he get's 5.0mpg... Doesn't sound like much but it saves him over $7,500 a year in fuel... What we should be asking.. What does hydrogen do the combustion process with diesel?:thinking:



BUMP..................

so you paid ~700 for an sl-25? that's strange.

because i just went to their site (savefuel.ca) and saw no sl-25 unit, instead i saw a $700 sl-50 unit, which produces 50 liters of the gas.
also, they claim the sl-50 draws 7-12 amps, whereas you found your sl-25 system drawing 23 amps. strange.

(maybe they recently upgraded their site, or products, or changed their product line around, i dunno.)

but from what ive read so far in this thread, the sl-25 you have installed gives you a ~10% boost in economy, and you also said the unit is not worth the money unless you drive 40,000 miles a year....

well seeing as you can now buy a sl-50 for the same amount of money you paid for the sl-25, im guessin its worth the money, (double the gas, double the btu's, double the efficiency, ((well not really, but close)) ) for the same amount of money.

id buy it for my dad, (the owner of the sprinter) but i need to convince him its worth it.
and he has a hard head. very hard. :shifty:

[svaric2]

so is this thing legit or not???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply people!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sorry

[jdcaples]

so is this thing legit or not???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply people!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sorry


I recommend you try to contact mgjessop (http://sprinter-source.com/forum/member.php?u=548) via private message or email. Click on the username and give it a try.

The user hasn't been active on this board since Sept of 2007, but may (or may not) receive - and/or respond to - a polite request by you for an update.

-Jon

[mgjessop]

Just an Update:

I have about 50k miles with the hydrogen Generator... I have averaged right about 14% fuel saving's... I have saved about 400 Gallons of Bio Diesel or about $1500. A savings of a about $10 a fillup... I have had no engine problems... I am getting on average close to 20k before oil changes.. Normally I would get 15-16K... Everything is awesome... Not one problem with the system... :thumbup:

[BULBASOR]

It's not possible to seperate hydrogen from the H2O water molecule with the power generated from a Sprinter engine.

There is no "chemical" process to seperate hydrogen from oxygen that does not require more power than it generates.

Hydrogen, like gasoline, packs a lot of power in a very small space, way more than gasoline. Hydrogen is only a means to 'store' energy. Hydrogen as a fuel is no more efficiant or less costly than gasoline, it's just more potent. It takes just as much energy to create either fuel in amounts that create the same amount of thermal BTU's

The only reason Hydrogen is even considered for automobiles is because it can 'store' more energy for electric motors in a smaller space than a battery. When hydrogen is forced through a fuel cell, it must bond with oxygen to get to the other side of the cell, and this generates electricity. The "exhaust" from this bonding is hydrogen and oxygen, (WATER).

Is requires the same amount of power to seperate the atoms in the water molecule as is produced by bonding them. In fact HONDA is offering a hydrogen generator the size of a refrigerator with thier 2010 electric fuel cell ACCORD and guess what the hydrogen generator burns to to create the hydrogen? NATURAL GAS!

In physics that is the law of conservation. Energy to matter - matter to energy you can't "create" energy from nothing.

[tegimr]

It's not possible to seperate hydrogen from the H2O water molecule with the power generated from a Sprinter engine.

There is no "chemical" process to seperate hydrogen from oxygen that does not require more power than it generates.

Hydrogen, like gasoline, packs a lot of power in a very small space, way more than gasoline. Hydrogen is only a means to 'store' energy. Hydrogen as a fuel is no more efficiant or less costly than gasoline, it's just more potent. It takes just as much energy to create either fuel in amounts that create the same amount of thermal BTU's

The only reason Hydrogen is even considered for automobiles is because it can 'store' more energy for electric motors in a smaller space than a battery. When hydrogen is forced through a fuel cell, it must bond with oxygen to get to the other side of the cell, and this generates electricity. The "exhaust" from this bonding is hydrogen and oxygen, (WATER).

Is requires the same amount of power to seperate the atoms in the water molecule as is produced by bonding them. In fact HONDA is offering a hydrogen generator the size of a refrigerator with thier 2010 electric fuel cell ACCORD and guess what the hydrogen generator burns to to create the hydrogen? NATURAL GAS!

In physics that is the law of conservation. Energy to matter - matter to energy you can't "create" energy from nothing.

All that you've stated regarding chemistry and physics is true. There is ample reading material in this thread that points to some understanding that HHO producing devices aid in fuel economy. It is my opinion, (and based on under-funded research) that the benefit comes from increased oxygen content, not from the hydrogen combustion. I KNOW EMPIRICALLY that the devices can increase efficiency. HOWEVER, since the laws of thermodynamics are so well established, I have to come to the conclusion that the sales literature/common perception incorrectly attributes the benefit to the hydrogen combustion.

I'd be very interested in seeing the algorithms for fuel mixture changes based on O2 sensors, but that seems to be part of the black-box secrets that MB (and other manufacturers) don't really let out.

Tim
PS - you can separate hydrogen and oxygen from water with a 9 volt battery - really, quite a bit. I don't suggest using match to test how much - especially inside a building and certainly without safety equipment. Using sodium hydroxide (lye) or similar compounds can increase the efficiency of the separation as the solution becomes warm. A neighbor friend 'made his own' (see my previous comments regarding my sons, and understand that this young man (19 yrs) is looked up to by my sons as being interesting and innovative - I do have fire insurance :eek:) and was shocked at the size of explosion that he got from his 'little 12 volt separator'. He's working on a Darwin award (http://www.darwinawards.com/), I think.

[Suba]

What are the opinions concerning the size most beneficial for a Sprinter ? I'm considering either the SL-50 or the SL-75. There would be trade offs between the two it would seem. The SL-50 is less expensive, and draws less amps, but the SL-75 is larger and theoretically should give a higher percentage of fuel saving, and go further between fill-ups, but it's over 50 % more expensive. What's the consensus about the possibility of internal damage as a result of using this product ? For instance exacerbating the injector bolts and head threads potential for stretching ?

I'm leaning towards the SL- 50, but would like some input before I buy.

[talkinghorse43]

What are the opinions concerning the size most beneficial for a Sprinter ? I'm considering either the SL-50 or the SL-75. There would be trade offs between the two it would seem. The SL-50 is less expensive, and draws less amps, but the SL-75 is larger and theoretically should give a higher percentage of fuel saving, and go further between fill-ups, but it's over 50 % more expensive. What's the consensus about the possibility of internal damage as a result of using this product ? For instance exacerbating the injector bolts and head threads potential for stretching ?

I'm leaning towards the SL- 50, but would like some input before I buy.

If it were to increase the cetane rating of the fuel, it would help the injector holddown issue. If, on the other hand, the cetane rating is decreased, that would be a negative. What's the effect on cetane (ignition delay shorter, or longer)?

[talkinghorse43]

It appears from the below that hydrogen would lower cetane, so, if true, that would be a negative for injector holddown life.

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7290522-description.html

[BULBASOR]

Yes yes we have made the little "battery bombs" since we were in college but I also learned that the explosive energy is common to ALL hydra-sulfide batteries due to hydrogen sulfide (battery Acid), not "pure Hydrogen".

My particular skill is electrical engineering, not like SEEK (he is electronics, much smarter than me) my business is BIG electric stuff like unit substations, gas fired turbine generators, and high power transmission. (Now you guys all know why I'm such a proponent of the ELECTRIC CAR). Sure, I want a small 4000 amp substation on every corner as out 'charging stations' when we go all electric. (Fill up your electric car in about 5 minutes at that amperage).

Yet I digress,

I have worked with a lot of SCADA systems for process control of the orifice dimentions on many many fossil fuel fired steam turbines for electrical generation. You would NOT BELIEVE the efficincies that can be had when you create electricity on a massive scale:

ONE rotation on a Westinghouse Frame 5 Steam Turbine generates 200 kilowatts of power and when the orifice control is done well with the correct algorythims this takes about 13.5 ounces of JP3.

THAT'S ENOUGH POWER TO RUN YOUR ENTIRE HOUSE FOR AN HOUR ON 13 OUNCES OF GAS!

I have seen 1300 megawatt turbines that can provide all the power needed to run all of San Diego AND Orange County COMBINED!

If you tried to even run your dishwasher from that OMB612 under the hood you would burn more fuel than that big turbine burns powering an entire house AND your Internal Combustion Engine would still be loosing 90 PERCENT OF ALL IT'S ENERGY IN THE FORM OF HEAT!!! yOU COULD INCREASE YOUR MILEAGE BY 600 PERCENT IF YOU COULD JUST FIGURE OUT A WAY TO RECOVER ALL THE THERMAL BYU'S YOUE ARE WASTING IN THE FORM OF HEAT!

These little gizmos that deliver 1 or 2 or even 5 percent fuel efficiencies are fun to play with but in the long run all your doing is messing around with the fuel to air mixture going into your car. Even atmospheric conditions can effect your MPG by 2%. Cycloning the air into the manifold is another proven method of increasing oxygen by compressing it. You could just run compressed air into your maniforld and get the same effect, in fact, I believe the entire design of the dreaded TURBO RESONATOR was due to someone at MB wanting to increase the air pressure after boost.

I think yor hydrogen generator is working just fine, but I also think it's still not the answer we are looking for (and i think you probably agree) but it is nice of you to test it out for us. My hope is that it's not going to harm your van by increasing inlet temps because you will not know it until a valve gets burned.

[tegimr]

. . .
ONE rotation on a Westinghouse Frame 5 Steam Turbine generates 200 kilowatts of power and when the orifice control is done well with the correct algorythims this takes about 13.5 ounces of JP3.
. . .
If you tried to even run your dishwasher from that OMB612 under the hood you would burn more fuel than that big turbine burns powering an entire house AND your Internal Combustion Engine would still be loosing 90 PERCENT OF ALL IT'S ENERGY IN THE FORM OF HEAT!!! yOU COULD INCREASE YOUR MILEAGE BY 600 PERCENT IF YOU COULD JUST FIGURE OUT A WAY TO RECOVER ALL THE THERMAL BYU'S YOUE ARE WASTING IN THE FORM OF HEAT!

These little gizmos that deliver 1 or 2 or even 5 percent fuel efficiencies are fun to play with but in the long run all your doing is messing around with the fuel to air mixture going into your car. Even atmospheric conditions can effect your MPG by 2%.
. . .
I think yor hydrogen generator is working just fine, but I also think it's still not the answer we are looking for (and i think you probably agree) but it is nice of you to test it out for us. My hope is that it's not going to harm your van by increasing inlet temps because you will not know it until a valve gets burned.

I can hear the HHO machine mfg. drooling at the thought of a HHO generator for your Westinghouse Frame 5! :rolleyes:

INDEED - if we could recover the wasted heat or reduce it we'd be much more efficient AND make Al Gore a happy man. Nice thing about hybrid is increased efficiency which decreases the heat waste.
NICE thing about our vehicles is that they should adjust the fuel to the oxygen available - hopefully not changing the heat - which I have yet to determine.

It's not a final answer, for certain. But with fuel costs raising the 5% starts to add up quickly. that is nearly 20 cents every 25 miles. Over a dollar every time I leave my town! Definitely a bonus for someone driving an delivery van - so long as it does not INCREASE RISK.

AND worth repeating, IF YOU INSTALL ONE - BE CERTAIN TO WIRE IT TO NOT RUN WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING. This would create a small container (your intake system) with a large amount of HHO, which could damage, injure, or cause death if ignited.

Tim

[Suba]

I'm definitely on the fence with this one. After reviewing all the information on this thread, and doing a little research, I've decided it would be prudent and smart to wait until there are more long term studies done, and more long term user reporting before I jump on the bandwagon.

Thanks for everyone's input......

[BULBASOR]

That would be a bit of a bomb.

I think your hydrogen generator is fine and all because it's not a lot of money.

How's THIS for an idea:

A 36 HP DC Electric Motor wound in the rotary format: (Stator revolves around the Armature), is a very flat beast, much like the old radial engine on old airplanes. The Armature, (shaft), is stationary, and the Stator, (housing), rotates around the shaft. This motor is about 18 inches hi by 7 inches deep and shaped like a donut.

Put one of these motors behind each wheel on a Sprinter. Connect those motors to 6 or 8 golf cart batteries mounted under the floor opposite of the fuel tank. Put a variable reostat on the brake pedal so whe you start to puch on the brakes the 4 wheel motor engage the batteries IN REVERSE! You now have REGENERATIVE BRAKING! (Just like on a Prius). You can also generat juice when going down hill instead of downshifting. All the while your charging these batteries, AND, saving your disk brakes for real emergencies. (You now have brakes that last forever!)

No do the math - 36HP per wheel, that's 144 full torque HP if you flip the switch to run the motors in forward! (AND you get 4x4 drive!)

144 HP ? That's already more HP than you are currently getting from your OMB612 ! ! ! If you have enough juice stored in the batteries you could go zero to 60 with a combined HP of over 270 horses and the electric horses would be INSTANT torque! We're talking zero to 60 on the low 5's IN A SPRINTER ! !

Put more electric storage on board or a hydrogen fuel cell to turn hydrogen into electricity and now you have one hell of a powerful very high mileage beast that would probably have a range of about 1500 miles on board, (you can't drive that long without falling asleep!)

And this is all CURRENT TECHNOLOGY (no pun intended), yet the car makers are still forcing us to drive the way they want us to drive. It's shamefull.

[tegimr]

Indeed - 'tis true.
With the right time and enough money, and a good machine shop, I'd do that in a heartbeat (or a lot of heartbeats)

Tim

[BULBASOR]

It's crazy, because the electric wheel motor has been used by General Electric on Locomotives for over 40 years. Our sprinters would work the same way. OMB647 under the hood generating electricity just like the deisel in a locomotive. Only on the Sprinter, there would be no need to run the engine all the time because we will not be pulling 5000 times our own weight like the locomotive does, but think,

If you DID run the OBM647 full time you COULD pull 500 times the weight of your Sprinter because ELECTRIC MOTORS DON'T CONVERT ALL THIER ENERGY INTO HEAT LIKE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES! You would have the FULL torque and power of all that energy going directly to your tires! You could tow huge trailers, toy haulers, boats, or anything you wanted for a fraction of the cost of using your OMB647 alone AND you would STILL blow away every car on the road!

And because the wheel motors are mounted directly on the wheels instead of the drive train you don't blow out your rear end or break axles like you would with a traditional drive train! That's why the railroads do it that way!

[BaywoodBill]

Whew, Bulbasor, what a sermon. I believe! I believe! :thumbup:

[Aircraft Wrench]

That would be a bit of a bomb.

I think your hydrogen generator is fine and all because it's not a lot of money.

How's THIS for an idea:

A 36 HP DC Electric Motor wound in the rotary format: (Stator revolves around the Armature), is a very flat beast, much like the old radial engine on old airplanes. The Armature, (shaft), is stationary, and the Stator, (housing), rotates around the shaft. This motor is about 18 inches hi by 7 inches deep and shaped like a donut.



So how much are they? do I have to purchase in lots of "5" (think hot dogs and buns)

Samples available?

[tegimr]

It's crazy, because the electric wheel motor has been used by General Electric on Locomotives for over 40 years. Our sprinters would work the same way. OMB647 under the hood generating electricity just like the deisel in a locomotive. Only on the Sprinter, there would be no need to run the engine all the time because we will not be pulling 5000 times our own weight like the locomotive does, but think,

If you DID run the OBM647 full time you COULD pull 500 times the weight of your Sprinter because ELECTRIC MOTORS DON'T CONVERT ALL THIER ENERGY INTO HEAT LIKE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES! You would have the FULL torque and power of all that energy going directly to your tires! You could tow huge trailers, toy haulers, boats, or anything you wanted for a fraction of the cost of using your OMB647 alone AND you would STILL blow away every car on the road!

And because the wheel motors are mounted directly on the wheels instead of the drive train you don't blow out your rear end or break axles like you would with a traditional drive train! That's why the railroads do it that way!

Indeed, I wish it were available.

re: "500 times the weight" - or with a 1/500th (maybe not that small) sized engine! With MUCH greater efficiency. Then people would complain about getting less than 100 MPG. :lol: Sadly, it is possible; just not implemented commercially yet.

re: "traditional drive train" Clever play on words!
Tim

[buga37]

Did any one install Hydrogen system on 2007 Sprinter (disel)?
do you need Map Sensor Enhancer or EFIE (Electronic Fuel Injection Enhancer Circuit)
or something more then just this. I have Map Sensor Enhancer and it lovers my milles, from 25mpg to 18mpg

[BULBASOR]

I would not see any advantage to running hydrogen in the Sprinter.

Hydrogen is only a good fuel if your going to pump it through a fuel cell to make electricity - then you can use electric drive motors but Sprinters don't have electric drive motors so there is no point to having a hydrogen fuel cell on a Sprinter.

There is no difference between an electric car that runs on hydrogen or one that runs on a battery. You charge the battery and when it's full your drive around on the electric motor until the battery is empty.

In a hydrogen car the only difference is that instead of a battery you have a hydrogen tank and a fuel cell that converts hydrogen into electricity. You fill your hydrogen tank with hydrogen and drive around on the electric motor until the hydrogen tank is empty.

Hydrogen is just another way to store energy - just like the battery.

I like the battery better because I can make my own electricity at home for free with a solar cell - I can't make hydrogen for free.

Also - I can find more places to plug into electric for a charge (like anywhere) but hydrogen is hard to find.

Also - The battery car has room for a small gas or deisel engine (that's called a HYBRID) and a hybrid that you can plug in at home and charge up for free on your solar cells is better than anything else cause if you only drive 60 miles a day you never uses the gas motor and you drive for FREE but in case you over run your charge you can always use your diesel motor and you can get diesel fuel anywhere so - the lesson here is_

PLUG IN HYBRID ELECTRIC CARS WITH DEISEL ENGINES ARE THE BEST and we should all be SCREAMING at Detroit and Washington to get them in production ASAP! (Like we NEEDED thm YESTERDAY!)

[mobileoilchange]

could be worse, we could build nuclear powered vehicles.

GOT BOOM?

[Altered Sprinter]

I would not see any advantage to running hydrogen in the Sprinter.

Hydrogen is only a good fuel if your going to pump it through a fuel cell to make electricity - then you can use electric drive motors but Sprinters don't have electric drive motors so there is no point to having a hydrogen fuel cell on a Sprinter.

There is no difference between an electric car that runs on hydrogen or one that runs on a battery. You charge the battery and when it's full your drive around on the electric motor until the battery is empty.

In a hydrogen car the only difference is that instead of a battery you have a hydrogen tank and a fuel cell that converts hydrogen into electricity. You fill your hydrogen tank with hydrogen and drive around on the electric motor until the hydrogen tank is empty.

Hydrogen is just another way to store energy - just like the battery.

I like the battery better because I can make my own electricity at home for free with a solar cell - I can't make hydrogen for free.

Also - I can find more places to plug into electric for a charge (like anywhere) but hydrogen is hard to find.

Also - The battery car has room for a small gas or deisel engine (that's called a HYBRID) and a hybrid that you can plug in at home and charge up for free on your solar cells is better than anything else cause if you only drive 60 miles a day you never uses the gas motor and you drive for FREE but in case you over run your charge you can always use your diesel motor and you can get diesel fuel anywhere so - the lesson here is_

PLUG IN HYBRID ELECTRIC CARS WITH DEISEL ENGINES ARE THE BEST and we should all be SCREAMING at Detroit and Washington to get them in production ASAP! (Like we NEEDED thm YESTERDAY!)
Read this oneMore Than 1 Million Prius Hybrids Sold (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/IndustryInfo/wireStory?id=4860148)
Honda to Sell New Gas-Electric Hybrid (http://abcnews.go.com/Business/GadgetGuide/wireStory?id=4898518)
and look at your future both MB
This engine is the second faze on the sun diesel concept, runs on bio-mass a combination of gasoline and diesel the best of two worlds more than a possiable contender for 2009-2010 Hydrogen capability with injector options.for higher and cleaner use of burn rates,
8069
next generation 4 cylinder 150 HP 200 220 fuel efficient euro five compliant this engine can run on hydrogen as a part conversion to produce energy and savings of fuels a virtual in-house self generating powerhouse.
Uses a seven speed triponic semi automated trans, double clutch system, developed for the US to met the magic bin 5 2012 emission requirements bought forward to 2009 Sprinters Yep if all goes well. 46 miles to the gallon with the correct fuels.Both engines are for commercial based vehicles not limited to sedans. there will always be a need for commercial transport.

The one good thing that will come out the oil mess is advanced engines, using alternative fuels that are clean emission free and best of all reducing the need for fossil fuel stocks. both engines do not require ethanol based fuels algae. free to produce. the down side is tax it knocks out state taxation and that has to be raised from somewhere.as to loss of fuel tax revenues. both of these engines have been developed to run on different types of fuels one DiesOtto in production in Europe now but limited as experimental using bio-mass re-newable fuel based products that is using waste products for conversion, WHICH IS NOT RELIANT ON GRAIN STOCKS. thus preserving food stocks for food.

The second engine uses synthetics environmentally friendlier produced fuels utilizing 100% synthetic based fuels and or using under utilized GL= gas to liquid in both LP GL gas and clean green coal based fuel technology.

For this too become viable all nations, or at least Europe, Asia Pacific, Japan, N/America will need to join as a co-operative to work in a bi-lateral Parisian agreements for Geo-political-stability.both China, India, including Russia, are showing interest as well. let the future unfold before it's too late.
Richard


8070

[BULBASOR]

Whay waste time and money burning fuel when the sun is free?

The internal combustion engine is a has been. It's future is to be relegated to back up power and stand by APU's and even those are mostly turbines now.

There is just no point burning ANY kind of material at all to get from one place to another. Any time you burn somthing ANYthing you change it's molecular structure into carbon and you LOSE THAT RESOURCE. The only resource that is garanteed to last as long as us and at quantities that we can never deplete is the SUN.

When you BURN grass or corn in your car your just using SUN energy stored in the plant. Most all stuff that burns is a side product of the nuclear activity of the sun be it growing plants living dinasoars (and the dead ones in our gas tanks) petrified wood products and charcoal or natural gas and methane.

What grass and corn give us in 3 months of growing is the lerftover sun energy stored in the plants fibers. The sam energy the sun is willing to give us in 1 millisecond without all the growing and planting and mis use of the minerals in the ground.

There is more electricity beating down on the roofs of our houses in a single day in the form of sun light than all the power required to light all the homes in the world.

Nature converts the sun in a very simple fashion - we need to do the same. There is a simple way to do it - but we just have not discovered it yet.

[Altered Sprinter]

true but I said waste resources that are renewable, why burn oil for heating, when waste wood can be used, or waste products carbon based, that can be utilized to be compressed to a fuel liquid.One of many energy sources not being used.it's call regeneration of recycling of an energy source that is currently not being utilized.. down streaming of a waste product and the benefit is a source of energy. Think about it! where does most used plastic end up? how many tons end up in a chocking ocean,land fill, waste paper products, drink a cup of coffee what happens to the container. the list is endless why burn sugar cane another source, forestry burn offs another carbon based product not being used. it's free to use and utilize a stop gap measure to an evolutionary change to make the most of a finite product, it creates employment, employment is tax based as to revenue tax that evil word is part of the economy, why ship money out of a country when if spent wisely from within money goes round and distributes all over this takes a country into self substantially, No wars either, I'm all for that one.
Richard

[BULBASOR]

Your talking about recycling.

Recycling is a very natural thing. All living things on the planet use recyclying - plants grow in dirt created from dead plants and animal poop and those plants die or get eaten and recycle and on and on and on.

I'm not really much on recycling because I'm not much of a tree hugger. Recycling is cool - I guess it's a noble thing and really it would be nice to start taking all the crap in the landfills and turn it into somthing we can burn - it's expensive to do that, but it would make things cleaner - but recycling will never cover even a fraction of the energy needed to drive a car.

Driving a car is a wholly unatural thing. There is no natural bio-pysiological evidence anywhere in nature for anything beyond bi-pedal movement for humans and primates - quadra-pedal movement for mammals - or multi-pedal movement for insects.

Nothing in nature has wheels;
until you get down to the atomic level. Atoms.

Atomic based transportation (electricity) is the most natural way to transport by wheels. The basic unlimited resource needed for atomic based transportation is not TERRESTRIAL- it's EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL.

The untimate energy source is not here on earth it's out there in the universe - the sun is the closest provider. Without it the earth is a dead chunk of rock.

I am NOT an enviromentalist - I really don't think about the whales or trees or stuff but because I travel out on the road all the time I would not want anything to happen to the whales or the trees because it's so much fun to see them when I travel in BULBASOR.

If you are a true TERRESTRIAL enviromentalist purist your loyalties should be with a more agrarian society were humans return to the natural way of life of living purley on the recycling system like all the other living creatures on the planet. Your mode of transport should be creature powered NOT fossil fuel. Such a society is sustainable and there are many out there who crave such a society but I am not one.

My personal feeling is that humans are animals but they are SPECIAL animals that have somthing more. I think humans have some notion of the great source of power and energy that is "out there" and might even be connected to it on some unconsious plane and that may be what drives us to silly notions like "wheels" and automobiles and space ships.

We need to tap into that EXTRA-terrestrial power supply that we may find out just might be our birthright.

Or - we can just be like all the other dumb creatures on the planet and go back to our mud holes and scrounge for whatever grubs the planet earth provides for the day.

[mean_in_green]

Uses a seven speed triponic semi automated trans, double clutch system, developed for the US to met the magic bin 5 2012 emission requirements bought forward to 2009 Sprinters

Richard, I think you're saying you believe this to be available from next year then?

[mobileoilchange]

I agree with both Richard and Bulbasor.
you both have good points.

the world as we know it has changed alot in a short period of time. for example, paper. with the internet and email less paper is needed, less trees need to be cut. not all areas of the world have trees or waste wood products to burn for heat. we could all benifit from geothermo heat. its free, its comfortable, and it doesnt get any cleaner then that.

having farmers grow corn, sugar, or anyother type of food product isnt the answer to our fuel problem. for one it will limit our food shortage in time. two, the processing fees will exceed the price of fuel as we know it today. three, burning "food for fuel" is still a polutant, although not as bad as gasoline or diesel. its still a polutant.

if nuclear power "WAS" safe that would be one good power source. but we all know the side effects. I agree that solar power is the answer, but we must advance into its potential power.

the internal combustion engine is in itself a dinosaur. its antique! time to move on and eliminate it.

a solar/electric sprinter! imagine no more talk of HOW MANY MILES PER GALLON DO YA GET? instead it would be how many sun rays do ya get.

the roof of a sprinter is plenty big enough for solar panels! as are semi trailers.
with solar power vehicles, there is no need for ANY oil, NO grease, NO air filters, hoses, belts, etc etc.

why are the auto industries wasting time on fuel buring dinosaurs? because they know they sell today.

[BaywoodBill]

I like the battery better because I can make my own electricity at home for free with a solar cell - I can't make hydrogen for free.


Hi Bulbasor. What does it cost you to get this free electricity? Everytime I've looked into solar cell stuff it seems more costly than what you get out of it and then it's a landfill problem later.... and maybe some of it's toxic.

[BaywoodBill]

The only resource that is garanteed to last as long as us and at quantities that we can never deplete is the SUN.

We have the resource -- energy from the sun -- but the conversion of that energy to a useful form depends so far on some fairly environmentally unfriendly methods. The manufacture of solar cells uses energy, resources, and creates toxic waste. Windmills (solar energy in the form of wind) take up space and endanger birds, nearby residents, and low-flying aircraft.... even people in cars driving on the highway if one of those monstrus blades flies off.

You acknowledge our shortcomings.
There is a simple way to do it - but we just have not discovered it yet.

[BULBASOR]

I hope I have not offended any environmental people - I'm not against the environmental thing and I'm not trying to say all environmental people are in a mud hole or something - I just think the earth has done just fine all by itself for billions of years before we humans ever came along.

I don't think we need to do anything to "fix" the planet - I think it works just fine all by itself. But I also do not believe this is "mother Earth" or our "permanent home". I go with what the Apollo astronaut said when they got "out there" - they called it "Spaceship Earth".

What we need to do is get OFF the planet. If your like me and you believe there is a higher calling for humans and that we are all sort of connected to some Carl Jung-ian 'collective consciousness' somewhere be it God or the Tibetan levels of existence (which coincide with the 16 known dimensions) or Christianity or whatever the 'truth' is - the point is that the science behind it must add up - the universe dictates it. Math is the language of the universe and might even be the language of what we might call GOD.

I think earth is the jumping off point. I suspect the Indians and other ancient peoples or pre-Columbian societies were striving to understand this when they looked out into space for answers. (Normal animals do not look out into space for answers). And that just might be where ALL the answers to our problems are - out in space where the sun is. We can use the sun to make everything go until be can figure out how to get off earth.

The world might end one day - but there is a possibility that humans are eternal - we might actually outlast the earth. No one ever thought of that so that's why we are building our cars all wrong. Going back in time and becoming our ancestors is not the answer either - so that's why I am not a 'purist' or "terrestrial environmentalist". I think the future of our journey lies "out there". When Albert Einstein used math to calculate the mass of the universe he proved that space is NOT infinite - he proved that the universe does NOT go on forever.

Someone asked Einstein; "How large is the universe?" to with he replied:

"If you launched a rocket from earth and it traveled in a straight line and never deviated from it's course eventually after who knows how many of millennium the rocket would end up right back on the other side of earth."

When we do get 'out-there' I'm pretty sure we will find out the answer was right inside of ourselves all along but we just had to go on the journey to find out. It's the journey that's the fun part.

[Altered Sprinter]

Richard, I think you're saying you believe this to be available from next year then?
Its being trailed in the US and Germany this engine was meant for Euro 5 not 1V Privately my thoughts are because of oil going totally off the planet, and with SUV being discontinued this engine may be bought forward for 2009-2010 late not 2011-12 as intended. it's designed for many types of fuel based products. Germany has the stations for fuels using Bio-mass fuels ELF and Shell... the US has no facility's but it can run on straight diesel or 100% bio-Diesel or HP LP-GL and hydrogen assist.The hydrogen assist is to compensate for the lack of power loss as a power booster which is part of the process to producing a clean high burn to almost eliminate NOX emissions to bring the engine back into specs, but also increases the MPG by 30% hence 46 miles to UK gallon. it's a commercial based engine out of the current Sprinter range. I have very little info on it, apart from seeing Damlier's video on it.
It's an alternative engine of the Diesel's concept towards the evolutionary advances as to the stepping stone for future fuel based technology. the engine already exists, thus lowering manufacturing costs, which means the price increase on the vehicle are favorable, for commercial based carriers. that need the economy and HP power to deliver the torque to carry the loads.
Or peal power:smilewink:
How to operate instructions:professor:
First you must push it,to make go...(:}:::::::::::::::::::::::::::):}
8077
Richard

[buga37]

I would not see any advantage to running hydrogen in the Sprinter.

Hydrogen is only a good fuel if your going to pump it through a fuel cell to make electricity - then you can use electric drive motors but Sprinters don't have electric drive motors so there is no point to having a hydrogen fuel cell on a Sprinter.

There is no difference between an electric car that runs on hydrogen or one that runs on a battery. You charge the battery and when it's full your drive around on the electric motor until the battery is empty.

In a hydrogen car the only difference is that instead of a battery you have a hydrogen tank and a fuel cell that converts hydrogen into electricity. You fill your hydrogen tank with hydrogen and drive around on the electric motor until the hydrogen tank is empty.

Hydrogen is just another way to store energy - just like the battery.

I like the battery better because I can make my own electricity at home for free with a solar cell - I can't make hydrogen for free.

Also - I can find more places to plug into electric for a charge (like anywhere) but hydrogen is hard to find.

Also - The battery car has room for a small gas or deisel engine (that's called a HYBRID) and a hybrid that you can plug in at home and charge up for free on your solar cells is better than anything else cause if you only drive 60 miles a day you never uses the gas motor and you drive for FREE but in case you over run your charge you can always use your diesel motor and you can get diesel fuel anywhere so - the lesson here is_

PLUG IN HYBRID ELECTRIC CARS WITH DEISEL ENGINES ARE THE BEST and we should all be SCREAMING at Detroit and Washington to get them in production ASAP! (Like we NEEDED thm YESTERDAY!)

I don’t agree with you, it is very cheap and easy to get hydrogen out of H2O, i think this is our future fuel, (I hope not gas or diesel) I made one myself
You can buy everything you need at Home Depot and Auto Part under $100 plus circuit board to control oxygen sensor $60-90

Here is manual and installation on Water4gas
http://www.filefactory.com/file/4b49b6/

[buga37]

Here is complete wiring diagram for 2007 Dodge Sprinter if someone needs it.
http://www.filefactory.com/file/182f49/

[BULBASOR]

You can not get hydrogen from water without breaking the very strong bond between the Hydrogen and Oxygen. That take a great amount of power. Right now hydrogen is made using electricity or natuaral gas. You can make your own hydrogen on board your Sprinter, but the power output required to create the hydrogen is almost as much power as you would get burning the hydrogen in your engine.

The stuff you sent from the internet is to convert you car to burn hydrogen - not CREATE hydrogen from water.

Driveing heavy objects like cars down the road takes a LOT of energy - it's not a natural conversion of energy to velocity - everything is out of wack because of the speeds and weights involved. If you just removed the air resistance alone you MPG would go up by 40%!

It's the UN=NATURAL way that we are propelling ourselves through space that creates the need for so much energy - at very high speed. Imagine how much food you would need to eat to walk all the way accross the USA - well you car needs just as much 'food' to expend the same amount of energy - it's basic thermodynamics - nothing is free.

Now - if you were to use SOLAR power to break the bonds of the water molecule you would get cheap hydrogen but it would take a few hours to create enough hydrogen to fill up unless you had a good set of panels (like about 2000 square feet).

But hydrogen to water ON BOARD - not possible and it's not happening and I challenge anyone to proove it.

[Altered Sprinter]

I said part hydrogen conversion as an assist power booster didn't I =Browns gas MB has had pure hydrogen hybrids conversions on sprinter type vans since 1985.and yes the storage of energy is still a problem, solar can't produce enough power for a days use for a commercial vehicle the technology is here, but the cost is too prohibitive at this point of time, to be commercially viable. There is a difference between domestic sedans, requiring energy, and a commercial type van cargo to haul goods for transport all day long, hence two way economics are in place:professor: for a two speed economy.
Solar is a free energy source but the cost to produce is still too expensive and bulky, to be cost neutral.. there is no reason to use solar panels on a roof when the design is a wind resistor, the design for solar paneling needs to be incorporated into the actual body of the vehicle that offers multiple energy storage options combined.
GM is going for the volt electric it's a start but whats missing for a recharge? power plug-in-stations across the entire USA..Electricity costs, therefore we are back in part to the square of one infrastructure's to supply for demand. can't be built in a day, Tax for States becomes an issue. so an economic balance is yet to be found to satisfy all parties. in the interim we look for a quick fix for a longer term tomorrow's meltdown.
Consider this Peak oil...IF we are at the point of no return then the price up of oil will go to two hundred a barrel+ and now is the time for government to resolve it, instead of saying can't do this it will hurt our economy.

8088

[BULBASOR]

I said part hydrogen conversion as an assist power booster didn't I =Browns gas MB has had pure hydrogen hybrids conversions on sprinter type vans since 1985

Burning Hydrogen is not at all hard to do - in fact in many ways it's a better fuel than gasoline. I do not see any problem if someone wants to run their car on hydrogen, but why use all that solar power and electricity to make hydrogen when you can just put the electricity right into the battery of your electric car???? What's up with that? With an electric car you just use the electricity - no need to convert it to hydrogen (which just wastes half of your process!!) No auto makers are really pursuing hydrogen as a means to fuel internal combustion engines - the whole point of hydrogen fuel is to run it through a FUEL CELL so there is no pollution - just water. When you burn hydrogen not only do you loose 1/2 your energy in heat but you also produce hydrocarbons. The strong natural bond between hydrogen and oxygen is called a covalent bond an in nature these atoms WANT to join and create a strong bond - so when you put hydrogen on one side of a cell and oxygen on the other side they will try to come together to form the water bond - the force is so great for them to bond that they will actually create electricity when they pass through the cell. No burning - no moving parts - no carbs - injectors - and no pollution at all.

If you BURN the hydrogen your not only eliminating another resource your creating pollution.

yes the storage of energy is still a problem, solar can't produce enough power for a days use for a commercial vehicle the technology is here, but the cost is too prohibitive at this point of time, to be commercially viable.

Well storage of electricity is not a big problem - batteries are the way to store electricity - but that's why some car makers like hydrogen as a storage for electricity. Your solar panels can make electricity and store it in a battery OR you solar panels can make electricity and use to to make hydrogen. You can either store the electric charge in a chemical battery or as liquid hydrogen. Both are good storage - Hydrogen is a nice way to store electricity because it's very LIGHT. 50 MILES OF HYDROGEN IN A STEEL TANK AND A FUEL CELL IS 1/2 THE WEIGHT OF A BATTERY WITH A 50 MILE CHARGE IN IT. So That is why folks at HONDA like hydrogen over plug in (batteries). Actually both are viable today.

there is no reason to use solar panels on a roof when the design is a wind resistor, the design for solar paneling needs to be incorporated into the actual body of the vehicle that offers multiple energy storage options combined.

Such a car would be useless at night, too. The solar option requires 'off board' storage, there is no other way. Solar panels on the roof of your HOME is probably the best. While your off tooling around the panels soak up sun and make electricity at your home - and stores it in batteries OR in hydrogen. When you get home at night - you fill up! Either way is good. If it rained all day you can "plug in" to the utility grid (a lamp socket) and pay for your electricity. Otherwise - the sun is free. Now, this is only for you daily little commuter driver. All the commercial and van stuff will need to stay on bio diesel and stuff, but 60% of the oil is used in the daily commute - that's the car that needs replacing - not our Sprinters.

GM is going for the volt electric it's a start but whats missing for a recharge? power plug-in-stations across the entire USA..Electricity costs, therefore we are back in part to the square of one infrastructure's to supply for demand.

Infrastructure is only a problem for HYDROGEN. Electricity is EVERYWHERE. You can plug in at a gas station - it's already there and ready to go - a quick charge for 50 to 60 miles on a lithium battery would take about 6 minutes and a standard 100 amp residential service would provide enough electricity to charge 40 cars at the same time! Infrastructure is not a big problem for plug-in cars, and for plug in hybrids it's not an issue at all.

Back to square one is a good saying - when cars were first invented they used gas - kerosene - electric - steam - coal - you name it. Electric was VERY popular in the beginning - but when it cam to hauling heavy loads kerosene (diesel) was the best. I don't think that is going to change much - even the big trains use a diesel to generate the electric for the wheel motors - but they get WAY WAY WAY better mileage than a diesel truck (in comparison the diesel electric train gets 400 miles to the gallon compared to a Frieghtliner on weight hauling ratio).

Our little diesel sprinters are here to stay - I suppose electric wheel motors and a generator behind the NAG1 is coming someday - but a pure electric Sprinter? not likely.

Everything I'm talking about in relation to electric plug in hybrids is for tiny little lightweight cars just to move people - not cargo. In that regard - we already have the technology.

[BBlessing]

[b]In a few short years, many in the future will see a decline in world standards, based on mans greed. What will be! 'Will be',

sad to say we are already at this stage...:yell:

bb

[Altered Sprinter]

I see where you are heading, which was why I stated a two way two speed economy of economics, one for a light weight sedan. one for a Van proper for commercial carrying of goods Batteries just way down a vehicle however it deletes a drive train thus a weight savings look at Damliers new Buses in NY and the huge bank of batteries on the roof to store the energy savings on energy 1.5% Versus diesel mass transportation average running is 3.5 miles per energy unit, not practicable for a solo operator or commercial fleet Diesel still wins out at todays prices.

There is a simple answer to development of sustainable vehicles and that is a unified supply of energy, easy to say , it's simple it can be done, but the logic of stakeholders influence's defies Governance logic to address toady's reality, not tomorrow, today now! from the second one reads this post. Government which lets every one down the transmission "IF" will be expensive and painful, that's the reality Geo-political-gasoline-spectrum of fact.

Electricity is still an issue supply and demand,again infrastructure's to be developed yet to cater for population growth as to energy increases based on population growth patterns. expensive and time consuming cheapest power source nuclear.. as to clean and green, but horrendously expensive to build. OK if your in the nuclear political club house, but if on the outside of the house it's a problem, and look at whats going on with this major stumbling block of energy. not a level playing field there.and sending the oil prices up born out of fear.

Look at down under for a moment in time, we have a large block of real-estate with a populous growth transient across many miles, through out Australia. Only in the last few days the Rudd labor government comes up with the bright idea to spend 500 million on hybrids Toyota gets 25 million for example. How dumb can a government get it's a political ploy for votes and to keep a manufacturer's going. that's called an alliance to a major car manufacture the same BS that Ford GM and Chrysler have done in the states for decades living off stalled exemption year after year, can't do this it hurts our economy.
Thats so nuts Honest it defies all logic of common sense.Australia has possibly the worlds largest LP gas supply of known reserves, out side of Russia , this supply will last up to two hundred years , plenty of time to adjust to a New world order, yet No one is pushing for GL- Gas to liquid Diesel Hydrogen units emission free till 2018 mandates time to get them perfect, and or to develop fuel cell technology further for future needs that meet energy requirements and emission standards, Siemens and Bosh have redeveloped this technology for space programs but its still not commercially viable for the populous mass-transportation at a cost that one could afford. Batteries require a massive amount of energy to produce using oil based carbon products one negative outweighing a benefit as to the batteries life span of how many charges can it take before it expires it's usefulness. it's as similar with solar panels oil based but could be reduced by recycling waste oil based products.which in turn leads to storage of carbon gas excess that can then be placed underground instead of letting it in to the atmosphere expensive to do and this means a new carbon tax.
Of course there are alternatives but the real reality of fact is..Money and taxation credits. nothing is for free even if you steal it, in the end when the piper calls his note in, some one like you and me, are going to pay, and pay for what others deserve. in Gods wonderful preserve.
HYDROGEN-FUELED MERCEDES SPRINTER VAN OPERATING SUMMARY (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.osti.gov%2Fbridge%2Fservlets% 2Fpurl%2F809115-xb59T8%2Fnative%2F809115.pdf&ei=vCNPSPTUNYGWsAOey6CmAg&usg=AFQjCNGs34neqVN_AJpLDE9A1pWfjjGxRw&sig2=84QrgV1aMR38Gtwrw-cF6A)
8. Timeline: Alternative drive systems at Mercedes-Benz (http://www.emercedesbenz.com/Nov07/21_Alternative_Drive_Systems_At_Daimler_AG_For_The _Mobility_Of_The_Future_8.html)
8090
Load this up and watch the video a complete city running on energy from the sun to be completed by 20016
Renewable Energy: Desert Dreams - Special Report: Energy - TIME (http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1712863_1712864,00.html)
now why would GW wont to give Saudi Arabia nuclear technology, hell Australia may just as well sell Uranium to India in that case. mixed messages being sent creates instability. in the world and OIL is the margins profit of speculation. Message above is only an insight as to alternative energy different strokes for different folks. Europe has done this for decades and that places Mercedes in an enviable position, which has paid off for them Handsomely.
Richard

8091

[BULBASOR]

Yes, your on the right track - the pure electric hybrids that we need to get PEOPLE ONLY to work and back do not need any government intervention. I think the economics of free electricity from the sun to charge your car will take care of the consumer on that one. Toyota anounced today the new Lithium Ion PLUG IN hybrid Prius is due out in year model 2010. The new 2010 Prius is 20% LIGHTER than the current model - but has 40% more battery capacity and the same gasoline engine as before, but because of the battery the 2010 Priud can go 100 miles on a charge without using the gas engine. If your commute is within 100 miles - and you charge at home plugged in at night - your gas usage is zero - and the cost to tricke charge is about 3 dollars (5 hours). If you want a 'fast charge' it's much higher amperage at 20 to 30 minutes but you don't get the full 100 miles.

As for the trucks including BULBASOR and all the othe Sprinters - Diesel ENGINES are probably here to stay - even if we are not burning oil based deisel fuel. There is just no way to get the kind of power and efficiency to move great amounts of weight. That's why trains are the way they have been for so many years and will never change. You Sprinter of the future will probably be more like a deiesel train locomotive - the "engine" will burn a bio diesel or some other plentiful resource at very high efficiency and mostly generate electricity for wheel motors like a train. I suspect the "engine" will still have a drive train to the rear axles for climing hills and heavy loads, etc . . but for crusing on level ground at 60MPH the engine would barley idle as the electric wheel motors would be more than enough to propel the Sprinter. The future "hybrid" Sprinter would probably get about 300 to 600 miles per gallon on the highway - but probably not much improvement over todays Sprinter around town or under load.

Trucks will always be an exception - but who cares? If no cars are using oil what's the beef? If all CARS were on electric using Nuke or Solar or Bio or Geothermal - or Wind or ANYTHING BUT OIL to get the juice there would be such a glut of oil that the middle east would turn into a third world nation overnight. Oil woild probably be 5 bucks a barrall. If the only ones using oil are planes and trains , well you get the picture.

[Altered Sprinter]

Yes agree
We have a few of the true hydrogen bus as similar to the NY ones all they do is blow a little water vapor, as you can see from this only print I have of a 2004 bus being off-loaded from the ship at Freemantle Western Australia.
8102
Pirus we have next lot turn up 2009
Sprinters could be designed to run on a power as you need basis for load carrying volume like a train having 4 diesel engines plus for the generator depending on power needs light load one engine or all four for full loading. or just slow down on speed and enjoy the day, fuel has gone to AU $1.83 a litre down here it's cheap we are still the worlds fourth cheapest on a non nationalistic market yes we pay more tax but that has many benefits and wages are higher at the lower per hour folk on minimum income I'd put it on par with the USA but as you are having problems it is causing as similar down under everything has slowed down except the commodity boom, thats driving up inflation not a level playing field even in our own country, but the junkers are going, and small fuel efficient cars sales have gone ballistic
PS your not the only one that likes to sit on a rock and think:professor: I read the chariots of the gods too.
Following the horizontal line of thoughts which defines mass=radius=dimensions of time.
mind you finding the start point in time, need to split the atom. that's a tricky one to find the appendix to the end of the line. about 14 trillion light years away:laughing:
There are three estimates for the radius of the universe
1-13
2-46
3-76 light years
8102
Richard

[BULBASOR]

Yup - the universe is getting smaller every day - your H2 Fuels Cell Bus is just an all electric bus. As people movers electric buses have been around FOREVER. Even here in So Cal back in the 40's we had a trolly car that went all the way from L.A. to Long Beach. It was an electric trolly with overhead lines.

Here where I live in San Diego county they have trollys too that are all red. They also use the overhead electric lines. I think electric is always the preferable way for mass transit (people are rather 'light' as far a cargo is concerned in relation to the amount of space they occupy).

Running the electric bus on a fuel cell with a tank of hydrogen gives the drivers more freedon to move about - the electric trollys and buses that use the overhead electric lines are more efficeint and use less power because they run electric direct without the need to convert fron hydogen to electric ON BOARD.

I don't think Sprinters will go fuel cell because Sprinters will always need a combustion engine for heavy loads and pulling power, but it is a possibility. I just don't see ALL ELECTRIC as a reality on trucks but I could be wrong.

[BaywoodBill]

Even here in So Cal back in the 40's we had a trolly car that went all the way from L.A. to Long Beach. It was an electric trolly with overhead lines.


I'm sure you don't remember that, Bulbasor; you've studied history.

The Red Cars also ran out to the East, to Monrovia and Duarte, and maybe as far as Cucamonga. I used to ride them from Downtown out to Arcadia and from Arcadia to a music teacher in Monrovia. I picked up my papers for my paper route at the station in Arcadia.

Downtown there were the Yellow Cars.

Then, when I didn't live there anymore, GMC pushed buses. They tore out the trolly lines and ran buses on the highways. The word "smog" was invented.

Now they are gradually extending "light rail" along nearly the same route as the Red Car used to travel.

[BULBASOR]

When I lived in L.A. the only remnants of the trolly left was the median down the middle of the 210 freeway to Pasadena. Everything else was gone.

I used to ride my bike along the rio hondo and the rio san gabrial riverbeds on top of the very foundation that the red car was on. The tracks were gone - the gravel was paved over. There was not even any graffitti in the riverbed back in those days. We used to ride our bikes all the way to the beach.

[BaywoodBill]

Yeh. It was a terrible shame to get rid of those trolleys but good bike paths were a consolation.

[BULBASOR]

The main point of the thing is that it was always ELECTRICITY that was the mainstay of moving paeople from place to place. Electric vehicles are more reliable and less prone to breakdown and they are far far far cheaper to run by the mile than an internal combustion type of vehicle. Electric motors are SO simple - a stator - and a rotor - that's it! ONE moving part!!

You can't get much simpler than that!

The reason it's not used is because the parts guy will be out of work, the repair guy, the gas station guy, the oil company executive, the government programs on fuel taxes, the detroit auto manyfacturers, and the insurance industry.

[jdcaples]

The reason it's not used is because the parts guy will be out of work, the repair guy, the gas station guy, the oil company executive, the government programs on fuel taxes, the detroit auto manyfacturers, and the insurance industry.

I'm sure they'd transition about as well as the lumber jacks in the Pacific Northwest.... except the insurance people. If I had an electric vehicle, I'm pretty certain I'd still need most of the insurance I personally carry and my (employer) company would still carry most of the insurance they carry too.

[BaywoodBill]

:hmmm: Yeh, Bulbasor, I'm with JD: I don't see how you would put the insurance industry out of work with electric cars. They will still crash and run into the front windows of hair salons. There might be the occasional electocution at a filling station. Drunk drivers will still be running people over. >>>>

What's your thought?

[BULBASOR]

Who in thier right mind would indure a 5000 dollar car that lasts for 30 years?

The only kind of insurance you will need is personal liability insurance. Comprehensive collision insurance would become sensless if you spent 500 on the deductable and 500 a year for the policy you just bought a new car in 10 years. It's not worth it.

I suspect the insurance of the future will all be "no fault" and "full replacement". You get in a wreck and replace both cars.

Just a thought but I might be getting ahead of myself.

[BaywoodBill]

Way ahead. In the first place, the cost for Comprehensive and Collision varies by the value and claims frequency/severity of the vehicle, so the $500 figure isn't accurate.

Second, the cost of the liability protection is usually roughly half the cost of the insurance (varied by the value, claims experience for the auto).

Insurance costs reflect claims experience and also very vigorous competition between companies. If the experience of the car of the future is as you say, the cost of the insurance will match that and the insurance industry will plug on.

[FuelSaving]

Hi, I am testing a commercial oxy hydrogen generator (SL50) similar to what mgjessop (the original post starter). I am also testing a home-made device (according to ebook sold at www.water4gas.ca website). The fuel saving percentage (around 15%) is similar to what mgjessop got. I believe it could be better and am explore why not and how. If you are interested in my test results, please go to my website at www.autofuelsaving.com

mgjessop, where do you feed HHO into the air hose, after air filter and before the turbo? Or right at the end of the air induction hose closer to the engine? The location I am testing is the latter. But one concern is that when the turbo is ON, the pressure in the air induction hose changes from negative (vacuum) to positive because of the compressed air. This could disrupt the HHO feed.

Some suggests that I should feed HHO right after the air filter but I want to do it after the oxygen sensor so that it does not detect a burst of oxygen and send false alarm to the engine computer.

Could someone draw a picture of the entire air system for Sprinter? I want to know how it works and where various sensors are. Thanks in advance. And thank Dick (that is the name he use on my website) for bringing me here! Now I know where I can ask questions about my 2006 Sprinter 2500!

I found this post showing the hose right after the Mass Air Flow sensor and the hose connected to the engine. What about other areas? I guess the compressed air goes through a metal tubing behind the coolant heat exchanger. So this means that the compressed air is heated. Could it be a problem for HHO?

[FuelSaving]

OK, here is the link to the post I mentioned in the last paragraph above showing the hose connecting to the air filter and mass air flow sensor:

http://sprinter-source.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3308

Here is the picture of the same hose in my sprinter after I slipped the oxy hydrogen tubing in there under the clamp:

http://autofuelsaving.com/images/before_turbo.jpg

As you see, I used the automotive goop to seal the gap around the tubing.

[Aqua Puttana]

[QUOTE=mgjessop;7950]I think I can help clear up a few things... The unit does not store any Hydrogen... It pulses it out... The unit only works when my engine is turned on... It is hooked up the air intake tube right after the air filter... I took a ballon to the output tube of the hydrogen maker... It took about 30 seconds to fill it up to about 10 inches in size... I tied it up and put a 4 foot string around it then held it over a candle...:crazy: It exploed with such a bang that I thought I blew myself up:bash:....................

I realize I'm joining this extended thread late in the game. I started reading it as a skeptic. When I got to this post I was really done, but I continued. Many of the posters on this thread that didn't support it made great points.

Let me say this as a maintenance guy who thinks in generally basic terms: I maintained the electrical equipment that provided 150,000 amps of direct current at 308VDC nominal (there are no typos in those numbers) to chlorine cell lines ( actually 2 @ 150,000 amps each). When you run that much electricity through salt water in H4 cells the output is basically sodium hydroxide, chlorine, and hydrogen. It created a whole bunch of hydrogen that had to be compressed by machines to send it out for use. Even with that amount of power you could not have blown up a balloon full of hydrogen without a compressor. Please tell me where this unit got the pressure to blow up a balloon.

[FuelSaving]

I used a rigid plastic tubing to do the job and I used the silicon the seal the gap:

http://autofuelsaving.com/images/before_turbo3.jpg

[BULBASOR]

Hydrogen is VERY flammable - if your were getting ANY HYDROGEN AT ALL from that hose you would be able to put a match to the end of that hose and show us a really good flame. See previous posts from Altered Sprinter and Company doing burn tests on different fuel additives. If it don't burn it ain't fuel!

You have shown NO proof at all that ANY hydrogen is coming out of that hose.

You are fooling yourself.

[Altered Sprinter]

Here is a test and I'm not joking either
True Australian tale..I would not lie:laughing:
Ok a game we played in Lebanon a few years+ back.. Being totally board with each others company! when not being shot at, we came up with a plan.
For a Sunday Afternoon bit of amusement. {basically to get even with those crazy Camels who were more intent on mounting us} rather than we were, trying to ride their twin turbo humpy rumps.
This can only be done with a gas engine.
First get a plastic coke bottle, cut a hole in the cap and place a spark plug in it, silicone or tape it off for sealing....AIR TIGHT.
Next run the hose of the little hose that may or may not be Hydrogen on the Sprinter, and let the gas fill the bottle! It's heavy gas, so let it run for a minute or two, pull off the hose and screw the coke cap on tight, real tight. NO CHEATING.
Next place one wire to the top of the spark plug and attach it to a plug on a gas engine, run a separate wire from the the spark plug to starter motor, or ignition wire....Then... well you could put it under a car seat to scare the DW!!![Guaranteed Divorce] Or on the back of the saddle of the camel :shifty:...long wire :thinking: very long:smilewink:
Turn on ignition... nothing will happen all is quiet, then turn key, the spark from the active engines spark plug will light up.... and that bottle will explode big time, no not a flame and or it instantaneously extinguishes. but the percussion will scare 10 years life out of you, along with the camels going like bats out of hell.
Said I'd get even with those sex made camels... Afghanistan camels no good.
Called Browns gas.
Go On who's game?:popcorn:
Richard
8695

[BULBASOR]

Mr. Camel looks like a sock puppet.

[BULBASOR]

Look guys - I can fill a bottle with lighter fluid or something and attach a hose to it and you will get fumes coming out of the hose - but the fumes from the evaporating fluid are not going to help your Sprinter go. You can put a couple drops of gasoline in a coke bottle and let it sit in the sun and then spark it off and you will get a big pop. What do you think the compression ratio is to that pop? 3 to one? 7 to one? I don't care of you can get it all the way up to ten to one! that's still only ONE VERY ANEMIC COMPRESSION STROKE IN A SPRINTER ENGINE THAT USES 3 COMPRESSION STROKES PER SECOND JUST TO IDLE!

Will you people use your brains please! Hydrogen is only like twice as powerful as gas - we are not talking 100 or 1000 times more powerful here - it's about twice as much BTU as gasoline. Even if there was any hydrogen the tiny bit of fumes possible from an air flow so small would not equal a couple drops of gasoline!!!!!

You totally fooling yourself!!

Anyone that butchers their Sprinter like this has something wrong in the brain - please get some professional help or Prozac.

[Jrmorgan]

I'm on the fence about Hydrogen generators. Having said that, a few things come to mind. First off if these generators do indeed produce the Hydrogen/Oxygen gas as the claim, this gas know as Hydroxyl, is a very volatile gas.

Gas vapor burns at a rate of 5,000 feet per second.
on the other hand Hydroxyl gas burns at a rate of 40,000 feet per second.

Looking at these generators, one would assume that they are passive. Meaning they do not build up pressure and expelling large amounts of this gas at anyone time. I would guess that you wouldn't want to start the generator and let it run for a long period of time before starting the engine.

That would be a huge problem.

Being passive the engine starts and sucks in the gas just as it has been produced. The idea with adding Hydroxyl gas is to better burn the diesel more completely. If the Fuel is burned more completely your mileage would go up. The question I have how much hotter does the engine get with this hotter fuel burn?

If you don't think Oxygen will burn just remember the Apollo 1 capsule.

:thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking: :thinking::thinking::thinking::thinking:

[autostaretx]

Jrmorgan wrote:
> If you don't think Oxygen will burn just remember the Apollo 1 capsule.

Oxygen did not "burn" in that disaster, it simply accelerated the combustion of everything else in the capsule. The interior was filled with pure oxygen at full atmospheric pressure... instead of the 4 psi that it would have operated in space. Thus anything that could burn (plastic wire insulation, for example) burned like an oxygen-assisted welding torch instead of smoldering or with a small flame.
The best model is the lazy yellow flame of acetylene before adding the oxygen feed in a welding rig.

Most of the hydroxyl systems have a switch or relay which kill the electrolysis unit when the engine is off. The Sprinter has an "engine running" circuit which would allow you to only generate gas when the engine is actually wanting it.

Finally, most of these systems only generate about a liter per minute (a common commercial kit is 50 liters per hour) of hydroxyl (combined H2 and O2 gas). That's still more than enough to shatter the various bits of the kit (or your Sprinter's intake plumbing) if there's a "backfire" ... but that's only about 1/3000th of the total air volume ingested by the Sprinter during that minute. The hydroxyl gas itself definitely burns explosively quickly, but when diluted to below 4% concentration of hydrogen to available oxygen it's no longer in that category.
There's usually a flame arrestor and/or series of "bubblers" to try and limit the effect of "backfires" (but they still happen).

--dick

[BULBASOR]

That is just not enough gas to do any good for the sprinter. You would be just as good to just pull the water caps off your car battery and vent the fumes from your car battery into your engine. Your CAR BATTERY PRODUCES MORE EXPLOSIVE GAS THAN THAT JELLY JAR IF YOUR FIGURES ARE CORRECT.

You need to go online and look up a REAL hydrogen machine - the kind they use to create hydrogen for autos - check to see what the power consimption is for the one the manufacture makes that actually fills a tank with hydrogen.

We need to figure out how to do that without using up all the power in Las Vegas. That's the trick. If we can use the power in our Sprinters to make REAL hydrogen that we can fill up a tank with then we might have somthing. That is the problem that needs to be solved.

Making fumes with batteries and jelly jars can be done by just mixing ornge juice and soap and adding a current - but there is not enough fumes there to make our motor go. Adding one or two strokes of the piston every 5 minutes is not enough because it takes four or five strokes just to turn the alternator that made the electricity to produce the fumes in the first place!!

The people selling these things are tricking people because a very small fume will make a big POP well so will a match but it's still not enough power to push your piston for even ONE stroke!

This is an OLD parlor trick. They fully tested this on mythbusters on TV and they found it to be totally bogus.

[tegimr]

Look guys - I can fill a bottle with lighter fluid or something and attach a hose to it and you will get fumes coming out of the hose - but the fumes from the evaporating fluid are not going to help your Sprinter go. You can put a couple drops of gasoline in a coke bottle and let it sit in the sun and then spark it off and you will get a big pop. What do you think the compression ratio is to that pop? 3 to one? 7 to one? I don't care of you can get it all the way up to ten to one! that's still only ONE VERY ANEMIC COMPRESSION STROKE IN A SPRINTER ENGINE THAT USES 3 COMPRESSION STROKES PER SECOND JUST TO IDLE!

Will you people use your brains please! Hydrogen is only like twice as powerful as gas - we are not talking 100 or 1000 times more powerful here - it's about twice as much BTU as gasoline. Even if there was any hydrogen the tiny bit of fumes possible from an air flow so small would not equal a couple drops of gasoline!!!!!

You totally fooling yourself!!

Well, for less than $50.00 to build, you can build one yourself and see that it works - or prove that it does not. NOTE: $50.00 is not a 'running' model, but a experimental model. A safe, running system will be more, depending availability of materials and knowledge. The truth will be demonstrable that fuel economy is increased. There are many who surmise WHY/HOW, but THAT it increases economy is easily verified.


Anyone that butchers their Sprinter like this has something wrong in the brain - please get some professional help or Prozac.

WOW - that is a strong visceral response, not typical for the level-headed responses provided by the cerebral BULBASOR. If water electrolysis as a method of improved mileage does not interest you, cool. A water electrolyzer interests some of us, including me - as does safety, the principle reason for my choosing the Sprinter to transport my family. Armed with sufficient knowledge about the dangers of the gases, cost of replacing an engine, and with safety as the principle concern, I'm confident that I possess the knowledge and skills to safely modify (couple of electrical connections, 1/4 inch hole in my air cleaner - hardly butchering) and enjoy some savings without a visit to a head doctor - and without an entry for the Darwin Awards.

Cheers!
Tim

[tegimr]

. . .
Finally, most of these systems only generate about a liter per minute (a common commercial kit is 50 liters per hour) of hydroxyl (combined H2 and O2 gas). That's still more than enough to shatter the various bits of the kit (or your Sprinter's intake plumbing) if there's a "backfire" ... but that's only about 1/3000th of the total air volume ingested by the Sprinter during that minute. The hydroxyl gas itself definitely burns explosively quickly, but when diluted to below 4% concentration of hydrogen to available oxygen it's no longer in that category.(emphasis mine)
There's usually a flame arrestor and/or series of "bubblers" to try and limit the effect of "backfires" (but they still happen).

--dick

Indeed - my question (see previous posts) is "does the hydrogen burn?' and thanks to those who did the math and it more causes me to think of the oxygen enriched air improves the burn of the diesel.

And to those experimenting, Consider the safety.

Tim

[BULBASOR]

There has never been any question that hydrogen will burn!

ANYTHING will burn! (Especially if you add enough oxygen to it)

RUST is BURNING!

Anytime you OXIDIZE something you are burning it. Steel oxidizes very slowly and the result is rust. Wood oxidizes faster and the result is charcoal.

The faster the oxidizing process the more of a flame effect. Adding more oxygen will accelerate oxidation to anything - even the space suits worn by Apollo 1 astronauts - they were so full of pure oxygen they oxidized in seconds when exposed to an ignition source - they would have oxidized if they were compressed too - that's how you light off a fuel - you either ignite it (like with a spark) or you compress it and it self ignites (like in a Sprinter Diesel Engine) The Sun also uses tremendous compression to ignite hydrogen at it's core.

Hydrogen is a great fuel - I'm not saying any of you are nuts for wanting to make hydrogen work in your Sprinters - that's a good thing.

What I am calling you nuts about is the part where you all have parked your brains about basic combustion in your engine - nothing has changed in your motor - you still need 3 really big explosions per second to idle your engine - even if your bottle made one explosion per minute (which I doubt it can produce hydrogen that fast) it still would only be one power stroke per minute - or one in 180 at idle - at 2000 rpm if your producing one per minute that's one power stroke in 6000. It's like using an eye dropper to drop one drop of diesel into the engine every minute (one drop of diesel would be huge compared to the amount of vapor your getting from the bottle).

The only way it can work is to get more hydrogen created - you just not producing enough hydrogen.

Even based on your own calculations it's about equivalent to adding 100 drops of diesel fuel to your tank - that's less than an ounce.

You EVAPORATE more fuel than that with every tank! It's just not enough to do anything.

If there was a way to really split the water molecule atom for atom - well - then you would have more power than the entire world would need. Think how HEAVY water is! Think of all that MASS converted to ENERGY and oxygen! 26 gallons of water would take you 7 times further than diesel if you could extract every hydrogen atom from that water. That would be quite a machine.

[Altered Sprinter]

Here is the living proof of Hydrogen conversion each supplementary stroke is powered by a Fartkin :smilewink: It is dangerous, many equations to think of.
Richard
8723
Dangers of Hydrogen Cycling (http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=pX6MtWRGW3M&feature=related)

[BULBASOR]

Ultimate Hydrogen Power

[Jrmorgan]

:lol:I found a new system for power, I harness Bulbasor to my 3500 and when I need better power or fuel mileage, I will just whisper HYDROGEN BIOIESEL!! Bam he's off!!!!

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[BULBASOR]

Hey, would hydrogen be considered a Bio-diesel? Is hydrogen a biological material?

I aways thought bio-diesel was grass and wood chips and stuff - but then dinosaurs are biological so does that not make oil a bio-diesel????

What the heck is a BIO-DIESEL anyway??? :hmmm:

I need to jump over to another thread the Seek is monitoring that's about mounting inverters. I'll be over there.

[Jrmorgan]

Hey, would hydrogen be considered a Bio-diesel? Is hydrogen a biological material?

I aways thought bio-diesel was grass and wood chips and stuff - but then dinosaurs are biological so does that not make oil a bio-diesel????

What the heck is a BIO-DIESEL anyway??? :hmmm:

I need to jump over to another thread the Seek is monitoring that's about mounting inverters. I'll be over there.

****........... you guys are mounting inverters????

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Jrmorgan]

Oh yeah, while I'm at it, isn't this an area that is for write ups? Members telling and showing how they did something on their trucks? Seems this thread turned into a who believes it works, who doesn't????????

:tongue::tongue::tongue::tongue::tongue:

[BULBASOR]

What's so funny about mounting inverters? Inverters are just to make some AC power so I can run my coffee maker.

What's wrong with that.

As for the hydrogen thing - it does not work.

[Jrmorgan]

Key word is "Mounting".....


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[BULBASOR]

Well, lot's of beans will make gas too - in fact I think you get more methan per bean than the hydrogen generator I read about in the links on this post. (The gas from the beans is more explosive too).

[Altered Sprinter]

Bulbasor the boys are having a little fun besides it so's work so there :tongue: but in a different way you do get fuel burnt and excess carbon emissions very low.
In 1972 when we had the fuel cries:cry: Aussies got smart and came up with a new alternative energy supply:rolleyes:
National Fuel Crisis (http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=xfMW4oGFGdY&feature=related)
Richard

[BULBASOR]

Cow Manure - Horse Crap - Farts - (Particularly Bean Farts) all very very good sources of fuel vapors - you get a lot more explosive vapors from that stuff than you do from the hydrogen jelly jar contraption.

You could hook up a hose to your butt and connect it to your air intake and probably get more fuel economy improvement - and it does not require any electricity to generate the gas!

That's way more efficient.

[Jrmorgan]

Cow Manure - Horse Crap - Farts - (Particularly Bean Farts) all very very good sources of fuel vapors - you get a lot more explosive vapors from that stuff than you do from the hydrogen jelly jar contraption.

You could hook up a hose to your butt and connect it to your air intake and probably get more fuel economy improvement - and it does not require any electricity to generate the gas!

That's way more efficient.

I hear in Germany farmers have collectives where they collect cow manure and process it in large vats to make methane gas. They burn the gas in turbine generators. The electricity is then broadcast to the local farmers who contribute to the system.

Yes once again we American are behind the times.

:professor::professor::professor::professor::profe ssor::professor:

[tegimr]

. . .

As for the hydrogen thing - it does not work.

:laughing: It's science. Please present your data from your experiments, rather than disparaging others data from their working systems based on your thoughts.
sigh. It's not religion. We're not psychotic. Some of the others have brains, though I personally may be lacking some due to a lack of discretion when younger.

We could argue safety, reasonable scaling, good for the motor long term, etc. but effective for improving mileage, no. Prove, by installing and showing no improvement. Or, just argue that the world is flat, because science knows so.

Cheers - Tim

[autostaretx]

Bulbasor wrote:
> What I am calling you nuts about is the part where you all have parked your brains about
> basic combustion in your engine - nothing has changed in your motor -
> you still need 3 really big explosions per second to idle your engine -

What you're missing is that they're not expecting the hydrogen to be a -fuel-, but a fuel -enhancer-.
Their "science" gets pretty waffley about how/what it's doing, but i'll just go with the "increases the speed of the flame front" as one feasible example. And it is true that the speed of ignition in an H2 O2 mixture is faster than diesel's.
Hence you're supposed to get a more efficient burn... more of the diesel ignites near the top of the cylinder stroke, thus providing more "push" on the piston instead of just burning after the power stroke has pretty much completed.
So the hydrogen (in the "booster" style of Hydroxyl add-in) is not a fuel, it just helps the diesel fuel produce more useful energy at an earlier point in the combustion cycle.

Myself? I'm kind'a sceptical, but as Tegimr posted, it's relatively simple to rig up a jelly-on-the-wall test rig to -try- it.
I've already done some voltage/current/plate-stack and electrolyte tests on the bench, and i'll slowly be building an (as cheap as possible) add-on rig for my Sprinter. No holes required (no jelly jars, either).

Folks might ask the initiator of this thread (mgjessop) specific questions, since he's been running a booster for many months, and his ScanGauge (and fill-ups) indicate a 14% mileage improvement.
Conversely, in the cummings-diesel forum, a couple of folks have -removed- their boosters, since they were only seeing a 4% improvement.

Tegimr wrote: "...it more causes me to think of the oxygen enriched air improves the burn of the diesel. "

Just as there's too little hydrogen to really serve as "fuel", remember that there's only -half- that amount of "extra" oxygen.. and it's consumed by the burning hydrogen. So the boosters aren't helping by "enriching" the air with oxygen, either.
There's probably more of a variation of oxygen content as air humidity changes than the HHO boosters provide.

--dick
p.s. Bulbasor also wrote: "The Sun also uses tremendous compression to ignite hydrogen at it's core."
..which we all agree is a -totally- different process, right? Fusion ain't combustion. Combustion is just shuffling a few electrons around to produce what's termed oxidation. Fusion is playing with nuclear forces. The use of the word "ignite" for thermonuclear fusion is pedantically incorrect.

[sikwan]

Some interesting Mythbuster stuff...

ydEkV-E0mP8

...go a kick out of the misspellings of the author and Grant's 555 squarewave generator schematic.

[BULBASOR]

Fusion is where we really need to get in the future down the road but as you say - everything else is just oxidation - this is true. The sun does not really use much oxidation because there is not a huge amount of oxygen there.

As for making hydrogen - using electricity to make hydrogen is great, and that's been going on for a long time. Hydrogen is also a fine fuel to burn in a car. There is no inherent advantage to burning hydrogen in your car but it works just as well as any other fuel.

I think you may be missing the point of hydrogen as a fuel.

None of the really serious hydrogen projects that are operating today successfully are using hydrogen as something to burn in an engine.

The whole point of hydrogen is to run it through a fuel cell to make ELECTRICITY. All of the vehicles running around on hydrogen are electric vehicles.

You CAN use hydrogen to BURN in your Sprinter - but why bother when switch grass, algae, bio fuel, and natural gas all work the same and are cheaper? (More plentiful too).

As for a SUPPLEMENT to my fuel? I understand the experiment but - I still ask you to go back to Altered Sprinters friends who did all the bench testing on fuel supplements - there is a LOT more science and thermal BTU burn testing data available on RL2 and other supplements that are working. Where are the same tests for hydrogen? How come there has been no serious study on it?

Maybe because anyone with the education to perform such a test already knows it does not work?

[BULBASOR]

Here is what the eggheads say about hydrogen. The reason I say the things I do about hydrogen is because I go by what the eggheads are saying - now - we CAN disagree with them - but why? They have all the education and they understand this stuff. I'm not a chemical engineer.

I have been led to believe that hydrogen is a fuel that is mostly for making electricity in cars (using a fuel cell).

Hydrogen IS ALSO A ALTERNATE BURNING FUEL FOR YOUR SPRINTER! I told you guys that BMW was changing a lot of their big luxury cars to diesel - there is a reason - : big heavy vehicles need lots of brake torque power that would drain a battery too fast - and a fuel cell needed to operate a large 760 BMW would be bigger than the engine - and on top of all that you still need to get an huge electric motor in there - (sort of impractical on heavy vehicles unless you can make them really really big (like a train)). So they are developing their heavy cars to go diesel so they are ready for hydrogen or whatever else comes along.

Anyway - HYDROGEN IS GREAT AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO DIESEL! But so do so many other fuels! If we all changed to electric cars with fuel cells that would force us to build an infrastructure of hydrogen fuel stations - and then you can fill your little jelly jars with PURE HYDROGEN and really get some results. But even so - the power needed to convert water to hydrogen is not free - and ultimately we are back to splitting the atom as you will read in this article about the eggheads: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2004/sep/10/environment.research

[tegimr]

. . .

Where are the same tests for hydrogen? How come there has been no serious study on it?

Maybe because anyone with the education to perform such a test already knows it does not work?

Past discussion (http://www.sprinter-source.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8555&postcount=27) There have been studies; however, if you look at the simplicity of the unit, it would be hard to fund - as funders look for ways to make money. Even at $2000.00 a unit, recovery of university research funding is highly unlikely. Manufacturers would shy away from this as well due to liability and the fact that people like convenience - that is, we don't want to check on more thing, we like to pull up to the pump, use a card, and go on. Then, to have a shop mechanic who understood it? Many can't even find simple problems and fix them. And, it is the 'eggheads' who often miss the big opportunities. A college degree did not make Bill Gates any money, or Henry Ford, . . .. The 'eggheads' once scoffed at people who believed that the world was round, that washing hands before surgery would decrease infection, etc, etc, etc.

To be clear, I don't think the performance increase is due to burning hydrogen, but I can verify increased performance, as can others. As to the myth busters deal - totally different discussion than we are having in this thread.

Best wishes - and happiness to all.

[Jrmorgan]

You mean the world isn't flat?????????????????????

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[svaric2]

Having just partiucipated in the cetane thread, the two rusty gears in my hollow head moved a few millimeters, and told me that hydrogen supplement to the diesel engine is literally like adding cetane. The hydrogen provides a quick pilot combustion that helps start up the diesel fuel combustion, EXACTLY what cetane enhancers do. Go figure. So on that basis alone, I say that the almighty jelly jar helps fuel economy.

But until mgjessop makes a video pointed at his scanguage, a few minutes with the hydro-gen off and a few minutes on, I will still be somewhat skeptical.

I mean, how much of a cetane improver is a few molecules of hydrogen per stroke? That's the million dollar question, folks.

[BULBASOR]

Your running a ten thousand dollar diesel engine created by eggheads! It's the heart of the whole matter!

If the sprinter did not have that special "egghead engineering" under the hood we would all be driving Chevy and Ford vans!

What's the point of driving a Sprinter then?

Look, - you just can't shove a hose into the engine and hope everything is going to be OK. Something like that really needs to be checked out by the egghead that designed the motor! So far - NO EGGHEADS are taking it up!.

As for university studies - they are granted money for stuff way more stupid than the study of the WOMBAT mating habits in June but not August. And the consumer profits from a successful hydrogen generator as described would be HUGE! HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS!

There would be no shortage of money to do studies on this item if anyone with the correct education to do it wanted to do it.

I remember these things being sold back in the 70's. I have been around the block a few times people. This is not MY first energy crisis.

I can also tell you that the worst is yet to come - just wait till we get to the 'odd - even days' and the three hour wait in lines to buy fuel. If we keep doddering away at tiny little trinkets that might improve MPG by 1% that's where we will end up in 3 years. I can get better MPG improvement on BULBASOR by just removing the rear view mirrors!

Did you know that 40% of your MPG on the Sprinter at 60 MPH is effected by WIND RESISTANCE? 40 percent!

Now THOSE are the numbers I'm looking for - 30, 40, 50 percent improvement - I'm sorry but at this late stage in the gas game anything less is too little.

Your device has been around for almost 40 years now and it's gone about as far as it's gonna go.

[svaric2]

some people live by the phrase "if it ain't broke... don't fix it" and others live by "If it ain't broke... upgrade it" . There will always be people that tinker with things out of curiosity, even expensive things. No use to get bothered by it.

I'd also be curious to tinker with the aerodynamics, BULBASOR. Specifically an underbody panel from front to back. But lack of free time is one big obstacle. :(

[BULBASOR]

MB has really just about gone as far as you can go getting the basic box to go down the road on the least amount of fuel with some degree of performance. How did MB do it?

Smallest possible motor
Way Way advanced transmission to make the little motor work right as a truck motor
Completely aero front to cut as much resistance as possible
Lots of turbo

What else can you do? What more can you add? What else - any suggestions (serious suggestions that work, not silly stuff like filling the van with helium or other silly stuff),

[svaric2]

just out of curiosity, how is the sprinter's tranny different from a regular auto tranny, like say, a chevy truck?

[autostaretx]

svaric2 asked:
> just out of curiosity, how is the sprinter's tranny different from a regular auto tranny, like say, a chevy truck?

Um... in what way?
Mechanically, it's quite similar (gears of different tooth counts being used to change the ratio of input shaft rotation to output shaft).

Control-wise, i don't know how Chevy Trucks do it these days, but the Sprinter's automatic tranny has its own
little computer which chats to the engine computer, and together they cooperate (or conspire) to try and operate the van
(a) efficiently, with a dash of
(b) as the driver wishes (the ECU/TCM learn your "aggresiveness" habits and adjust shift-points to match)

If you're in the rest of the world with the manual transmission option, then it's quite similar to a manual Chevy.

--dick

[BULBASOR]

Ya, what he said - adaptive shifting - the tranny changes based on how your drive.

I think that is where the real fuel economy change happens because when I first got my sprinter I was always grabbing lower gears because i did not want to lug the motor but the tranny adjusted and moved down the shift points.

My MPG went down. So then I went light on the foot and would not let the the van build up enought pressure to downshift and i kept driving in higher gears and driving much slower and, sure enough, the shift points got higher and my MPG went WAY up.

[BULBASOR]

HOW IS HYDROGEN MADE?
Since hydrogen doesn't exist on earth as a gas, we must separate it from other elements. We can separate hydrogen atoms from water, biomass, or natural gas molecules. The two most common methods for producing hydrogen are steam reforming and electrolysis (water splitting). Scientists have even discovered that some algae and bacteria give off hydrogen.

Steam reforming is currently the least expensive method of producing hydrogen and accounts for about 95 percent of the hydrogen produced in the United States. It is used in industries to separate hydrogen atoms from carbon atoms in methane(CH4). Because methane is a fossil fuel, the process of steam reforming results in greenhouse gas emissions that are linked with global warming.

Electrolysis is a process that splits hydrogen from water. It results in no emissions but it is currently a very expensive process. New technologies are being developed all the time.

Hydrogen can be produced at large central facilities or at small plants for local use. Every region of the country (and the world) has some resource that can be used to make hydrogen. Its flexibility is one of its main advantages.


http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/IntermediateHydrogen.html#HowIsHydrogenMade?

[BULBASOR]

I worked for General Electric for two years - Siemens for 6 years - Westinghouse for TEN years.

I know a little bit about electricity on the large scale. The real work of hydrogen generation is going to happen at one of the places I mentioned, not in someones garage. Now- we will get some really great hydrogen and electric CARS out of some guys garage - but the fuel will ALWAYS be a by product of some huge industrialized distribution process requiring national capital as is was in the beginning with Rockefeller or Standard Oil or even the big Whaling Ship Companies of the 17th century. You can make oil lamps in the workshop, but the oil must come from BIG BUSINESS. Unfortunately, that's just the way it is.

The only way we little peon people can get free of the biggies is by using SOLAR POWER. We can use it at home, we can use it to charge the batteries in our cars - we can even use it to MAKE HYDROGEN! But 1 acre of solar panels would only make about 10 gallons a week. But that same acre could charge a battery to get you 100 miles a DAY on an electric motor.

The guys at GE are trying to make the hydrogen generator - if anyone can do it - they can > http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/science_news/2936846.html

Hydrogen on the Cheap
Last month, we took an in-depth look at alternative fuels. Among them was Earth’s the Universe's most abundant element, hydrogen. Although its future looks bright—the only by-product of a hydrogen fuel cell is water, and experts believe they can one day be used to create electricity to fuel cars—the cost and energy required to create hydrogen has taken it out of the running as a near-term energy alternative to oil.

That may be about to change. Researchers at GE’s Global Research lab in Niskayuna, NY, have developed a system that produces hydrogen at a fraction of the cost and could be available commercially in just a few years.

[BULBASOR]

Don't forget the potato car:

http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/18784/page1/

And please be aware that the energy required to make hydrogen is always 30% less than the energy you need to put in to get the hydrogen, (In other words, if you used natural gas you get 70% of the hydrogen energy of the natural gas: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/29/automobiles/29ALT.html?fta=y


You will see the 30% figure over and over again on all the research: http://ksatbrokennews.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/gasoline-hydrogen-fuel-fact-or-fiction/

Many famous economists have also ran into this 30% rule dealing with hydrogen - Friedman cites 22 professors: http://www.oilcrash.com/articles/h_scam.htm

There are two points I'm trying to make here. Point number one:

Your jelly jar contraptions do not make hydrogen. This is not my opinion - it is a fact. You making Hydrazine. The hydrogen content you are getting is the same as in normal air that we breath.

Point two:

Hydrogen is not really the best thing to use to power your car! If you are going to BURN anything just use the methane or natural gas or gasoline or diesel or whatever it is your using to make the hydrogen! No matter how you slice it - you LOSE 30% of your energy to produce hydrogen. There is no way to get around the net energy loss.

Opinions are fine and I believe in free speech but science and fact are needed to back up opinions or there is no truth. It's not good to propagate something that is not true, and if you encounter such a thing you have an obligation to reveal the truth.

Trust me- if these devices worked General Electric and Siemens and General Motors and Tesla Motors and Honda would be ALL OVER THIS THING like a cheap suit. Honda has a hydrogen car on the road RIGHT NOW! Look it up - it uses natural gas to make the hydrogen. Why would HONDA not have a jelly jar on their hydrogen car????

[tegimr]

. . .

There are two points I'm trying to make here. Point number one:

Your jelly jar contraptions do not make hydrogen. This is not my opinion - it is a fact. You making Hydrazine. The hydrogen content you are getting is the same as in normal air that we breath.

Point two:

Hydrogen is not really the best thing to use to power your car! If you are going to BURN anything just use the methane or natural gas or gasoline or diesel or whatever it is your using to make the hydrogen! No matter how you slice it - you LOSE 30% of your energy to produce hydrogen. There is no way to get around the net energy loss.

Opinions are fine and I believe in free speech but science and fact are needed to back up opinions or there is no truth. It's not good to propagate something that is not true, and if you encounter such a thing you have an obligation to reveal the truth.
. . .


Thanks - fulfilling my obligation, then.
FACT:
um. hydrazine is NH2-NH2. ( Hydrazine: The Toxic Fuel In That Busted Spy Satellite (http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/02/15/hydrazine-the-toxic-fuel-in-that-busted-spy-satellite/?mod=googlenews_wsj) - hopefully not what I'm breathing! ) Compounding hydrazine requires a source of nitrogen. Water has no nitrogen. Water is H20 - two parts hydrogen one part oxygen no parts nitrogen. My device outputs O2 and H2 in the ratio of 1:2 by volume 'cuz that is the input elements. Learned in high-school chemistry, confirmed in college. If I were to synthesize nitrogen in my device, I reckon that would require somewhat more complex 'contraption'

FACT:
"Our" device separates the oxygen from hydrogen in the water molecule: the free atoms re-bond to form Hydrogen molecules (H2) and oxygen molecules (O2), both of which are naturally occurring in our atmosphere.

FACT:
I enjoy fuel savings. Empirical savings. I do not pretend to KNOW what happens to allow for fuel savings.

FACT:
I don't use a jelly jar, or stainless steel wire, or any fancy electronics. I'm not attempting to run on 'hydrogen' and have substantially documented WHY (science reasons) that I don't believe that the hydrogen contributes to the savings. What we've accomplished any high-school educated person could do. The measurable results are something so simple that a high-schooler could document them. The safety factors are not so 'simple', but achievable with just a little instruction. My device is a more 'basic' than mgJessop has, and cost less in the onset and has provided a great project for the kids and I - science, metal working, safety, etc.. The project started with significant research with my fine wife's guidance for the kids ( she IS an 'egghead' with a diploma that certifies her). My father also contributed, both in the safety field and in the making the project simple enough to have the kids learn.

The wonderful thing about science is that we should continually follow the scientific method -
Scientific Method described (http://www.sciencebuddies.org/mentoring/project_scientific_method.shtml)
Scientific Method and Fringe Energy - a challenge to believers and skeptics alike. (pesn.com/2006/07/11/9500290_Scientific_Method/)

And the scientific method starts with observation - and experimentation follows. If it were not for people challenging 'known facts' we'd be in a different world. So, experiment! analyze! and publish your results!

Regards and respect to all

Tim

"No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong." Einstein

[BULBASOR]

Hey - as long as your having fun, that's what counts.