Run your car on water - legit or scam?

I get SO tired ofthe nay sayers who "know all the answers" when, in fact, they don't even know the question.

 Sit Down - Shut Up - Read!!

 Here is a synopsis of a sampling of the research that has been done:

        Because these articles are typically privy to only the scientific community, the general public does not read them or see them on the news. Justification of technological viability must come from mainstream authorities!
        It would be nice if CNN would do an Documentary about these articles!! They all are about the concept of “fuel enhancement”.

            The following is a list of Journal Articles in Mainstream Publications that highlight the time and effort that past       researchers have put into using hydrogen based fuels to enhance carbon fuel combustion.

    Update Heavy-Duty Engine Emission

    Update Heavy-Duty Engine Emission Conversion Factors for                 Mobile6: Analysis of BSFCs and Calculation of Heavy-Duty             Engine Emission Conversion Factors, United States                         Environmental Protection Agency, EPA420-P-98-015, May                     1998

        Lax and Rucker, Medium and Heavy Duty Truck Fuel Economy         and Consumption Trends, Society of Automotive Engineers,             SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper # 810023, February, 1981

        Houseman and Cerini, Jet Propulsion Lab., California Institute         of Technology, On-Board Hydrogen Generator for a Partial             Hydrogen Injection Internal Combustion Engine, August 1974,         SAE Paper # 740600

        Kong, Crane, Patel and Taylor, NOx Trap Regeneration with an         On-Board Hydrogen Generation Device, March 2004, SAE                 Technical Paper Series, Paper # 2004-01-0582

        Welch and Wallace, Ortech International and University of                 Toronto, Performance Characteristics of a Hydrogen-Fueled             Diesel Engine with Ignition Assist , October 1990, SAE                     Technical Paper Series, Paper # 902070

        Hoekstra, Van Blarigan and Mulligan, University of Central                 Florida, Sandia National Labs and Florida Solar Energy Center,         NOx Emissions and Efficiency of Hydrogen, Natural Gas, and             Hydrogen/Natural Gas Blended Fuels, , May 1996, SAE                     Technical Paper Series Paper # 961103

        Tunestal et al., Lund Institute of Technology and Swedish Gas         Center, Hydrogen Addition For Improved Lean Burn Capability         of Slow and Fast Burning Natural Gas Combustion Chambers,         October 2002, SAE Technical Paper Series Paper                            # 2002-01-2686

        Ochoa, Dwyer, Wallace and Brodrick, University of California at         Davis, Emissions from Hydrogen Enriched CHG Production             Engines, October 2002, SAE Technical Paper Series Paper               # 2002-01-2687

        Fontana, Galloni, Jannelli, and Minutillo, Department of                     Industrial Engineering, University of Cassino, Performance
        and Fuel Consumption Estimation of a Hydrogen Enriched                 Gasoline Engine at Part-Load Operation, July 2002, SAE                 Technical Paper Series Paper # 2002-01-2196

        Tully and Heywood, General Motors and Massachusetts                 Institute of Technology, Lean-Burn Characteristics of a
        Gasoline Engine Enriched with Hydrogen from a Plasmatron             Fuel Reformer, , March 2003, SAE Technical Paper Series                 Paper   # 2003-01-0630

        Natkin et al., Ford Motor Company and University of                         California-Riverside, Hydrogen IC Engine Boosting
        Performance and NOx Study, SAE Technical Paper Series Paper         # 2003-01-0631

        Conte and Boulouchos, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology,         Influence of Hydrogen-Rich-Gas Addition on Combustion,                 Pollutant Formation and Efficiency of an IC-SI Engine, March             2004 SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper # 2004-01-0972

        Allgeier et al., Robert Bosch Gmbh, Swiss Federal Institute of         Technology and HTI Biel, Advanced Emission and Fuel                     Economy Concept Using Combined Injection of Gasoline and             Hydrogen in SI-Engines, March 2004, SAE Technical Paper             Series, Paper # 2004-01-1270

        Tomita, Kawahara, Piao, Fujita, and Hamamato; Hydrogen             Combustion and Exhaust Emissions Ignited with Diesel Oil in a         Dual Fuel Engine, September 2001, SAE Technical Paper Series         Paper # 2001-01-3503

        User’s Guide to Mobile6.1 and Mobile6.2, Mobile Source                 Emission Factor Model, United States Environmental
        Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Section, August 2003,             EPA420-R-03-010

        Frequently Asked Questions to MOBILE6, United States                 Environmental Protection Agency, Assessment and
        Standards Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality,             EPA420-B-013, November 2003

        Kihara, Tsukamato, Matsumoto, Kon and Murase; Real-Time             On-Board Measurement of Mass Emission of NOx, Fuel                     Consumption, Road Load, and Engine Output for Diesel                 Engines, March 2000, SAE Technical Paper Series Paper                  # 2000-01-1141

        Lenz and Cozzarini; Emissions and Air Quality, Society of                 Automotive Engineers, 1999, ISBN 0-7680-0248-6, pages             32-33

        Taylor and Gagnon, Environment Canada’s Proposed Plan for         the Canadian Conversion of MOBILE6.2, Environment Canada,         Pollution Data Branch and Transportation Systems Branch,             July, 2003

        Kreucher, Ford Motor Co., Economic, Environmental and                 Energy Life-Cycle Inventory of Automotive Fuels, SAE                     Technical Paper Series, December, 1998, Paper # 982218

        He and Wang, Argonne National Laboratory, Contribution                 Feedstock and Fuel Transportation to Total Fuel-Cycle Energy         Use and Emissions, October 2000, SAE Technical Paper                 Series,  Paper # 2000-01-2976

        Camobreco, Sheehan, Duffield and Graboski, Ecobalance, Inc.,         DOE National Renewable Energy Lab, USDA and Colorado                 School of Mines, Understanding the Life-Cycle Costs and                 Envrionmental Porfile of Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel Fuel,             April 2000, SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper # 2000-01-1487

        Joshi, Lave, McLean and Lankey, Michigan State University,             Carnegie Mellon University and US EPA, A Life Cycle                         Comparison of Alternative Transportation Fuels, April 2000,             SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper # 2000-01-1516

        J.J.J. Louis, Shell Global Solutions, Well-to Wheel Energy Use         and Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Various Vehicle                         Technologies, March 2001, SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper          # 2001-01-1343

        Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits, Air Resources                 Board, California Environmental Protection Agency, State of             California, Guidelines for the Generation and Use of Mobile             Source Emission Reduction Credits, February, 1996 p.71

        Mobile Source Emission Reduction Credits, Air Resources                 Board, California Environmental Protection Agency, State of             California, Guidelines for the Generation and Use of Mobile             Source Emission Reduction Credits, February, 1996 p.77

        Hsu, Practical Diesel-Engine Combustion Analysis, 2002 SAE             International, SAE #R-327 ISBN: 0-7860-0914-6

        Fitch, Motor Truck Engineering Handbook, 4th edition, 1994             Society of Automotive Engineers, ISBN: 1-56091-378-9

        Holt, Alternative Diesel Fuels, 2004 SAE International, ISBN:             0-7680-1331-3

        Ross, Internal Combustion Engine Kit with Electrolysis Cell,             United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent                         # 6,209,493 , April 3, 2001

        Ross, Electrolysis Cell and Internal Combustion Engine Kit, ,             Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Patents # 2278917 &             2349508, July 27, 1998 & June 4, 2001

        Schlapbach and Zuttel, Swiss Federal Laboratories for                     Materials Research and Testing, University of Fribourg,                     Transformation of Hydrogen into Clean Mobility Fuel Using Fuel         Cells: the Storage Problem, submitted to Nature, May 29, 2001

        Holt, Alternative Diesel Fuels, 2004 SAE International, January         2004, ISBN: 0-7680-1331-3, page 180   982218

        Holt , Alternative Diesel Fuels, 2004 SAE International, January         2004, ISBN: 0-7680-1331-3, page 180

        In 1974 John Houseman and D.J/Cerini of the Jet Propulsion             Lab, California Institute of Technology produced a report for             the Society of Automotive Engineers entitled “On-Board                 Hydrogen Generator for a Partial Hydrogen Injection Internal             Combustion Engine”.

        In 1974 F.W. Hoehn and M.W. Dowy of the Jet Propulsion Lab,         prepared a report for the 9th Inter society Energy Conversion         Engineering Conference, entitled “Feasibility Demonstration of         a Road Vehicle Fueled with Hydrogen Enriched Gasoline.”

        In the early eighties George Vosper P. Eng., ex-professor of             Dynamics and Canadian inventor, designed and patented a             device to transform internal combustion engines to run on             hydrogen. He later affirms: “A small amount of hydrogen                 added to the air intake of a gasoline engine would enhance the         flame velocity and thus permit the ngine to operate with                 leaner air to gasoline mixture than otherwise possible. The             result, far less pollution with more power and better mileage.”

        In 1995, Wagner, Jamal and Wyszynski, at the Birmingham,             of University Engineering, Mechanical and Manufacturing,
        demonstrated the advantages of “Fractional addition of                 hydrogen to internal combustion engines by exhaust gas fuel
        reforming.” The process yielded benefits in improved                     combustion stability and reduced nitrogen oxides and                     hydrocarbon emissions.

         Roy MacAlister, PE of the American Hydrogen Association              states the “Use of mixtures of hydrogen in small quantities
         and conventional fuels offers significant reductions in exhaust          emissions” and that “Using hydrogen as a combustion
         stimulant it is possible for other fuels to meet future                      requirements for lower exhaust emissions in California and an
         increasing number of additional states. Relatively small                  amounts of hydrogen can dramatically increase horsepower
         and reduce exhaust emissions.”

         At the HYPOTHESIS Conference, University of Cassino, Italy,          June 26-29, 1995, a group of scientists from the
         University of Birmingham, UK, presented a study about                  hydrogen as a fraction of the fuel. In the abstract of that
         study it stated: “Hydrogen, when used as a fractional additive          at extreme lean engine operation, yields benefits in improved          combustion stability and reduced nitrogen oxides and                      hydrocarbon emissions.”

         In the Spring of 1997, at an international conference held by          the University of Calgary, a team of scientists representing
         the Department of Energy Engineering, Zhejiang University,              China, presented a mathematical model for the process of
         formation and restraint of toxic emissions in                                  hydrogen-gasoline mixture fueled engines. Using the theory          of chemical dynamics of combustion, the group elaborated an          explanation of the mechanism of forming toxic emissions in              spark ignition engines. The results of their experimental                  investigation conclude that because of the characteristics of              hydrogen, the mixture can rapidly burn in hydrogen-gasoline          mixture fueled engines, thus toxic emissions are restrained.          These studies and other research on hydrogen as a fuel                  supplement generated big efforts in trying to develop practical          systems to enhance internal combustion engine performance.          A few of them materialized in patented devices that didn’t              reach the level of performance, safety or feasibility that would          allow them to reach marketing stages.

         California Environmental Engineering (CEE) has tested this              technology and found reduction on all exhaust emissions.
         They subsequently stated: “CEE feels that the result of this              test verifies that this technology is a viable source for                      reducing emissions and fuel consumption on large diesel                  engines.” 

         The American Hydrogen Association Test Lab tested this                  technology and proved that: “Emissions test results indicate
         that a decrease of toxic emissions was realized.” Again, zero          emissions were observed on CO. Northern Alberta Institute
         of Technology. Vehicle subjected to dynamometer loading in          controlled conditions showed drastic reduction of emissions
         and improved horsepower.

         Corrections Canada tested several systems and concluded,              “The hydrogen system is a valuable tool in helping Corrections          Canada meet the overall Green Plan by: reducing vehicle                  emissions down to an acceptable level and meeting the                  stringent emissions standard set out by California and British          Columbia; reducing the amount of fuel consumed by increased          mileage.”

         Additionally, their analysis pointed out that this solution is the          most cost effective. For their research they granted the                  C.S.C. Environmental Award. 

         We also conducted extensive testing in order to prove                  reliability and determine safety and performance of the                  components and the entire system. As a result of these tests,          we achieved important breakthroughs as far as the designs of          the components were concerned. We have since increased the          hydrogen/oxygen production significantly. This has resulted in          increased effectiveness on engine performance.

         The results of these tests were able to confirm the claims              made about this technology: the emissions will be reduced,              the horsepower will increase and the fuel consumption will be          reduced.

From researching the Internet we also found the following information:

To best describe how Hydrogen Enhanced Combustion works, we are providing this excerpt from a University Technical Report, written by Mr. George Vosper, P.Eng.;

...a Hydrogen Generating System (HGS) for trucks or cars has been on the market for some time. Mounted on a vehicle, it feeds small amounts of hydrogen and oxygen into the engine’s air intake. Its makers claim savings in fuel, reduced noxious and greenhouse gases and increased power. The auto industry is not devoid of hoaxes and as engineers are skeptics by training, it is no surprise that a few of them say the idea won’t work.  Such opinions, from engineers can’t be dismissed without explaining why I think these Hydrogen Generating Systems do work and are not just another hoax. The 2nd law of thermodynamics is a likely source of those doubts. Meaning ...the law -would lead you to believe that it will certainly
take more power to produce this hydrogen than can be regained by burning it in the engine. i.e. the resulting energy balance should be negative. If the aim is to create hydrogen by electrolysis to be burned as a fuel, the concept is ridiculous. On the other hand, if hydrogen, shortens the burn time of the main fuel-air mix, putting more pressure on the piston through a longer effective power stroke, and in doing so takes more work out, then this system does make sense.

Does it work? Independent studies, at different universities, using various fuels, have shown that flame speeds increase when small amounts of hydrogen are added to air-fuel mixes. A study by the California Institute of Technology, at its Jet Propulsion Lab Pasadena, in 1974 concluded:

    The J.P.L. concept has unquestionably demonstrated that the         addition of small quantities of gaseous hydrogen to the
    primary gasoline significantly reduces CO and NOx exhaust             emissions while improving engine thermal efficiency

A recent study at the University of Calgary by G.A. Karim on the effect of adding hydrogen to a methane-fuelled engine says:

    ... The addition of some hydrogen to the methane, speeds up         the rates of initiation and subsequent propagation of flames over     the whole combustible mixture range, including for very fast             flowing mixtures. This enhancement of flame initiation and             subsequent flame propagation, reduces the Ignition delay and         combustion period in both spark ignition and compression             ignition engines which should lead to noticeable improvements in     the combustion process and performance.

    What happens inside the combustion chamber is still only a             guess. In an earlier explanation I suggested that the
    extremely rapid flame speed of the added hydrogen oxygen             interspersed through the main fuel air mix, gives the
    whole mix a much faster flame rate. Dr. Brant Peppley, Hydrogen     Systems Group, Royal Military College, Kingston, has convinced     me that insufficient hydrogen is produced to have much effect by     just burning it. He feel’s that the faster burn is most likely due to     the presence of nascent (atomic) hydrogen and nascent oxygen,
    which initiate a chain reaction. I now completely agree. Electrolysis     produces “nascent” hydrogen, and oxygen, which may or may         not reach the engine as nascent. It is more probable that high         temperature in the combustion chamber breaks down the                 oxygen and hydrogen molecules into free radicals (i.e. nascent).     The chain reaction initiated by those free radicals will cause a             simultaneous ignition of all the primary fuel. As it all ignites at         once, no flame front can exist and without it there is no pressure     wave to create knock.

The results of tests at Corrections Canada’s, Bowden Alberta         Institution and other independent tests reinforce the belief that combustion is significantly accelerated. They found with the HGS on, unburned hydrocarbons, CO and NO, in the exhaust were either eliminated or drastically reduced and at the same R.P.M. the engine
produced more torque from less fuel.

Recently I took part in the highway test of a vehicle driven twice over the same 200-kilometre course, on cruise control, at the same speed, once with the system off and once with it on. A temperature sensor from an accurate pyrometer kit had been inserted directly into the exhaust manifold, to eliminate thermal distortion from the catalytic converter. On average, the exhaust manifold temperature was 65°F lower during the second trip when the Hydrogen Generating System was switched on. The fuel consumption with the unit off was 5.13253 km/li. and 7.2481 km/li. with it on, giving a mileage increase of 41.2% and a fuel savings attributable to the unit of 29.18%

From the forgoing, the near absence of carbon monoxide and unburnt hydrocarbons confirms a very complete and much faster burn. Cooler exhaust temperatures show that more work is taken out during the power stroke.  More torque from less fuel at the same R.P.M. verifies that higher pressure from a faster burn, acting through a longer effective power stroke, produces more torque and thus more work from less fuel. The considerable reduction in nitrous oxides (NOx} was a surprise. I had assumed that the extreme temperatures from such a rapid intense burn would produce more NO.,. Time plus high temperature are both essential for nitrous oxides to form. As the extreme burn temperatures are of such short duration and temperature through the remainder of the power stroke and the entire exhaust stroke, will, on average, be much cooler. With this in mind, it is not so surprising that less NOx is produced when the HGS is operating.

Assume a fuel-air mix is so lean as to normally take the entire power stroke (180°) to complete combustion.  Educated estimates suggest the presence of nascent hydrogen and oxygen decreases the burn time of the entire mix by a factor of ten (10). If a spark advance of 4° is assumed, the burn would be complete at about 14° past top dead centre. Such a burn will be both rapid and intense. The piston would have moved less than 2% of its stroke by the end of the burn, allowing over 98% of its travel to extract work. The lower exhaust manifold temperatures observed when the Hydrogen Generating System was in use can be viewed as evidence for this
occurrence.

Power consumed by this model of the electrolysis cell is about 100 watts. If an alternator efficiency of 60% is assumed, then 0.2233 horsepower will produce enough wattage. Even on a compact car, a unit would use less than ¼ % of its engine’s output, or about what is used by the headlights. The energy regained from burning the
hydrogen in the engine is so small that virtually all of the power to the electrolyser must be considered lost. That loss should not, however, exceed V4%, so that any increase in the engine’s thermal efficiency more than ¼ %, is a real gain.

An engineering classmate suggested a grass fire as a useful analogy to understand combustion within an engine.  The flame front of a grass fire is distinct and its speed depends in part on the closeness of the individual blades.  If grass is first sprayed with a small amount of gasoline to initiate combustion, then all blades will ignite almost
in unison. In much the same way, small amounts of nascent oxygen and hydrogen present in the fuel-air mix will cause a chain reaction that ignites all the primary fuel molecules simultaneously. Faster more complete burns are the keys to improving efficiency in internal combustion engines. Power gained from increased thermal efficiency less the power to the electrolysis unit, is the measure of real gain or loss. It follows from the foregoing paragraph that even a modest gain in thermal efficiency will be greater than the power used by an electrolysis unit. The net result should therefore be positive. Thus onboard electrolysis systems supplying hydrogen and oxygen to internal combustion engines, fuelled by diesel, gasoline or propane, should substantially increase efficiencies.             

While the auto industry searches for the perfect means of eliminating harmful emissions, consideration should be given to what these systems can do now, since the HGS considers reduction of harmful emissions even as the engine ages. Almost all unburned hydrocarbons, CO and NO,, are eliminated. Reducing hydrocarbons and CO causes a slight rise in the percentage of CO2 in the exhaust, but as less fuel is used, the actual quantity of CO2 produced is reduced by roughly the same ratio as the savings in fuel. In brief, noxious gas is almost eliminated and greenhouse gas is decreased in proportion to the reduction in fuel consumption. Nothing I have learned so far has lessened my belief that the benefits of using electrolysis units to supply hydrogen to most types of internal
combustion engines are both real and considerable.
               

    Reprinted with the permission of George Vosper, P. Eng. June         1998

    That'll give you something to start with.

Yes, there are scams out there, just like there are "Quack" Doctors, Lawyers and Engineers.  But this science is sound.

     Jer

 

Thanks for the additional info! 

As for the .org, those "1st level domain" names used to mean something.  .com was commercial, .org, organization, and .net, network.  If you were a commercial venue, you were supposed to use .com.  That is no longer the case.  Anyone can buy any of those names for any reason and use them as they like. 

There are still some the have meaning, such as .gov for government sites, .us for more government stuff, and .edu for educational.

Hope to see you around more!

Jason