Go Back   Cruiser Log World Cruising & Sailing Forums > Cruising Forums > The Bosun's Locker > Engines | Propulsion | Generators
Cruiser Wiki

Join Cruiser Log Today

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-23-2014, 11:36 PM   #15
Moderator
 
redbopeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Home Port: Washington DC
Vessel Name: SV Mahdee
Posts: 3,185
Default

"Someone with a mechanical engineering degree could probably comment on how accurate or otherwise my numbers are, I'm sure I've missed something somewhere but it still doesn't seem to add up."

Del, I do have a mechanical engineering degree, and my quick numbers (when originally reading the info posted before your last post) made me think I was off by an order of magnitude--therefore I must be wrong and not understanding this at all. Your numbers look similar to mine--so you're getting numbers also off by an order of magnitude of what is needed for this to be cost effective to use. Perhaps another more knowledgeable ME or process engineer will come along to share something neither of us is getting.
__________________

__________________
"Do or do not. There is no try." - Yoda

What we're doing - The sailing life aboard and the Schooner Chandlery.

redbopeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2014, 07:06 AM   #16
Admiral
 
haiqu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Home Port: Sydney
Vessel Name: Keppelena & Shenoa
Posts: 1,379
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by delatbabel View Post
I've read the paper and I now think that there's some (although limited) merit in it.

...

I still wish that the people selling these kits referred to the actual scientific paper and used proper scientific / engineering terms for what they are selling, rather than pseudo-science.
The paper was written in 2010 whereas the "pseudoscience" has been around since the 1970s. Sometimes you need to invent new terms and concepts to describe anomalous behaviour.

Quote:
The main concerns that I have now are as follows:

From the paper, it appears that you need to inject somewhere between 3% and 10% of the total diesel fuel volume (allowing for experimental error and combustion chamber inefficiencies) of H2 and O2 into the fuel stream to gain this efficiency. That means, say, around 5% of total liquid volume. When you separate water into H2 and O2 the gas takes up many many more times the total liquid volume, so you have to be careful to base these calculations on liquid volume not gas to liquid volume.

That means, if you're carrying, say, a 100 litre diesel fuel tank you also need to carry a 25 litre water tank, and top up the water each time you top up the diesel.
The paper talks of "diesel equivalent" and states an optimum of 6%. Since the calorific value of hydrogen is 131,000 kJ/kg vs diesel's 44,000 and since 44% of the water converts into H2 the extra water needed to supplement 100L of diesel is less than 8L.

Quote:
You also need to generate enough electricity to separate that 25 litres of water, in its entirety, into the gaseous components H2 and O2. That's a non trivial amount of energy, however the exact amount of electrical energy required will vary quite markedly depending on the H2O solution that you're using -- separating "pure" liquid water into H2 and O2 is a very inefficient process and takes much more energy than just the electrolysis process would indicate, but the efficiency increases and the amount of total energy required decreases as you add electrolytes to the solution. However it's never 100% efficient and still requires a large amount of electricity.
I refer you to page two of the paper, which states: "The power needed to produce the H2/O2 mixture is included as an input energy to the engine." In other words, they allowed for that in the charts.

The Epoch EP-500 converter used is not what I'd call the latest technology. I assume it's running brute force DC and getting less than Faraday figures (N.B. I've queried the author of the paper to get actual conversion efficiency, without which it seems the paper is meaningless. So much for "real science").

Homemade converters using pulses along the lines of Meyer's work easily achieve 3X that figure, and I can refer you to a Japanese paper that shows 80X Faraday using plasmas.

Just for shits and giggles, here's a video of Eric Kreig, probably the most vocal opponent of alternative fuels and especially HHO, which until recently he considered "just another scam". One of the manufacturers of these devices took up his challenge and proved to him that it works. His car went from 22MPG to 37MPG.

__________________

__________________
"The cure for anything is salt water... sweat, tears, or the sea" -- Isak Dinesen

I've Contributed to the Cruisers Wiki: All sections
haiqu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2014, 01:36 PM   #17
Admiral
 
haiqu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Home Port: Sydney
Vessel Name: Keppelena & Shenoa
Posts: 1,379
Default

OK, that last was just a bit tongue-in-cheek. Kreig later recanted, as all skeptics are wont to do. It seems the converter used in the test had some plating problems and he saw this as reason enough to disqualify the result, along with reservations about the pump clicking off at the same time.

Yes, I'm sure that would account for the 68% improvement in fuel economy ...

Here's that paper about plasma conversion of H2/O2 gas.

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgeneration.pdf
__________________

__________________
"The cure for anything is salt water... sweat, tears, or the sea" -- Isak Dinesen

I've Contributed to the Cruisers Wiki: All sections
haiqu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Steel hull costs kyle.meidlinger General Cruising Forum 0 03-26-2013 02:46 PM
Med Berthing Costs? garylitten General Cruising Forum 4 09-16-2011 10:16 PM
Avoid Eritrean Ports At All Costs. Lighthouse Regional Discussion Topics 0 02-28-2011 08:37 PM
Project Boat Costs Peter Owen The Poop Deck 7 11-14-2007 07:34 PM
Cruising costs willskene General Cruising Forum 48 08-20-2007 04:46 PM

Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0