Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]
Who is online
In total there are 38 users online :: 3 registered, 0 hidden and 35 guests
Most users ever online was 218 on Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:58 pm
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] based on users active over the past 5 minutes
Looks good! Nylon is fine and is completely inert to most acids. Provided it doesn't get extremely hot (unlikely) there's no real risk there.
How fast is it to produce hydrogen? Like how many m3 per minutes? Any video of it in action?
Would it be easily viable to store, your hydrogen in compressed tanks? Providing they are purged of air first obviously. Then you could sell them to the less fortunate
He has a system that I think it kind like a big syringe, the hydrogen fills the syringe, then a hydraulic pump compresses it, then it´s stored. So there is no air/oxygen contaimination.
That´s right, I am going to load the pictures and the project as soon as possible. There is no contamination.
Let´s think how to put the H2 in action on Hybrids.
I have design a combustion cannon in steel, H2M Missile.
I think it is more likely that this reduces loss of energy.
Free energy is a myth, a false one at that.
I've seen a couple of seemingly objective videos on youtube that indicate it does work.No holy grail, just a bit more mileage.
I posted the vid because it shows you how to build it.
Edit: My brother plans on running the reaction from a secondary carbattery.
This means energy is put in from the grid.
Cheaper than gas anyway.
This topic makes me wonder...how fast would a spudgun sized ( whatever that is) chamber be filled with a H2 and O2 mix using batteries to split the molecules?
I imagine a piston hybrid with a chamber semi full of water producing it's own perfect mix off of a patterypack..
No more metering, or buying fuel of any kind...
And on top of that...it's green!
All you'd need is a pressuregauge to monitor the process.
Would batteries supply enough juice to do the job and...how long will it take to fill?
Not sure if this idea is enough for a split topic...
Gun Freak wrote:
Oh my friggin god stop being so awesome, that thing is pure kick ass. Most innovative and creative pneumatic that the files have ever come by!
Can't ask for a better compliment!!
I assure you, it does not reduce loss of energy (from your standpoint at least, but I'm getting to that) - it adds another step, a lossy one at that, into what is already only about a 30% efficient cycle.
Here in Canada, when one accounts for the inefficiency of internal combustion engines, grid energy works out to be very close in cost to buying gasoline. Your gasoline is more expensive than ours, so it would certainly be cheaper to operate an electric car than a gasoline driven car, especially when one considers the efficiency of electric motors in comparison to internal combustion engines (ICEs).
But using grid energy to produce fuel to burn in an ICE? You're just stacking up inefficiencies at that point. If gasoline was unavailable, or cost ten times what grid energy does (per useful unit of energy which, as I mentioned, is about 30% of the theoretical value) I could see it being viable. I can't, however, see it being a viable onboard system, just due to the power requirements. You'd have to be drawing kilowatts from the battery to make a difference (and at 30mpg, about 100kW to actually power the vehicle independently). Is the argument here that comparatively miniscule quantities of hydrogen in the fuel mix, less than 1%, make a significant difference to fuel efficiency? If so, I'd really appreciate a link to some peer reviewed papers on the topic.
As to using the electrolysis products in a hybrid: a 2:1 hydrogen/oxygen mix is FAR from perfect. A 4:1 mix produces nearly identical pressure with a higher SOS in the combustion products, and is less prone to detonation. If I were running hydrogen/oxygen in a hybrid, I'd be looking at something more like 6:1, which still gives good pressure (about 14% lower than 2:1) and increases sound speed by 25% while greatly reducing the possibility of detonation. Even if you're going for maximum pressure with no regard for buffering, the ideal mix is about 2.3:1.
How long would it take to fill? A typical piston hybrid might have 40kJ chemical potential energy in the chamber, so it's safe to assume you'd need 80kJ from the battery (accounting for the inefficiency of a good electrolysis device). One car battery stores around 2-4MJ, so that would give you at least 20 shots before you needed to recharge. It's reasonable to draw 500W from a car battery for extended periods, which results in a recharge time (for the hybrid) of 160 seconds. In practice, you could draw more power. Probably one kilowatt or so, but you'd need to check the battery specs.
Spudfiles' resident expert on all things that sail through the air at improbable speeds, trailing an incandescent wake of ionized air, dissociated polymers and metal oxides.
Depending on how complex the electrolysis cell is I suspect you could fill a "typical" combustion chamber in anything ranging from a couple seconds to a couple minutes. The amount of energy required from the battery is, to a first approximation, the same as the total combustion energy you'll get when the gun is fired. If the combustion energy is a KJ then you'll need to pull at least that much energy from the battery pack. If your gun is 10% efficient that means you need 10x the energy from the battery as the energy your projectile will end up with. Given the costs of batteries I would think that just buying an O2 tank and using propane (butane, ...) would end up being simpler, cheaper and more efficient.
You are missing the point RJB. The point is that a premade fuel (oxidizer and reducer) is almost always going to end up being cheaper than using a battery to create the fuel via electrolysis.
Also, if I am reading your numbers correctly you've posted irrelevant data. "PCS" is?
The energies quoted are per gram (I assume that is what you mean by "Gr"). For a combustion process that is an irrelevant unit. You need to convert the energies per gram to energies per unit of oxidizer. If you do that you get H2 at 119Kcal/mol oxygen and butane at 105Kcal/mol oxygen. A difference of about 10%, not the ~300% your numbers indicate.
PCS is higher calorific power, Gr is a gram...
And the H2 (I refered) won´t be provide by an electrolysis machine, will come from my H2R, not directly because after the reaction, it will be save on a chamber, and this is the chamber that will be stay together with the gun.
Still, the difference in energy between H2+O2 and a hydrocarbon+O2 is fairly minimal. The only real advantage of H2 as the reducing agent is the very high burn rate. Of course, that just raises the possibility of detonation.
couldn't detonation be useful given appropriate build materials and a light projectile, due to the increase in propellant gas speed?
Detonation -> you hybrid/combustion cannon became a bomb, turning itself+yourself to vapor
What do you mean with light projectile?
Do you think that in a gun the burn rate doesn´t matter jimmy?
Last edited by RJB INDUSTRIES on Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Who is online
Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]