Running Your Pathy on WATER

[TrailChaser]

I'm not trying to "seem smart" I'm simply stating that you cannot get more energy out of something then you put in, so there is no way to improve your fuel mileage. Why would I bother wasting time and money on something that is obviously a scam. Why don't I try the fuel line magnets while I'm at it...

 

If you KNOW people who are running these and are showing good results they must have changed their driving habits since installing...

 

 

At some point in history the smartest people on Earth thought, (sorry) KNEW the Earth was flat... The smartest people on earth at some point in history KNEW that everything in the universe revolved around the Earth....

 

Just like right now the smartest people on Earth KNOW you can not achieve over unity....Even tho lots of people are doing it.

 

You have to admit that you really don't know anything about the subject first hand. You are simply regurgitating stuff that you read that was most likely regurgitated from some other source. Which seems to be the main problem with the internet, and forums like these. Just like when someone reads up on how to change a CV or something then turns right around and starts giving advice to people on how to do the job before ever actually doing it yourself. Why? Maybe you genuinely want to help, but the fact of the matter is I find it pretty disrespectful that you post up the exact thing I specifically asked NOT to hear in my thread.

 

ALL I ASK, is that BEFORE you come on this thread being a skepic about something that's being offered for testing for free.... Try it for yourself and post up your results, or shut up and wait for people on here who are testing it to post up some results.

 

I've read NO LESS than 5hs worth of skeptics reasons as to why it won't work on a dozen other forums, so I'd really rather not have that happen here.(Maybe anyone who wants to tell everyone why it won't work or just to spew their stupidness about how something is a waste of intranetz space should just start their own thread.)

 

 

As for changing driving habits... Unless you go from driving like a teenager who thinks he could qualify to drive for Nascar to driving like a 80yr old grandmother; you'll never get 25-60% increase in fuel mileage.

 

I was waiting until some of these guys posted up MPG results, but here it is anyway... This is a link to the same guy from my first links new thread.(He made a new thread because of all the BS in the other thread.) I wheel with some of these guys and know a couple personally. Also note that a lot of the guys posting in that thread were sounding just like you in the previous thread, yet now that someone they know is showing that it definitely has an effect they've swallowed their pride and are now on board with the whole thing.

http://www.lonestarjeepclub.org/board/showthread.php?t=22303

 

 

PS. Don't try the fuel line magnets... I already tried them a couple of years ago and they do not work.

[88pathoffroad]

I should make up 4 cells for my van and find a 100 amp alty for it. Actually, I HAVE a 100 amp alty in my garage that the charging post broke off of. I wonder what it'd take to fix that bad boy. It's a chrome alternator.

 

I already have a line running from inside the cab to a vac line, I used to run water injection on it for kicks to see if it helped. It did, then it didn't, so I took the water jug and drip-feed valve out and capped the line. The van is carb'd, so no sensors to fool. The only problem I can see is that I hardly ever refill the tank completely, I'm too broke. Hard to estimate mileage that way. I also need a new battery or two for inside (I run my 1800W power inverter off an in-cab gel-cell but the battery apperas to be taking a dump on me).

[02silverpathy]

It DOES take energy to make energy, however it IS about efficiency...in fact the entire notion of making Hydrogen is about efficiency.

 

The alternator uses energy even when it is making less than it provides (regulated to make only what is necessary, but still requiring a belt to spin).

 

If your alty is making electric from the belt turning, that is currently turning with the aide of Hydrogen combustion, it is indeed changing the EFFICIENCY of the entire cycle of energy use. While it is agreed that we are using energy to make energy, we are attempting to make a more efficient cycle....not get "free" energy.

 

The efficiency comes from seperating water....damn near free vs. buying gas.....no where near free!

[Crispyc]

Might I suggest one thread for those involved in this expiriment to post their progress and findings.

 

A separate thread for people to debate over whether or not it will work.

[Kittamaru]

So far it looks promising... which site did you buy the system from?

[unccpathfinder]

Everyone keeps talking about COE...but I don't really know how to convert mechanical energy into electrical energy into heat and chemical energy...I don't think you can produce more fuel than you burn but I can't say it for a fact b/c I don't know how to make all the conversions...but it was just a thought I had the other night...

 

Anymore updates?

[TrailChaser]

No real updates yet, I've been sick for the last couple of days. The cell I made in the video is suppose to be a joke compared to the real cell I'm making from the plans I bought. That cell was from some free instructions and looked really easy/cheap to make so I decided to do it first to see if I thought there was any need to go forward with the real plans since they are a bit expensive to follow since you have to buy a lot of 4" sch80 CPVC and electronics to control the electrodes.

 

I measured the production of my first "plate" cell and I was getting about .5 liters per minute at 12volts and 20amps using 6 plates and having every other plate connected in series. Most people are shooting for 1.5-2lpm for the desired effect on fuel milage. The fancy one I'm building doesn't measure output in liters for some reason. They just tell you what (high)pressures it should operate at under certain engine rpms.(Which is suppose to be the reason for the sch80 CPVC)

[Kittamaru]

The idea here, UCCPath, is that an internal combustion engine operates at aboutt 8-10% efficiency at best. Burning HHO can help increase the efficiency because creating HHO is a HIGHLY efficient process. You, basicly, turn a little bit of pure electricity, taken from reserves left on the alternator, thus not putting MUCH more strain on it or the engine, and turning it into small to mid sized amounts of hydrogen via electrolysis. The HHO helps MPG by taking the place of some amount of gasoline, and also by burning far cleaner AND more completely, thus reducing the amount of power lost in the exhaust stroke. This, in turn, helps the engine clean itself of debris, as well as, potentially, clear the exhaust system up a bit. Now you have a better airflow, around 15-17% burning efficiency if not more, AND you are using less actual gasoline to do it. All at, maybe, a 1-2% loss of efficiency at the Alternator. That is still a gain of 7-10% efficiency, maybe more depending on how well built the alternator is and how much (or how little) strain it puts on the engine. If you have a larger alternator that doesn't need to use 100% of it's possible output, you'd have a higher gain. The more cells you run, the more gasoline you can replace (to an extent) and the higher your gains.

 

The thing is, you have to find the perfect balance of HHO based on RPM, which changes drasticly in city driving compared to the rather steady RPM of highway driving.

 

I'm going to look into this more... this might be a very good idea, especially if we upscale it a bit.

[MikeV]

Awesome info guys, reading up on it a bit elsewhere; I'll sit back and listen so I don't clog the thread.

[unccpathfinder]

The idea here, UCCPath, is that an internal combustion engine operates at aboutt 8-10% efficiency at best. Burning HHO can help increase the efficiency because creating HHO is a HIGHLY efficient process. You, basicly, turn a little bit of pure electricity, taken from reserves left on the alternator, thus not putting MUCH more strain on it or the engine, and turning it into small to mid sized amounts of hydrogen via electrolysis. The HHO helps MPG by taking the place of some amount of gasoline, and also by burning far cleaner AND more completely, thus reducing the amount of power lost in the exhaust stroke. This, in turn, helps the engine clean itself of debris, as well as, potentially, clear the exhaust system up a bit. Now you have a better airflow, around 15-17% burning efficiency if not more, AND you are using less actual gasoline to do it. All at, maybe, a 1-2% loss of efficiency at the Alternator. That is still a gain of 7-10% efficiency, maybe more depending on how well built the alternator is and how much (or how little) strain it puts on the engine. If you have a larger alternator that doesn't need to use 100% of it's possible output, you'd have a higher gain. The more cells you run, the more gasoline you can replace (to an extent) and the higher your gains.

 

I'm well aware of the process and the efficiencies of power plants (mechanical/aerospace engineer) what i'm not aware of is the conversion of energy from one format to another and how that effects the laws of conservation...I know point A = B and most is going to be lost in heat/friction so how does it become more efficient b/c the further you drive the less potential energy which has been converted to heat via combustion and friction

 

 

Burning HHO can help increase the efficiency because creating HHO is a HIGHLY efficient process

 

not convinced...now if you were using a natural occurring resource like wind or solar power to produce the electricity I would agree..

 

I'm not trying to discourage or hamper trails progress b/c I'm really interested to see if it works...I understand the philosophy but just not the actuality

[TrailChaser]

I installed the simple six plate cell into my pathy over the weekend. The cell is only making about .5 liters per minute(desired output is 1.5-2lpm) drawing around 20amps at the normal 13.5-14volts that the charging system supplies.

I hooked up the cell downstream of the lowbeam relay so I could still turn it on/off from my seat w/out having to run a new set of wires and hook up a switch.(keep in mine this is totally temporary)

I ran the gas(HHO) hose from the cell to a bubbler(mason jar) on the other side of the engine.

The gas then goes into a vac. line from the bubbler.

 

I ran it for the first time today on the way to work which is about 15mins away at 70ish mph. The only difference I could really notice was the engine was much quieter than it normally is.(keep in mind I'm only running a third of the recommended amount)

 

Today I'm telling my boss(who wheels the X) and a co-worker about it today while driving us to lunch.

Right about the time we're pulling in to park I'm telling them about how I set it up so I can turn it on/off via the headlight switch. I guess I was having a brain fart, because for some reason I inadvertently turned my lights on then got out and we went and ate lunch. So the whole time we were in there the cell was pumping out half a liter of gas a minute.

When we got back out to the truck I tried to start it, but it was acting like the starter solenoid wasn't engaging. I tried a few more times and finally BOOM. Then HOLY SH!T WHAT WAS THAT!!! People came out of the restaurant to see what the hell that noise was also. I knew instantly what that noise was. Hydrogen explosion...

 

So we get out to investigate and I'm still scratching my head as to HOW this happened until I saw the headlights on. Then I knew... What a freakin DA...

When I popped the hood I figured I'd see pieces of broken mason jar all inside my engine compartment. Not the case. The glass held up great, but the TIGHTLY screwed on lid was blown off. After further investigation I concluded that it was a fire type explosion and not just pressure.

 

The reason the bubbler was there in the first place is for safety. It actually did a great job of doing it's job and keeping the fire from reaching the cell. If it had gotten to the cell it most likely wouldn't have done too much damage since it's housed in sch40 PVC. I don't want to find out how bad that would be, but I assume I would at least lose my radiator in the blast. It did leave a nice solid reminder in my hood.

 

Enough typing, time for the pics.

 

Here's the cell.

 

This is the bubbler with a F'ed up lid. Check out how it smashed the top of the ring against my hood.

 

Here's the mark it left on the inside of the hood.

 

Here's the outside of the hood. That dent has a nice ring to it. lol

 

 

 

Well, I learned a thing or two with this happening.

1.Get an easy pop-off top bubbler.

2.Wire it so it only comes on when the ignition is on.

[Precise1]

Holy Crap!! That was just a 1/2 mason jar explosion and it did that to your hood?? Yeah, I'd call that a solid brain fart, but I can see how it happened. Well, I doubt you'll do anything like that again, regardless of the visual reminder. I'm glad you got away with a 'simple lesson' and nothing else.

 

B

[HitTheTrails]

uncc, the coversion of energy from one form to another for this example (as I understand it) is as follows:

 

Gasoline has an energy density of about 45 megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg). Meaning if your engine was 100% efficient you would produce 45MJ of mechanical energy (kinetic energy of the flywheel, pulleys etc.) from one kg of gas. As we know, you will infact produce more like 5MJ of mechanical energy. This mechanical energy then has to be coverted to electrical energy via the alternator. Assuming the alternator is 50% efficient you are now left with 2.5MJ = 0.7 kilowatt-hours of electrical energy. This electrical energy is now converted to HHO at some efficiency, lets assume it's 80% (this is probably high). Now you have made 1.75MJ of HHO. So, you started off with 1 kg of gasoline, that was 45MJ of chemical energy and you are now left with 1.75MJ of chemical energy in the form of HHO. Even if this HHO was burned at 100% efficiency by the engine you would only get 1.75MJ of mechanical energy out of it, versus 5MJ if you were to just burn the gas in the first place.

 

This is my simplified way of explaining how this cannot work

 

If, on the other hand, the HHO was produced using electricity that came from solar panels on your car, or some other form of external energy you could get for free, then the gains would be worthwhile.

[unccpathfinder]

DOH...I remember when I had my AC charged and the guy must of had it over pressure and a leak on the HP side it blew the cap off while I was running down the road and heard it and it left a smaller dent than that but still was loud as hell...

 

at least you didn't have a huge blast and catch the truck on fire or anything...

 

better go ahead and get a switch installed that the relay only sees power when the ignition is in the run position

 

 

You could have a pretty high tech "Tater gun" with that setup...

[HitTheTrails]

Wow! Good to hear the only damage is a dent in the hood.

[unccpathfinder]

Thanks HTT...could you PM me some references or was that just out of "previous knowledge"

[Precise1]

Allow me to state that I am undecided on this, but I have done no practical experiments. I have investigated it in the past and I am glad that someone is now. Regardless of the outcome of Trailchaser's experiments, we will all learn something.

 

Gasoline has an energy density of about 45 megajoules per kilogram (MJ/kg). Meaning if your engine was 100% efficient you would produce 45MJ of mechanical energy (kinetic energy of the flywheel, pulleys etc.) from one kg of gas. As we know, you will infact produce more like 5MJ of mechanical energy. This mechanical energy then has to be coverted to electrical energy via the alternator. Assuming the alternator is 50% efficient you are now left with 2.5MJ = 0.7 kilowatt-hours of electrical energy. This electrical energy is now converted to HHO at some efficiency, lets assume it's 80% (this is probably high). Now you have made 1.75MJ of HHO. So, you started off with 1 kg of gasoline, that was 45MJ of chemical energy and you are now left with 1.75MJ of chemical energy in the form of HHO. Even if this HHO was burned at 100% efficiency by the engine you would only get 1.75MJ of mechanical energy out of it, versus 5MJ if you were to just burn the gas in the first place.

 

Yes, that is a text book physics answer based on conversion/transformation/application of energy that makes many assumptions and estimates. It is a good place to start, but does not take into account real world application (the big picture). Let's address some of those....

 

Power consumed by this model of the electrolysis cell is about 100 watts. If an alternator efficiency of 60% is assumed, then 0.2233 horsepower will produce enough wattage. Even on a compact car, a unit would use less than ¼ % of its engine’s output, or about what is used by the headlights. The energy regained from burning the hydrogen in the engine is so small that virtually all of the power to the electrolyser must be considered lost. That loss should not, however, exceed V4%, so that any increase in the engine’s thermal efficiency more than ¼ %, is a real gain.

 

TC's version is 20A@12V (In DC 1W = 1V x 1A) so that's 240 watt. 2.4Wx.23HP=.55HP so we'll round up to 1HP. That's .67% of a stock motor. The Pathy is NO powerhouse, but if I lost 1hp, I'll be damned if I would know...

 

I have not found #'s as to the desired HHO production volume per , but we will assume that TC's version is adequate for this example.

 

The point to the HHO injection is NOT to use it as primary fuel, but to enhance the efficiency for the current fuel (gas or diesel) AND reduce emissions.

At the HYPOTHESIS Conference, University of Cassino, Italy, June 26-29, 1995, a group of scientists from the University of Birmingham, UK, presented a study about hydrogen as a fraction of the fuel. In the abstract of that study it stated: “Hydrogen, when used as a fractional additive at extreme lean engine operation, yields benefits in improved combustion stability and reduced nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbon emissions.”

Corrections Canada tested several systems and concluded, “The hydrogen system is a valuable tool in helping Corrections Canada meet the overall Green Plan by: reducing vehicle emissions down to an acceptable level and meeting the stringent emissions standard set out by California and British Columbia; reducing the amount of fuel consumed by increased mileage.”

Additionally, their analysis pointed out that this solution is the most cost effective. For their research they granted the C.S.C. Environmental Award.

A study by the California Institute of Technology, at its Jet Propulsion Lab Pasadena, in 1974 concluded:

The J.P.L. concept has unquestionably demonstrated that the addition of small quantities of gaseous hydrogen to the primary gasoline significantly reduces CO and NOx exhaust emissions while improving engine thermal efficiency

Blah, blah, blah... Taken from here, only because of the independent studies. http://www.hydrogen-boost.com/hydrogeninjection.html

 

The whole point is to get the gasoline to burn faster and more completely. NOT to burn the HHO for it's fuel density value, but to increase the efficiency of the gasoline combustion. It does seem to work according to some research. Lets say it increases the current efficiency 10% (which is a low estimate from what I have read)...

if your engine was 100% efficient you would produce 45MJ of mechanical energy (kinetic energy of the flywheel, pulleys etc.) from one kg of gas. As we know, you will infact produce more like 5MJ of mechanical energy

Here is an 11% efficient gasoline engine, increased 10% makes it 12.1% efficient. That's a realistic increase, and may get you from 18 to 20 MPG... Not a huge deal, but lets see what TC realizes. Then there is the side of the significantly reduced emissions (a sign of better combustion). I will seriously consider setting up something like this on my 78 VW Bug FI as it is challenging to pass CA smog.

 

My point is that text book theory doesn't address whats trying to be done here and it makes some sense when broken down. The Wright brothers couldn't fly, the WW2 German jets were eye openers, the guy who invented the turbo was crazy, etc. I look forward to the results of the guy that IS doing it...

 

B

[unccpathfinder]

Yea...we had a lot of talks about complete combustion in thermo and how some of the more modern engines were going to dual spark plugs to try to increase complete combustion...

 

I think this would be a great way to increase emissions...but will CA smog a vehicle with this on it if it doesnt have that specific stamp? even if you showed them on 2 tests back to back the difference it made (be it significant)

 

Keep on trucking TC...I hope you get some real results and possibly learn some tricks along the way to maybe optimize the system

[Precise1]

I think this would be a great way to increase emissions...but will CA smog a vehicle with this on it if it doesnt have that specific stamp? even if you showed them on 2 tests back to back the difference it made (be it significant)

 

Decrease, I hope you mean... As for CA smog, who cares. What specific stamp, it's an owner modification... I have this system and the car passes. Test the emissions, who cares how I got it there. Not factory equipment? I'd happily take them to court over that...

 

B

[unccpathfinder]

Decrease, I hope you mean... As for CA smog, who cares. What specific stamp, it's an owner modification... I have this system and the car passes. Test the emissions, who cares how I got it there. Not factory equipment? I'd happily take them to court over that...

 

B

 

 

Yea your right B...increase the purity of the emissions (decreasing the bad them as you say)

 

The stamp I thought I read about sometime somewhere on aftermarket parts like headers had to have some approval stamp...I agree with you completely on who cares what you did to make it pass as long as it passes but I had this whole badass vision of the smog folks here in CA and are asses even if you did pass emissions but had some "unauthorized equipment"...I have yet to pay them a visit yet...I guess that day will come eventually

[HitTheTrails]

Thanks HTT...could you PM me some references or was that just out of "previous knowledge"

 

 

That was just out of previous knowledge. I pulled the energy density of fuel off the net somewhere, same with approximate efficiencies.

 

 

B, thanks for that explanation, it makes sense. I have read that the addition of hydrogen will help the thermal efficiency, but I believe the amount you need to add in order to get results is pretty significant? I thought they were adding pressurized hydrogen and large amounts. well, by large I mean much more than you can produce with an on-board electrolysis running off the alternator... I wonder how much u need and if that will offset the energy needed to produce it in the first place...

 

I agree that the amount of energy that TC is taking via the alternator is small so if it doesn't help it won't hurt that much.

 

TC, sorry for the abrupt wording of some of my previous posts, I could of stated my opinions more politely. Good luck

[MY1PATH]

I see your point of energy desity but isn't the hydo cell going to be running off of surplus energy from the alternator?(energy that was being created but not used) I veiw it has taking un-used engery from the alternator and putting it back into the engine.

[HitTheTrails]

I see your point of energy desity but isn't the hydo cell going to be running off of surplus energy from the alternator?(energy that was being created but not used) I veiw it has taking un-used engery from the alternator and putting it back into the engine.

 

 

How is it surplus energy? The alternator might have "excess capacity" but it will be producing the energy that is needed based on the load. Any extra load being put on the alternator puts extra load on the engine and thus burns more fuel.

[kmgar99]

Yea your right B...increase the purity of the emissions (decreasing the bad them as you say)

 

The stamp I thought I read about sometime somewhere on aftermarket parts like headers had to have some approval stamp...I agree with you completely on who cares what you did to make it pass as long as it passes but I had this whole badass vision of the smog folks here in CA and are asses even if you did pass emissions but had some "unauthorized equipment"...I have yet to pay them a visit yet...I guess that day will come eventually

 

 

I think the stamp you're talking about is the "C.A.R.B" stamp. I think it stands for California Air Resources Board or something like that.

[GrimGreg]

CA is so screwy that you can convert your engine, or replace your engine with something that will emit less "polution" and fail their tests simply because you modified the engine.