It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Does this fuel saving device seem legitimate?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   
I'm not sure if I am posting this in the write forum, but it seemed like the best fit to me as I would like to know about the science and technology behind this device.

I came across the Hydro-Gen fuel saving device browsing around the net and it caught my interest. If it was something like that tornado thing that is total BS I wouldnt even waste the bandwidth or anyone's time, but this thing seems feasible.

You can see the website here

www.savefuel.ca...

This is a brief description of what the device does which can also be found at the above link




In a nutshell, the Hydro-Gen separates hydrogen gas from the natural hydrogen-oxygen mix in standard tap water (i.e. H²O). It then adds the resulting extracted hydrogen to the conventional air mix in a vehicle engine (e.g. gasoline, diesel, etc.) thus supplementing the expensive fuel with an additional low-cost (i.e. free) supplement -– the hydrogen extracted from the free tap water, of course!


Here are some pics of it which are also at the above link




Installed under the hood





This is how the device works according to the site




How exactly does the Hydro-Gen Work?

How the Hydro-Gen works is actually pretty ingenious. The unit sends an electric charge through a liquid electrolyte comprised of water and Lye (or baking soda) which causes the hydrogen molecules to separate from the oxygen molecules in the water. It then captures the hydrogen and channels it into the engine via the air intake system.

The principle is diabolically simple, really. The introduction of this second fuel actually reduces the engine’s need for the primary fuel.


So does this seem legitimate to you? I am very interested to hear what people think of this thing, and whether its a sham or the real deal?




posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Very interesting. I think the fact that he claims to offer a full money back guarantee is enouraging. Shoot I might just have to spend th $197 and get one.

Both of our vehicles could benefit from this. And for less than $200 it is really low risk.

- McGrude



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 03:33 PM
link   
You're wasting your money on this, trust me. First of all the oxy-hydrogen gas produced by adding lye to water with an electrical charge is very dangerous and unstable. Secondly the amount of hydrogen produced by what amounts to a 10th grade science experiment isn't going to make any difference in your car. Thirdly you're going to end up with a very caustic solution in this little container that will burn the skin off your hands if you come into contact with it.

O, and what little hydrogen it makes will stop coming out when it runs out of water. I gurantee the water will be gone out of that thing in no time which means you'll be stopping to add water to a caustic solution that produces no result for your car all the time. And the lye will stop absorbing the oxygen from the water before too long which means you'll need to put on your protective goggles, gloves, and apron to empty the container and clean it. Then you'll need to add in fresh lye and more water.

You'll spend more money on lye than you'll save on gas.
Not to mention that they guy wants almost $200 for this cute little science kit.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I have some thoughts for this guy. I am sure that he is on to something becasue this looks like it could be a great invention. I can tell that it isnt fairly new because of the details/website. Looks interesting and I would check into more if I were you. I probably will myself. The man uses a process known as electralisys. Splitting of the Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms. Mixing the Hydrogen atoms with the current air makes it denser, causing for "thicker" air to be shoved down into the engine. This is much like a supercharger, or turbocharger, except it is using probably at least 98% hydrogen to do the job. Yet effecient because it does not require hardly any more mechanical work from the engine.

I have actually thought about inventing a new engine that uses elecralisys. Only runs off of your garden hose. More detail about that later.

brodband



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Thanks for the replies guys. I will look into it more, but I doubt I'll get one.

broadband I would like to hear more about your electrolysis engine design idea.

I have often wondered why a large alternator couldn't be used to generate the electricity needed to extract hydrogen from water, and then the hydrogen could be burned in the engine, and the free oxygen atoms could be used as an accelerant thus turning the alternator to keep the process going. Even if you had to have a small petroleum based fuel system to get it all started I would think it would be an improvement over burning straight fosil fuel.

Does anyone know how much energy is needed to extract hydrogen from water? Can someone tell me why that idea would not work? Would more energy be needed for hydrogen extraction than the alternator could produce?



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I have a bunch of new systems that I am coming up with but I cannot let my secret just run out everywhere
. But I can tell you this. By splitting the H2O, It would use Oxygen as its main gaseous source of energy. A higher percentage of Oxygen burns better than Hydrogen. But, with a special carb design that I call I.R.I.S or: Integrated Radial Intelligent Systems, which is basically an iris that will open or close for a ratio mixture for the H2O, which will be determined by how much power should be applied to the engine. That is the farthest that I can go into detail with that. I am inventing a method of "Hyper-Elecralisys", which will be the quick way to split the atoms. I am still trying to design it.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:56 PM
link   
>>>Does anyone know how much energy is needed to extract hydrogen from water?

Exactly as much as when you recombine it in a fuel cell minus thermal, and resistive losses, and far more than you would get out burning it in a reciprocating engine.

>>>Can someone tell me why that idea would not work?

Because you can't get more energy out of a system than you put in.

If the device could deliver overunity the inventor would be walking across the stage to pick up his Nobel Prize, not hawking tin cans on the internet.

>>>Would more energy be needed for hydrogen extraction than the alternator could produce?

Of course it would, otherwise everyone would have one in their car.

Many different water fuel devices have been around, and the only one that seems to work is the Pantone GEET, and it simply uses more of the thermal energy for expansion, and captures most of the waste fuel in the exhaust.

It is not a free energy machine, but you can get much better efficiancy with it in the right situation.

I don't think it would work well with a modern car.

All the sensors and computers can get all confuse with simply a lose wire, let alone a major mod like this.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 06:28 PM
link   
I think that this research is legitimate, but whether it pans out remains to be seen. I have seen news reports of this technology and have posted an article about it. If I were you, I would wait for this technology to hit the auto parts stores and maybe the auto manufacturers. The push is on to save energy and legitimate technology will not be found hiding in the hinterlands of magazine classifieds and the internet.

www.atsnn.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Thanks archangel. Thats what I was looking for. I know you can't get more energy pout of something than you put into it....yet; because it breaks the known laws of thermodynamics but I thought I would throw it out there anyway.

I am very interested in the work Somender Singh is doing with grooves and how they create turbulence in the combustion chamber which imporves efficancy

www.somender-singh.com...

and the work of Robert Krupa and his firestorm sparkplug invention/technology

www.nexusmagazine.com...

www.robertstanley.biz...

I think those 2 technologies used in conjunction with one another have the potential to produce some amazing results.



[edit on 17-11-2005 by warpboost]



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 07:46 PM
link   
quanthomme.free.fr...

Dozens of Pantone modified engines here.

Its in french, but the pictures are well worth the visit.



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by warpboost
Thanks archangel. Thats what I was looking for. I know you can't get more energy pout of something than you put into it....yet; because it breaks the known laws of thermodynamics but I thought I would throw it out there anyway.

FI am very interested in the work Somender Singh is doing with grooves and how they create turbulence in the combustion chamber which imporves efficancy

www.somender-singh.com...

and the work of Robert Krupa and his firestorm sparkplug invention/technology

www.nexusmagazine.com...

www.robertstanley.biz...

I think those 2 technologies used in conjunction with one another have the potential to produce some amazing results.



[edit on 17-11-2005 by warpboost]



Here's some more info on Somender Grooves.
Duplicated here: Fueleconomytips.com

Discussed here:
MPGResearch.com

Initial results are very promissing. Dyno testing in the works. Seat of pants power up noticeably. Mileage up as well.

As for Firestorm plugs last I heard From Robert, they were supposed to be out this month.

[edit on 2-2-2006 by iburnh2o]



posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Interesting stuff. Honestly I wish we had an automotive forum here. I frequent many other automotive forums and have never heard anything of these new technologies.

Im interested in this groove tech too, although Im a tiny bit skeptical about their claim of lower emissions. The article talks about significantly increasing combustion temperatures...which, as far as I know, would increase NOx emissions, one of the gases we try to control with all our smog regulations and emission systems.



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by PlausibleDeniability
Im interested in this groove tech too, although Im a tiny bit skeptical about their claim of lower emissions. The article talks about significantly increasing combustion temperatures...which, as far as I know, would increase NOx emissions, one of the gases we try to control with all our smog regulations and emission systems.


From speaking with Somender about the technology via email I believe the grooves create more turbulence in the combustion chamber which atomizes the fuel better and allows for a faster for effcient flame front which burns more of the fuel than if there wasn't a grove. I almost think of it like holding a flame to your hand, but this happens much faster. If you hold a flame to your hand for a few seconds you will get burned, but if you do it for a split second you wont get burned.I don't know if you have ever used a oxy acetylene torch but when you just burn the acetylene there is a lot of black soot from the flame, but as soon as your turn the oxygen on the flame becomes blue, gets much hotter and there is no soot at all.



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:13 AM
link   
The obvious problem with this, and other water splitting engines like the Pantone types is the initial use of electricity in the conversion...

and an alternator would barely start the process, much less help...

BUT! if the process was done with a home based electrolysis set up, run by windmill (free electricity).
The resulting gas would just be stored in the vehicle instead of produced in it, then yes, the addition of enough Hydrogen to the mix, would result in less gas used, without the loss (and perhaps increase) of power

all the "free energy" (wind, solar, geothermal, etc) are not free, but they are much less expensive, and if able to be maintained by the owner, could be almost free...
which in turn, would allow people to convert this free electricity to mobile use from a base station... in the form of converted Hydrogen, electric cars, and fuel cell cars...

it is the inherent problem with Fuel cells also... they work, but require hydrogen, and as we can see, hydrogen isn't free...



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:20 AM
link   
You better off just modifying your engine to take vegetable oil or peanut oil.


apc

posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   
I hadn't seen a commercial version of this before, but I am familiar with a local mechanic that has integrated a similar hydrogen system in his truck. I do not know the details of his operation. He has so far noted a max 15% increase in mileage. His goal is 25%.


J_3

posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Yes it works well. I have not used that model, I built one myself about 1 year ago. It is very easy to assemble, all you need is a container two metal tubes and essentially you will be burning the hydrogen produced, with the gasoline - making your car a hybrid, very efficient. However, you could easily build one that works just as well for well under $20 dollars.. I wasn't suprised though when I saw 200.00



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Years ago some guy appeared on CNN running his Porsche with 50 per cent water mixed with gasoline and a special fuel injection system. He mixed the gasoline by using some emulsifying agent in small quantity. People looked at it and found lower emissions, and basically doubling gas mileage. Why did it work? Some said it was making your engine partially steam. Of course the entire story disappeared, especially after the oil companies bought the guy out.



posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Anyone heard of Aquafuel?

jlnlabs.online.fr...

This site will teach you to build a simple POC.

www.blazelabs.com...

And this site has a comparision between Gasoline and Aquafuel.





posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by brodband
But, with a special carb design that I call I.R.I.S or: Integrated Radial Intelligent Systems,


Just a thought.. but I think it makes more sense to call it Iintegrated Radial INDUCTION System(s)...



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join