Water 4 Gas

[King of the Americas]

Do cars burn 100% of the fuel the consume?

It is possibly that a little Hydrogen could assist an engine to burn ALL the fuel?

Granted, you can't get more energy out, than you put in, but what if that is NOT what is at work here?

I mean, say you get the same energy out of the device that you put in, BUT that Hydrogen you produced helps you get ALL of the energy out of the gas you use...?

 

[Toke]

This is pretty much pointless because thermodynamics already proved it to be impossible NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO!!

To be more specific.
If you use electricity from the cars generator it will increase the load on the engine = use more gasoline.
You dont have "surplus" electricity, just like you dont have free energy.


Thermodynamics will let you use fuel more effectively. Like on newer ships, where the heat in the exhaust gas create steam for a turbine/generator.
Older vessels use the exhaust boiler only for steam for heating purposes.

 

[TMiguel]

Once an engine is running, it is producing 'surplus' electricity.

You can jump a car off that has a dead battery, and once it is running, is begins charging said battery.

If your car is already producing 'surplus electricity', why NOT use it to create a little H and O, that once ported into the intake, INCREASES engine performance?

To produce a surplus of electricity you must have an electrical generator strapped to the engine (that creates resistance), drawing power away form it, which means you are wasting energy that could be used for moving. (you basically got fool on the rolling around of the machine that you basically don’t understand)

Hybrid cars do not strap the generators to the electrical engines, but ratter to the breaks (that instead of wasting the kinetic energy into heating the breaks, it is used to recharge a battery).

We aren't producing more energy, we are just using what we have more efficiently...

Efficiency is gain when you are able to waste less heat in the conversion of chemical energy (combustion of fuel) into work (and even that is more limiting that you think). Water would just help to waste even more heat.

 

[Ladewig]

What a bizarre thread.

I heard the engine run without the device, and then when it was activiated.

It ran more smoothly...

Your hearing?! Are you trying to tell us that you are partly basing your conclusion about how much gasoline an engine used based on your hearing?

Then after a full tank of gas was used, the guy 'claimed' he got 6 mpg more.

On the internet, it is easy to find people giving testimonials about all sorts of fuel saving devices, do you believe all of them or do you want to see objective test results before spending money?

 

[TMiguel]

To be more specific.
If you use electricity from the cars generator it will increase the load on the engine = use more gasoline.
You dont have "surplus" electricity, just like you dont have free energy.


Thermodynamics will let you use fuel more effectively. Like on newer ships, where the heat in the exhaust gas create steam for a turbine/generator.
Older vessels use the exhaust boiler only for steam for heating purposes.

But that is no where even close to the painting being portrayed here.
Water will not in any way help the combustion, has the waste is not on the unburned fuel, but the necessary heat you need to give away in order for the engine to work in the first place.

 

[Toke]

Water4fuel is a hoax.

I am giving an example that works, where heat energy does not go up the chimney but into a generator and onto the main switchboard of the vessel.

 

[GreyICE]

Do cars burn 100% of the fuel the consume?

It is possibly that a little Hydrogen could assist an engine to burn ALL the fuel?

Granted, you can't get more energy out, than you put in, but what if that is NOT what is at work here?

I mean, say you get the same energy out of the device that you put in, BUT that Hydrogen you produced helps you get ALL of the energy out of the gas you use...?

We've been there. We've done this. Combustion efficiency on modern NON-DIESEL engines is in the 99.9% range.

If you have a diesel car there's some gains to be had improving the combustion efficiency and I assure you there's a hell of a lot of legitimate research being done on exactly that subject, but a car ICE mixes so thoroughly that the combustion is as close to complete as to make no difference.

There's also research being done on combustion aids to allow ICE to burn very lean, but simply installing one of theese does not achieve the very high level of control necessary to get successful lean burn (you'd need to reprogram the fuel injectors, at a minimum).

 

[King of the Americas]

What a bizarre thread.


Your hearing?! Are you trying to tell us that you are partly basing your conclusion about how much gasoline an engine used based on your hearing?



On the internet, it is easy to find people giving testimonials about all sorts of fuel saving devices, do you believe all of them or do you want to see objective test results before spending money?

I tend to believe someone 'moreso', if and when they aren't trying to sell me something.

And "Yes, I DID hear a difference between the two idles."

While my sensory organs ARE imperfect, I have used then to successfuly navigate this world, avoid pitfalls, and even locate items, people, and places.

I heard a distinct difference in how that engine operated.

They guy claimed to witness a difference in fuel consumption, and while I did take him at his word, I am 'here' today to confirm my conclusions or have them be debunked.

I am certainly not emotionally connected my findings or conlcusions...

 

[Toke]

There was another hoax where the fuel was surposed to be heated to plasma by the catalyser in the exhaust line. The plasma would be lead through the fuel line through the caburator and into the cylinders.
It should give a cleaner combustion and great savings.

Plasma is the stuff you have between a welding electrode and the steel. It is hot and bright.

 

[Sherman Bay]

I heard the engine run without the device, and then when it was activiated.

It ran more smoothly...

Then after a full tank of gas was used, the guy 'claimed' he got 6 mpg more.

The guy is either lying or ignorant of what he is doing. No one has yet been able to violate the Laws of Thermodyamics. If he thinks he can, and can prove it, the Nobel Prize is his for the asking and he will go down in history with a greater name than Newton or Einstein.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=483094

http://www.straightdope.com/columns...eage-using-your-alternator-to-make-browns-gas

In short, you're converting fuel A, gasoline, into fuel B, hydrogen, which then helps power the car. Net efficiency of this complicated process: 10 percent. Efficiency of an ordinary car engine...20 to 25 percent. Conclusion: Hydrogen gizmos are a fool's bargain...Where miraculous fuel economy schemes are concerned, tricksters abound, preying on marks who distrust "the authorities" and can't tell good science from the pseudo kind.

 

[GreyICE]

There was another hoax where the fuel was surposed to be heated to plasma by the catalyser in the exhaust line. The plasma would be lead through the fuel line through the caburator and into the cylinders.
It should give a cleaner combustion and great savings.

Plasma is the stuff you have between a welding electrode and the steel. It is hot and bright.

Well to be absolutely correct, that's a bit off. Plasma refers to any ionized gas (the 4th state of matter). ONE WAY to achieve gas ionization is the extreme temperatures - welding torches, heart of the sun, etc. Another way is electrically, such as is done in plasma TVs (the plasma there is very cool, in comparison, and does not, say, melt the TV).

However another definition of plasma is "Cool sci-fi word when I want my woo to sound good."

Determining which is which is left as an exercise to the reader.

 

[tesscaline]

I tend to believe someone 'moreso', if and when they aren't trying to sell me something.

And "Yes, I DID hear a difference between the two idles."

While my sensory organs ARE imperfect, I have used then to successfuly navigate this world, avoid pitfalls, and even locate items, people, and places.

I heard a distinct difference in how that engine operated.

They guy claimed to witness a difference in fuel consumption, and while I did take him at his word, I am 'here' today to confirm my conclusions or have them be debunked.

I am certainly not emotionally connected my findings or conlcusions...

Smoother idle does not equal better gas mileage. So even if you "heard a smoother idle" it is not evidence to support claims of increased gas mileage.

 

[Toke]

A large marine two stroke have around 90% mecanical efficientcy, and overall efficientcy of 46%. (from fuel to propellershaft)

 

[GreyICE]

A large marine two stroke have around 90% mecanical efficientcy, and overall efficientcy of 46%. (from fuel to propellershaft)

What's their Carnot efficiency? That's really all that's important. Mechanical efficiency just asks how the shaft is doing, and overall is quite meaningless.

Also, if there's a two-stroke with an overall efficiency of 46% (i.e. 46% of the gasoline's chemical energy becomes propulsion force) I will be shocked. Cars get about 20%.

 

[TMiguel]

I tend to believe someone 'moreso', if and when they aren't trying to sell me something.

And "Yes, I DID hear a difference between the two idles."

While my sensory organs ARE imperfect, I have used then to successfuly navigate this world, avoid pitfalls, and even locate items, people, and places.

I heard a distinct difference in how that engine operated.

They guy claimed to witness a difference in fuel consumption, and while I did take him at his word, I am 'here' today to confirm my conclusions or have them be debunked.

I am certainly not emotionally connected my findings or conlcusions...

Which means you just bough what he said.

 

[Sherman Bay]

Let's look at this another way. How about mounting a wind turbine on the car and feeding the electricity back into the engine (somehow, never mind exactly how, because it can be done). Will this gain you "free" energy?

Of course not, because the car's engine is effectively pushing the turbine's blades. If it could do this at 100% efficiency, you would lose nothing (and gain nothing). Since all processes are less than 100% efficient, you lose.

Reminds me of the guy who crossed the ocean in a cheap boat, just a bathtub and an electric eggbeater. It was the cost of the extension cord that made it impractical.

 

[TMiguel]

What's their Carnot efficiency? That's really all that's important. Mechanical efficiency just asks how the shaft is doing, and overall is quite meaningless.

Also, if there's a two-stroke with an overall efficiency of 46% (i.e. 46% of the gasoline's chemical energy becomes propulsion force) I will be shocked. Cars get about 20%.

Carnot efficiency gives you the maximum you could possibly get if your machine is technologically perfect. Since technologic perfection is technologically impossible, the real result will be quite lower (and more important).
Has far has I know (and was well pointed out), I personally never seen In my life a Carnot efficiency bigger then 80 something %, something whit 90% is a technological marble.

About your 20% efficiency for the cars, I have to tell the rest of the community that unfortunately “was” true (it is still true for some cars), although a bit outdated has today’s cars have improved to around 30 to 40% (and even so can still be outdated compared to the best efficient models).

 

[Toke]

What's their Carnot efficiency? That's really all that's important. Mechanical efficiency just asks how the shaft is doing, and overall is quite meaningless.

Also, if there's a two-stroke with an overall efficiency of 46% (i.e. 46% of the gasoline's chemical energy becomes propulsion force) I will be shocked. Cars get about 20%.

Marine engines are big, well cared for, and run at optimal rpm.
46% is not unreasonable.
The rest of the energy leaves by the cooling water, chimney, or radiating into the engineroom.

The mechanical efficiency is a important indicator of engine status.

You go to each cylinder in turn and measure the pressures during a stroke/cycle?.
The curve of difference between compression and max pressure give the effect of each cylinder. Divy the shaft effect with the sum of the cylinders and you have the mechanical effectivenes.

Such meassurements are done regulary to chek adjustment of injection timing and oil amounts.

They do not run on gasoline but marine heavyfuel, a bit like tar, must be heated to around 110-130C before the fuelpumps.

 

[Toke]

good night

 

[quarky]

If the trick worked, why not run a gas powered electrical generator in you car, and run straight electrolysis-derived hydrogen through the motor?

The savings should be even greater, no?



(No)