On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:11 PM, Olin Lathrop wr= ote: > Yigit Turgut wrote: > >> You could put the extra capacity of the > >> generator to use doing other things, like splitting water into > >> hydrogen and oxygen, but that extra power isn't free. It ultimately > >> comes from the mechanical input power, which comes from the engine. > >> Put another way, when the generator ouptut is loaded more, it in > >> turn becomes a bigger mechanical load on the engine. Put yet > >> another way, the generator shaft is harder to spin when there is a > >> larger electrical load on its output. > > > > It is true, but you'd know that it's negligible if you had actually > > seen > > the output of a car alternator or looked into how much current it is > > capable of generating. > > More nonsense. In no case will the alternator put out more electrical > power > than it is taking mechanical power from the engine. There is no "free" > power to split water. > > > Car is already an inefficient machine, you > > will not need to burn extra fuel for electrolyze process. > > Yes a car is rather inefficient. The only way this scheme could possibly > win is if you are able to run the engine at a more efficient operating > point > when splitting water then when just letting it produce power to push the > car > on demand. This is basically the principle behind hybrids. I have a Hon= da > Civic hybrid, and I can attest that it actually works. I can reliably ge= t > 50 miles/gallon on the highway once the engine has reached its normal > operating temperature. > > If this is your argument, then the path to splitting water and burning th= e > hydrogen in the engine has to not be too lossy as measured from the > original > engine output power back to new engine output power. In a hybrid like my > Honda Civic, the computer tries to keep the engine at a more efficient > operating point. This means sometimes making it produce more power, whic= h > runs a generator and is stored in batteries. Sometimes it means draining > the batteries to run a electric motor (actually the same as the generator > in > this case) so that the engine can be run at lower power. > > This only works because the inefficiencies of whole loop are less than th= e > power saved by running the engine at a more efficient operating point. I= n > this case the loop is generator to battery to motor. In your case it is > generator to split water to the hydrogen/oxygen used as a fuel back into > the > engine. Since the initial generator is the same in both cases, lets forg= et > about it. That leaves the storage efficiency of NiMH batteries and a > electric motor in my case, and the efficiency of splitting water and the > engine using the hydrogen/oxygen as a fuel in your case. NiMH aren't too > bad, and electric motors can be downright good (over 90% for really good > ones, but I don't know what is actually in my car). Look up the efficien= cy > of splitting water. I think you'll find it's not as good as a NiMH > battery. > Even if it is, the real problem with your method is the horrible efficien= cy > of the engine. That's going to be way less than the efficiency of a > electric motor. > > I'd be very surprised if you can show loop efficiencies high enough to no= t > swamp any win you get by running the engine at a more efficient operating > point. Unless you can provide some hard numbers and evidence you actuall= y > understand what's going on, I have to conclude you're just chasing anothe= r > perptual motion machine. > > > I think you are stressed a little bit, a slim blunt can make your > > day! Also you can ask Colin for a sniff (if he is into sharing, which > > I doubt in your case). > > I have no idea what this babble is supposed to mean. However, it would b= e > a > good idea for those that aren't too swift with physics to refrain from > trying to explain it to others. > Ok leaving every discussion behind, assuming I am %100 wrong , there is a practical observation which is that the power of the engine increases significantly with this system. I am not saying go and do it and I will als= o won't do it to my baby (Volvo C30 T5) but if hydrogen is not efficiently seperated from oxygen how come there is a change in the performance ? If it is set to come into equation at higher rpms (5-6k) it might be a good trade-off, you can't know it from sitting there. You might stuck theoretically at a point explaining how this can work thus label it as not doable. For this very case, we are talking about the efficiency - output of a system which is observable and a measurable quantity. Equations are -not always- stronger than observations. That's not how we do it > you might think you fully get the theory and you can also insist that yours is true, but once you realize that someone else actually does something which you tagged as impossible > you need to accept the fact and update your theory. That's what I am doing, trying to make sense from experimental results because I can see that some men on Earth is obviously capable of doing it > which leads us that this is permitted by nature and you just don't have the precise parameters to conduct the same. http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-20021736-48.html --=20 http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .