antifreeze
Veteran X
Hey did I mention that BMW already did this?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Breakthrough Invention Can Help Save World's Auto Makers!!!
- Thread starter JuggerNaught
- Start date
More options
Who Replied?Hey did I mention that BMW already did this?
My understanding is that in the OP the hydrogen is created from water onboard. Is this not the case?
So my question was about the use of water in creating hydrogen. Option #2 and #3 completely fail. I'm very much aware of the issues for storing hydrogen or some other fuel that can be reformed into hydrogen. However, this is going back to how you were mocking anyone who called the bs on the HHO (water) system.
In electrolysis the electrical energy is used to break the chemical bonds such that you get hydrogen and oxygen. When hydrogen is burned in an engine, the complete combustion results in water. Since there are efficiency losses here, the original article is in fact impossible. As far as electrolysis for small amounts of hydrogen, I really don't see how wasting all that energy is going to cause a significant benefit. Especially when considering how many extra components will be required to do so.
Jesus fucking christ. Do you know know how to fucking read? I honestly don't know how to make it much simpler.
THE BENEFIT FROM ADDING HYDROGEN IS NOT THE TINY AMOUNT OF EXTRA ENERGY FROM ITS COMBUSTION!!!
1.) It reduces autoignition. This allows for...
1a.) A leaner burning engine. This reduces the amount of unburned fuel coming out of the engine and hence, reduces waste.
1b.) And more aggressive engine timings. This allows the engine too collect more energy from the powerstroke. You can do this with a simple computer reprogramming for your car already, but that means generally means you have to run more expensive gas. As directly proven by the MIT study, the addition of hydrogen gas results in an effectively higher octane.
2.) Faster flame travel. Instead of have fuel continue to burn and expand while the piston is well past TDC, the fuel is nearly completely burned after 2 milliseconds. This means the combustion maximizes its force on the piston and this increases torque. Fuel that is not burned near max compression does not have the ability to apply the same percentage of energy to useful work, so more of it is lost as heat. Either as exhaust heat or heat to the combustion chamber. This means we have...
3.) A cooler running engine. With a cooler running engine, the water pump doesn't have to work as hard and the oil lubricates better, so you have reduced friction losses.
Of course, this doesn't matter if you are a magazine editor that can't apply critical reasoning. Because if you don't reprogram your computer, or give it at least a month for the computer to readjust to the ability to burn at leaner fuel-ratios or altered timing itself, then you wouldn't be able to see any benefit.
And what are you talking about #3 completely failing? I can understand #2, as no one will want to go to a welding shop to fill up their hydrogen tank, but #3 has worked in multiple experiments and has the benefit of not requiring an additional tank of freezable water.
P.S. I could be wrong, but I think the thing with BMW is an engine that runs with either 100% hydrogen or 100% gas, not a gas engine with a hydrogen additive.
We'll try this one last time to see if you can address the issue at hand. Hydrogen does have some very convenient properties such as a very high adiabatic flame temp. It also produces no carbon dioxide when burned and obviously no sulfur. There are also many useful properties in how quickly the flame propagates. However, the higher the flame temp the more NOx that is produced in IC engines. Now, when you actually refer to the temp in the engine it will obviously not be the adiabatic flame temp. The reason hydrogen is burned cooler is primarily going to be for reducing emissions. One of the problems in burning traditional fuels is at low temps many of the hydrocarbons will not get burned. With hydrogen this is completely different.
Now a couple things, in a given engine if there is no knocking the octane number is going to have a negligable effect on power derived. Sure hydrogen has a high octane number but octane is not representative of how much energy can be derived.
The above about hydrogen is rather well defined and seems to be what you were attempting to address. Now the thing I'm trying to address is how adding water into the engine has any bearing on the above. Yes I know there are cars that run entirely on hydrogen and they will tend to work much better than gasoline powered cars. However, hydrogen has plenty of issues besides with how it is burned. The way that the original post suggest is with water. The reason the BMW mentions hydrolysis is because hydrogen is very readily derived from natural gas and that would obviously produce CO2. If it is produced by electrolysis then the only CO2 produced is with w/e was used to create the electricity which is almost always going to be considerably lower (but not zero unless attached directly to clean energy sources).
Now, you were saying you can perform electrolysis in a car. Which I am pointing out is flat out retarded. It is up to you to explain why performing electrolysis in a car to get hydrogen from water is useful. Either you explain that or you show some other way in which water can be actively converted into hydrogen that will be a positive driver to efficiency as claimed in the original post.
Now a couple things, in a given engine if there is no knocking the octane number is going to have a negligable effect on power derived. Sure hydrogen has a high octane number but octane is not representative of how much energy can be derived.
The above about hydrogen is rather well defined and seems to be what you were attempting to address. Now the thing I'm trying to address is how adding water into the engine has any bearing on the above. Yes I know there are cars that run entirely on hydrogen and they will tend to work much better than gasoline powered cars. However, hydrogen has plenty of issues besides with how it is burned. The way that the original post suggest is with water. The reason the BMW mentions hydrolysis is because hydrogen is very readily derived from natural gas and that would obviously produce CO2. If it is produced by electrolysis then the only CO2 produced is with w/e was used to create the electricity which is almost always going to be considerably lower (but not zero unless attached directly to clean energy sources).
Now, you were saying you can perform electrolysis in a car. Which I am pointing out is flat out retarded. It is up to you to explain why performing electrolysis in a car to get hydrogen from water is useful. Either you explain that or you show some other way in which water can be actively converted into hydrogen that will be a positive driver to efficiency as claimed in the original post.