Pure Hydrogen Fuel Supplementation

The Purpose of this thread is to Share knowledge which you do not have with you
so broaden your understanding .

The facts are there and what we are doing is putting the mis information you have in perspective

to show you the path


Estimating Water Use - Per LPM of HHO
*I have been asked, many times, how much water the Cells use per hour. I think, now, I can shed some light on the subject. It is not an easy answer, but I think I have enough information to get you in the ball park.We are told that, 1 Liter of water can make 1860 Liters of HHO gas. That is, 1000 Milliliters of water can make 1860 Liters of HHO, or 1,860,000 Milliliters. Thus, 1 Milliliter of water can make 1.86 Liters of HHO, or 1860 Milliliters.
LPM x 1000 / 1860 = Milliliters Per Minute of Water** x 60 = Milliliters Per Hour

What percentage of hydrogen and oxygen are in water? You have to be more specific about what % value you want
You can consider a volume %:
Water consista of 2 volumes hydrogen and 1 volume oxygen
That is:
Hydrogen - 66.67% by volume
Oxygen - 33.33% by volume

Alternatively you can think of the % as a mass %:
Molar mass of water = 18g/mol
1mol of water will consist of 2g of hydrogen and 16g of oxygen
Mass % hydrogen = 2/18*100 = 11.11%
Mass % oxygen = 16/18*100 = 88.89%

NOTE we are ONLY TALKING ABOUT Supplementation to raise the CN NUMBER of the
fuel to give you clean burn and higher yield

per litre purchase of the fuel

 

Please advise me that there is something with those numbers.

ONce you work out that it is very straight forward and no smoke or mirrors

Ask your 12 year old to work out for you how much fuel

you have wasted
over the last 10 years by not being aware of this.

I am here simply to share the information correctly.

 

I'm going to have to agree with the people that are a bit skeptical on this. Basic scientific methods outline a basic proof of concept. Test results showing a with and without delta of any idea will prove/disprove a theory. Richard Feynmen made a solid point in that one cannot take the results of earlier experiments and start there as a base or foundation. You have to start again to get a baseline. Only then can you experiment with the baseline to see if things change for better or worse. Another thing is not to be close minded to people that know things you don't. I admit to a lack of chemistry background, but do have a fundamental knowledge of physics and basic math. The whole browns gas and unicorn fuel thing plays into the marketing and advertising that gets people to think hybrid cars are a good idea. Sorry for the rant, it's been building for some time

 

You'll find my Maths in an earlier post, Very similar apart from

I used YOUR number of 1 Gallon per 24 hours, AND I gave an answer.

Simple questions;-

1) is that Gallon (1 US Gal = 3.78 litre) per day correct

2) What size (Cubic Capacity in litres or Cubic Inches) make and type of diesel engine would be YOUR ideal for that 24v @ 4a

3) Are you saying 10-18% by volume of Hydrogen added to the air charge at the intake of the engine?

 

I have an idea...form a complete idea based on real world, scientific experiment and publish the results! Speculation and opinion don't mean anything without proof. It starts with a baseline of known numbers such as horsepower per gallon per hour of fuel consumption. Add to that the wonders of your unicorn fuel and the DOCUMENTED results of said unicorn. Otherwise you are wasting your time with educated people that can see through your hogwash. I suspect there will be a few Prius owners that would be more than willing to send credit card numbers to buy your useless fluff. Nuff said

 

The improvement in combustion by adding anything is not possible, because a modern engine burns efficiently more than 97 per cent of fuel. So if is right the HHO helps to burn, the maximum of savings will be at maximum 3% , what is not in reality a saving because the systems to produce Browns gas lose some energy too, bigger than this. The 30% efficiency of Otto engine (in petrol 4 str.), or termodinamic efficiency, is not related with the fuel, but a characteristic of the system independently of the fuel used (this imply from the heat generated by the combustion just the 30% will convert im motion) and 70% will be losed ever. For diesel the efficiency is a bit bigger but ever under the same concept or principle.

HHO systems are fake. In USA several "companyes" stop operating because the number of prosecutions against them. In several States some persons was procesed by the law.
Sorry for my english, somebody can explain also how gases won't be measured by volume -they occupy any volume depending temperature and pressure and must be measured in mass or Newtons- and how termodinamics laws works (also using solar energy, the heat will produce loses of efficiency, and any electrolisis produces heat). Another thing is HHO tends to explode ever, to return to H2O, so is not safe.
I tryed several years ago in an old car, can improve an old engine burn indeed, but not worth the effort in a new or big engine (my car was a Lancia Delta 1500 year 91).

 

This is not HHO

 

OUr Titanium Plates

Electron exchange split gas Membrane

OUr Controller for heat and freeing control

OUr Split gas pure hydrogen production

OUr ability to control and meter mix

Our ability ti feed into engines in multi separate or co join points

Our ability to change ecu also and feed direct ot 1 stag 2nd stage or
tps staged injection

OUr ability to compress and store in metal hydride at low pressure
or tanks with our special compressor

Low low amp and high volt control

===============================================
Are all very different from HHO
which is mixed uncontrolled loose fed gas, often made from stainless
or others with no control and over heat and fail

People often approach with no idea or training on what they are doing

Hence we made this thread to show the clear differences


===============================================

These are the differences I am teaching you here

You are un aware of these things hence I have start this thread to start your learning of this advancing subject

You have already paid for fuel and not received the full benefit for 10 years

Will you do it for the next 10 years?

 

The improvement in combustion by adding anything is not possible,

What a joke? are you serious? you are very foolish to post that ?


because a modern engine burns efficiently more than 97 per cent of fuel.

complete bs no modern diesel engine get any where close to that

that is for sale and affordable we are talking real engine and real use .
the diesel marine engines are at best 70 complete burn. NOTE it

I am not talk wild numbers form the internet in a panic to discredit a thread
numbers put out to confuse you by petro guys.

===================================================================
I am talking FUEL and
FUEL BURN the % not any things else, if you confused just leave thread.


The 30% gain is from the addition of hydrogen % to unlock the unburn fuel potential.
that is the gain. Learn it.

("So if is right the HHO helps to burn, the maximum of savings will be at maximum 3% ,???????????
what is not in reality a saving because the systems to produce Browns gas lose some energy too, bigger than this. ??????")
================================================
This is not brownes gas not hho not hydroxy,!!!!!
================================
as all of those are random mixed and not measurable and not able to control the gas separate thus,

just like if you used any fuel in a random mix uncontrolled fashion you will get mixed crap results

NOt sure why you would post that trying to say they are the same?
That is why I am educating you here, the difference they are not same and very different

==========================================================================
What we have is split gas pure hydrogen from electron exchange membranes

this provides control and high quality gas hydrogen and oxygen separate for precise meter micing or injection

PLEASE NOTE THAT.
===========================================================================

The 30% efficiency of Otto engine (in petrol 4 str.),

We are talking diesel not petrol.!!!! so not sure why you would post that ?

or termodinamic efficiency, is not related with the fuel, really ? Wrong! as we are talking diesel LOL you made a big mistake there again!!!

Your wrong if your going to clip things from wiki clip the full information please do not mislead.

===========================================================================
When expressed as a percentage,
the thermal efficiency must be between 0% and 100%.

Efficiency is typically less than 100% because there are inefficiencies such as friction and heat loss that convert the energy into alternative forms.

For example, a typical gasoline automobile engine operates at around 25% efficiency,
and a large coal-fueled electrical generating plant peaks at about 46%.

The largest diesel engine in the world peaks at 51.7%. In a combined cycle plant, thermal efficiencies are approaching 60%.[2] Such a real-world value may be used as a figure of merit for the device.

For engines where a fuel is burned there are two types of thermal efficiency: indicated thermal efficiency and brake thermal efficiency.[3] This efficiency is only appropriate when comparing similar types or similar devices.

For other systems the specifics of the calculations of efficiency vary but the non dimensional input is still the same.

Efficiency = Output energy / input energy

==========================================================================

You continue here

but a characteristic of the system independently of the fuel used (this imply from the heat generated by the combustion just the 30% will convert im motion) Your completely WRONG as stated above.
==========================================================================

We are saying clearly we have Fuel Supplementation
and that a hydrogen % allow for a more complete burn as a better fuel mix

it supplements a % and unlocks the the complete burn of fuel normal wasted in the diesel engine 30% + So ( h%+30%) = gain

=============================================================================
and 70% will be losed ever. not sure how to read your BS here as you have now just posted crap .

=============================================================================

For diesel the efficiency over all other engines is a bit bigger but ever under the same concept or principle.

Wrong ,

We are looking at the Complete burn or not complete burn of efficiency nothing else. Termodinamic efficiency LOL

IF you pay for 10 litre of diesel fuel and only burn 70% you loose 30% of your money

If you add hydrogen pure and meter mix it and or meter mix oxygen to match all the various engines combos as required

you gain the % hydrogen displaces + the 30% gain

for completely burning the fuel you already paying for

The purpose of this thread is to

Raise awareness of the technology advances
and the new applications solar wind, storage generator and fuel supplementation all of which where not possible before


I am here to answer question about the tech and help present the correct information
you can research this in depth

I have made a DIY guide and website to aid the process.

www.securesupplies.biz

I am here to share the tech.

I respect your various skills and knowledge and that is why I am here

as I know after you
research it and apply your knowledge and skills you will help change the world from fossil fuels.


d

 

>This is Pure Hydrogen split gas , controlled and meter mixed by
separated feed or direct injected as Hydrogen ONLY <

So why is the Oxygen not also captured and added to the combustion process?

O2 burns , and you paid the electric bill to split it out.

Although the cost of fuel is in decline for at least the next couple of decades , it still is a large percentage of most operating budgets.

Where are the large companies that run 500+ trucks?
Where are the ships that eat tons of fuel per hour , and are in the sights of the Air Police?

I would think the folks with 7 to 9 figure annual fuel bills would be beating down your doors.

Or are they immune to BOOB BAIT?

 

"Seccure Supplyers"
Please not call me "foolish" neither invite me to leave this forum because you come here with commercial interest and I'm not new here. Before call me anything just support your own commercial post.
So, you come to teach? Better if you go to teach to university.
I'm not talking about any internet data, the only internet data is what you still bringing. This is not a forum of or enthusiasts in new energyes but of people who needs to rely in the efectiveness of their engines for matter of life or death.
Yes, the internal combustion engine is as I described, and before qualify me bring support to the opposite, what can looks more serious. If not I will denounce your posts as spam.
So please don't mess with me because I don't mess with you, I just talking about your parascientifical data.
Be polite and with respect you can go anywhere.

 

http://www.infobae.com/2006/02/14/238421-el-primer-rompehielos-que-funciona-motor-agua-llego-ushuaia
(In the link an Icebreaker that works with water added to the fuel and went to Antartica. More can be researched).

This is real, better efficiency can be achieved by vaporizing water in the engine or adding it to the fuel, is an old and simple technology that was used in racing cars too and comes from WWII airplanes. The new I showing is old, from 2006 and I know in person the designers.
So put a boat in the water for a few months with and without your technology and show to the world the comparisons.
Other question is if worth the effort, and the answer is not. The better efficiency can be achieved with any well tunned and maintaned engine with any addition to compromise how was designed by the engineers. Anything you add to a medern engine will create unnecesary complications. New engines still being designed each time better, and yes, the efficiency of an Otto system about input-output won't be improved, and the fuel burnt is 97 percent actually, any engineer knows this.
I think you fail the forum, you need to go to a mechanical engineers forum, this forum have another function.

 

So why is the Oxygen not also captured and added to the combustion process?

O2 burns , and you paid the electric bill to split it out.

Although the cost of fuel is in decline for at least the next couple of decades , it still is a large percentage of most operating budgets.

Where are the large companies that run 500+ trucks?
Where are the ships that eat tons of fuel per hour , and are in the sights of the Air Police?

I would think the folks with 7 to 9 figure annual fuel bills would be beating down your doors.

Yes we are doing ok ,

We have oxygen and yes we do apply it for some installs mostly as a separate line in different location than H but on gasoline it is not applied as the hy bypasses all sensors with no changes to ecu

and there are many variations of engines and installs

 

There is a mix of claims like "the output can be measured", but no explanation of how. The rest is the typical sales pitch with a lot of pseudo-science and no substance.
Secure Supplies: you are not going to be successful selling anything in this forum with the same method you would advertise in Mother Jones or Hippiemagazine. We demand proof and will challenge you for it. Long rambling posts only make you look less honest and credible. Make them short and include experimental data and documentation.

 

Suggest you do the research here

www.securesupplies.biz it has a DIY section for you to learn after you know every thing even more that you think you know now you can discuss

THis thread is simply to highlight
many misunderstandings which are common I have clarified a lot of them for you so at least you can see there has been a major advance.

I will post things here from time to time to allow for update for people following

as the tech progresses.


Dan