Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Hidden Science & Advanced Technology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-04-2011, 04:30 AM   #21
ownoiz
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,310
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Found Maf / Map Enhancer on Ebay for £15 that lets you lean out your fuel by modifying signals to the ECU.

There is also a 'DEMSE' made by a company called Kempco-HHO in the states that does the same sort of thing. Can't post images though they won't allow me to save them off ebay.

I think these units would do the trick for ECU cars.
There is software available to remap your air/fuel curves and spark. You download what is in your ecu and change the settings, using your PC and the supplied OBD2 cable.

Unlike 'tricking' the ECU with different voltages from its sensors, these programs allow you to dictate the air fuel ratios you are aiming for.

This software can be expensive though, and is usually reserved for tuning shops who will tune alot of cars with it hence make initial investment viable.

And any tuning of this calibre requires tuning on the road (or dyno) and another standalone wideband oxygen sensor and gauge or logging software to monitor your air fuel ratios so you dont go too far/lean.

But this softwares are only available on vehicles say 10 years or newer in this form...before that, the chips would have to be removed and changed.

Example: http://www.optican.net/index.htm

As for these MAF devices that basically change the signals to the ECU, it works in some cars but not in others...some later cars are too complex and they will aim for the programmed air fuel ratio set in the ECU (read by oxygen sensor) so unless you mess with the 02 sensor also they just retune themselves to richer again to return to the lambda setting entered by the factory into the ECU program...it all gets a bit messy.

Sometimes, imo, the kiss principle works best regarding fuel economy. (keep it simple stupid)

Yes almost all new cars run too rich and air fuel + spark are not optimally tuned, except for high end cars like ferraris etc where there is little to gain from changing things. Ironically alot of this is to do with protecting catalytic converters and other so called emission controls.

So that would be the place to start. But the enemy is detonation, but that can be adressed also by running engines colder (within reason) and pulling heat out of the cylinder heads.

Lean out the air fuel mix, and increase the timing, and at the same time run engines cooler, (170 degree thermostat.) to prevent detonation.

Firstly, catalytic converters are a scam and a drag on the engne...if you can remove them in your area and not get into trouble - remove them. This will also allow engine to run cooler and not detonate with leaner mixes and more spark advance.

Free flowing exhaust will do the same, especially tube headers, that let more heat out than cast iron exhaust manifolds. Some argue the thicker manifolds retaining heat are better, but people who know, know that argument is moot when used in conjunction with other changes...since cooler cylinder head allows more spark advance, leaner air/fuel, and longer engine life...this does alot more on a road car than retaining a bit more heat in the exhaust.

Tube headers allow alot more heat to dissipate out of the cylinder head.

Also...modify crankcase ventilation...that is part of you emission controls that suck spent combustion gases out of your crankcase, and back into the intake charge...making it hotter, less oxygen, dirty and oily = more prone to detonation...use these cans and vent to atmosphere...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/UNIVE...Q5fAccessories

and allow your intake charge to only be fresh air and fuel, not burned gas and oil.

All these modifications, (free flowing exhaust and intake, cooler engine) allow you to lean out the air fuel more, and increase the spark advance more. (within reason)

I have personally seen up to 20% decrease in fuel consumption on cars with these things done, and as a side effect = more power...and have for example seen cars that were 350 horsepower in standard form doing 11 litres per 100kms unmodified on the highway...go to 450 horsepower and 9 litres per 100 kilometers on the same highway.

Other fuel economy modifications on a car that doenst already have them are...best ignition leads/ignition unit/coilpacks, electric engine cooling fans, electric water pump, alloy driveshaft (there are even carbon fibre ones but remember cost/benefit), lightest wheel/tyre combination possible, and ofc removing excess weight.

I would do all these things before rigging up water injection, just my 2 cents, if you can get things for the right price.

Because water injection was typically used on emissions strangled engines, and forced induction engines, to prevent detonation...and if you dont have forced induction or a strangled engine, you can lean your mixture out anyway without the problems of water injection.

And if you want to start going inside the engine (internal modifications)...then the right camshaft, deburring the cylinder heads especially under the valves insde the ports etc will also increase fuel economy if done correctly.

One thing i have learned is, production engines are greatly compromised...most of them...and keeping catalytic converters happy with rich fuel ratios makes the oil companies happy also.

http://forum.davidicke.com/showpost....7&postcount=28
.

Last edited by ownoiz; 11-04-2011 at 04:55 AM.
ownoiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 06:09 AM   #22
ownoiz
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,310
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Some time later, Chrysler (among other auto manufacturers) installed water injection on a number of its large displacement engines . . . again for a performance increase. Indeed, water injection—used to produce power increases—is nothing new.
Chrysler typically used this on smog engines, not on high performance engines.

These same engines before tighter smog regulations actually made more power without water injection, because the other engine components were freer flowing...intake manifolds, exhausts, camshafts etc...and they ran colder thermostats hence operating temps.

Before fuel injection and ECUs, some of these engines struggled to meet new emissions rules in the 1970s, hence things like water injection, which allowed them to run hotter and leaner, but they werent necessarily more economical than previous engines as they were compromised in other design areas.

And with minimal modifications to these same engines using modern parts, they run better without all of that and use less fuel.

They didnt have strong ignitions and fuel injection back then, carburettors are typically dirtier than injectors, couple that with weak spark and there would be too much unburned fuel given off, so then in turn they would have to run the engines hot, and they were more prone to detonation than before.

Infact ill go as far as saying some of those water injected engines are gas guzzlers compared to what they are capable of being with 1/2 a day of bolting on modern parts externally.

The water injection was a mechanical method used to get around emission laws and cover up other design flaws and technology gaps...thats why its not used on modern naturally aspirated engines afaik, as it is not required, due to the abilities of injection, ecu microprocessor and sensors, which can respond to detonation through ignition timing and/or alter the amount of fuel injected when conditions change...something carburettors and fixed spark curve distributors couldnt do.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
There are many rumours of 90mpg carburettors and novel methods for improving car MPG, apparently, one rumour has it that the reason car manufacturers introduced cleaning agents into petrol was to prevent these super carburettors being developed as it stopped them working. There are lots of stories you can look up.
I see some of these as myths...when you reach a certain limit of air vs fuel, the charge will pre ignite when you dont want it to and/or inadequate power will be made = inadequate force to push piston down...atmospheric air itself cant ignite, so if there isnt enough fuel in there mixed with it...it wont, or it will be weaker.

What you can do, is use higher octane fuels, to be able to squash the charge more (high compresson pistons or turbo/supercharger) that will give more power with the same fuel.

But these fuels are more expensive so that can defeat the purpose.

I have seen supercharged cars running on methanol for example..but expensive fuel unless you can make your own...but the power is incredible...meaning you only need a really really small engine to run a car, as you can easily make 2.5 to 3 horsepower per cubic inch of displacement.

And these higher octane fuels do nothng on their own, if the compression pressures and ignition timing on that engine isnt also increased to use that potential.

But i will say, i DO believe that internal combustion engines can run entirely on hydrogen gas, much like they do on LPG...but it is supressed because we can potentially make our own H with water and electrolysis.
.
ownoiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 05:01 PM   #23
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Wow mate, shed load of info here thanks.

Regarding the software to modify ECU's I haven't seen it personally but I knew some of the modders were doing it with Skyliners etc. I have seen you can buy programmable ECU's but as you pointed out - its cost benefit analysis time.

I am looking for a cheap way to do it so thats why I thought of biasing the O2 sensor but a quick read about ECU's and I see that depending on the ECU there may be many factors used to regulate fuel. I realised the other day that manufacturers would be setting the programs with memory of the conditions of their tests and hence anything that gives a different result to theirr maps will incite a change.

I realised this because injecting water into combustion will allow more air in that will give a more complete burn with less waste - this is desireable. But the ECU will sense this an error and compensate by richening up the fuel. If you think about it, its nuts. When the cars performance improves - the ECU worsens it!

Finding these cheap Maf's on Ebay I thought I had the answer but I've taken your comments on board and I realise it may not be that simple.


Cat's as a scam - oh yes. I've written about that on here before with a story I heard regarding California government and the introduction of CAT's. Didn't know all the back history you wrote about so thanks for that.


Thanks for the tuning reminder. I forgot about most of those things. My 2nd car is a 1985 Lotus Excel with twin Dellorto's and no ECU so perhaps I should start there. Trouble is to lean it out requires re-jetting and selecting the right jets is beyond my capabilities.

The Merc is going to take a lot more thought although as it is LPG, if I could plug into the controller it wuld probably be easier to reduce the gas flow. One thing I did think though, LPG runs hotter than Petrol so I am causing greater wear on the engine, a water injection would improve this situation by cooling the engine.

Quote:
Because water injection was typically used on emissions strangled engines, and forced induction engines, to prevent detonation...and if you dont have forced induction or a strangled engine, you can lean your mixture out anyway without the problems of water injection.
Thank you, I have seen all these water injection kits marketed for forced induction and did not know why. Talking of Detonation, that again is another reason why I am keen to fit a kit on the Lotus - the engine is knocking a bit.

On a tangent, a friend of mine used to use a garage where the owner had done a degree in fuels. The owner offered to retune my friends car to use 15-20% Diesel mixed with Petrol. He said this would improve power and economy on my friends car - this was back in the mid 80's. Apparently, the garage owner had a van that went like a rocket because this is what he did. 15-20% Diesel mixed winto full tank of Petrol to burn in a Petrol engine and advanced the timing to make more power.

Any thoughts or knowledge on that?

Regarding the high mileage carbs, I have seen quite a few designs. No doubt some are just myths but it seems logical to me that the greater you atomize/vapourize the fuel the better results you will get. Thinking of it logically, early carburettor designs employed a rag soaked in petrol which dripped fuel into the engine. SU's used needles and venturi affect and then my Dellorto's and Webers used tuned cavity's with there jets with holes in and worked on air flow. If you found away to even further atomise the fuel then your gains would improve.

Further, if you gently heat the fuel first to get it moving towards a gas state then that is even more effective seperation and mixing of the original liquid fuel with air. There were a few designs using heat to vapourize the fuel and I think some using pressure to do the same. Anything that takes the original fuel from a liquid towards a gas state must work better thn the cruder carbs or even fuel injection once high atomisation has been achieved.

Which leads us nicely to H2.

I've got 4 hour instructional DVD on converting and running cars on H2. In it there is a great part which explain why we cannot run cars on H2 with onboard generators. They explain in great detail how much current/power is required to generate X litres of fuel per minute and how much is required per min to burn in combustion. Its a great lecture but in my opinion they are slightly wrong.

Well not wrong, just misinformed or not telling the whole story.

They are using the standard equations for electrolysis. Yet the HHO idea of adding an electrolite to the water reduces the current required for electrolysis. Its actually quite obvious and there are again a few designs. One by a Mr Cornish back in the 80's. He used a length of wire as both a conductor and sacrificial electrode, the wire carrying the current for the electrode was used as one of the electrodes. The wire was contiuously moved closer to the other electrode/anode and sparked and destroyed itself at the tip. This released released Hyrdocarbons into the mix as well as the Hydrogen from the electrolysis process. He sent the design to BMW who wrote back and said they had succeeded in running one of their cars on it.

link here - http://keelynet.com/energy/cornish.htm

JL Naudin used the electrode from a AA or D cell battery as electrodes for electrolysis, again, he arranged them close together and as they performed the electrolysis they also sparked, destroying the carbon electrode and releasing hydrocarbons into the mix. He calls it the Bingo fuel generator.

Finally there is the Geet by Paul Pantone, highly exoctic but equally plausible but a completely different process to produce another 'dirty' hydrocarbon based fuel.

Personally I'm also of the opinion that the Electric (and steam) cars have been surpressed. EV's may not completely replace all the cars on the road but if we had had them offered as an alternative for the last few decades they would have suited some people as second cars etc.

I bought my Lotus with a plan to convert it to electric, been looking around researching and watching prices for over 10 years - just don't have the funds to convert it and turn it into what may just be an expensive toy. Also, as i have been looking at these alternative fuels - specifically water as fuel for some time the Lotus has an aliminum engine and I reasoned this would be preferable for fuels with higher amounts of water as a waste product. The idea was to mess around with it running HHO gas mixed with petrol or Water electrolysis design mixed with petrol and eventually convert to electric. Now they got the Tesla- but I don't have the 90K to buy it!

The info in the Jet fuel link was also interesting - thanks.

Looks like I got a lot more to think about - thing is, like my electric car plans, the more I spend sitting around thinling and researching I'm not out there trying things out and learning from experience. I'm definitely a tinkerer and would prefer to build it and see how it goes and then modify than try and make a complete plan with all the details to build.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 05:24 PM   #24
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

The Cornish invention for posterity

Quote:
Cornish Hydrogen Generator
KeelyNet 01/10/02
US Patent 4,702,894 - Cornish - October 27, 1987

Your Car can run on water using this device without pollution !
Costs: 400 miles = 1 $. ( One US dollar ).

Your house can be warmed up this way .

Copyright Layo France, Hyères.





A forgotten patent !
You will find here the exact transcript of the 30 June 1982 European patent Publication N° 0055134A1 allowing a car effectively running on water and little aluminum ( I Gk. at 1$ for 400 miles ) without any pollution whatsoever.
Inventor: Mr. Francois P. Cornish, UK

Last seen in Canada ( summer 1988 ). We are unable to locate him since several years now which is rather bothering.

If you (the reader) heard from him or know his place, please contact us or ask him to contact us.

Webmasters please do link this planet-saving information but do also mirror on your site ASAP - and refer to : www.layo.com (site no longer exists)

All photographs are our own making when visiting Mr. Cornish in London in 1983 and copyrighted.
Specifications:
Water is split into Hydrogen and Oxygen
Oxygen is cleverly combined with aluminum
Hydrogen is collected and sprayed in a standard carburetor like with methane-gas.
A 900 Kilo car runs 600 Kilometer on 20 liter water and 1 Kilo aluminum.
Clean energy, once put in Aluminum at 1$/Kg, refining Bauxite, is released here first
making oxygen inoffensive.
Why we don't see these cars yet ?

At the time (1981) only some minor difficulties existed (see the BMW letter).

Electronic control developments might make this easier to implement today. Please think about the following:

To develop a smooth way to get rid of the aluminum oxide powder from the bottom of the water reservoir.
Find an absolutely sure check signaling if oxygen remains although the BMW-letter is not speaking about that point.
Don't experiment if you are unqualified, . . .
remember combining O² and H² is highly dangerous - - -
Use oxygen sensors.

Engineers must attack this subject before this planet runs out of time !.

Quote:
A Letter from BMW on the subject

BMW AG
Muenchen 40 Postfach 40040

References: 3895-5538
Nov 5, 1981

Proposal for improvement

Dear Mr. Cornish,

In reply to your telex of 17th October, our findings to date are as follows:

The unit as present assembled in a 2000cc car produced sufficient gas to power the engine continuously.

The aluminum consumption averaged out at 180 cm per minute over a 70 minute test run.

With the capacitor (as per your specification) connected up, we were able to work in our 14v environment.

The water temperature remained low, and even without the radiation system was found to be well between your limits.

No acid was found on analysis after the test run.

We however feel that one possible problem area may be the disposal of the oxide deposit. Could you please let us know what your findings have been on this side.

Yours faithfully,

Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft
Service Division
I.V. Henseler
V. Krause
Quote:
Here follows a complete text of this neglected
June, 30, 1982 European patent Publication N° 0055134A1
Quote:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION (text 8/8/96 OCR-scanned and partly corrected..)

This invention relates to hydrogen generation.

It has already been proposed to replace conventional fuels with hydrogen in the running of internal combustion engines. Conventional proposals are to produce hydrogen by the electrolysis of water and then to store the hydrogen in some form or another. No economically viable storage system for the highly explosive hydrogen gas has yet been evolved. Whatever system is evolved would involve fairly massive tanks of some kind or another and precautions to prevent explosions. The present invention is based on the desire of the inventor to be able to provide hydrogen on demand from materials which are in themselves safe to handle.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION . According to the invention a method of generating hydrogen comprises the steps of exposing a fresh metal surface to water and heating the interface between the metal surface and the water at least to the lowest temperature at which the metal reacts with water to form a metal oxide and hydrogen, the metal being chosen from metals which are higher in the electromotive series than hydrogen and having stable and safe handling characteristics. Preferably the metal surface is exposed and the interface heated by pressing an electrode of the relevant metal against a second electrode under water and applying a high voltage between the electrodes while preferably moving the electrode surfaces relatively to one another.

In other words in the preferred form of the invention hydrogen is formed by creating an underwater electrical discharge between two electrodes at least one of which is made of a metal as defined above.

The electrical discharge and the relative movement between the electrode surfaces ensure that fresh metal surfaces are exposed to the water while at the same time the discharge heats the interface between the electrodes and the water to the required temperature at which the metal reacts with water to form its oxide and to liberate hydrogen.

Also in the preferred form of the invention rile metal is aluminium which has the advantage that it is in relatively abundant supply relatively cheap is formed with a protective oxide layer on its exposed surfaces and reacts with water at a relatively low temperature. Aluminium wire fed against a rotating aluminium drum has been found to give excellent results to provide hydrogen for powering small internal combustion engines.

A convenient way of securing the high voltage required is to employ the conventional distributor and coil arrangement which provides the sparking for an internal combustion engine. Two coils in parallel fed from a common distributor has been found to give excellent results. Other methods of generating high voltages from the.comtery or the drive shaft of an internal combustion engine may also be used. The method of the invention lends itself in an excellent manner to supply hydrogen on demand. In this case hydrogen is fed to a small buffer store and as the pressure in the store exceeds a predetermined level, the electrodes are separated so that hydrogen generation is interrupted. As the pressure drops to a certain level the electrodes are again fed towards one another.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING

The invention will now be further described, by way of example, with reference to the accompanying drawing, in which: Figure 1 is a schematic representation of apparatus for generating hydrogen, and suitable for powering a motor vehicle; and Figure 2 shows a portion of an appropriate electrical circuit.

DESCRIPTION OF A PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

In the illustrated embodiment there is a generating tank 10 fed with water from a reservoir tank 11 through a float valve 12 to keep the water level 1o in the tank 10 substantially constant. When the apparatus is used in a motor vehicle, the tank 11 can take the place of the conventional fuel tank of the vehicle with a pump 14 in the line 15 to pump more water into the tank 10 when the position of the float 12 indicates that this is required. Water is consumed as hydrogen is generated, and so the tank 11 has to be periodically refilled. The generating tank 10 is in communication with an air cooled heat exchanger 16, which may take the same form as a conventional motor car radiator.

The generating tank 10 is surmounted by a collecting vessel 17 from which hydrogen is drawn through a restricted orifice 18 of an internal combustion engine. Inside the tank 10 there is a drum 19 driven by any suitable means to rotate at a constant speed. The drum 19 is made of aluminium. A depending flange 20 provides a water seal to the top left hand corner of the tank 10, so that that corner is not in gas communication with the vessel 17.

A coil 21 of aluminium wire 22 is fed through a push-pull unit 23 of the kind used to feed welding wire to argon arc welding devices. The unit 23 is arranged to feed the wire against the surface

of the drum 19 and to traverse the wire along the length of the drum on a bar 24. the wire passes along a insulating sleeve 25 which enters the tank 10 through, a suitable wiper seal.

In the vessel 17 there is a pressure sensor 26 connected to a control unit 27. When the pressure sensor senses a pressure above a predetermined value, it signals the control unit 27 which in turn stops the unit 23 so that wire is no longer fed towards the drum 19. When the pressure drops again, feeding is resumed.

In use, the coil 21 is connected to the high tension side of s two ignition coils or transformers 30 and 33. These transformers have primary windings 31 and 34 and secondary, nigh tension windings 32 and 35. A capacitor 36 is connected across the high tension connections. The terminals 28 and 29 are connected to a conventional vehicle.comtery.

At the point of contact between the end of the wire 22 and the drum 19 an electrical discharge takes place. As a result the adjacent metal surfaces are heated to high temperature the protective oxide film which naturally forms on exposed aluminium surfaces is disrupted, and the exposed aluminium surfaces react with the water. In fact the electrochemical situation at the interface is such that the wire 22 is consumed with the following reaction taking place.

2al+3h2o ---- A12 + 3H2

As a result, hydrogen bubbles from the contact point while the aluminium oxide collects as a white powder in the base of the tank 10. A grid 37 in the bottom of the tank allows the powder to pass through, and then keeps the powder substantially free from currents in the tank 10. The hydrogen passes through the vessel 17 and the orifice 18 to the carburetor of an internal combustion engine.

There may be a tendency for bubbles of hydrogen to adhere to the surface of the drum 19 which rotates in the direction indicated by the arrow 38. to prevent this To prevent this happening a wipper blade 39

can be located in the position shown in Figure 1, so as to separate any adhering bubbles from the drum surface.

Alternatively, a wiper blade 40 may be arranged on the opposite side of the drum. In this case a small volume of hydrogen gas may collect 5 beneath this blade, and it may be possible to pivot the blade 40, thus releasing this pocket of hydrogen in order to facilitate startup of an engine fueled by the hydrogen.

It may be possible to use salt water in the tank 10, rather than fresh water.

The drum 19 preferably rotates at a speed between 400 and 700 rpm, but the rotation may be as slow as 50 rpm.

During operations the temperature of the water in the tank 10 may rise as high as 95°C, although it is likely that a unit mounted in a moving vehicle, for example, will be able to maintain the water at a lower temperature.

A unit substantially as shown in the drawings has been used to drive a 500cc motor cycle engine. The wire 22 had a diameter of 1,6 mm and was of commercial purity (98°'~A1). The unit produced over 1000 cc of hydrogen a minute, with an aluminium wire consumption rate of 140 to 180 cm per minute. The rate of deposition of aluminium oxide was about 4 kilograms per 500 kilometers traveled.

Conventional modifications were made to the carburetor to enable the engine to run on a mixture of hydrogen and air. The wire 22 carries a voltage of about 18000 volts with a current of about 1 amp.

The invention may equally be used to power stationary industrial engines ,as well as motor vehicle engines.

CLAIMS

1- Apparatus for generating hydrogen comprising a tank 10 for containing water, a metal surface (22) arranged in the tank, means for heating the surface at least to the lowest temperature at which the metal reacts with water to form a metal oxide and hydrogen, and a chamber (17) for collecting the generated hydrogen.

2- Apparatus as claimed in Claim 1, wherein the metal surface (22) is aluminium.

3- Apparatus as claim 1 or Claim 2, wherein the means for heating the surface in an electrical discharge between the surface (22) and another electrode (14)

4- Apparatus as claimed 4, wherein a second metal surface (19) i arranged in the tank, and means are provided to move one surface (19) relative to the other, the two surfaces being connected in an electric circuit (Figure 2) so that they form electrodes between which an electrical discharge can take place.

5- Apparatus as claimed in Claim 4, wherein the second metal surface is aluminium (19).

6. Apparatus as claimed in Claim 4 or Claim 5, wherein the first metal surface (22) is a wire and the second metal surface (19) is a drum, the drum being mounted for rotation and the wire being supported so that it approaches the cylindrical surface of the drum at an angle to a tangent to the drum surface.

7. Apparatus as claimed in Claim 6, wherein the wire (22) is supported by a device (23) which continuously feeds the wire, as it is consumed, towards the drum surface (19).

8. Apparatus as claimed in Claim 7, wherein means (26,27) are provided for sensing the pressure of hydrogen gas in the chamber (17) and for regulating the feed rate of the wire feeding device (23) in accordance with the sensed pressure, to control the hydrogen output.

9. Apparatus as claimed in any preceding claim, wherein the tank (10) is connected to a heat exchanger (16), so that water can circulate from the tank, through the heat exchanger, and back to the tank.

10. A method of generating hydrogen comprising the steps of exposing a fresh metal surface (22) to water and heating the interface between the metal surface and the water at least to the lowest temperature at which the metal reacts with water to form a metal oxide and hydrogen, the metal being chosen from metals which are higher in the electromotive series than hydrogen and which have stable and safe handling characteristics.

11. A method as claimed in claim 10, wherein the metal (22) is aluminium, and a fresh metal surface is exposed and the interface heated by pressing an aluminium electrode (22) against a second electrode (19) under water and applying a high voltage between the electrodes.

Copyright [email protected] 1996
Created: 8/8/1996. (site no longer exists)
Quote:
US Patent 6,299,738 - Richardson - October 9, 2001
for use in fuel gases

Last edited by pi3141; 11-04-2011 at 05:27 PM.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 05:40 PM   #25
davoid
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 57
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Don't know if this is at all interesting to you, but how about a car that runs on water alone?

http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1910

On the company's website it has links to different solutions

http://www.genepax.com/

Not sure if this is helpful, as i don't have a car myself. But a water-powered car would be fucking AWESOME...
davoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 06:12 PM   #26
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davoid View Post
Don't know if this is at all interesting to you, but how about a car that runs on water alone?

http://presscore.ca/2011/?p=1910

On the company's website it has links to different solutions

http://www.genepax.com/

Not sure if this is helpful, as i don't have a car myself. But a water-powered car would be fucking AWESOME...
Yes its very inetresting thanks.

Thats an electric car - called G whiz here in the UK. Genepax are using water to split to Hydrogen and then using the Hydrogen to attain electric power but not by burning it.

But I hadn't seen that Honda FCX Clarity fuel cell-electric vehicle. Looks interesting. Thing is big companies have trialled these things before and then they die away but yes an electric car that runs on water would be awesome.

I was thinking the other day why not buy an HHO welding generator, put a load of batteries in the boot of your car. Charge the batteries up and use them to power the HHO welding generator. The welding generator should produce enough HHO to fuel a car and run it on Hydrogen.

When you get home at night you would need to rechrge the onboard batteries and add water.

But effectively, its a better Hybrid desing than the ones we see on the road now.

The HHO welding generators take about 35 amps, so if you had 3 x 220aH batteries on board, you could power it and drive the car for 18 hours before you needed a recharge. Take out the petrol tank and fit a water tank. I don't see the down side.

Best use a rotary engine car for that idea as Wankels are perfectly suited to Hydrogen fuels (I've read)
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 08:00 PM   #27
davoid
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 57
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Thats an electric car - called G whiz here in the UK. Genepax are using water to split to Hydrogen and then using the Hydrogen to attain electric power but not by burning it.
Do you understand how these work? I have a reasonable knowledge of chemistry and physics, but I don't see how electrons are generated from the hydrogen. At first I thought that the hydrogen would be produced by electrolysis, but I gather it's a heating process that produces the HHO, somehow separating the hydrogen molecule. But how do you get... ah. think I just realized - it's the breaking of the molecule - there must be a spare electron because of the breaking of the valent bond. Answered my own question, but now I've typed it out I may as well post it...
davoid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 08:10 PM   #28
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davoid View Post
Do you understand how these work? I have a reasonable knowledge of chemistry and physics, but I don't see how electrons are generated from the hydrogen. At first I thought that the hydrogen would be produced by electrolysis, but I gather it's a heating process that produces the HHO, somehow separating the hydrogen molecule. But how do you get... ah. think I just realized - it's the breaking of the molecule - there must be a spare electron because of the breaking of the valent bond. Answered my own question, but now I've typed it out I may as well post it...
Cheers!

Was wondering that myself. I presumed they go water to hydrogen and then hydrogen though fuel cell to electricity and water by product.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2011, 11:59 PM   #29
ownoiz
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,310
Likes: 3 (3 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Which leads us nicely to H2.

I've got 4 hour instructional DVD on converting and running cars on H2. In it there is a great part which explain why we cannot run cars on H2 with onboard generators. They explain in great detail how much current/power is required to generate X litres of fuel per minute and how much is required per min to burn in combustion. Its a great lecture but in my opinion they are slightly wrong.
I was thinking more along the lines of a tank and filling it with compressed hydrogen, similar to LPG system...rather than creating the hydrogen on board.

BMW has already done this method also, even a long time ago, they once had an old 750 v12 running on straight hydrogen with little modifications to the engine itself...it was once online but all that info has now disappeared though (no suprises there)

I think if you can fit an insulated tank, and fill it with hydrogen...then the next step is to meter the gas flow to the engine correctly, like i said before, similar to LPG...thats how these prototypes were done...i even remember another BMW, a 3 series they had done ot to also, had a double wall insulated tank in the boot/trunk.

Im not really a fan of trying to make the hydrogen on board ideas.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
I realised this because injecting water into combustion will allow more air in that will give a more complete burn with less waste - this is desireable. But the ECU will sense this an error and compensate by richening up the fuel. If you think about it, its nuts. When the cars performance improves - the ECU worsens it!
Yes the ECU will always try and tune back to its target setting.

To put it simply, the target air/fuel ratios are typed into the ECUs program (its kinda like a spreadsheet if you see it when its downloaded onto PC)

The ECU then always attempts to reach this air/fuel ratio that has been put in there...the only way to change it properly and not introduce problems is to change the numbers in the program. (by buying the software)

There is one little cheat... many cars actually dont use/read the o2 sensor under heavy load/full throttle or near full throttle...they go from "closed loop" to "open loop" ...so they can be tricked under those conditions, but then you will only see benefts when you have pedal to metal, you wont get better economy at part throttles.

So under "open loop" the cheap way to trick is to bypass air arond the maf with 19mm irrigation hose and a ball tap in it...sounds crude But the tap allows you to adjust the airflow past the maf.

this also works ALL THE TIME on early ECU cars that dont have o2 sensors at all, such as some Japanese cars like KA24 Nissan...a real cheap way to lean them out.

The engine then doesnt know it is gettting this extra air as its not going past the maf sensor, but around it, so it will not add more fuel...hence leaner.

I suggest if you are going to tinker, buy a wideband o2 sensor first, they arent so expensive and you will at least know your air/fuel ratios.

This one is a higher end tool, a bit pricey (but you could score one s/h on ebay usa) http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/products/lm1.php

But the cheap way is buy an air/fuel gauge and sensor from summit racing or similar, ( i recommend auometer gauge and bosch sensor) all you have to do is weld the bung into your exhaust and add the extra o2 sensor and connect the gauge so you can physically see air/fuel while you drive.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Thanks for the tuning reminder. I forgot about most of those things. My 2nd car is a 1985 Lotus Excel with twin Dellorto's and no ECU so perhaps I should start there. Trouble is to lean it out requires re-jetting and selecting the right jets is beyond my capabilities.
well jets are a trial and error thing, change them and look at your air/fuel gauge.

But yeah dellortos are more difficult to get parts than say a Holley (best carb imo) ...with a holley you can get the jet kit that has ALL of them in it, and keep trying them until is how you want (by looking at air/fuel gauge)

I often have seen mileage increases with the RIGHT holley carburettor over others, (when the carb hasnt been molested ) but you cant get the right manifolds for every engine ofc...its more for american engines.

Like i said, tuners arent magicians when it comes to changing jets, its trial and error, and you need an air/fuel gauge to monitor what you are doing...or you are just working blind!! ...sure some people tune by looking at the spark plug color...but a bosch o2 sensor and gauge is quite cheap these days.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
The Merc is going to take a lot more thought although as it is LPG, if I could plug into the controller it would probably be easier to reduce the gas flow. One thing I did think though, LPG runs hotter than Petrol so I am causing greater wear on the engine, a water injection would improve this situation by cooling the engine.
I have an LPG car also, (have had a few over the years) i dont know if you have dual fuel on yours or LPG only but if you have noticed that it runs hotter on LPG than petrol, thats because it has been tuned leaner when it runs on LPG.

I have found LPG to be the other way around...because it is a gas compressed into a liquid...it freezes everything as it changes back to gas at the converter before it goes in the engine, hence cooling things down.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Thank you, I have seen all these water injection kits marketed for forced induction and did not know why. Talking of Detonation, that again is another reason why I am keen to fit a kit on the Lotus - the engine is knocking a bit.
A freebie modification - You could try the catch can idea first so spent crankcase gases dont go back into the intake...you dont even have to buy anything really, just run any/all the breather hose(s) that come out of the engine crankcase into a small plastic container and cut a hole in it so it can vent to atmosphere. Block the manifold intake point where these gases get sucked into the engine...theres lots of info online about crankcase ventilation.

The way most manufacturers have done this crankcase ventiliation is very crude...it leads to crusty/oily deposits in the engine on the piston tops and head, which get hot and cause detonation.

When you stop this crap from going into th intake manifold, the deposits start to go away.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
On a tangent, a friend of mine used to use a garage where the owner had done a degree in fuels. The owner offered to retune my friends car to use 15-20% Diesel mixed with Petrol. He said this would improve power and economy on my friends car - this was back in the mid 80's. Apparently, the garage owner had a van that went like a rocket because this is what he did. 15-20% Diesel mixed winto full tank of Petrol to burn in a Petrol engine and advanced the timing to make more power.

Any thoughts or knowledge on that?
No, i never heard of diesel petrol mixes


Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
Regarding the high mileage carbs, I have seen quite a few designs. No doubt some are just myths but it seems logical to me that the greater you atomize/vapourize the fuel the better results you will get. Thinking of it logically, early carburettor designs employed a rag soaked in petrol which dripped fuel into the engine. SU's used needles and venturi affect and then my Dellorto's and Webers used tuned cavity's with there jets with holes in and worked on air flow. If you found away to even further atomise the fuel then your gains would improve.

Further, if you gently heat the fuel first to get it moving towards a gas state then that is even more effective seperation and mixing of the original liquid fuel with air. There were a few designs using heat to vapourize the fuel and I think some using pressure to do the same. Anything that takes the original fuel from a liquid towards a gas state must work better thn the cruder carbs or even fuel injection once high atomisation has been achieved.
I dont know if there are any magic beans to be found here, infact in regards to heating up the fuel, imo you have it the wrong way around

I have found Holley carburettors are better than the others, with more parts available...they often can make more power than fuel injectors on race engines, becasue they actually atomise the fuel better than injectors that squirt wet into the cylinder head...and i know they are much more simple yet better than most other carburettors.

The only othe improvement i have seen in this area is General Motors newest v6 engines which inject fuel directly into the combustion chamber instead of traditional intake port location) ...the fuel then cools the combustion charge, allowing for higher compression ratios without detonation = more economy and power.

And in my experience, hotter/heated fuel is worse, people attempt to cool the fuel down , not heat it up, for performance and economy gains...because it cools the charge down and prevents detonation, and creates a denser air/fuel charge.

Case in point...fuel coolers...(and they work well)

http://www.jegs.com/i/Moroso/710/65125/10002/-1

Many people also use heat shield wraps etc to keep the fuel lines cold.

So on any engine i would rather see the gasoline cold, starting form the tank, and the whole system and fuel lines, than have it get hot, i always have seen performance increases.

The best you can do for any engine, is cool the intake charge down, using any method possible..cold air intakes , remove engine covers, remove bonnet/hood insulation, remove other insulations on the front of the car to let air cool the intake manifold...most engine compartments are basically an oven..but take one look at a good sports car like a Ferrari, and their engine covers are louvers!! They are basically open to the outside, and they keep the fuel and intake systems cold also.

So yeah, if you are trying to heat up your fuel, you will get a less dense charge, worse economy and power, and more prone to detonation.
.

Last edited by ownoiz; 12-04-2011 at 12:02 AM.
ownoiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2011, 07:34 PM   #30
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ownoiz View Post
I was thinking more along the lines of a tank and filling it with compressed hydrogen, similar to LPG system...rather than creating the hydrogen on board.

BMW has already done this method also, even a long time ago, they once had an old 750 v12 running on straight hydrogen with little modifications to the engine itself...it was once online but all that info has now disappeared though (no suprises there)
Yes agreed.

I remember seeing the BMW in the press. As you say just like LPG. The DVD video I had was all about this, there's no doubt that works.

I heard that there were problems with standard combustion engines backfiring when run on Hydrogen and that Rotary engines work fine with Hydrogen.

The generating onboard idea is intriguing but I do understand peoples reluctance regarding this. I am too. Stan Meyers definitely seemed to have something, there may also be something in this HHO idea now I've seen welders in commercial use employing this gas its obvious it combusts, no doubt about that. Its just is it suitable for a petrol engine without causing adverse affects.

I know also there is strong evidence that most of those onboard generators do nothing more than cool the cylinders like water injection. A wet sponge in the air filter would do the same without all the bubbles and electrolizing nonsense.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ownoiz View Post
So under "open loop" the cheap way to trick is to bypass air arond the maf with 19mm irrigation hose and a ball tap in it...sounds crude But the tap allows you to adjust the airflow past the maf.
Nice! Thanks for that. Any tips and tricks always welcome!


Good point about the wideband sensor. I've stripped and cleaned my carbs and set them back up again but have seen recommended on the Lotus forum a wideband sensor (and colortune) is neccessary to get the job perfectly right. Looks like that will be a likely purchase soon. Threw my old colortune away years ago after I stopped driving mini's and started buying modern cars with ECU's.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ownoiz View Post
I have an LPG car also, (have had a few over the years) i dont know if you have dual fuel on yours or LPG only but if you have noticed that it runs hotter on LPG than petrol, thats because it has been tuned leaner when it runs on LPG.
Yep mines dual fuel - its a simple single point injection (fumigates through the air filter) it runs a few degree's hotter than on petrol. Maybe I need the controller re adjusted then to increase the gas flow.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ownoiz View Post
A freebie modification - You could try the catch can idea first so spent crankcase gases dont go back into the intake...you dont even have to buy anything really, just run any/all the breather hose(s) that come out of the engine crankcase into a small plastic container and cut a hole in it so it can vent to atmosphere. Block the manifold intake point where these gases get sucked into the engine...theres lots of info online about crankcase ventilation.
Cool I'll try that - I already pulled the one on the Lotus and got a filter to plug up the pipe with as well as sealing up the hole in the air filter. I read about them doing that recently when reading up on the carbs. No more oily air filters!

I'll look for the crank vent on the Merc and look at doing the same to that.


Lots more good info in your post thanks - I've taken it onboard!
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2011, 03:52 AM   #31
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Seems like I've found the answer to my question -

Quote:
The 99-mpg Wonder

More green, less clatter--at last, a diesel you might want to own.
By Stuart Brown, January 2002 Issue

Imagine that the U.S. decided to get serious about its petroleum
consumption, cutting its dependence on Middle East oil and relieving
pressure to drill wells in the wilderness. What would we drive? Electric
cars that only go so far before recharging? Costly, complex hybrids?

There is another solution, and it has already taken Europe by storm:
high-tech diesels. They aren't for sale in the U.S., because they don't meet
emissions standards. But if we all suddenly needed to go nearly a hundred
miles on a gallon of fuel, the technological question is no longer in doubt.
In Europe, the advanced diesels account for about a third of new cars
purchased.

A pair of the cars recently made a rare visit to America, and FORTUNE took
them for a spin to see what life in this alternate, hyper-fuel-efficient
universe would be like.

If the word "diesel" brings to mind boggy performance, clattering under the
hood, and the reek of kerose, fear not. These cars accelerate decently, and
they don't stink or clatter. The smaller one, Volkswagen's teeny Lupo 3L
TDI, is a celebrity in Europe, where its fuel consumption of just three
liters per 100 highway kilometers (about 99 mpg) makes it the efficiency
champ. The featherweight Lupo has a tiny three-cylinder, 1.2-liter engine,
but it is nourished by a variable-output turbocharger that inhales cool,
dense air from an intercooler.
Combined with the latest in electronic direct
fuel injection, these features coax 61 horsepower and surprising low-end
torque from the little power plant. Which is enough to carry you about your
daily rounds, we learned.

The Lupo's got a five-speed automatic transmission, and when you select the
thrifty "Eco" driving mode its gears upshift early during acceleration, and
the motor "freewheels" to an idle when you let off the throttle, all to save
fuel. The weirdest feature is the way the motor shuts off after three
seconds of waiting at red lights. It restarts automatically when you take
your foot off the brake and go for the gas. The Lupo has just enough
performance to keep from getting rear-ended and does fine on freeways at 75
mph. Bravo, VW engineers.

European shoppers looking for something further up the vehicular food chain,
and willing to put up with fuel consumption of 4.4 liters per 100 kilometers
(about 64 mpg), can opt for Opel's Astra 1.7 diesel, a well-appointed coupe
built by GM's German subsidiary.

Diesels can get 25% to 40% better mileage partly because diesel fuel
contains about 10% more energy than gasoline does, and also because they
don't have a mechanical throttle, which hurts a gasoline engine's
air-breathing efficiency. The advent of electronically controlled direct
fuel injection has greatly improved the diesel's combustion efficiency and
lowered its exhaust emissions. But the improvements still won't meet the
EPA's tough rules taking effect in 2004, which will hold diesels to the same
very low emissions limits as gas engines.

Catalytic devices now under development will clean much, but not all, of the
remaining soot and oxides of nitrogen in diesel exhaust. "Diesel could be a
good alternative to some of the other energy strategies being explored, if
we could get some relief on emissions standards," says James Kerekes, chief
engineer for diesel engines at GM. "That's the balance that Europe struck."

© 2002 Business 2.0 Media Inc. All rights reserved.

Link - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ETList/message/868
(original article no longer available)
So yes, a system that cools the air taken in by the engine and/or cools the cylinders allowing more air in can be used to tune the car to be more efficient and give greater MPG as the VW Lupo demonstrates.


Last edited by pi3141; 08-05-2011 at 03:53 AM.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 08:15 PM   #32
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

1952 Flight magazine

Quote:
BOOSTING GAS TURBINES
Why it is Desirable and How it is Done: Water-Methanol and other Injectants
By W. T. GUNSTON

Link - http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchi...0-%200092.html

Quote:
Before we go on to study results obtained it must be appreciated that security must compel the drawing of a veil over all present experimental work. We may, however, note that most of the liquids specified as "possible" have, in fact, been tried in actual installations, and generally found wanting.
First of all, research upon the injection of plain water has taken place in almost every country. Shortly after the end of the war, experimental results began to be made available.
Quote:
Turning finally to methanol and methanol-water mixtures, there is little published information upon the result of past experiment. This may be because they are clearly the most useful liquids for this purpose and are of great operational importance, while the previously quoted results may largely
concern work which has since been abandoned. Suffice to say that research upon their use is being carried out by both private firms and Government establishments in a great many countries, and that water-methanol injection is already a standard operating procedure on all kinds of turbinepowered
aeroplanes, including such diverse types as heavy bombers, carrier fighters and turboprop airliners.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2012, 11:46 PM   #33
openwide333
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

I assume a lot of big companies and areas of government want to avoid this sort of tech or keep it under wraps because of how it will affect profits and economic growth but the truth is clearly seaping through the cracks now.
openwide333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-01-2013, 04:13 AM   #34
sucahyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 987
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Very interesting thread.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
apparently, one rumour has it that the reason car manufacturers introduced cleaning agents into petrol was to prevent these super carburettors being developed as it stopped them working. There are lots of stories you can look up.
This may still happen.

I have a fuel booster, cemenite, that work better for the cheaper fuel (88 octane) than the expensive one (92 octane). The cheaper fuel end up being more powerfull than the expensive one after boosting. Cemenite is not a consumeable.


You may want to try using GEET as fuel vaporizer or water injector (SPAD).


Combustion will produce water vapor too. Is there really corrosion problem with water injection?
__________________
An example of failed CB, Rants
sucahyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2013, 08:05 AM   #35
pi3141
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,547
Likes: 100 (79 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sucahyo View Post
Very interesting thread.

This may still happen.

I have a fuel booster, cemenite, that work better for the cheaper fuel (88 octane) than the expensive one (92 octane). The cheaper fuel end up being more powerfull than the expensive one after boosting. Cemenite is not a consumeable.


You may want to try using GEET as fuel vaporizer or water injector (SPAD).


Combustion will produce water vapor too. Is there really corrosion problem with water injection?
Cheers!

Actually I have been considering the Geet idea or building something similar along the Hydcrocarbon cracking idea, using an exhaust modified like Geet.

My dreams of building an electric car are slowly fading.
pi3141 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2013, 01:02 PM   #36
hypophos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 215
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default

I run a mazda rx7 with water injection.
I have a nozzle that injects water just before the turbo it works just as well as race fuel with the water injection set up I can make great horsepower on normal pump fuel
If I didn't have that set up I would have to run race fuel or E85 or lower the boost to suit normal fuel.
My 13b rotary engine makes near 500hp.
hypophos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-01-2013, 12:54 AM   #37
apollo_gnomon
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,392
Likes: 6 (4 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sucahyo View Post
Very interesting thread.

This may still happen.

I have a fuel booster, cemenite, that work better for the cheaper fuel (88 octane) than the expensive one (92 octane). The cheaper fuel end up being more powerfull than the expensive one after boosting. Cemenite is not a consumeable.


You may want to try using GEET as fuel vaporizer or water injector (SPAD).


Combustion will produce water vapor too. Is there really corrosion problem with water injection?
Water vapor from combustion corrodes the exhaust system. Water injected to the intake stream can corrode the cast iron piston rings and cylinder liner if allowed to condense on shutdown. Also, water injected into the intake stream can get into the blow-by gasses and get into the oil and corrode the cam shaft, crankshaft and bearings.

Also, the water needs to be very pure to prevent any minerals from building up on surfaces.

Not to say water injection is bad, just that it has engineering considerations that may not be obvious at first glance.
apollo_gnomon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-01-2013, 01:46 AM   #38
sucahyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 987
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by apollo_gnomon View Post
Water vapor from combustion corrodes the exhaust system. Water injected to the intake stream can corrode the cast iron piston rings and cylinder liner if allowed to condense on shutdown. Also, water injected into the intake stream can get into the blow-by gasses and get into the oil and corrode the cam shaft, crankshaft and bearings.
I see. Is it better in vapor form than mist?

Is exhaust heater water bubbler better? (GEET style)
__________________
An example of failed CB, Rants
sucahyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-01-2013, 01:49 AM   #39
sucahyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 987
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hypophos View Post
I run a mazda rx7 with water injection.
I have a nozzle that injects water just before the turbo it works just as well as race fuel with the water injection set up I can make great horsepower on normal pump fuel
If I didn't have that set up I would have to run race fuel or E85 or lower the boost to suit normal fuel.
My 13b rotary engine makes near 500hp.
Nice power. how much boost that water injection can increase?
__________________
An example of failed CB, Rants
sucahyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-01-2013, 01:51 AM   #40
sucahyo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 987
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pi3141 View Post
My dreams of building an electric car are slowly fading.
What is the roadblock?
__________________
An example of failed CB, Rants
sucahyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:01 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.