why all "water car/hydrogen generators" are scams

[superdave1984]

make sure if you do this you watch EVERY angle. You must watch the o2 sensor as this will throw the whole reading of the computer off due to the added oxygen (air) amount. Also and I know it might sound dumb but do very thorough tests when building it, idk what design you plan on yousing but make sure the thing can carry current before you even test it. An easy way to do this is to have a spare housing without the top cap and you hook up some smaller jumper cables to the unit and power it on. Also be sure to use baking soda otherwise its pretty pointless as it can't split fast enough. But yea other then that this is pretty foolproof.

I have a friend who signed up for this class.
http://www.ttcmckenzie.edu/
We will use his Escape for the test mule. We thought it would at the very least be interesting and something to do to counter boredom. Like I said in a previous post, if these things fail miserably, this school will lose all credibility for years to come.

 

[MAKG]

This is too funny.

How can you monitor the injector pulse width? Its FN easy. A $15 duty cycle meter (or an old-fashioned dwellmeter) will do it. These often come in handheld multimeters. I have both in mine, along with a tachometer, diode tester, and all the usual DVOM functions (i.e., it's rather full-featured), and I spent a whopping $65 on it.

It's not as hard to prove this is bullshit than you think it is.

Dude, you're spouting random garbage. And the stolen quotation I'm referring to is NOT the one you quoted, but the "definitions" you gave for catalyst and reactant. Admit it, you looked them up in a dictionary (perhaps online) and didn't even parse them, let alone understand them. A catalyst is something that produces catalysis.....very funny.

You ARE NOT going to bluster your way through this. You don't understand it, and your attempts to pretend you do make it even more obvious you don't. I don't know where you get away with that kind of BS, but we just aren't the idiots you think we are.

As for "something that has been done cannot be proved impossible," you're giving credibility to false (and in some cases misguided) claims. There have been claims that communicable diseases such as TB have been cured by leeches. There were claims that the Black Death was caused by impure air. People even make claims of alien abductions and Bigfoot sightings, and occasionally identify things like balloons and even the Moon as UFOs. So, next time you get a disease, forego the antibiotics. 'Cause it's "proven" that leeches work, in the same manner that it's "proven" that monkeys fly out of your butt or that one can create energy from nothing.

 

[phatcap]

beefstew, please enlighten us as to how the hho unit saves gas if the fuel injector is spraying the same amount of fuel into the cylinder whether the thing is on or off?

 

[rboyer]

I think beefstew missed his ride on the spacecraft that was following the Hale Bopp Comet!

 

[phatcap]

 

[baddad457]

beefstew, please enlighten us as to how the hho unit saves gas if the fuel injector is spraying the same amount of fuel into the cylinder whether the thing is on or off?

I see you haven't paid attention in this class. Musta been sleeping in the section where the computer program was modified.

 

[superdave1984]

beefstew, please enlighten us as to how the hho unit saves gas if the fuel injector is spraying the same amount of fuel into the cylinder whether the thing is on or off?

To be fair, it said it pulsed at the same time interval and for the same duration. It didn't say same volume of fuel. I think the computer hits the injectors with the timing of the engine so regardless that would not change. For all we know it leaned the mixture or richened it. The guy didn't do any MPG testing, just fuel pulse tests.

 

[krugford]

The amount of fuel delivered would depend on the fuel pressure, which isn't controlled by the ECU.

 

[superdave1984]

Not necessarily. The computer can control the fuel pressure regulator.

 

[rboyer]

They're talking about Pulse Width. Think about it for a minute. It's how many milliseconds the injector stays open for.

 

[krugford]

Maybe I've missed something with all the vacuum controled fuel pressure regulators I've seen on the various vehicles I've owned. Care to explain how the computer controls that?

 

[Jason]

Maybe I've missed something with all the vacuum controled fuel pressure regulators I've seen on the various vehicles I've owned. Care to explain how the computer controls that?

I am not saying this IS how it's done but there are a few electrically control vacuum solenoids.

 

[MAKG]

Maybe I've missed something with all the vacuum controled fuel pressure regulators I've seen on the various vehicles I've owned. Care to explain how the computer controls that?

It doesn't. It controls how long the valves (injectors) are open at each stroke. The fuel pressure regulator is irrelevant as long as the pressure is high enough.

The claims about messing with the mixture are wrong. There is an oxygen sensor that will keep the mixture close to stoichiometric for the fuel being used, within broad bounds (and it goes out of bounds when the injector pulse width maxes out -- detectible with the test).

The pulse width measurement is a good idea. If you mess with the mixture, you'll see the computer adapt there. That it's not seen means the mixture isn't being messed with.

 

[BeefStew42791]

How can you monitor the injector pulse width? Its FN easy. A $15 duty cycle meter (or an old-fashioned dwellmeter) will do it. These often come in handheld multimeters. I have both in mine, along with a tachometer, diode tester, and all the usual DVOM functions (i.e., it's rather full-featured), and I spent a whopping $65 on it.

It's not as hard to prove this is bullshit than you think it is.

Dude, you're spouting random garbage. And the stolen quotation I'm referring to is NOT the one you quoted, but the "definitions" you gave for catalyst and reactant. Admit it, you looked them up in a dictionary (perhaps online) and didn't even parse them, let alone understand them. A catalyst is something that produces catalysis.....very funny.

You ARE NOT going to bluster your way through this. You don't understand it, and your attempts to pretend you do make it even more obvious you don't. I don't know where you get away with that kind of BS, but we just aren't the idiots you think we are.

As for "something that has been done cannot be proved impossible," you're giving credibility to false (and in some cases misguided) claims. There have been claims that communicable diseases such as TB have been cured by leeches. There were claims that the Black Death was caused by impure air. People even make claims of alien abductions and Bigfoot sightings, and occasionally identify things like balloons and even the Moon as UFOs. So, next time you get a disease, forego the antibiotics. 'Cause it's "proven" that leeches work, in the same manner that it's "proven" that monkeys fly out of your butt or that one can create energy from nothing.

Sorry guys, it took me kind of a while to get back here. I had to deal with a family emergency but its all good.
Thanks for lettin me know how to do that, I didn't realize it was that easy.

Anyway though I have a message as it relates to everything else..

You have turned this from a scientific discussion to a pathetic pointless attack on my personal knowledge. You asked for a definition of the terms you brought up, which is exactly what you got. Yes, the direct definition of a catalyst is "the primary agent behind catalysis". I however did not just leave it at that I also gave the definition of catalysis, which is as I said, a process with the result of the speeding up of a chemical reaction. This was a purposeful door left open for you to show how much knowledge YOU had about this, which you either ignored completely or could not walk through. The way a catalyst works is it lowers the activation energy of a chemical reaction. This enables a reaction that normally would require a lot of energy, such as seperating a water molecule into its basic elemental foundation, to function at a much lower energy. This is how running the generator off the car's electrical system is possible. Furthermore this even more so disproves your argument of the physical laws being violated because for proper catalysis to have taken place the equilibrium of the chemical reaction CANNOT be affected. This then even is a demonstration of the very laws you talk about. You see, there is not 1 chemical reaction in this process, however someone may try to twist it. There is the seperation of the water into hydrogen and oxygen, and AFTERWARDS in a totally different closed access system there is the reverse application of the reaction, the combustion (and therefore oxidation) of the hydrogen making water vapor. And as for you accusing me of looking definitions up in a dictionary, is that not what its for? Even so, I had no need for a dictionary, as this is taught in any high school chemistry course

Your referring to mythological and downright absurd "sightings" have no relevancy to this discussion. Yes many make claims that are far fetched in their statements as a way to rip people off. BUT to indirectly accuse me of making misguided and false claims is totally absurd because this cannot only be proven by scientific reasons but also has been examined, studied, and experimented with. These are not just sightings or botched videotapes or photoshopped pictures. There are real results from real experiments performed by real people. It doesn't matter if it goes against the status quo and you want to hear it or not, this can work. And once again you are right, energy cannot be made from nothing. But for real, energy cannot be made at all. Energy is converted from one process to the next which is exactly how this system runs, a constant conversion of electricity starting from the same place everything else does on your car..the battery.

 

[BeefStew42791]

beefstew, please enlighten us as to how the hho unit saves gas if the fuel injector is spraying the same amount of fuel into the cylinder whether the thing is on or off?

Certainly. And actually baddad there is no tampering with the computer programming required. A congruent amount of hydrogen takes the place of the gasoline. How? After gasoline is combusted in the cylinder and the exhaust gases are forced out of the cylinder there is nothing in the cylinder. Therefore when the exhaust valve closes and the piston begins to fall again a vacuum is created and thus is how fuel becomes sucked into the cylinder once it passes the injector, as I'm sure we are all well aware. I am sure we're all also aware the hydrogen, as does everything else, takes up a volume of space. Thus when hydrogen is introduced into the system, it now must work with the gasoline in how much volume the two take up. An equilibrium must be reached. This is why the more hydrogen you can get into your system, the better, because it means less room for gasoline to work with. This is why I do not trust the article by allen or whoever his name was from popular mechanics.

As Dave brought out, if I may borrow from your statement, there was no mpg testing. For all we know based on allen's lack of forth coming with information there is a huge range of variables. For example, was there was not enough hydrogen generated? As has been stated there is a range that the o2 sensor will accept as is related to how rich or lean the engine will be allowed to burn before the computerized equipment kicks in. This is what makes me think not enough hydrogen was generated, there simply was not enough to make a noticeable impact. A catalyst is needed.