The moring coffe, and thought crossed my mind...

[ydeardorff]

Hey guys/gals,

Now Im sure, Im missing a lot on this thought. But it crossed my mind today as I am waking up and getting my day going starting with a fresh pot of coffee.

So here goes....

Take any internal combustion engine....
Im wondering if we've been thinking about this all wrong, or at least in part.
Now hydroxy gas has broken water into 1-O and 2-H's. So in theory here (its an early morning still drinking coffee theory so don't blast me) When hydroxy is combusted it reverts back into water vapor, and oxygen, yes? Okay, so if this could be reclaimed, and split again we wouldn't need 500+ LPM on a hydrogen booster, would we? The idea here is in physics nothing is destroyed it is just re-arranged.

Quote from wikipedia ( I know its not the most reliable source)

A pure stoichiometric mixture may be obtained by water electrolysis, which uses an electric current to dissociate the water molecules:

electrolysis: 2 H2O → 2 H2 + O2 (corrected) H2O -> H2 + O
combustion: 2 H2 + O2 → 2 H2O (corrected) H2+ O -> H2O

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxy_gas


So since we would be re-introducing the same gases already used, and splitting the condensed water vapor back into hydrogen, the engine would need less, or no fresh intake air. The engine would be re-using the gases it already used ad be supplemented as needed with fresh hydroxy gas that was reclaimed from the prior combustion process.

My thought here is that in an engine design that has largely remained unchanged for nearly 100 years. The air pump that is a gasoline engine might need a larger rethinking if hydrogen were to be a primary fuel source.

Is this idea perfect? of course not. There are other gases like NO, CO, and CO2 to contend with. But Im wondering about the feasibility of this idea of a recycling engine. Even if the engine is only using the gases more efficiently, rather than a completely closed system.

The issue here I think would be more heat removal (exhaust temps are hot), and water vapor reclamation, and splitting speed. The HHO device via a sensor would only need to maintain the hho content at a proper ratio, rather than trying to compete with the CFM of the intake pulling in fresh air. Or would the same problem still be production rate of the cell?

Thoughts?

[RustyLugNut]

Hey guys/gals,

Now Im sure, Im missing a lot on this thought. But it crossed my mind today as I am waking up and getting my day going starting with a fresh pot of coffee.

So here goes....

Take any internal combustion engine....
Im wondering if we've been thinking about this all wrong, or at least in part.
Now hydroxy gas has broken water into 1-O and 2-H's. So in theory here (its an early morning still drinking coffee theory so don't blast me) When hydroxy is combusted it reverts back into water vapor, and oxygen, yes? Okay, so if this could be reclaimed, and split again we wouldn't need 500+ LPM on a hydrogen booster. The idea here is in physics nothing is destroyed it is just re-arranged.

Quote from wikipedia ( I know its not the most reliable source)

A pure stoichiometric mixture may be obtained by water electrolysis, which uses an electric current to dissociate the water molecules:

electrolysis: 2 H2O → 2 H2 + O2 (corrected) H2O -> H2 + O
combustion: 2 H2 + O2 → 2 H2O (corrected) H2+ O -> H2O

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxy_gas


So since we would be re-introducing the left over oxygen, and splitting the condensed water vapor back into hydrogen, the engine would need less, or no fresh intake air. The engine would be re-using the gases it already used ad be supplemented as needed with fresh hydroxy gas that was reclaimed from the prior combustion process.

My thought here is that in an engine design that has largely remained unchanged for nearly 100 years. The air pump that is a gasoline engine might need a larger rethinking if hydrogen were to be a primary fuel source.

Is this idea perfect? of course not. There are other gases like NO, CO, and CO2 to contend with. But Im wondering about the feasibility of this idea of a recycling engine. Even if the engine is only using the gases more efficiently, rather than a completely closed system.

The issue here I think would be more heat removal (exhaust temps are hot), and water vapor reclamation speed. The HHO device via a sensor would only need to maintain the hho content at a proper ratio, rather than trying to compete with the CFM of the intake pulling in fresh air.

Thoughts?

First off, there is no excess oxygen if all you are combusting is a stoichiometric mix of HHO. There is no nitrogen present so no NOx production and the small amounts of CO and CO2 would come from your lubricant slip.

HHO combustion is very rapid - almost an explosion. Heat production is tremendous but with the small amounts of HHO we can produce, and the extended expansion cycle that will result (Atkinson cycle - aka Prius) exhaust temperature will be relatively low. Condensation of the exhaust vapors can be made relatively rapid.

The problem is making the HHO rapidly enough. That is the bottom line and your limiting variable. "Power in" minus process losses means you will be losing energy in your "closed cycle" which isn't really closed since you will be extracting work from it and you will lose work in the condenser. Throw in friction and heat losses and pumping losses to boot and you come up with the need for a LARGE electrical input needed just to idle the engine on HHO.

[ydeardorff]

yeah I figured as much. Seemed like a good idea. At least in part. Seems it all comes down to the cell production rate again.:mad: Even with hydrogen releasing 3 times the energy of gasoline its still not enough.
Although I have experimented with the corrosion cell theory in my cell designs. And found pairing more reactive metals with each other leads to greater production at lower amperage. See (corrosion cell)
Its still not enough though. Makes me ponder what is the road block here in our designs.

[RustyLugNut]

Its still not enough though. Makes me ponder what is the road block here in our designs.

Our understanding of it is what limits us. That is why we continue to prod the edges of our understanding ( basic research ) so that we can see avenues to applications.

What you have suggested is a dead end. But many of the principles discussed could/can be used to improve the internal combustion engine. The Atkinson cycle ( over expansion ) is already used in the Prius and other commercial engines. Reduced ring seal friction is a big percentage gain in efficiency that manufacturers are working on. Reduced pumping losses via non- throttled operation (Diesels and other compression ignition systems) is an obvious application. Even the idea of running pure oxygen and hydrocarbon fuel to eliminate NOx and increase operating temperatures has been tried. HHO can be part of the equation in improving the efficiency of the IC engine.

If you want an efficient closed loop heat engine, study the Stirling engine.

[Madsceintist]

Hey guys/gals,

Now Im sure, Im missing a lot on this thought. But it crossed my mind today as I am waking up and getting my day going starting with a fresh pot of coffee.

So here goes....

Take any internal combustion engine....
Im wondering if we've been thinking about this all wrong, or at least in part.
Now hydroxy gas has broken water into 1-O and 2-H's. So in theory here (its an early morning still drinking coffee theory so don't blast me) When hydroxy is combusted it reverts back into water vapor, and oxygen, yes? Okay, so if this could be reclaimed, and split again we wouldn't need 500+ LPM on a hydrogen booster, would we? The idea here is in physics nothing is destroyed it is just re-arranged.

Quote from wikipedia ( I know its not the most reliable source)

A pure stoichiometric mixture may be obtained by water electrolysis, which uses an electric current to dissociate the water molecules:

electrolysis: 2 H2O → 2 H2 + O2 (corrected) H2O -> H2 + O
combustion: 2 H2 + O2 → 2 H2O (corrected) H2+ O -> H2O

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxy_gas


So since we would be re-introducing the same gases already used, and splitting the condensed water vapor back into hydrogen, the engine would need less, or no fresh intake air. The engine would be re-using the gases it already used ad be supplemented as needed with fresh hydroxy gas that was reclaimed from the prior combustion process.

My thought here is that in an engine design that has largely remained unchanged for nearly 100 years. The air pump that is a gasoline engine might need a larger rethinking if hydrogen were to be a primary fuel source.

Is this idea perfect? of course not. There are other gases like NO, CO, and CO2 to contend with. But Im wondering about the feasibility of this idea of a recycling engine. Even if the engine is only using the gases more efficiently, rather than a completely closed system.

The issue here I think would be more heat removal (exhaust temps are hot), and water vapor reclamation, and splitting speed. The HHO device via a sensor would only need to maintain the hho content at a proper ratio, rather than trying to compete with the CFM of the intake pulling in fresh air. Or would the same problem still be production rate of the cell?

Thoughts?





Ah, I see I do have a calling here.....................
You ydeardorff, would do well to study Stan Meyers work extremely close as I think you may have more ambition to complete the task that I have found to be be most factual. Stan did exactly what you are theorizing. I knew when I first found 'HHO" that with the first few experiments that it could be a direct replacement not just an addition to or supplement for gasoline.
I had a Chevrolet Cavalier that I drove on this concept, and a Toyota Corolla as well, which is under reconstruction for higher compression. As I am reading your post, I am truly excited to hear someone else that has the same for-site. I hope that you will not give up on this as it is very time consuming and difficult, BUT well worth it. I will give you what ever advise that I can, and help you in the right direction when needed.
DO NOT LET SOME ON HERE DISMISS THIS AS IMPOSSIBLE OR FRAUDULENT, it will be up to you to decide when you find the truth.




This isn't a completely closed loop cycle at all, but you have the correct set-up in mind. As I have said many, many times, you have to process everything that goes in to the engine. Air, water, exhaust all are processed to a needed structure, then measured to a required amount, and used as the fuel to run the car. The only fuel is completely processed out of water, PLAIN water !!


P.M. me if you wish........

[ydeardorff]

If I did try to play with this idea. It would be on something tiny like a 4 stroke weed whacker motor or something that my cell will easily keep up with.
But Im sure, the learned people here would more than likely proven right. But it would be fun to come up with something that worked, even if it had no actual use.
I just find it fun to experiment. seeing and understanding the results is fun. Plus it keeps me busy.

[Madsceintist]

If I did try to play with this idea. It would be on something tiny like a 4 stroke weed whacker motor or something that my cell will easily keep up with.
But Im sure, the learned people here would more than likely proven right. But it would be fun to come up with something that worked, even if it had no actual use.
I just find it fun to experiment. seeing and understanding the results is fun. Plus it keeps me busy.



You will love this than............
http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=FLlF3chy0AEACsijp7TqLZGg&feature=player_detailpage&v=Hy88V4CWgJ0

[ydeardorff]

If it were in english that would have been better.
Seeing it run would have been nice too.

Looks like he is using a custom made circuit powered by the engine coil positive and negative terminals. The white gears on the back are some sort of gear reduction for the generator. The stick on the big gear cant turn a full revolution so, not sure of its purpose. Its then tied into what looks like an inverter to run something Im guessing.

20 years in the US Navy help me decipher languages, ... sometimes. This was not one of those times. LOL

[Madsceintist]

If it were in english that would have been better.
Seeing it run would have been nice too.

Looks like he is using a custom made circuit powered by the engine coil positive and negative terminals. The white gears on the back are some sort of gear reduction for the generator. The stick on the big gear cant turn a full revolution so, not sure of its purpose. Its then tied into what looks like an inverter to run something Im guessing.

20 years in the US Navy help me decipher languages, ... sometimes. This was not one of those times. LOL

That wooden gear set-up is the alteration of the engines timing for the firing of the coil. Being as HHO has such a higher ignition rate you have to alter the timing a large amount.


My bad, try this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMlciNOyo_U&feature=relmfu

[ydeardorff]

Yes Ive seen several of those over-unity videos. I would like to try this someday on something that doesn't wear out mechanically. A fuel cell.

No moving parts, equals longevity, and durability. If it possible to work in the same way, with excess, It may prove useful.

[RustyLugNut]

Yes Ive seen several of those over-unity videos. I would like to try this someday on something that doesn't wear out mechanically. A fuel cell.

No moving parts, equals longevity, and durability. If it possible to work in the same way, with excess, It may prove useful.

Those so called over -unity systems never stand close inspection. I have looked at several HHO and electric generation systems. They do not work as advertised. Some of them are clever and some are very efficient.

The world needs alternatives to our current energy sources. The over-unity wacko's will not, because they cannot provide.

If someone has an over-unity energy system that works, then I'll be the first to applaud and admit my wrong. But all I have seen are honest errors, charlatan tricks and out and out liars.

[ydeardorff]

Didnt Zero Fossil Fuels get a 200% return on his generator/hho tests? I saw the video a awhile ago on his channel.
I forgot the context of what he was referring to in the gains he reported.

I have two 5K gensets, one is a very nice electric start model that I will eventually move my HHO work into. But for now a home heater is my priority with winter pending.

[RustyLugNut]

Didnt Zero Fossil Fuels get a 200% return on his generator/hho tests? I saw the video a awhile ago on his channel.
I forgot the context of what he was referring to in the gains he reported.

I have two 5K gensets, one is a very nice electric start model that I will eventually move my HHO work into. But for now a home heater is my priority with winter pending.

Some of those over-unity videos have been up for years. Gensets that seem to run on nothing but HHO, electric generators that seem to be self propelling and electric circuits that seem to produce an excess of energy. The proof of burden is on them. If you have a viable system, it would prove itself very quickly and you would attract real investment. Instead, you hear stories of disaster, government conspiracies and Big Oil meddling, etc. Simple excuses because they couldn't get their inventions to work.

[myoldyourgold]

But for now a home heater is my priority with winter pending.

The only HHO heater that I have seen that really works was one used with an oil burner. It requires a small compressor and air/HHO reservoir pressure tank to keep the HHO under the flash point while compressing (air to HHO ratio) and then injected with the oil. When all the ratios are right there is a gain and a very clean exhaust. Complicated setup and when your insurance company finds out about it they void the insurance on your home. They visualize an exploding basement. To get is insurable is very expensive. To increase the results you have to experiment with an exotic heat exchanger. The heat exchanger technology is complex when using HHO and this is where there is plenty of room for development.

Rusty is right about over unity. There is only the appearance of over unity. The energy has to come from some where!! None have been duplicated by anyone reliable.

[ydeardorff]

yeah, I see your point.
However, back on subject here. Lets play devils advocate for a bit.
For the purpose of this discussion, lets say we do have a generator capable of keeping up with a given ICE, under a low amperage feed. No matter if that engine is 1/4 of a CC to a 5 liter V8.

We couldnt, I dont think make the system entirely closed loop. although the emissions would be significantly reduced in terms of volume. We would still have to add in new HHO to keep the reaction working. So a small amount of bleed off would be necessary.
Im thinking we would need:
Some way to cool the exhaust down back to ambient temp for the next cycle.
A way to reclaim the water vapor, and condense it back into useable water.

To retard the spark for HHO

And exhaust pressure relief valve

And an HHO feed into the intake.

Im not going to say it couldnt be done, as lack of a successful prototype doesnt mean it "cant be done" it just hasnt been figured out yet.

Would it be difficult sure, no big leap there. But what Im thinking of, is a more efficient method than gasoline, with little, or no emissions. Then a fuel source that is perpetually recycling itself. Or at least lasts longer to a level no one has ever though possible.

The ICE has and was designed like an air compressor pump. Its design revolves around getting rid of the poisonous gasses, not reclaiming them, for re-use. Gasoline has roughly one third of the energy of hydrogen when ignited, but the flame front is different. For instance the reason diesel engines produce so much torque is because it is a slower burning fuel than gasoline, and burns most of the pistons power stroke. So the power stroke of the diesel engine is different than a gasoline engine. Hydrogen, on the other side of the coin from gasoline burns 5 times faster than gasoline. So even the bore and stroke of the engine may need to be redesigned for optimum use. Such as a very short engine stroke.
But I feel the theory is sound, problem is without deep private pockets a design like this wouldn't see the light of day, EVER. No corporation would make money on a car that consumes little fuel, and doesn't require any, or very few fuel refills.

[ydeardorff]

The only HHO heater that I have seen that really works was one used with an oil burner. It requires a small compressor and air/HHO reservoir pressure tank to keep the HHO under the flash point while compressing (air to HHO ratio) and then injected with the oil. When all the ratios are right there is a gain and a very clean exhaust. Complicated setup and when your insurance company finds out about it they void the insurance on your home. They visualize an exploding basement. To get is insurable is very expensive. To increase the results you have to experiment with an exotic heat exchanger. The heat exchanger technology is complex when using HHO and this is where there is plenty of room for development.

Rusty is right about over unity. There is only the appearance of over unity. The energy has to come from some where!! None have been duplicated by anyone reliable.

Im designing my HHO space heater like a furnace. Unlike the ones seen on youtube, mine is built vertically, with tons of safety systems installed. Its a "set it and forget it" design. It even has a digital thermostat controlling it. Im basing my design on home gas furnaces only shorter. The hot section is separated from the production side, fully insulated, and air flow controlled. After my time in the navy, safety is very high on my list of priorities.

[RustyLugNut]

What you are suggesting is over-unity. Can you run your engine on nothing but HHO? Yes . . . until you run out off HHO. "But I will just make more HHO and do it more efficiently" you say. You cannot make HHO at over 100% efficiency. The laws of the physical world won't allow it. In reality, we struggle to exceed 50% efficiency with our electrolysis generators. Subtract the losses I have already mentioned, and your engine will stop functioning when your energy input stops. HHO is just an "ENERGY CARRIER". Just like OIL and NATURAL GAS. If you understand this concept, you will understand the impossibility you are suggesting.


yeah, I see your point.
However, back on subject here. Lets play devils advocate for a bit.
For the purpose of this discussion, lets say we do have a generator capable of keeping up with a given ICE, under a low amperage feed. No matter if that engine is 1/4 of a CC to a 5 liter V8.

We couldnt, I dont think make the system entirely closed loop. although the emissions would be significantly reduced in terms of volume. We would still have to add in new HHO to keep the reaction working. So a small amount of bleed off would be necessary.
Im thinking we would need:
Some way to cool the exhaust down back to ambient temp for the next cycle.
A way to reclaim the water vapor, and condense it back into useable water.

To retard the spark for HHO

And exhaust pressure relief valve

And an HHO feed into the intake.

Im not going to say it couldnt be done, as lack of a successful prototype doesnt mean it "cant be done" it just hasnt been figured out yet.

Would it be difficult sure, no big leap there. But what Im thinking of, is a more efficient method than gasoline, with little, or no emissions. Then a fuel source that is perpetually recycling itself. Or at least lasts longer to a level no one has ever though possible.

The ICE has and was designed like an air compressor pump. Its design revolves around getting rid of the poisonous gasses, not reclaiming them, for re-use. Gasoline has roughly one third of the energy of hydrogen when ignited, but the flame front is different. For instance the reason diesel engines produce so much torque is because it is a slower burning fuel than gasoline, and burns most of the pistons power stroke. So the power stroke of the diesel engine is different than a gasoline engine. Hydrogen, on the other side of the coin from gasoline burns 5 times faster than gasoline. So even the bore and stroke of the engine may need to be redesigned for optimum use. Such as a very short engine stroke.
But I feel the theory is sound, problem is without deep private pockets a design like this wouldn't see the light of day, EVER. No corporation would make money on a car that consumes little fuel, and doesn't require any, or very few fuel refills.


I will be courteous and not dissect your post point by point because it has been done here and in other places over and over. But I will address your last paragraph since it is a fallacy put forth by the conspiracy theorists.

Car companies do not care what fuel their vehicles run on. They make money selling and servicing cars. Here in San Diego, the Mitsubishi iMev electric as well as the electric Smart Cars are selling well and are seen more often. The Chevy Volt has sold well. I have friends who enjoy not having to go to a gas station more than once a month. A significant portion of our electric services here in Southern California is increasingly provided by clean natural gas, solar and wind power. And, there is nothing big oil can do about it!

Believe me when I say the giant car corporations want more efficient cars and cars with alternative energy, just as long as the customers WANT such cars. And people do want them. Look at the Prius . . . it has sold more than 1 million units as of this writing.

[Madsceintist]

Here we go.....................again !
You just walked yourself into a wall, Rusty. You say just an energy carrier, ehh !
Natural gas ? a carrier? No I think the last time I drove a fork lift, I was running on natural gas...... I think ! NO, I know I was !! Or it was. Or maybe I was and I thought it was .. One of them. :confused:

You tube may have too many fools committing tom foolery, but it also has it's sincere parties that are just like us. I must say that you (Rusty), disappoint me! This site is supposed to be here to support and lead people in a positive direction, and a truthful one! You are attempting to lead this man away from something that not only is truth, but his theory that is already proven to work. Even if you yourself haven't seen it or believe it.

Car manufactures are in the business to keep you in a newer model as often as possible...............
The Chevy Volt; when the battery pack is out of life, or out of warranty, the replacement value totals the car itself !!!!
One huge question as well ! Where and what powers the filling stations that these electric cars plug into ?? ........Mostly coal burning energy plants. Several other power plants have coal as a back-up for the lack of power from Hydro or Nuclear.
The west coast is one of the few places that utilize solar and wind in great amounts, but you left out the rest of the world.
Big oil is only as big as it is due to the government, and the government is getting bigger and bigger due to oil. Control comes by giving the wanting and needing what they want and need. As long as they stay in control, they will do what ever it takes to keep that power. You can not take away what is driving the world economy!! It wont be allowed, regardless of theories. Until they figure out a way to make a profit off of us using HHO, it will remain this bogus, garage made, inefficient fallacy that it is called by some!

ydeardorff;
Many cars today and of yesterday have the majority of what is needed for your thoughts. Intake, exhaust, egr system, spark. Not all engines have an egr system, but it's easy to retro most that aren't. Anything that has less computer control the better!
If you will notice that in the video that Rusty says is not real, the only thing going in to the intake tube is HHO and a small amount of metered air at the cell. They had to make shift the timing adjustment which is a must.
I don't know what cc that motor is , but my small cell ran a 2.2 liter engine at idle and low rpm at 55-70 mph, without trouble. This was in the same fashion that anyone on here uses an HHO system. My Toyota is more to the sum of the Meyers system. So this cell and set-up is NOT as far fetched as some will lead you to believe! Until you yourself have exhausted any and all avenues, don't let someone pull the rug out from under your thoughts! If or when you run into a problem with your works, I will be of whatever help that I can to you, or will refer you to someone that may be better suited for your need !! Continue on..................

[ydeardorff]

Well, Im not gonna bust on rusty. I think hes trying to convey information accurately. However gruff it may come across sometimes. :D

Each new idea does need grounding. And what rusty has mentioned are many things that must be over come. Many of these things are not as easy as they seem. With new technologies opening up all day long, every day, it is impossible for anyone to say "It cant be done". Even the extent to which we have taken HHO to this day is a major leap forward from 100+ years ago.

“Education’s purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one”
Malcolm Forbes

The trick here is to ensure we do not close our minds to new ideas, and continually try to think outside the box. But not so far outside as to not find the box again. :D

For instance, HHO heaters (a project of which I am now working on). Many people have tried varying techniques, but have missed the mark. Sure they may make a decent heater, but not one that will effectively work the way they want it.
I am taking a new approach, built off of others work. But this is how its done, and has been done for decades, if not centuries.
Heck, one day we may end up with a car that uses an hydrogen cell that powers a fuel cell to drive an all electric car. An on demand HHO/Electric Hybrid. Zero emissions, unlimited MPG etc. No ICE to wear out. Just wheel bearings, brakes, and electric motors to service. Can it be done now, I dont think so, and probably not. But who, knows with the right motivation it might be figured out. 4 dollars a gallon is one heck of a motivator for me. And my electric bill being 3-500 per month in the winter if I use electric heat is also not on my happy list.

[RustyLugNut]

Here we go.....................again !
You just walked yourself into a wall, Rusty. You say just an energy carrier, ehh !
Natural gas ? a carrier? No I think the last time I drove a fork lift, I was running on natural gas...... I think ! NO, I know I was !! Or it was. Or maybe I was and I thought it was .. One of them. :confused:

You tube may have too many fools committing tom foolery, but it also has it's sincere parties that are just like us. I must say that you (Rusty), disappoint me! This site is supposed to be here to support and lead people in a positive direction, and a truthful one! You are attempting to lead this man away from something that not only is truth, but his theory that is already proven to work. Even if you yourself haven't seen it or believe it.

Car manufactures are in the business to keep you in a newer model as often as possible...............
The Chevy Volt; when the battery pack is out of life, or out of warranty, the replacement value totals the car itself !!!!
One huge question as well ! Where and what powers the filling stations that these electric cars plug into ?? ........Mostly coal burning energy plants. Several other power plants have coal as a back-up for the lack of power from Hydro or Nuclear.
The west coast is one of the few places that utilize solar and wind in great amounts, but you left out the rest of the world.
Big oil is only as big as it is due to the government, and the government is getting bigger and bigger due to oil. Control comes by giving the wanting and needing what they want and need. As long as they stay in control, they will do what ever it takes to keep that power. You can not take away what is driving the world economy!! It wont be allowed, regardless of theories. Until they figure out a way to make a profit off of us using HHO, it will remain this bogus, garage made, inefficient fallacy that it is called by some!

ydeardorff;
Many cars today and of yesterday have the majority of what is needed for your thoughts. Intake, exhaust, egr system, spark. Not all engines have an egr system, but it's easy to retro most that aren't. Anything that has less computer control the better!
If you will notice that in the video that Rusty says is not real, the only thing going in to the intake tube is HHO and a small amount of metered air at the cell. They had to make shift the timing adjustment which is a must.
I don't know what cc that motor is , but my small cell ran a 2.2 liter engine at idle and low rpm at 55-70 mph, without trouble. This was in the same fashion that anyone on here uses an HHO system. My Toyota is more to the sum of the Meyers system. So this cell and set-up is NOT as far fetched as some will lead you to believe! Until you yourself have exhausted any and all avenues, don't let someone pull the rug out from under your thoughts! If or when you run into a problem with your works, I will be of whatever help that I can to you, or will refer you to someone that may be better suited for your need !! Continue on..................

Mad, the fact that you do not know what an energy carrier is exposes your ignorance. Follow the high value energy stream from the source to it's final use and it's loss into low grade energy. The energy carrier cannot produce more energy than what it was given. The natural gas in your forklift analogy expends energy. It does not produce it.

Mad, I've called you out numerous times on this forum. You cannot produce any shred of evidence that you have "2 vehicles that run on nothing but HHO". And you never will. I have seen several "engines that run on nothing but HHO". I made the inspection after what seemed to be the baffling ability to run on "nothing but HHO". But they had energy input streams that slipped the investors notice. I asked the inventor to redo the test without the input streams. None could run after that. The HHO and water were still there. It even ran for a bit showing great efficiency on one unit. But they all wind down without an energy input stream. I'll make you a bet Mad. A million dollar bet. There are investors that do nothing but throw money at business ideas. If you let them see your "HHO cars that run on nothing but HHO and water", they will fund you to an initial offering of a million USD. The problem is, these guys hire myself and others to inspect technology. I will find out how your system by passes the laws of nature. I will ask you to shut off the energy streams. Your system will grind to a halt. You will be discredited. Or . . . maybe your system works and you become rich beyond your wildest dreams and the world is a better place! But, we all know you won't do it. Because you hide behind this and other forums where any claim can be made and left unsubstantiated and linked to video streams that are simply that . . . movies. We all know special effects are not possible right? Everything in the movies is real.

You ask me to talk about truth? So, let's see it from you Mad? You say you are a master mechanic, and yet you have holes in your knowledge. And you won't admit it. I remind the reader to look back on an argument between Mad and myself concerning PWM fuel injection pumps. Mad didn't know of their practical applications in current production and after market fuel systems. And he asks you, the reader, to trust his knowledge of science which lies outside his field of expertise? To trust the "fact he has systems that run on HHO and water"? The burden of proof lies with the inventor. It has always been that way. And it still is.

I gave the examples of alternative energy sources and alternative transport systems to point out that these systems do exist and are growing. They work and are becoming main stream even if only in a regional way. They serve to undermine the conspiracy theorists belief that "Big Oil" controls everything. That their monopoly on energy is absolute. That they will "silence" anyone in their way. If you are clever enough to build a car that runs on "nothing but HHO", then you will be clever enough to protect your intellectual property. My company has electronic server storage and physical repositories on three continents and an undisclosed island. And it costs us less than a hundred a month to maintain this security. If Meyer and his ilk were so brilliant, you would think he would have been brilliant enough to protect and disseminate his findings since he was such an altruist.

As to the battery pack in the Chevy Volt, . . . Just like the pack in the Toyota Prius, the replacement pack will increased in performance and decreased in price. Battery technology is improving. After 10 years, your pack isn't just junked. It still has storage capacity, just not to manufacturers specs. It will be bought up and will spend it's last few years as massive battery back ups for peak load topping in your local energy company's arsenal. There are numerous government grants putting this into practice. Your trade in value can be used to buy a newer more capable battery pack. Yes, GM makes money on your pack and it's installation. But, you won't need another one for years if all goes right. If you run the Volt's ICE genset on alternative fuels, Big Oil can be cut out of the loop. And they can't do a thing about silencing the technology. That is the point I am trying to make.

Real, useful technology will make it into the light of day one way or another if there is a want and need.

[Madsceintist]

If this were about you and I, Rusty I would continue on with our nonsense. Just because I'm not in the spot-light with my work or a court room for fraud, doesn't mean that I have to prove to YOU, anything! I have witnesses to my work and that is satisfactory for me. I do not need or seek your approval.
The fine people on this forum also do not need your skepticism. Your help when it isn't in a beating is however appreciated.
I do understand energy carriers and wasn't meaning it the way you took it. However you say that HHO isn't the same, or at least that is how I took it. But then you admit to seeing engines run on HHO .. ?? !! :confused: Make up your mind, please.
You know sometimes I think you want to take something that you didn't come up with, so as to run with it as your own. I will help people to achieve what has been done, but I will not GIVE you mine. It is a package, a system and will be available when protected. I can and will refer people to what I have used to make it as far as I have, but those who choose to go there must figure out how to build what is needed, if they can get a grasp on the parts and intent, then they too will succeed.
I will admit without a doubt that it hasn't been easy, and still have some issues. I spent the first year of my first coming across the use of HHO as fuel, up night and day, endlessly. It drove me nuts trying to figure out what the aspects were of its ability. I now know. So lets agree to disagree and end the badgering, unless you sincerely wish to continue. I am very hard headed, and can go either way. But I also suppose that is due to my ignorance ............

[RustyLugNut]

. . .I spent the first year of my first coming across the use of HHO as fuel, up night and day, endlessly. It drove me nuts trying to figure out what the aspects were of its ability. I now know. So lets agree to disagree and end the badgering, unless you sincerely wish to continue. I am very hard headed, and can go either way. But I also suppose that is due to my ignorance ............

I know a thing or two about HHO production and use. I have designed and built hydrogen and oxygen generators for industrial use.

You think highly of yourself don't you? You don't even understand the arguments I put out against the use of HHO as an over-unity mechanism. I have done nothing more than call out the wacko's who populate this forum. Ignorance is applauded on this forum. I stand on the other side . . . the side of reason and experience. You have a right to say all the drivel you want, and I don't have the right to challenge you? I told you I have seen HHO systems that seem to run the car's engine all by it's lonesome. I know that can't be by the laws of nature. Oh, it looked puzzling for a minute. But I saw quite quickly how it worked. Once I put an end to the energy stream, it didn't work. I can already surmise how your system performs as it does. If you had anything that really worked you wouldn't be on this forum. Your partners would can you. Or you are Mad . . . Never mind, you already admit that part.

It is obvious you never were on the debate team. You have a hard time following the salient points. The pivotal point was over-unity. It is not found in nature, and it will not be found in man's devices. What ydeardorff was suggesting will not work. Many people claim they have it but it continues to elude them. I will trust in nature, science and engineering. They are proven to work. You claim over-unity with your device . . . I call your claim false. You are not just arguing with me, you are arguing against nature.

And beating you down? I beat down ignorance, untruth and lies. You just happen to be the bearer of such. I challenge claims that propagate these lies. Your claims fall under this category. You don't have to prove anything to me. I already KNOW how your system will perform . . . or won't.

You call yourself hard headed. I on the other hand strive to be clear headed.

[Madsceintist]

I know a thing or two about HHO production and use. I have designed and built hydrogen and oxygen generators for industrial use.

You think highly of yourself don't you? You don't even understand the arguments I put out against the use of HHO as an over-unity mechanism. I have done nothing more than call out the wacko's who populate this forum. Ignorance is applauded on this forum. I stand on the other side . . . the side of reason and experience. You have a right to say all the drivel you want, and I don't have the right to challenge you? I told you I have seen HHO systems that seem to run the car's engine all by it's lonesome. I know that can't be by the laws of nature. Oh, it looked puzzling for a minute. But I saw quite quickly how it worked. Once I put an end to the energy stream, it didn't work. I can already surmise how your system performs as it does. If you had anything that really worked you wouldn't be on this forum. Your partners would can you. Or you are Mad . . . Never mind, you already admit that part.

It is obvious you never were on the debate team. You have a hard time following the salient points. The pivotal point was over-unity. It is not found in nature, and it will not be found in man's devices. What ydeardorff was suggesting will not work. Many people claim they have it but it continues to elude them. I will trust in nature, science and engineering. They are proven to work. You claim over-unity with your device . . . I call your claim false. You are not just arguing with me, you are arguing against nature.

And beating you down? I beat down ignorance, untruth and lies. You just happen to be the bearer of such. I challenge claims that propagate these lies. Your claims fall under this category. You don't have to prove anything to me. I already KNOW how your system will perform . . . or won't.

You call yourself hard headed. I on the other hand strive to be clear headed.


I can't argue with you on most of what you say. Yes I do understand very well how everything in nature wears or winds down. Aside from the earth spinning and the sun coming up every morning! I'm sure in due time that too will wind down! However, you are missing my point, but I do understand your site on this. Take away a part of the process and it will wind down or die, Duh !!! It's not just a cell and a motor. Nor do I have a hidden power supply outside of the cars ability to recharge the battery which is the primary source of energy input(to start). Nor do you drive a car until the wheels fall off without maintenance and repairs(some do). Regardless, with or without the HHO or other substitutes, you WILL have wear and tear on any car, and repairs.

Lets see what happens when you remove something from the energy stream;


1 ........
Typical car; 4 cylinder, has a battery, alternator, other accessories. Runs and drives on it's own produced power from a fuel source on board in which happens to be gasoline.

Take away the gasoline. It dies!
or
Take away the battery. It will eventually die when the alternator wears out and has no power to feed the system running everything!
or
Take away the alternator. It will also die when the battery's voltage drops to low to run the system!

2 ........
Same typical car; 4 cylinder, has a battery, alternator, other accessories. Runs and drives using an on board system to manufacture it's own produced power from a fuel source on board which happens to be water!

Take away the water. It dies!
or
Take away the battery. It will eventually die when the alternator wears out and has no power to feed the system running everything!
or
Take away the alternator. It will also die when the battery's voltage drops to low to run the system!

The major difference with the two is that the car running on water is running on water !!! There are many modifications to the basics of the systems. Many added components and yet some deleted components as well! NO SYSTEM IS AN OVER UNITY SYSTEM ! They all take energy to produce energy, and they all lose energy in that process.
Everything can be manipulated to some extent, including the laws of nature! Case in point; Stem cells that were created from DNA strands without an embryo!
I'm not a scientist or a newly found inventor that has found something amazing. It was here before me and will be found by many after me as well, except for you, apparently. It works for those who wish to make the effort with the ability to decipher extremely small details and put them to real, practical use.
As they say......... There's more than one way to skin a cat !

[BioFarmer93]

Mad-
Now you know why I don't hang out here anymore...

Rusty-
Refresh me on what you have actually contributed to this forum, I afraid I haven't done much reading here since you resurfaced and started slamming everyone with your professional mega-knowledge and poo-poo attitude about all things not accomplished in a PhD staffed multimillion dollar lab. It's obvious that we're just too low on the scientific totem pole for the attentions of big brained elitist science snobs like you, Rusty. Or, do you simply post here to "stir the pot" so to speak, to show our pathetically ignorant responses to your uber-geek cohorts so that you all can have a good laugh at our expense?
I'm thoroughly aware that I'm a horses ass on occasion, but you sir have zero clearance speaking to anyone's arrogance other than your own. As horses asses go, you bring to mind the image of a Clydesdale in a lab coat. Aren't there professional level forums for you to hang out and be a professional level jerk in? I think Farrah Day and yourself would make a marvelous pair. You two could breed and make a whole litter of blindered, expensively educated elitist little science snobs and run rampant over all of the amateur-dedicated boards like this one.

[RustyLugNut]

Mad-
Now you know why I don't hang out here anymore...

Rusty-
Refresh me on what you have actually contributed to this forum, I afraid I haven't done much reading here since you resurfaced and started slamming everyone with your professional mega-knowledge and poo-poo attitude about all things not accomplished in a PhD staffed multimillion dollar lab. It's obvious that we're just too low on the scientific totem pole for the attentions of big brained elitist science snobs like you, Rusty. Or, do you simply post here to "stir the pot" so to speak, to show our pathetically ignorant responses to your uber-geek cohorts so that you all can have a good laugh at our expense?
I'm thoroughly aware that I'm a horses ass on occasion, but you sir have zero clearance speaking to anyone's arrogance other than your own. As horses asses go, you bring to mind the image of a Clydesdale in a lab coat. Aren't there professional level forums for you to hang out and be a professional level jerk in? I think Farrah Day and yourself would make a marvelous pair. You two could breed and make a whole litter of blindered, expensively educated elitist little science snobs and run rampant over all of the amateur-dedicated boards like this one.

You have more ass in your post than some music videos. . .

Yes I am here to stir the pot. And I do have a very specific agenda. I fear this forum will not be able to help me achieve it ( tongue in cheek sarcasm meter beeping wildly).

I build out of my little garage items of value to people who invent. Of course my garage is stacked with CNC controlled equipment so I am not your average tinkerer. And I can help people with real engineering. And I build for the company I work for on a contract basis. I do post on other high brow science forums - where I am the villain because I believe ( know) that HHO works in a positive way. More and more, the highbrows come to realize there could be something to this HHO by electrolysis and vapor carburetors and HCS. But you have to speak to them in their language. And use the very principles they use. There is no hiding. Hopefully, some of them will move industry to action. There already is and has been action by industry in the areas of vapor and hydrogen application albeit with much resistance.

The PMs I receive bring good discussion and bad. It also brings work. I have some on the bench right now because of this forum. There is so much spam on this forum with nary a care, so I simply join in the discussion as an impassioned spammer. But I keep it directly centered on this forum and it's needs.

And I care about this forum. Good things come out of here. We have folks on here who can cut your plates, design waterless bubblers and have pre-made gasket spacers. The electronics side is lagging but is showing much involvement. Winning the electronics battle has become the biggest issue for the average HHO user as these vehicles dominate the automotive mix in the first and second world.

I have hope for this forum because there is enough here for the average tinkerer to build something that just might help him or her gain an economy edge just as long as their EXPECTATIONS are realistic. Outlandish claims of over-unity and such lead people to believe things that are unreachable by the garage experimenter and industry in general. And people walk away disparaging the technology and the people who took their money not realizing the value it has in the proper application.

So, go ahead and call me names. It won't matter to me. I will still get PMs and provide discussion and services. Look at my post history. I post to things I have knowledge and experience. I ask that others do the same. If it breaks the laws of science, then watch out, I'm the volunteer watch dog. At least when I have the time.

As to technology, everyone will have to hold each other accountable. I am the first to acknowledge my lack of expertise in many fields and you will see me post little to nothing in those fields. I ask others to do the same. Mad steps over the line when he veers away from the automotive tech he is good at and makes claims that inflate peoples expectations. I do not dog his posts. Corrections in that field will have to come from other mechanics. I encourage them to join in as it is sorely needed on this forum.

A concerted effort is needed to move towards providing something that will "facilitate the production of HHO for the common folk". Over-unity and inflated claims detract from that effort. Forum members can produce effective HHO generators. We still must tackle the electronics integration. Then we will have to have industry step in and mass produce components to make this available to those who are not tinkerers.

We should embrace the HCS camp as they have a viable technology. I put up a post of my experiences, no matter how old it is. HHO and HCS might be the winning ticket to this all - to bridge the oil resources we now have till the time we find new energy carriers and new energy sources.

[hhoconnection]

All of this in-fighting makes me sick! It all boils down to one word...TACT. There is nothing wrong with challenging someone or disagreeing with them but just do it in a TACTFUL manner. That was the problem with Farra Day. She was brilliant, but socially clueless. Rusty, we are all on the same team here, just talk to others the same way you want to be talked to and there won't be any problems.

[BioFarmer93]

Huh, I'll be darned.. Perhaps you have a saving grace then. If that's truly the case then why not try delivering your wisdom and/or your skepticism of other members accomplishments with a bit (quite a bit) less of the sneery "I'm a professional and smarter/better than you, you don't understand squat." theme that comes through all too well in your posts. Understand that you are not the only one that receives PM's, and the ones I've received lately that complain about you is over 30%. From people that rarely complain. I'm done with this topic for now, respond or not as you see fit. However, I do reserve the right to light your butt up in the future upon observation of you behaving poorly toward my friends. That is all.

[RustyLugNut]

All of this in-fighting makes me sick! It all boils down to one word...TACT. There is nothing wrong with challenging someone or disagreeing with them but just do it in a TACTFUL manner. That was the problem with Farra Day. She was brilliant, but socially clueless. Rusty, we are all on the same team here, just talk to others the same way you want to be talked to and there won't be any problems.

Pamper and coddle and accept untruths? Why would I want someone to let me go on being wrong?

There are numerous posters on this forum who bring incorrect beliefs and get away with it because no one dares hurt them for fear of being tactless. These over-unity supporters are the most sensitive bunch because they have very little to stand on and they know it so they lash out.

Oh look at all the posts people have put out calling me all sorts of names! Look at BioFarmers attack. Does he get called out? No, he is one of the chosen. He is "nice".

Double standard. By your silence, you subscribe to the misguided positions on this forum hhocon. Your information and videos are spot on and clear, mixed in with this over-unity drivel that permeates this forum. You may not think much of it, but it hurts people.

I met a trucker at the market this summer passed. . . chatting in the check out line, it turns out he reads this forum. He was embittered. He had followed information, including yours hhocon, and had collected parts on Ebay and other sources. He built a system and installed it, with some mechanics help, on his diesel flatbed delivery truck. He had spent several hundred dollars he indicated. The system "didn't work" he said. He said his tank range had only gone up by "40 - 50" miles over his usual 400. He expected to double his range and maybe even someday "run on nothing but HHO". Sounds familiar? I told him to hold on a bit longer to his equipment as he was going to just dump it all. I convinced him that the economics of 40 extra miles was worth it, and his several hundred dollar investment would be paid off in a few months and then it becomes a savings that would be money in his pocket. We still keep in touch and he seems happier with the performance of his system even though he continues to consider this forum "bunk".

Unfulfilled expectations are killing our efforts. Much of it comes from the over-unity camp and the exaggerated claims others spew out. I choose not to tactfully stand aside.

[Madsceintist]

[QUOTE]:
As to technology, everyone will have to hold each other accountable. I am the first to acknowledge my lack of expertise in many fields and you will see me post little to nothing in those fields. I ask others to do the same. Mad steps over the line when he veers away from the automotive tech he is good at and makes claims that inflate peoples expectations. I do not dog his posts. Corrections in that field will have to come from other mechanics. I encourage them to join in as it is sorely needed on this forum.

A concerted effort is needed to move towards providing something that will "facilitate the production of HHO for the common folk". Over-unity and inflated claims detract from that effort. Forum members can produce effective HHO generators. We still must tackle the electronics integration. Then we will have to have industry step in and mass produce components to make this available to those who are not tinkerers.
:[QUOTE]

I do not veer away from my profession or the experience that I gain through my profession. I will not intentionally post something that I have not done. I will not intentionally post anything that I do not have experience in. I have posted things in which I have completed or are working on, and I post as such without misleading anyone. If I do not know, I admit to such without hesitation! I do not think that at any point that I have steered anyone to the belief that there is a magical over-unity in my design. There are many differences in each and every persons set-up and each will get a different result from there's. I have stated many times that the electronics and some physical alterations of the engine(depending on the car) are required, for even the basic use of HHO as this forum is primarily set forth to use. I do give people the information that I have not only came across, but also use effectively, and try to help others to decipher that same use in it's intended manor!

I do not have delusions or illusions of things that are not viable. I do not have beliefs that are not realistic, I believe what I see that works, especially when I myself can make it work !!!!! As far as you being a self appointed watch dog, SIT, STAY , and HUSH sometimes. A barking dog is really annoying ! If you do not recall I am not beyond recalling myself if I have missed something or just plain wrong. In this case, you are out of line to trash me when you can't prove me anymore a liar then a honest straight forward individual. My car and system aren't in use at the moment and as I have said, I will post a thread in the future of the system and car running on the system, in a short neat package so as to have it in one very short thread as opposed to a long drawn out one like they tend to get. I WILL NOT show my entire system, as that would be STUPID !! But all will be seen to be true and factual. Those who understand what I have already said several times will understand what is in my system and will be more than welcome to come view, ride, drive, and test how they like, and it doesn't result in damage.

As you will notice, I have not at one time tried to sell or claim to have something I will sell. I have mostly helped people in the way of Mechanical direction as with questions of need. I have shared MY experiences and what little knowledge that I have gained. Even if it wasn't in a lab or university of your liking. It is real world, on the road, high mile use. I would like to tell you to put that on your lathe and spin it, but this CRAP needs to cease and desist.

[RustyLugNut]

Huh, I'll be darned.. Perhaps you have a saving grace then. If that's truly the case then why not try delivering your wisdom and/or your skepticism of other members accomplishments with a bit (quite a bit) less of the sneery "I'm a professional and smarter/better than you, you don't understand squat." theme that comes through all too well in your posts. Understand that you are not the only one that receives PM's, and the ones I've received lately that complain about you is over 30%. From people that rarely complain. I'm done with this topic for now, respond or not as you see fit. However, I do reserve the right to light your butt up in the future upon observation of you behaving poorly toward my friends. That is all.

Is this YOUR forum? Is this you and your friends PERSONAL playground? Last I checked, it wasn't.

Many applaud my approach and the veracity of my arguments. Just because you and a few others don't is not going to change me.

"Light my butt up". That is a personal attack. Much the same way you attacked me via innuendo, allegorically and directly - calling me an ass. That reflects badly on you. People know who you are. I don't need to make any accusations in return.

"You are mistaken and wrong in claiming over - unity. Prove your device". That is an attack on the point of contention. If you can't answer the attack, say so. But bear the burden of making the claim in the first place without the ability to support it even with general principles.

Don't worry. Eventually I will tire of your sandbox and I will leave.

[RustyLugNut]

[QUOTE]:


As you will notice, I have not at one time tried to sell or claim to have something I will sell. I have mostly helped people in the way of Mechanical direction as with questions of need. I have shared MY experiences and what little knowledge that I have gained. Even if it wasn't in a lab or university of your liking. It is real world, on the road, high mile use. I would like to tell you to put that on your lathe and spin it, but this CRAP needs to cease and desist.

"I have ran 2 cars on HHO by itself, why it would be so difficult for any manufacture to do so is just not conceivable." (quote from a diesel post).

You need to substantiate this claim or desist.

[RustyLugNut]

Maybe for you.



So, what do you need?

So . . . you have a system that will work for the majority of electronic controlled vehicles out there? Fool with O2 sensor levels, MAP sensor levels, IAT sensors . . . etc. A system that will work every time and will meet the requisite "ease of use" that the daily consumer will need?

I have an HHO system that works pretty much without fooling any of those sensors or interacting with the ECU. The vehicles perform flawlessly every time.

The problem is . . . I have to ADD sensors. In-cylinder sensors are used to monitor the flow of HHO to provide optimal BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) maps in a closed loop system.

Beru Corporation called back and simply said they only service the large OEM manufacturers with their cutting edge replacement spark plugs and glow plug sensors.

Optirand and others can build a sensor into any spark plug or glow plug on a custom basis but at over 1000 dollars a pop.

8500 dollars for a sensor suite to do research is one thing. But I need to reduce the cost drastically so the system can be available to most everyone. I am using an old laptop to run the HHO system and run the sensor suite. I will transfer the logic to an octal core micro processor. I can build the electronics and the HHO generator for a few hundred. But the sensors need to be eliminated or reduced in price - drastically. Once an engine is mapped, and the HHO distribution noted and adjusted for equal pressure readings, only one sensor will be needed for feedback information.

I need in cylinder pressure sensors! For cheap!

[Madsceintist]

[QUOTE=Madsceintist;52410]

"I have ran 2 cars on HHO by itself, why it would be so difficult for any manufacture to do so is just not conceivable." (quote from a diesel post).

You need to substantiate this claim or desist.


I am SO sorry that I do not have the first car(Cavalier) set-up any longer to show YOU. It was given to a family member after I returned it to stock in preparation for the the car that has taken it's place(Corolla). And it(the Corolla) is not in service currently as it is getting the upgrades that I believe I need to overcome my biggest hurdle! Maybe in your almighty glory you can help me, or you can be the same as you have been up til now. But I'm sure since you just can't wrap your intelligence around it, that you wouldn't even bother! Not that I really want your help at this point, or at all. Being as you don't seem to have the working knowledge of building engines for a living, and i like to overcome my problems by myself in most cases. I lay claim to MY achievements, as well as my failures.

I suppose I should go back and correct the statement as HHO and HHO/water !!!!! Or do you wish me to spell it out all over again.........
As I have said, I have witness's and had a co-pilot for the drive in the Cavalier which netted me an unscientifically controlled very solid 128-129 miles for one gallon of gasoline on one of my first installed HHO builds as a supplement with gasoline. The later is where I have my hang-up with horsepower, and is why the car is not in service. AND I DO NOT NEED "YOUR" APPROVAL. Problem solving takes time and parts cost money, both I am short on, much like my patience with you.

[RustyLugNut]

[QUOTE=RustyLugNut;52417]


I am SO sorry that I do not have the first car(Cavalier) set-up any longer to show YOU. It was given to a family member after I returned it to stock in preparation for the the car that has taken it's place(Corolla). And it(the Corolla) is not in service currently as it is getting the upgrades that I believe I need to overcome my biggest hurdle! Maybe in your almighty glory you can help me, or you can be the same as you have been up til now. But I'm sure since you just can't wrap your intelligence around it, that you wouldn't even bother! Not that I really want your help at this point, or at all. Being as you don't seem to have the working knowledge of building engines for a living, and i like to overcome my problems by myself in most cases. I lay claim to MY achievements, as well as my failures.

I suppose I should go back and correct the statement as HHO and HHO/water !!!!! Or do you wish me to spell it out all over again.........
As I have said, I have witness's and had a co-pilot for the drive in the Cavalier which netted me an unscientifically controlled very solid 128-129 miles for one gallon of gasoline on one of my first installed HHO builds as a supplement with gasoline. The later is where I have my hang-up with horsepower, and is why the car is not in service. AND I DO NOT NEED "YOUR" APPROVAL. Problem solving takes time and parts cost money, both I am short on, much like my patience with you.

Look at my request. Look at your reply. Take out the scathing remarks and add the caveat "it seems to work from my observations, but it will need to be understood better". And that would be fine.

And witnesses are not a replacement for peer group specialists.

[Madsceintist]

[QUOTE=Madsceintist;52422]

Look at my request. Look at your reply. Take out the scathing remarks and add the caveat "it seems to work from my observations, but it will need to be understood better". And that would be fine.

And witnesses are not a replacement for peer group specialists.


Well they may not be Peer group specialists, but when they understand that a car runs on gasoline and they watch you take that away and the car dies, then you add the cell and repeat as they watch the whole process the whole time, and then remove the gas again and the car still runs, I would say that makes them a creditable witness for me. Even if you weren't there.
Will I have a more reliable, creditable, scientific backing ?? At some point. After what I am after is solved and my lawyer says what can be divulged.

[RustyLugNut]

[QUOTE=RustyLugNut;52424]


Well they may not be Peer group specialists, but when they understand that a car runs on gasoline and they watch you take that away and the car dies, then you add the cell and repeat as they watch the whole process the whole time, and then remove the gas again and the car still runs, I would say that makes them a creditable witness for me. Even if you weren't there.
Will I have a more reliable, creditable, scientific backing ?? At some point. After what I am after is solved and my lawyer says what can be divulged.

I have already told you I have witnessed the same thing from other inventors - twice. The third time, I was asking questions when the inventor stopped the demonstration and simply said "we are done here" and took his "Meyers engine" away. The first two inventors were naive about what was going on with their "over - unity engines". The third was being devious. I am not your average witness.

[BioFarmer93]

Is this YOUR forum? Is this you and your friends PERSONAL playground? Last I checked, it wasn't.

Many applaud my approach and the veracity of my arguments. Just because you and a few others don't is not going to change me.

"Light my butt up". That is a personal attack. Much the same way you attacked me via innuendo, allegorically and directly - calling me an ass. That reflects badly on you. People know who you are. I don't need to make any accusations in return.

"You are mistaken and wrong in claiming over - unity. Prove your device". That is an attack on the point of contention. If you can't answer the attack, say so. But bear the burden of making the claim in the first place without the ability to support it even with general principles.

Don't worry. Eventually I will tire of your sandbox and I will leave.

Rusty- Mad didn't call you an ass, I called you a horses ass. It however was not actually meant as an attack so much as simply an observation on your continued offensiveness. I'm also the one who used "light up your butt" which was hardly an attack, rather a colloquially phrased statement of intent to address your future rudeness if necessary. It seems that you deliberately phrase your responses to carry offense along with your answer- you give one the impression of the same sort of high-brow nastiness that the Sheldon Cooper character does on Big Bang Theory. If you have ever seen it then you realize that the character's intelligence is recognized and acknowledged, but his lack of social grace based on his extremely high opinion of himself, is not. In short, be nice when you type, and we will.

(disclaimer: no instances of over unity were claimed in this post)

[Madsceintist]

I have already told you I have witnessed the same thing from other inventors - twice. The third time, I was asking questions when the inventor stopped the demonstration and simply said "we are done here" and took his "Meyers engine" away. The first two inventors were naive about what was going on with their "over - unity engines". The third was being devious. I am not your average witness.

Not to defend anyone that I do not know, either way. But if what YOU say is true as you say, I can see that it could be YOU, that they developed a problem with and not the fact that their devises did not work. . Just saying! But then I haven't met you in person, just our ridiculous and sometimes useless arguments back and forth here.
Regardless of how you want to view this, I do not feel that I am an inventor!! I simply have taken what I know and what I have learned and applied it to a real and useful application from what others before have done, and will no doubt be improved upon later. People who know me well or don't know me well have often referred to me as Macgyver, not an inventor. I'm a determined individual who can see more than what is in front of me, I read people and things very well, as to "size" them up quickly. It has always came naturally to me to figure things out very easily and generally spot on. Some people have it and some don't. And that is not an insult to anyone! There are many great people out there, but you wack us all on the head.

[RustyLugNut]

Rusty- Mad didn't call you an ass, I called you a horses ass. It however was not actually meant as an attack so much as simply an observation on your continued offensiveness. I'm also the one who used "light up your butt" which was hardly an attack, rather a colloquially phrased statement of intent to address your future rudeness if necessary. It seems that you deliberately phrase your responses to carry offense along with your answer- you give one the impression of the same sort of high-brow nastiness that the Sheldon Cooper character does on Big Bang Theory. If you have ever seen it then you realize that the character's intelligence is recognized and acknowledged, but his lack of social grace based on his extremely high opinion of himself, is not. In short, be nice when you type, and we will.

(disclaimer: no instances of over unity were claimed in this post)

So, you get to use offensive language and brush it off as " not meant as an attack"? Good for you! You get to set the rules.

Look at my other posts with people who just want to discuss a point. I find over-unity and other such wacko science beliefs to be offensive. So, don't offend me.

[RustyLugNut]

Not to defend anyone that I do not know, either way. But if what YOU say is true as you say, I can see that it could be YOU, that they developed a problem with and not the fact that their devises did not work. . Just saying! But then I haven't met you in person, just our ridiculous and sometimes useless arguments back and forth here.
Regardless of how you want to view this, I do not feel that I am an inventor!! I simply have taken what I know and what I have learned and applied it to a real and useful application from what others before have done, and will no doubt be improved upon later. People who know me well or don't know me well have often referred to me as Macgyver, not an inventor. I'm a determined individual who can see more than what is in front of me, I read people and things very well, as to "size" them up quickly. It has always came naturally to me to figure things out very easily and generally spot on. Some people have it and some don't. And that is not an insult to anyone! There are many great people out there, but you wack us all on the head.

Just understand it goes against science and nature. Which means there is a pretty good chance it isn't so. You may have fooled yourself like the first two inventors in mention.

The third inventor packed up his engine when I started asking questions. He knew the game was up. I already knew his trick.

[Madsceintist]

Just understand it goes against science and nature. Which means there is a pretty good chance it isn't so. You may have fooled yourself like the first two inventors in mention.

The third inventor packed up his engine when I started asking questions. He knew the game was up. I already knew his trick.


I guess when its all said and done, we will see. So try to take it with a grain of salt until the sting goes away. I have no tricks, just hard work.

[RustyLugNut]

I guess when its all said and done, we will see. So try to take it with a grain of salt until the sting goes away. I have no tricks, just hard work.

Good mechanics don't gain their knowledge by being lazy, and you are knowledgeable proving your hard work.

In your quest for over-unity, you may find tremendous efficiency. That is what I found in reverse engineering the so called "Meyer's engine" for the investors who hired me. Don't ignore the tremendous efficiency you already have in your system. You can build a business around that! What we learned from the charlatan's "trick" allowed us to move forward with good solid principles that can be used to build upon.

[hhoconnection]

Rusty - I'm sorry to have singled you out in my last comments, I just hate to see any in-fighting going on in these forums. My plea for tact goes for everyone. These forums are an invaluable source of information and I don't want to discourage any newcomers from participating. I'm happy to see that we are back to a civil tone.

I tell people that we HHO enthusiasts are like "the dogs behind the fence". When my wife and I walk our dog we occasionally go by a fence that has two dogs in the back yard. They bark in envy as we go by wanting to get at our little dog to no avail. So what do they do instead, start fighting with each other as we go on about our happy lives. That's what we are, dogs behind the fence watching the big oil companies walk by, living the high life. We just want a small piece of what they have but we can't get it so what do we do? Fight with each other, getting into petty ****ing matches, wasting valuable time and energy when we should be encouraging each other and sharing any new ideas that we have without fear of ridicule. I'm not saying we have to be saints, just respectful. Maybe together we can figure out how to get out of this damn yard!

[ydeardorff]

i got to thinking more about running an engine on HHO only.
Correct me if Im wrong, but if someone was to design an engine from the ground up wouldn't a hydrogen burning engine require an incredibly short piston stroke, and modified timing from that of a gasoline burning engine? Would that also lower the overall intake CFM of the engine making on demand hho production more feasible?
Their would be no more need for emissions, and distilled water could be kept in the gas tank instead of fossil fuel. combined with a condensate recovery system, the "mileage" could be significantly extended.
Given the higher yield of energy from hydrogen burning, more power could be had. But like the difference between diesel engines and gasoline engines, the speed of the explosion has a direct effect on available torque. So would a hydrogen engine end up having less power in the end?

Just putting another thought on the table...

[Madsceintist]

i got to thinking more about running an engine on HHO only.
Correct me if Im wrong, but if someone was to design an engine from the ground up wouldn't a hydrogen burning engine require an incredibly short piston stroke, and modified timing from that of a gasoline burning engine? Would that also lower the overall intake CFM of the engine making on demand hho production more feasible?
Their would be no more need for emissions, and distilled water could be kept in the gas tank instead of fossil fuel. combined with a condensate recovery system, the "mileage" could be significantly extended.
Given the higher yield of energy from hydrogen burning, more power could be had. But like the difference between diesel engines and gasoline engines, the speed of the explosion has a direct effect on available torque. So would a hydrogen engine end up having less power in the end?

Just putting another thought on the table...


Keep on going ......... :)
More power ...!