I have every intention of trying the "Brown's Generator" type of Hydrogen supplement. But before I try it on my F250 w/460; where I have to deal with the fuel injection, O2 sensor, and computer; I figured I would try it on the simplest of cars. My 1966 Mustang, 2bbl 289cu. 3 vacuum lines; distributor, PCV, and Transmission. That's about as simple as they come.

Before I try this, I have a question. Could be simple or it could be an argument starter. Many of the Nay Sayers on the whole HHO principle are people I believe have never tried it. That's OK, I can live with that. But one thing (MANY OF THEM) are saying is because of the LAWS of Thermodynamics, it takes more energy to create the hydrogen energy you are using, and therefor it is a net loss. Therefor, it is a waste and/or scam. I can understand and possibly agree with this in principle if we were talking about trying to run the electricity in your house. Agreed, it probably would take more energy to separate the hydrogen and the oxygen. But we are talking about a car. A car, where the electricity that is required is coming from the alternator. The alternator that spins in relationship to the RPM's of the engine whether the battery is fully charged or totally dead. The voltage regulator switches on and off to allow the voltage/current to go to the battery or not. Now, not counting air conditioning (Because that is using an additional pully and therefor more load on the engine); I can't really say that I've seen any of my cars get SIGNIFICANT LESS mileage on a gallon of gas because I was driving at night with the lights on, heater on, stereo blasting away 200 watts, and the cigarette lighter running my radar detector.

I'm sure that the windings in the alternator get warmer and may even create a little more resistance when the regulator is allowing the generated voltage/current to go to the batter. But it isn't significantly more. If it was a major drain on the gas mileage, the first thing in all those "Feel Good" green articles about saving the planet; besides checking the air in your tires, tune ups, etc... would be to drive ONLY during daylight hours, don't use the stereo or heater, etc...

So, I think you know what my question is; What exactly to the nay sayers mean when they say it takes MORE energy to separate the Hydrogen from the Oxygen and that it's a net loss creating Hydrongen, when we're talking about a car that the hydrogen generator is only going to use between 5-10 amps; which assuming your alternator can handle that, isn't much more current than my stereo or headlights are using. I.e. 100 watt headlight is approximately 8 amps. Times 2 of them is 16 amps. Throw in another 2 amps for tale lights. So, I'm not losing gas mileage with all the lights on. How is my gas mileage going to go down with converting hydrogen using this law of thermodynamics that they so proudly scream.

I am very good in engineering. I am an electrical/electronic engineer. Other than college chemistry and physics, I don't have a background in that. Maybe I am missing something here. But I do know electricity and I am very good at math. I also know that a car does NOT get significantly better or worse gas mileage if it's a nice day with absolutely NO ELECTRICAL draw (Minus that required to create spark in the plugs); and a glooming winter night with all lights, heater, flashers, stereo system, etc.... So, how would using the hydrogen generator in a car (NOT IN A HOUSE) use any electricity that isn't already being generated by the fact that the engine is turned on???? Thanks.... Mike.......

 

The first law of thermodynamics stattes the "Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only altered in form." This simply means energy in=energy out. In a perfect world it takes1 unit of energy to do 1 unit of work and there are no parasitic losses, but we live in the real world and have to deal with "energy losses" which is most commonly observed as heat, anytime a machine generates heat it is loosing energy. What this means is that if you input 10ergs of energy to a process such as converting rotational energy into electrical energy (such as the alternator on your car engine) you will get maybe 7.5ergs out as electricity and the other 2.5ergs are converted into heat.
If the first law of thermodynamics is not true and you could somehow get more energy back than you put in there would be no way to control the process.
A easy way to observe the 1st law of thermodynamics is to drop a ball on the floor, in a perfect world if you drop the ball 3' to the floor then it would rebound back up 3', but as we all know the ball will not rebound 3' and you have to lower your hand to catch the ball adding energy to the process, in the fantasy world where the HHO people live and they get more energy out than they put in, a ball dropped from 3' would rebound 6' doubling its energy which means the next time it hits the floor it rebounds 12' doubling its energy again and this would continue forever.

 

Run your car on water? - it's a scam!

Read ALL the articles on this page.

This guy is offering $1 million dollars to any person who can verifibly prove their vehicle is getting better mileage from one of these systems. Not one person has been able to. I've seen several people here claim to get better mileage, I say they are either liars or fooling themselves. If you're getting better mileage go claim you're $1 million dollars...

There's a sucker born every minute.

 

I understand the laws of thermodynamics. I am not arguing that. But you are missing the question. Because you use the law of thermodynamics as your argument, you claim that 100% energy in equals <100% energy out. I agree. But in the case of a car's alternator, we're talking about a "Supplemental" energy source who's energy output is not relative to "IT'S" energy source.

In other words; Gasoline is used in the motor to explode the pistons and physically push them up and down. The alternator's sole purpose in life is to provide an electrical spark to the spark plugs to cause the explosion of the gasoline in the pistons. That is the primary purpose of the motor and the alternator. (In reality, the alternator simply recharges a battery which is providing the spark). The truth however is, it takes very little electricity to create the spark. That's why if you don't use lights, radio, fans, heaters, etc... you can run a car for hours and hours on a battery with NO ALTERNATOR at all.

So, what does this mean. It means that because mankind can not live without their lights, stereo, wipers, etc... they put in a battery and alternator that puts out much more energy than it can use. Just like the electricity in your house. Much more is produced by the power plant then you can use. You can't store that, you simply stop producing as much. That's what the alternator does with a voltage regulator. The battery and the alternator will continue to output current until the battery/sensor are fully charged. But, because the energy required to TURN the alternator is already factored into the operation of the motor, very little change in energy is required from when the alternator IS putting out current to charge the battery and when the alternator is idle because the battery is fully charged.

So, now that we know that the motor has already factored in the energy required to TURN the alternator, which it's going to do whether we try hydrogen separation or not, then the law of thermodynamics does not apply, because the energy required to separate the hydrogen and oxygen is "LEFTOVER" energy that is going to be expelled whether we use it or not. In other words, the alternator doesn't have a CLUTCH like the air conditioner where when using the air conditioner puts a LOAD on the engine and reduces efficiency. The alternator is a continual load (+/- a negligible difference), whether it's putting out current to the battery or not.

THAT IS THE QUESTION. I understand the law of thermodynamics. You like analogies? The D.C. Power packs that run just about every small consumer electronics you have. I.e. Power pack for playstation, dsl modem, calculator, electric razor, etc.... You know what I'm talking about. If you have a 1000ma 12vdc output power pack, (12 watts); because of the law of thermodynamics, the input A.C. power requirements will be higher than 12 watts. (I AGREE); let's assume for the sake of argument it's 15 watts. However, because it is a CONVERSION of power, you will use the INPUT power whether you have an output requirement or not. I.e. Plug the power pack into the A.C. outlet in the wall. DON'T plug the other end into the Playstation, calculator, Printer, etc... The power pack will still use the 15 watts to change the A.C. voltage to D.C. 12 volts. That's going to happen whether you like it or not. And if you could itemize your electric bill, you would find that you didn't save 1 penny by unplugging the device, but left the power pack plugged into the A.C. outlet.

In the case of a car, the MOTOR is the A.C. power plant. It's a big TURBINE. The Alternator is the POWER pack that you plug into your sony, printer, calculator, etc... The alternator is connected all the time. Just like the power pack plugged into the A.C. outlet. Just because you didn't put a load on the alternator/power pack; doesn't mean that the load required to convert the energy from the MOTOR/A.C. outlet has been reduced. It hasn't. This is the question.

And FTE; I don't really give a crap about some "guy" who is offering a million dollars. That means nothing to me. BECAUSE, I am not questioning the hydrogen technology. That is NOT my question. I never asked once whether or not it would work. Read what I asked. I asked an ENERGY question. Whether it's hydrogen or some other technology that works with 12 Volts D.C.; my question is; how can people argue a technology as requiring MORE energy to operate it than it produces, when the energy used to operate said device is extra/leftover/residual/etc... power that is there whether you want to use it or not. In other words, you AREN'T producing the 12 volts D.C. for the PURPOSE of splitting hydrogen. The 12 volts is already there because it is needed to create spark in the spark plugs via the coil/distributor, and you happen to be using the leftover energy that's going to be there whether you use it or not. You do NOT reduce gas mileage (Measurably) because your alternator is constantly putting out voltage to the battery or the voltage regulator has disconnected the charging circuit. The PHYSICAL mechanics required to make the energy is operating 100% of the time that the motor is operating.

If you address that question, I would appreciate it. We can argue whether or not splitting hydrogen from oxygen can be beneficial to a motor or not later. But for now, I need to either debunk the argument that the CREATION of Hydrogen is somehow reducing your MILES PER GALLON because your alternator has to produce 5-10 amps (60-120 watts) to operate the hydrogen generator. (Hell, my car stereo pulls more than that, and I don't get WORSE MILEAGE because I am listening to "Born to Run" as I run down I-80. Once we can either get this argument out of the way or some how prove that the engine is getting worse gas mileage because the stereo is on; then we can argue whether or not hydrogen is of use.

FWIW; the whole thermodynamic argument is VALID if you are talking about creating energy for the sole purpose of producing hydrogen. You are correct. It takes more energy to produce energy. Some times this is required; i.e. we can't run our transportation infrastructure on crude oil. We need to expel energy to convert energy. So I agree with the thermodynamic argument. However, in an automobile, you are using energy that is already produced, will ALWAYS be produced, and will be produced whether you use it or not. Therefor, the energy required to OPERATE the hydrogen generator (In a vehicle application) is totally irrelevent. It's FREE ENERGY. It's there whether you want it or not. You can't SAVE or CONSERVE that energy. It's already there. You might as well find a use for it. Sort of like solar. It's already there. Whether you want to use it or not. We only use a small percentage of solar energy to grow food, keep us healthy, create evaporation/condensation/precipitation, etc... That's why solar is feasible. We're using the LEFTOVER ENERGY. Well, your alternator is producing a lot of LEFTOVER ENERGY.

If I'm wrong, explain HOW. Don't argue the hydrogen aspect. Matter of fact, DON'T ARGUE. Explain how I am wrong that we are producing EXTRA energy to CREATE energy. later... mike....

 

Before I read further-let me correct you before everyone jumps all over you. The generator or alternator's sole purpose is not to create spark,it is to keep all the electronic components working and the batteries at a full state of charge.In the cars now a days it would not run for more than 30-45 minutes on a full battery and no output from the generator. There can be as much as 8 modules in a vehicle and they will not operator under 8-9VDC and the engine will stall. Lack of spark,fuel pressure and all the outputs from the PCM and the engine will not run. You may be able to run a car from the 70's w/ no generator output for hours but not a newer fuel injected on.
The alternator's sole purpose in life is to provide an electrical spark to the spark plugs to cause the explosion of the gasoline in the pistons. That is the primary purpose of the motor and the alternator. (In reality, the alternator simply recharges a battery which is providing the spark). The truth however is, it takes very little electricity to create the spark. That's why if you don't use lights, radio, fans, heaters, etc... you can run a car for hours and hours on a battery with NO ALTERNATOR at all.

 

I agree w/ you 100% on the fact that the generator is always running. Although most newer cars, like you Focus actually spins but not put out any amperage until the PCM tells it to, there are two PIDS in your Focus. GENCOM and GENMON. One is an input and one is an output between the PCM and the generator. I do in fact believe you and have been disagreeing w/ some that pose we are burning more fuel to generator 12-20amps on 12VDC because the generator is fully capable if producing this for free.Back to the a/c compressor that is said to cost you 7-10HP to run efficiently. The alternator will require some power but no where near that rating. They will argue the point that that extra draw on the generator will cause extra rotating stress on the engine and thus burning more fuel to do that then you will get from you HHO generator. I disagree w/ that totally and only agree if you had to draw more than 50amps and the system would discharge the battery over time.Most newer cars only require probably 20% of the generators RMS output, so on a vehicle w/ a 120amps system you should be able to run well over 50amps top run your system. They will not answer your question,only tell you it will not work. It has been proven both ways, some say it will work and some say it will not. Ca you run it on pure water? NO. Can you get a bit more economy form an ICE? Maybe if it is done correctly.

 

I think you're missing the point when it comes to how an alternator works. An alternator does not draw a fixed amount of energy off of the engine regardless of the amount of current it is producing.

The voltage regulator does NOT simply stop generated current from going into the electrical system. If the system voltage is low, the regulator provides more current to the alternators field rotor, causing more electricity to be generated and requiring more mechanical energy input. When the system voltage increases, the voltage regulator reduces current to the field rotor, causing less electricity to be generated, requiring less mechanical energy input.

In simple terms, the energy demand placed on the alternator by the regulator is directly proportional to the energy demand the alternator places on the drive belt and thus the engine.

Nor is this a new thing. This is how voltage regulators have worked since the inception of the alternator.

I'm not saying, however, that HHO injection is a scam, waste of time, etc. I've yet to see any scientifically controlled studies to show that HHO injection works. But, if it is true that the input of small amounts of hydrogen and oxygen cause an improvement in the energy efficiency of the engine, then there might be a benefit.

If, however, all you're getting is additional energy from burning the hydrogen and oxygen in the engine, then you're definitely losing more energy in the production of the hydrogen and oxygen.

 

Sorry to say this... folks can argue it all they want and get indignant about it, but it still violates the laws of thermodynamics. If this technology worked it would be used on a wide-scale --- its been around for over 100 and has not changed, at all, in that time. How many of you have taken physics courses? This exact scam made the rounds in the 70s --- people were suckered then with psuedo science, just as they are now.

Run your car on water? - it's a scam! --- Read all the pages there.

 

Thanks for your reply 18vtx00. I agree with what you said concerning electrical requirements and the alternator. I know that, but was trying to simplify the fact that very little electricity is required to run the car. FWIW; I had the alternator go out on the focus a few weeks ago and I ran the car for 3 days before the battery didn't have enough charge left to start the car and run it. I then recharged the battery for 1 more day of use before I had the time to replace the alternator.

For my use; as I mentioned in my first post on this subject; I plan on doing this to my 1966 mustang. We're talking such little electrical requirements to run the car. Even with the standard 60 amp alternator; running an HHO generator; even at 10 amps; is not going to have any significant impact on the existing efficiency/mpg of the car. Now, whether or not the Hydrogen does is a totally different possibility. But that is not my immediate question or concern. I was just trying to either educate the "Law of Thermodynamic" crowd that their laws they are trying to use in their argument does NOT apply to this situation, because the energy required to produce the hydrogen energy, is basically a "FREE SOURCE" of energy that is available whether you use it or not, and it will NOT significantly reduce the efficiency of the vehicle. OR; I am open to the possibility that I am wrong. I doubt it, but if I am, then someone will have to explain WHY; both with physics and mathematics. Those are the only 2 laws an disciplines that apply in THIS SITUATION.

Again; if their theory that using more "ELECTRICITY" from the alternator will some how reduce your fuel economy significantly; then they need to ONLY drive during daylight hours without headlights; no stereo; no heater; etc...

 

dchamberlain; please explain to me how you are LOSING energy from the motor and alternator in the PRODUCTION of the Hydrogen??? I know exactly how alternators work. I'm sorry for over simplifying the process. BUT, if you think that an alternator working at 0 load and an alternator working at 100% load create a significant different in fuel economy, you are mistaken. But I guess "SIGNIFICANT" is debatable. Again, the energy required by the alternator to generate the hydrogen, is already available at NO CONSIDERABLE ADDITIONAL LOAD ON THE MOTOR that is being ran anyway. (You're driving some place)

 

Ken, thank you for finding those articles. I'm really looking forward to what he finds in future testing. I also realy like the toolbox design that was used. I now know how I'm going to house my latest design. Most people that are into these try to lean the A/F ratio. Could it be possible that the HHO counteracts the conditions of running what would normally be too lean? I don't know, but real world results from real people, not just testimonials and not trying to sell me anything, are hard to ignore. One thing I do feel confident in saying is that it is making our Windstar run smoother. It had developed a bit of a knock and would occasionally idle rough when warmed up. The knocking gradually got quieter and quieter and was gone within the first week of trying HHO and it has not had the rough idle once since installing it. I'm due for an oil change and will probably pull the spark plugs to see how they are looking to see if there are any signs of running too lean..

 

It takes energy to generate the hydrogen/oxygen gas. That energy comes from the alternator. The energy to drive the alternator comes from the engine, period. The amount of energy needed to generate the hydrogen/oxygen may be very small, but the energy created by burning the hydrogen/oxygen is smaller.

Your earlier posts suggested that the energy coming from the alternator was free. It would be generated whether it was used or not. This is not true. The law of thermodynamics is non-negotiable. It doesn't matter how negligible the energy requirements of separating water into hydrogen/oxygen are, the resulting energy created by burning the hydrogen/oxygen will be less.

 

dchamberlain; I really can't believe that you think that way. Sorry, but what you believe in is wrong. There is a difference in PRODUCING energy and CONVERTING energy. The law of Thermodynamics applies differently to both. If you don't realize that, then nothing anyone says will make any difference. Here are 2 things to think about.

1) A car stereo using 240 watts is approximately 20 amps. Are you saying that having your stereo blasting away is reducing your mileage significantly?

2) Putting up a solar panel is inefficient in the amount of energy it can produce. (Inefficient in the amount of photons that can be converted). Yet, is solar energy a waste of time?

The law of thermodynamics applies when producing energy used to produce another form of energy. It doesn't apply in the same context when CONVERTING energy from energy already available. If it takes 10 amps to make a hydrogen generator work (Whether the hydrogen is of any use or not); the amount of load on the engine for the alternator to produce that additional 10 amps is so negligible that you can't even measure it in loss of horsepower or MPG. That part of Thermodynamics is what is "Non-Negotiable". We don't produce the sun's energy; or the river's energy; or the wind's energy. Therefor, thermodynamics is NOT an issue. It's not even a FACTOR. Economics might be a factor, but NOT thermodynamics. While an alternator does in fact put a load on the engine to operate; the difference in LOAD between the alternator working at 0% and 100% load, is so negligible that Thermodynamics is NOT an issue. Sorry, but that is the LAW OF MATH, and that is Non-Negotiable.

If you want to prove me wrong, then drive your car for 10 fill ups and check your mileage with absolutely NO electrical load other than the minimum required to operating the ignition system. NO LIGHTS, NO STEREO, NO HEATER, NO ANYTHING ancillary. Then do it again for 10 more fill ups with a 200 watt stereo on full blast, headlights on all the time day and night, heater continuous, etc... There will NOT be any significant load change or change in MPG and efficiency. Again, there is a difference between PRODUCING energy and CONVERTING energy. I think you need to understand that, then you can understand thermodynamics.

 

You need to go back and do a little studying on the laws of thermodynamics.

The first law of thermodynamics. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. There is NO concept of producing energy, merely changing it from one form or another.

If you can't get this fairly simple concept down, there isn't any point in further discussion on the matter. You simply do not understand the concepts you are discussing.

 

I have to wonder if only one of the AC filed went bad on you and was still producing 12VAC. Usually there are 3 fields that can make up to 18VAC. It is hard to believe it could run that long and crank over if there was no output from the generator at all. Maybe you car is a stick,no A/C and no power windows? But yeah..drive at night!!