ஹைட்ரோகேன் fuel

InstructablesInstructables
Username
Password

(forgot?)
Sign up now or login

* Answers
* Contests
* Forums
* Submit

Go

* Food
* Health
* Living
* Outside
* Play
* Technology
* Workshop
* DIY Quiz

*
Science
* Apple
* Arduino
* CNC
* Electronics
* Lasers
* LEDs
* Soft Circuits
* USB
* Software
* See More »
* See Less «

* Art
* Assistive Tech
* Audio
* Cell Phones
* Clocks
* Computers
* El Wire
* Gadgets
* Laptops
* Linux
* Microcontrollers
* Microsoft
* Photography
* Remote Control
* Reuse
* Robots
* Sensors
* Soldering
* Speakers
* Steampunk
* Tools
* Websites
* Wireless

fb-root
Separate Hydrogen and Oxygen from Water Through Electrolysis
PrintPrint PDF Make this a favorite!Favorite FacebookFacebook TwitterTwitter Send this to a friendE-mail
by hooloovoo33
Instructables is Hiring! Java Developer & Sales Positions
introSeparate Hydrogen and Oxygen from Water Through Electrolysis
Electrolysis a method of separating elements by pushing an electric current through a compound. It is used in various industrial applications such as removing copper from its ore. It is also used to separate hydrogen and oxygen from water. Electrolysis isn't the most efficient way to obtain hydrogen, but it is one of the easiest and cheapest ways to "homebrew" hydrogen.

Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. With the "green-energy" craze and talk of powering our future oil-free economy on hydrogen, it has gotten much attention in the last few years. Learning about this potential fuel of the future is important and interesting. Besides, hydrogen is a powerful fuel, and blowing stuff up in the name of science is fun .

Separate Hydrogen and Oxygen from Water Through Electrolysis
image not found
loading...
Twice as much hydrogen as oxygen
hooloovoo33
i

Remove these adsRemove these ads by Signing Up.

step 1Electrolysis of Water - An Explanation
This section is an explanation of the electrolysis of water, feel free to skip it if you don't find it interesting.

2H2O(l) = 2H2(g) + O2(g)

As everyone knows a water molecule is formed by two elements: two positive Hydrogen ions and one negative Oxygen ion. The water molecule is held together by the electromagnetic attraction between these ions. When electricity is introduced to water through two electrodes, a cathode (negative) and an anode (positive), these ions are attracted to the opposite charged electrode. Therefore the positively charged hydrogen ions will collect on the cathode and the negatively charged oxygen will collect on the anode.

When these ions come into contact with their respective electrodes they either gain or lose electrons depending on there ionic charge. (In this case the hydrogen gains electrons and the oxygen loses them) In doing so these ions balance their charges, and become real, electrically balanced, bona fide atoms (or in the case of the hydrogen, a molecule).

The reason this system isn't very efficient is because some of the electrical energy is converted into heat during the process. There have been reports of 50%-70% efficiency, but I doubt that is possible in a home environment. Anyway, enough with the boring stuff, lets go make some gas!
Electrolysis of Water - An Explanation
image not found
loading...
Twice as much hydrogen as oxygen
hooloovoo33
i
« previous step To Download the PDF or View All Steps,
Become a Pro Member » next step »
595 comments

Add Comment
1-40 of 595 next »
4
Feb 12, 2011. 8:04 PMWesley666 says:
It would be better if you used sodium sulfate instead of salt. With salt the two half reactions change so that, although hydrogen is still produced, you are also going to produce chlorine gas, which is toxic.
REPLY
Feb 11, 2011. 3:33 PMelectro.magnumman says:
Can anyone tell me for sure? if the Anode or the Cathode produces the hydrogen? Videos on YouTube of experiments say its the Anode, Your saying its the Cathode?

Could you imagine how cool it would be if you took a home hydrogen machine, attached it to a CNGPUMP.com to fill a CNG vehicle with Hydrogen instead of CNG (compressed natural gas) made from home tap water?

A CNG car is already equiped to handle a gas stored at 3600psi, and hydrogen is fine at that pressure (keep the oxygen out, or your making a bomb). I know you may have to make some timing modifications such as retarding the timing to TDC, but I really can't see many other changes needed.

And since the vehicle is already Bi-Fuel, if the hydrogen runs out, you just run on gas. Then overnight you slow fuel your tank again using the CNGPUMP from your home brew hydrogen. Hmmmmmm
REPLY
Jan 30, 2011. 5:43 PMteche says:
one dangerous way to get graphite is open up a really cheap brand of battery such as radio shack or other supermarket brand batteries.
batteries apart.jpg
REPLY
Jan 3, 2011. 12:28 AMneaj says:
what type or kind of wire can i use? I want to try this experiment myself.
REPLY
Aug 23, 2010. 2:38 PMonebadvette says:
One thing people need to keep in mind with this kind of setup is that you are not going to get the kind of flow required to do any kind of work that will help MPG. These HHO system type things are sold on ebay with plans etc. The amount of work and energy required to get a substantial amount of gas is...substantial. I don't have a degree in physics, but used to run a machine that was designed to make pure O2 for submarines. It required 1050 amps of DC current to produce 120scfh with double that for Hydrogen which we disposed of overboard. The amount of gas produced from a 12 volt source is not enough to help your car. It's a cool science experiment for school, but that's about it. Former MM2(SS) A-gang type. (google what that is. I also used to run the CO2 scrubbers and COH2 burners for atmosphere control.)
REPLY
Dec 14, 2010. 3:57 AMdaddyo44907 says:
I have to disagree with you. I have worked with HHO for 7 years. Our engines receive 14.7 parts of air to each part of fuel vapor. The oxygen content of that is is 20% or less. That is not enough oxygen to burn all of the hydrocarbons. The result is carbon monoxide and a few other greenhouse gases. Adding more oxygen content --- to the metered air --- will increase the burn so that more of the metered fuel is burned and less metered fuel makes it out the exhaust. Oxygen is an oxidizer, without it, the chemical process of combustion will not produce a flame. The more oxidizer, the hotter the flame. People that are using HHO in their vehicles have near zero greenhouse emissions. The engines run smoother, have more power, oil changes are fewer, fuel economy follows -- if and only if the government mandated vehicle computers allow it. They are programmed to maintain 14.7 parts of air for each part of fuel vapor. There lies the problem with fuel economy. The added oxygen, from HHO, does make a positive difference. The added Hydrogen is only a small amount of fuel, but it too makes a difference.
REPLY
Dec 15, 2010. 11:20 PMonebadvette says:
Disagree with ME all you like. You CAN'T disagree with the laws of physics and chemistry. What company do you work for? What degree do you have? 7 years? I ran these machines for the U.S. Navy for 12 years as a Machinist Mate. Don't take it from me, here's a link that will dumb down the physics/ chemistry for you. http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam.shtml and this http://www.aardvark.co.nz/hho_scam2.shtml Now, I'll gather that your going to reply and state that "no, no, no, you've got it wrong." Okay, what's your source? What are the numbers you are going to give us? Consider this as well. Hot rodders use nitrous to have gains in horsepower. Of course, they add more fuel to the available oxygen, but the pitfall is that there is limited amounts of it stored under pressure. When the bottle runs empty, there goes your source. Reread my initial post. If these things were really that efficient, the Navy would use them on submarines for life support. Not just to get more MPG in your car. The company that makes the machines for the Navy is calld Treadwell and their upgraded machines pump out a whopping 225 cubic feet per HOUR. A car is rated in cubic feet per MINUTE. Big difference even in usage. Also, look at that machine and what it takes to make it work. http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/treadwell-supplies-oxygen-generator-components-for-nuclear-subs-2-04690/ If you have a device that puts out that amount of CFM, sell it to them and make millions and I'll be quiet. Until then people, these things are nothing more than a cool experiment to show kids. Here's one more great article totally debunking this. http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/gas-mileage/4310717
REPLY
Dec 16, 2010. 7:25 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Of course I can disagree with the laws of physics and chemistry. They have been proven wrong many many times. How do you think they got written. Pooof --- there they are? Nadda. John Bedini, Tom Bearden, Howard Johnson; just a few modern day geniuses. It is statements like yours that hold back the future of mankind. You do it because you were taught wrong (you were lied to and made to believe the lie). Let these young people open their minds to possibilities. Don't close or block doors they want to persue, just because you have been there and done that; what might you have missed?

Electrolysis of water is the easiest way to demonstrate the chemical process of separating the ions. Let them do their experiments and let them form their hypothesis; and let them dream of ways to use and improve the knowledge.

As for Nitrous (NOX) --- it is not a fuel --- it is an Oxidizer. Oxides are what make the existing fuel burn hotter.

As for HHO, it only takes one quarter of a liter, per minute, to reduce the harmful emissions that exist in the engine exhaust. Wow, that much. Automobiles are not going to run on HHO, per-say, they are engineered to take in air (they are air pumps). The air dilutes the powerful HHO "perfect fuel". Fossil Fuels need Air in order to burn a flame; HHO does not. HHO is an explosive gas; a perfect mixture. It is many times more powerful than gasoline. I know from experimenting; not from reading what someone wrote about it. Money makes the world go round; Big Oil fuels the world. Big Oil creates the illusions that you read - and believe. Of course, they make it very believable. You can't disagree with the Laws of Physics and Chemistry. Right?
REPLY
Dec 16, 2010. 5:18 PMonebadvette says:
You got at least one thing right....NOS allows you to ADD more fuel because the benefit is an increase in HP. You're statements are more rhetoric than anything. Yes, I think people should push the limits with technology. You have to start somewhere. But to state that this system will increase your MPG's is just rubbish. It won't do that with the current materials and technology. Someday maybe it will. If a new metal or combination of metals that allow a smaller amount of current to allow this process to happen and there is a breakthrough of a catalyst that allows the electrolysis to be near self sustaining, then it would be great. Most of the gasoline that we "burn" is sent out the exhaust pipe.
As to your experiences, what degrees do you have? where have you been published? What field experience do you have other than tinkering around in your garage? One quarter of a liter per minute that reduces emissions. That's your findings? The setup presented here won't make that much. Did you bother checking out the machine from treadwell? They make 225 cubic feet per HOUR. And this is getting electrical power from a nuclear reactor. Think that little box in your car is going to make a quarter liter per minute? Wow. I have ocean front property for you in Arizona. REAL CHEAP. Call me.
REPLY
Dec 16, 2010. 7:04 PMdaddyo44907 says:
The people here are not claiming this "experiment" will provide more mpg. This apparatus is a visual aid at most. Someday the world skeptics will realize it takes more than a gallon equivalent of gasoline energy --- to make a gallon of gasoline. How is that for efficiency? Care to compare it to making hydrogen? How about the cost of delivery? Hydrogen can be made at the pump; no middle men to mark up the price. Heck, it can be made in the home; in fact, hydrogen was piped to homes as fuel for stoves and furnaces in 200 major cities, long before natural gas was harnessed, Natural gas eventually used those pipes. It cost nothing to manufacture the natural gas - just delivery of a waste product at the time.

HHO gas is easy to manufacture. It is easy to use it to overcome the pollution caused from burning fossil fuels. It is possible to get better mpg with it. It can be manufactured on board as you drive. The same can be accomplished with just adding oxygen to the metered air. The same can be accomplished by just adding hydrogen to the metered air. So tell me, why won't the EPA just allow more metered air? The rest of the world does; and the rest of the world gets better mpg. Pollution from automobiles is man made. In this country, it is mandated to be 14.7 parts air to each part of fuel vapor. That is so that we the people can not easily get better mpg. It is enforced by our automobile computers.

You are correct about one thing. There are some scam companies out there that advertise and guarantee better percentages of fuel efficiencies. There are no guarantees that any one vehicle will get better mpg's. But, there are thousands of silent testimonies out there, that can attest to getting better fuel economy because of HHO. In the beginning, one had to keep their mouth shut in order to keep their HHO Generator.

You have your opinion of the HHO system based on what someone else published, researched. You are welcomed to it. I for one, have my knowledge of HHO based on work and experimenting that I and others like me accomplished by not listening to skeptics. I thank you for keeping me at the grinding wheel. It is my calling.

As for you having Ocean front property in Arizona, tell me how a smart guy like your self, got suckered in to buying it.
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 3:38 AMonebadvette says:
Wow. Your thoughts on this subject are comical at best. HHO can be made at home, and in the car. The sheer VOLUME of gas requried to make the difference in output of the ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) in power, MPG, or even just to reduce the greenhouse emissions WILL NOT be attained by a system installed in an automobile with TODAY's technology. In the future? It is a possibility.

I was pretty transparent about my experience with this topic, while yours is still nothing but your meanderings on the internet. Where are you published? If you are so secure in the technology that you are using, where is the proof? What sources do you have that are verifiable and repeatable that meet the common scientific standards? Sorry, but "I have my own knowledge" is nothing more than a faith based standard. No more verifiable than asking someone about the existence of God. It's what they believe in based on faith. I'm looking for scientific data that backs up your statements seeing as how you responded to my statements about how much you need to run a car and that this instructable is for demonstration purposes, not an HHO car conversion post. You chimed in on that. PROVE me wrong and make millions, no BILLIONS in the process. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure this back and forth is moot.
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 6:33 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Well young wippersnapper, you will just have to live a little longer and experience more out of life before you will understand anything someone tells you. Maybe you will grow up to be a scientist or a scientologist. A good start would be for you to pay attention to what you read.

As for it being possible to make HHO in your car, it is possible. We the people are doing it. As for cleaning up the exhaust emissions, only a half pint of HHO per minute is needed for in-town driving. Not very much is it! It takes less than 5 amps to make that much. That is 60 watts of power. Wow, so much power. You can't make that much, but the rest of us can and do.

I am amazed at how one sided your posts are. No wonder you got stuck with lake ocean front property in Arizona.

But something good came out of this. You now have received your first comments on this website. Wow, that must be a 2 year record. By the way, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you know that Profile thingy, well you forgot to fill it out. If you need an example to follow, look up mine.
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 11:41 PMonebadvette says:
Young wippersnapper? I'll let the readers judge for themselves as for the validity of your claims. You've provided NO real facts when asked. NO SOLID PROOF, other than to forward your obvious agenda from your profile "thingy". Yes, I know what it is. No, I'm not going to change it. I've completed 10 strategic deterrent patrols on Trident ballistic missile submarines. Probably more technology on board than most people see in their lifetime. I pay attention to what I read. You can keep on believing in a device that is akin to perpetual motion. It doesn't work. Chemistry, as well as physics, prove it doesn't provide enough energy to make a difference at this time. Yes, the process itself works, but not on a big enough scale to do what these people claim. It's obvious from your profile what your agenda here is. 33 posts in 3 days? You must be here trying to scam people into believing the fals science that is HHO. The internet, and any physicist or chemist will tell you, that it's a scam.
The Arizona property was in jest. You're 63 and should know sarcasm when you see it. I've been here at this site, unregistered however, since inception. I'm sure you have better things to do with your time in retirement than to go back and forth on the internet about a system that you think works, and which I, as well as anyone with moderate common sense, knows doesn't. Good day.
REPLY
Dec 26, 2010. 10:30 PMzuner2012 says:
@ both of you. Since making HHO takes such small amounts of energy, small solar panels can provide enough power to create it. Consider this: letting solar panels sit and create a lot of HHO while you're watching a movie or reading a book seems fairly efficient to me. Sure, the law of conservation of energy says energy cannot be creates nor destroyed, only transferred. The creation of HHO would be converting the sun's energy to chemical energy in HHO. We can then use this to increase the efficiency of fuel burning.

But hey, whatever.
REPLY
Jan 1, 2011. 1:08 AMonebadvette says:
Here's the real deal with all of this. Do your own experiments and see what results you get. I'm here to tell you that if you think you're going to the cfm required to produce any kind of results that will make a significant impact, try it and see. let me know what your results are, and if they're that significant, I'll go in half with you and we'll make millions.
REPLY
4
Dec 23, 2010. 6:51 PMThe Incredible IT Maker says:
ppl.... pointless to argue over the net......
REPLY
1
Jan 2, 2011. 7:56 PMplayer2756 says:
thats something i can agree with
REPLY
Sep 1, 2010. 2:12 AMCyborgGold says:
Seeing as how you have experience with my question, though it is off topic here... I have been wondering how much oxygen produced constantly (eg. liters per minute) per cubic foot of space would be needed to have a noticeable positive effect? I am considering making a solar powered device that would feed oxygen into my house to freshen the place up a bit similar to the way plants do, since I can't seem to keep a plant alive for any respectable period of time. I'm pretty sure the oxy generator would require more power than a typical solar cell could produce (amperage wise) but am curious about how much gas would theoretically be needed. Thank You in advance if you can help!
REPLY
Sep 1, 2010. 7:07 PMonebadvette says:
You're going to need a lot of power to produce a large amount of oxygen. Someone smarter than I figured out how much energy is requried to produce X amount of O2. I know for certain that the amount needed to have performance gains on an engine that uses 500 CFM (per MINUTE) is substantail. We had 1050 AMPS of DC current running through the cells to produce 120scfh (per HOUR) drawing power from a nuclear reactor. To refresh the air in your home, figure out how many cubic feet your house is, then get a fan that does that amount of change in whatever specific time you like. You get the fresh air that way with less power. Plants are easier than you think. Consider an automated watering system and put them in the windows for sunlight. Sorry, probably not the answer you are looking for, but that's fact. I chimed in here because there are people out there who believe that these HHO products will give the gains advertised and I know it not to be true. There's no conspiracy, just scientific fact to debunk it. Yes, you can make O2 and H from water. To make a difference in an automobile, you need a lot of it.
REPLY
Dec 28, 2010. 6:55 AMscram1 says:
I'm new here...Just wondering if anyone tried making a larger version HO generator and using it for home heating ??I would imagine solar and or wind power could be used to produce the electricity needed for electrolysis.. I would imagine the system could be used on demand, making the gas when heating is needed ?? just wondering........
REPLY
Jun 30, 2008. 11:30 PMsixminus4is5 says:
First off, there's no such thing as HHO gas. Hydrogen and oxygen are both diatomic elements so during electrolysis the gases released are O2, H2, water vapor, and some(depending on the electrolyte) Cl2. Second, hydrogen has a very low boiling point, around 20.3K, which is much lower than nitrogen's 77.4K boiling point therefore it's impossible to condense hydrogen using a nitrogen bath. Third, the best electrolyte depends on electrode materials. For copper and most steels NaOH is the best electrolyte, for carbon and platinum group metals acids are fine. Cl2 production is a concern with NaCl but the amount produced will be small. The half cell potential for is slightly more energetically favorible for O2 production but at higher voltages Cl2 production takes over, lower voltages are best and remember that electrolysis is a function of current and not voltage.
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 8:51 AMdaddyo44907 says:
HHO is a term used to refer to the hydrogen and oxygen released via electrolysis. The Nitrogen info is immaterial, but if it is being produced, it will deminnish in the burn. Electrode material needs to hold up to the bombardment of the electron flow, as well as the electrolyte (if any). Copper is a no no any way you look at it. Unless you think for yourself, you are only as smart as you are taught. I respect your education.
REPLY
Jul 6, 2008. 7:14 PMzolar1 says:
Here is something that might be useful for everyone. It talks about Electrical Conductivity of various materials .

Tonight I took a piece of 1" copper pipe and flattened it into a 2" x 4" plate. I used that for the negative electrode and stainless steel for the positive electrode sice copper disintegrates if you use it as a positive electrode.

Amp draw was MUCH higher than for stainless steel alone and production seemed a lot higher too.

The 2 plates in a solution of Lye and distilled water yielded almost 30 amps. Plate spacing was about 1/16" (roughly).

If you decide to try the copper, please post your findings here for everyone's benefit.
REPLY
Jul 11, 2008. 10:10 AMsyncdram says:
The reason for such high amperge is due to such a small plate surface area and your voltage per plate gap. With a cell design say +nnn-nnn+ what you need to do is achieve 1.50 to 2.0 volts per plate gap. Anything over this voltage per plate gap creates wasted energy and heat. Thus your high amperage with only 2 plates. +-. Also increase your plate gap to 1/8th if your not going to use nuetral plates. 1/16th is to close for a straight series cell. Your amperage will be through the rough and thermal runaway will accure within minutes. The simplest cell that i have in my lab is a 18 plate cell with 11 nuetral plates running on 12v at 10 amps producing cold 1.6 lpm. And this cell is made from wall plates. Hope this helps.
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 8:15 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Don't forget the amount of electrolyte. It too affects the amperage -- directly, by lowering the resistance of the water. Since the copper conducts better, it lowers resistance; thus more output. But as we both know, copper is going to muck up the water and cause the surface area on the other plates to muck up.
REPLY
Mar 12, 2009. 12:47 AMElgin4 says:
what are neutral plates? What exactly do they do?
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 8:26 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Learn more about Neutral plates here: http://www.hho4free.com/neutral_plates.htm
REPLY
Mar 12, 2009. 6:51 AMzolar1 says:
Neutral plates are just that: neutral. They are not connected to any direct source of power. They act like resistors and also give more surface area to make the hydroxy. If you simply used 12V across 2 plates (electrodes), the current would heat the water up to boiling, thus not making Hydroxy. Neutral plate (4 to 6 are best) cuts down the amps and you make more hydroxy and less steam.
REPLY
Jul 11, 2008. 11:07 AMzolar1 says:
Thanks for the info. Unfortunately, it's hard to fit big plates inside a small PVC pipe. My aim was to get as many inside the pipe as I could. If I could have done it, I would have used 2"x6" plates. I might be able to fit 15 plates inside the pipe, but that will require very close plate spacing and a really tight fit. Any suggestions? I am looking for a ratio of 1L/min/L of engine size or roughly 2L/min on my wife's car. 3+ L/min on my dad's S-10.
REPLY
Jul 12, 2008. 3:06 PMsyncdram says:
The plate config i noted above in a well sealed (air tight) container will produce 1lpm easy. at 25 amps with a spacing of 1/8th and will fit in a 4 inch pvc container. Key note is to have a (good air tight container). Any place other than the outlet tube of your electrolyzer tank is a huge loss in gas output. This is almost always over looked when testing for out put. A cell that can produce 1lpm with just the microscopic escape rout to find will cut down your flow rate substantially. You may then think the cell itself is the problem. The goals you have set for yourself are very high for automotive use. To achieve 2 and 3 lpm would require amperage from your cars alternator that would surely pull hard on those alternators. 40 and above. Not to say you can't do it. Just unrealistic for automotive use. 1lpm will be fine, and the goal should be to find less energy input and have more output. No more than 25 to 30 amps max for automotive. And use 10 gage wire. I run these levels in my lab for torches ect at the rates you are looking for. The wire and hardware such as switches and relay and fuse protection to run safely accounting for high heat temps from the water ect would have to be larger than 10 gage to handle the amperage. If not your wires and switches will become very hot and may fail. So i hope this helps and has given some insight.
REPLY
Jul 11, 2008. 9:49 AMsyncdram says:
I have been working with hydroxy for sometime now 8 years and must note that in this picture the diagram is wrong. The negative plate and or plates along with neutral plates create the hydrogen only and not oxygen. The positive plate or plates only create oxygen only. The 2 gases mixed together is called hydroxy. So only the negative plate will create hydrogen and the positive plate will create oxygen. I'm sure the author made a typographical mistake. Also when testing cells or cell designs always used distilled water and lye. Never add copper of any sort to your mix or your water and plates will turn brown. For the average user everything in the water needs to be stainless no less than 304 grade. Baking soda if added to water weather distilled or tap will also make your water turn to muck even if you are using 316 grade stainless. You can use 304 grade wall plates in distilled water with lye for your electrolyte and your plates and water will stay clean. I hope this will help everyone in there testing with hydroxy. Remember think safety. Hydroxy is highly explosive.
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 8:06 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Right on the money.
REPLY
Jul 25, 2008. 8:16 AMwpe35 says:
i use a 3x5 inch stainless steel plate insulate the edges then use 19 ga stainless wire wrap eqals 10 on each side solid plate is negative wire is positive produce 2/3 liter per minute 6 amp draw at 12vdc heat range is between 140 to 160 degree then use air intake to cool it on vehicle
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 8:04 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Excellent output for a 6 amp draw. The temperature however, says something is not right.
REPLY
Jul 28, 2008. 7:42 AMbadboybil says:
I built a hydrogen generator with interior dimensions of 3x5x6in made of 1/2in lexan. I was thinking of using 16- 2.5x4in stainless steel plates with a spacing of.25in 8 positive and 8 negative. I think its 304 stainless. Is it to many plates? Is the spacing to close or to far away?
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 8:01 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Your spacing is right on. Your plate configuration is parallel, meaning you have alternating positive and negative plates. It will produce as much gas, as you can supply amperage. But it will not be efficient. Electrolysis is mot efficient when the voltage between the plates (cell water area) is 1.25 to 2 volts; per water area. Any voltage above this causes heat. The higher the voltage, the more heat loss you will have. You can make the cell run cool, but you will loose efficiency. If you want learn more about this, visit my website hho4free.com (check out "Neutral Plates"
REPLY
Aug 13, 2008. 4:48 AMsquirts1 says:
Wouldn't you get better results in your car if you were to use only the hydrogen not mixed with the oxygen?? Or am I missing something?
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 7:53 AMdaddyo44907 says:
Your question is a good one. I would have to agree with you. I say that because modern day automobiles have computer controlled fuel delivery systems. They look for a change in the exhaust oxygen content. They look for change in the atmosphere pressure. They look for change in the moisture content of the air. They look for change in the temperature of the engine. They look for change in the volatility of the fuel. We are screwed.
REPLY
Aug 22, 2008. 2:54 AMvrw says:
I dont understand how law of conservation of enegry applies here (in this case of electrolysis). Due to luck, water exists in huge quantities in the form of seas on earth. Water already contains fuel ( i.e. H2 ). By electrolysis we are just saperating it. It is just that due to some reason our elctrolysis process is not as efficient as required. I think law of conservation of energy does not apply here. Just in case, we are able to somehow create electrolysis process efficient enough, that does not mean we would create a perpetual machine, (which will brake the law of conservation of energy.)
REPLY
Dec 17, 2010. 7:46 AMdaddyo44907 says:
You are correct about the word Perpetual. Eventually there will be a failure. So replace your idea with "continuous motion", knowing that eventually there will be a failure; even if it is only once in a million years.

In addition, water is being ignited today, by Plasma Arc. Water vapor can be ignited when it is sprayed across a Plasma Arc. Most likely, this method will replace electrolysis. Companies are developing Plasma Ignition Systems, and Plasma producing Spark Plugs. They are burning water, but they are finding that there may be a need to change the design of the internal combustion engine for this to work at its best. This is a good subject to research if you are electronics minded.
REPLY
1-40 of 595 next »

Add Comment

* related

ElectrolysisElectrolysis
by Riley C

Make a Ballistic Bubble MachineMake a Ballistic Bubble Machine
by ynze

Distill Hydrogen PeroxideDistill Hydrogen Peroxide
by spencer012

Easy Elephants Toothpaste ExperimentEasy Elephants Toothpaste Experiment
by sciencebob.com

Generating Hydrogen... without BatteriesGenerating Hydrogen... without Batteries
by icinnamon

Amaze A Science Class with Elephant Toothpaste Amaze A Science Class with Elephant Toothpaste
by kentchemistry.com

Simple ElectrolysisSimple Electrolysis
by sjs229

Collecting Hydrogen and OxygenCollecting Hydrogen and Oxygen
by ferroucious

Decomposition of Hydrogen peroxide by Potassium permanganateDecomposition of Hydrogen peroxide by Potassium permanganate
by cforchemistry

"Elephant Toothpaste" with Potassium permanganate and Hydrogen peroxide
by cforchemistry

More Related »

* info
* subscribers
* stats

180,333
views
4.72 (29 ratings)
Ratings:
hooloovoo33
1
Author:hooloovoo33
Published:Aug 27, 2007

License: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

Related: Hydrogen, Explosion, Electrlysis, oxygen, seperate, water
GUIDES

Car Mods

Forbes Teach Me Fast Contest Winners

Rockets

Turbines

More Guides...


Instructables
Search

More in Technology

* Apple
* Arduino
* Art
* Assistive Tech
* Audio
* Cell Phones
* Clocks
* CNC
* Computers
* El Wire
* Electronics
* Gadgets
* Laptops
* Lasers
* LEDs
* Linux
* Microcontrollers

* Microsoft
* Photography
* Remote Control
* Reuse
* Robots
* Science
* Sensors
* Soft Circuits
* Software
* Soldering
* Speakers
* Steampunk
* Tools
* USB
* Websites
* Wireless

News & Updates

Join over 500,000 Instructable fans who receive our DIY newsletter.

Pro Membership

Get more out of Instructables by becoming a Pro member today!
Go Pro!

Give the gift of DIY
with a Pro Membership!
Give Pro
About Us

* About
* Advertise
* Press
* Contact
* Jobs
* Legal
* Help
* Privacy Policy

© 2011 Instructables
Pro Membership Benefit!
To download or print this PDF, support DIY and Instructables by becoming a Pro member today!
Username
Password
Remember?
Forgot username or password?
Step 2: Materials****DISCLAIMER**** You are putting electricity into water. It has the potential to be dangerous. Do so at your own risk. Be smart about it. If you wouldn't touch it with your hands don't stick it in the water. If you're worried about it wearing rubber gloves will give some extra insulation. ****DISC...