Water powered rotary?
09-23-08, 11:10 AM
#26
Hot Dicken's Cider
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Marion, Ohio
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lol, the amount of misinformation and ignorance in this thread is unbeliveable. Aaron Cake is correct, some of you others are smoking crack.
While hydrogen does have significantly higher energy per unit mass than gasoline, it is practically impossible to store hydrogen at the densities required to make it even somewhat comparable. Realisitically, you must make comparisons using energy per unit volume. Once you do this, it becomes very clear that gasoline, alcohols, and other fuels have the advantage.
For many years I played with water powered cars and to say hydrogen has a low energy density is very wrong it just like those ******* that say rotaries don't have torque!! It all depends on density, water contains 2 hydrogen atoms for each O atom. If you actually get down and do some of these experiments and actually measure things you will find some very interesting facts.
09-25-08, 08:08 AM
#27
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: North Queensland Australia
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all this is no such thing as a "water powered car". Water is not a power source. And unless you are doing a matter to energy conversion, it never will be. Water can be broken down into hydrogen and oxygen which makes a decent fuel, but it requires energy to do this. Basic fundamental science.
There are times when this is not true. I'll let you figure out when.
You can never run a car on pure hydrogen because it needs something to react with. Whether you burn it with air, or combine it with oxygen in a fuel cell using a catalyst, it needs something else to react with. Gasoline is useless on it's own. It must be combined with air (oxygen, nitrogen, and a bunch of other random stuff) to liberate energy.
Water injection is used to cool the combustion process.
Well duh. Any 3rd grade science student has performed electrolosys and burned the hydrogen produced. The problem is that electrolosys is very inefficient and without a major power input, very little gas is produced.
No one in the world is driving a water powered car, because such a thing flat out doesn't exist.
Belief is irreverent. Reality is the only belief worth having.
Bingo.
Pure hydrogen is not explosive at all. It's only explosive when it is near an oxidizer. Again, basic fundamental science.
I'm sorry, what? Cold fusion is not yet possible.
Yes...but it is not powered by water. The "reaction chamber" contains something that reacts with the water and splits into hydrogen and oxygen. Both the water and reactant are consumed during this reaction. Byproducts are produced besides hydrogen and oxygen. This is hardly new science but again, it is NOT powered by water. It is powered by hydrogen, generated in this reaction. I forget exactly what they are using to react but generally several types of metal hydrides are used.
Here's a link to a topic on my forum which explains why all this stuff is pure horse ****:
http://www.aaroncake.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7606
There are times when this is not true. I'll let you figure out when.
You can never run a car on pure hydrogen because it needs something to react with. Whether you burn it with air, or combine it with oxygen in a fuel cell using a catalyst, it needs something else to react with. Gasoline is useless on it's own. It must be combined with air (oxygen, nitrogen, and a bunch of other random stuff) to liberate energy.
Water injection is used to cool the combustion process.
Well duh. Any 3rd grade science student has performed electrolosys and burned the hydrogen produced. The problem is that electrolosys is very inefficient and without a major power input, very little gas is produced.
No one in the world is driving a water powered car, because such a thing flat out doesn't exist.
Belief is irreverent. Reality is the only belief worth having.
Bingo.
Pure hydrogen is not explosive at all. It's only explosive when it is near an oxidizer. Again, basic fundamental science.
I'm sorry, what? Cold fusion is not yet possible.
Yes...but it is not powered by water. The "reaction chamber" contains something that reacts with the water and splits into hydrogen and oxygen. Both the water and reactant are consumed during this reaction. Byproducts are produced besides hydrogen and oxygen. This is hardly new science but again, it is NOT powered by water. It is powered by hydrogen, generated in this reaction. I forget exactly what they are using to react but generally several types of metal hydrides are used.
Here's a link to a topic on my forum which explains why all this stuff is pure horse ****:
http://www.aaroncake.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7606
Japanese companies currently have 2 advertised prototypes from 2 different companies that use lead based cold fusion. Add water and you get electricity you need nothing else.
2 I am well aware that you need a oxidizer but most hydrogen cars store H2 under pressure or in metal hydrides maybe I assumed too much of you. H2 burned in air does pollute. Adding water injection does lower the temp reducing this tendency..
As opposed to fuel cell H2 cars that use oxygen from the air to make electricity.
3 I never mentioned electrolysis.... Also with regard to electrolysis ... if you have the voltage just right the process is endothermic absorbing heat from the environment...not that I would ever do it that way as you said it is very inefficient.
Your words
Pure hydrogen is not explosive at all. It's only explosive when it is near an oxidizer. Again, basic fundamental science
My words
I don't drive in a vacuum I have 21-23 percent oxidizer around me all the time.
Your words.
No one in the world is driving a water powered car, because such a thing flat out doesn't exist.
My words
Tell the 2 companies in Japan it can't be done! I don't think they would believe you!!
After all they have 4 prototypes driving on Japanese roads as we speak!
I also drove a 6 cylinder 3 liter engine that run on hydrogen and oxygen split via solar. It didn't drive far and you couldn't use it realistically but I guess you are wrong their too.
Anyway have a great day.
Cheers
Michael Smith
01-07-09, 11:59 AM
#29
ANTI-REPUBLICAN
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Strasbourg, PA
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although I agree that if this were a viable resource, that many details would need to be worked out - I have to say that this statement is relative to the process being used for electrolosys. There are those which are quite efficient - enough for the job of powering your vehicle.
01-08-09, 01:36 PM
#30
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
I forgot about this topic.
Waiting still for that link to the "run on water" cars from Japan.
Compared to just charging batteries, electrolosys is very inefficient. The power is better used to charge an EV.
Waiting still for that link to the "run on water" cars from Japan.
Compared to just charging batteries, electrolosys is very inefficient. The power is better used to charge an EV.
01-08-09, 01:55 PM
#31
Rotary Freak
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wayne NJ
Posts: 2,508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just did some searching on this ***** "water powered car" and he seems not to be a complete retart the vehical works off some type of electroloisis. a simple search in google brought me to this. a liter of andy water and even tea will alow the thing to move at 80kmph for about an hour
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrxfMz2eDME
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrxfMz2eDME
01-10-09, 10:18 AM
#32
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
Yeah, I've seen that one before. All the "water powered cars" are either HHO scams, just a fuel cell, or use something to react with the water and make hydrogen. Not water powered at all. Big surprise there. 
02-21-09, 11:44 PM
#33
Full Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greensboro NC
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lol, the amount of misinformation and ignorance in this thread is unbeliveable. Aaron Cake is correct, some of you others are smoking crack.
While hydrogen does have significantly higher energy per unit mass than gasoline, it is practically impossible to store hydrogen at the densities required to make it even somewhat comparable. Realisitically, you must make comparisons using energy per unit volume. Once you do this, it becomes very clear that gasoline, alcohols, and other fuels have the advantage.
While hydrogen does have significantly higher energy per unit mass than gasoline, it is practically impossible to store hydrogen at the densities required to make it even somewhat comparable. Realisitically, you must make comparisons using energy per unit volume. Once you do this, it becomes very clear that gasoline, alcohols, and other fuels have the advantage.
02-25-09, 06:18 PM
#34
ANTI-REPUBLICAN
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Strasbourg, PA
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know about the charcoal canister concept but I don't really believe that it would be the solution to using hydrogen as a fuel for a car because of the volume consumed in order to power an IC engine. A charcoal canister isn't going to modify this volume - it may make it safer to store, but most likely not. Wherein lies your biggest problem with hydrogen as an automotive fuel - storage of such a large quantity. A charcoal canister isn't going to reduce that volume. Myers had it right by basically mass producing it at the point of use and using that which was produced.
On a higher note, I saw that Cali's looking to legalize and tax bud due to their deficit.
On a higher note, I saw that Cali's looking to legalize and tax bud due to their deficit.
02-25-09, 06:50 PM
#35
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Prosser Washington
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesnt work. Simple as that.
Some of my co-workers thought it would, they all chipped in to buy the book.
Thier "brown" gas experiment never worked. They made thier little containers out of canning jars, only had one explode.
Either way, it doenst work.
BTW i did not fall for it and never chipped in. I also got a good laugh when it failed..lol
Some of my co-workers thought it would, they all chipped in to buy the book.
Thier "brown" gas experiment never worked. They made thier little containers out of canning jars, only had one explode.
Either way, it doenst work.
BTW i did not fall for it and never chipped in. I also got a good laugh when it failed..lol
03-12-09, 01:27 PM
#36
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: erin
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look it up for yourself
First the water4gas is a scam but the technology of it is legit. I have made my own cell and i had a increase of about 30% fuel savings. There are a lot of scams out there but if you research just the information(public information not kits) you can build one cheap and easy.There are many sites devoted to getting this information out FREE.Second Stan Meyer did not use brute force he use resonance meaning he was not putting electricity into the water but different frequency so over unity is possible( I'm not say he did or did not but it is possible) Third I don't know but was told that you can't use this for a rotary because of the apex seals. If anybody know please pm me . I want to put it on my s4 for the power and economy but I'm scared it will blow the motor.
03-15-09, 10:23 AM
#38
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
First the water4gas is a scam but the technology of it is legit. I have made my own cell and i had a increase of about 30% fuel savings. There are a lot of scams out there but if you research just the information(public information not kits) you can build one cheap and easy.There are many sites devoted to getting this information out FREE.Second Stan Meyer did not use brute force he use resonance meaning he was not putting electricity into the water but different frequency so over unity is possible( I'm not say he did or did not but it is possible) Third I don't know but was told that you can't use this for a rotary because of the apex seals. If anybody know please pm me . I want to put it on my s4 for the power and economy but I'm scared it will blow the motor.
http://www.aardvark.co.nz/stanley_meyer.shtml
HHO is a scam. It will never work. Basic, 8th grade science tells you this.
I demand proof that you obtained a mileage increase. This proof is to be scientific, conducted in controlled conditions and must include a double blind test.
04-07-09, 06:57 PM
#39
what could go wrong?
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: N Virginia
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea of an HHO engine is not to replace a gas-powered rotary, but to enhance it. Water4Gas is a nice starting point. I did a conversion on my dad's Dodge Neon and now it gets about 50 miles to the gallon on the highway. I want to test it on my rx7, but my car is tempermental enough. I'd like to try hooking up the water vat to more than 12 volts and see if I can't get a better output.
Try it before you slam it. As far as the Water4Gas guy being a known criminal, aren't we all criminals at heart?
Try it before you slam it. As far as the Water4Gas guy being a known criminal, aren't we all criminals at heart?
05-03-09, 12:12 AM
#40
The idea of an HHO engine is not to replace a gas-powered rotary, but to enhance it. Water4Gas is a nice starting point. I did a conversion on my dad's Dodge Neon and now it gets about 50 miles to the gallon on the highway. I want to test it on my rx7, but my car is tempermental enough. I'd like to try hooking up the water vat to more than 12 volts and see if I can't get a better output.
Try it before you slam it. As far as the Water4Gas guy being a known criminal, aren't we all criminals at heart?
Try it before you slam it. As far as the Water4Gas guy being a known criminal, aren't we all criminals at heart?
Abraham Lincoln
16th president of US (1809 - 1865)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
streetlegal?
New Member RX-7 Technical
13
03-17-22 02:46 PM
befarrer
Microtech
3
08-22-15 05:52 PM