HH-O Hydromoving Technology

wheee!

ILet's say a high power stereo system drawing 18 Amps or separating water at 18 Amps uses the same power. If that has minimal effect on the performance of the engine prior to adding the hydrogen and oxygen which results in more efficient combustion and reduced emissions, then he has achieved his goals. If the current draw reduces hp by more than the H + O combustion, then we have an issue.

Yes, I would agree that some tuning changes are definitely required to accommodate a system like this. He has already stated he wrote the software to change the ECU. He also stated that his system employs a multiple anonde cathode array for parallel separation and efficiency. All of which draws about 18 amps. If that is all it takes to generate 100ml of H+O per 100kms, then the results he is claiming are possible.

This has yet to be proven conclusively I guess. I assume that is the point of his research.

I appreciate your serious comments and intelligent questions. Let's hope that there is real progress being made with this technology, merely for the sake of progress!

__________________

wstar

I just want to be clear about what we're saying is or isn't conclusive. It's a conclusive fact of known science that the process of using input electrical current to split water into H2 and O2, and then burning that H2 and O2 for energy, is a net loss of energy. There are inefficiencies in every conversion, and you cannot get out more than you put in (or even the exact same amount you put in - always less). Whatever drag 18A of electrical charge places on an engine through an alternator *has* to be less than the amount of additional engine power provided by throwing the resulting H2 and O2 into the combustion chamber.

This is very basic science. If these constraints are violated, we're in the realm of whacko perpetual motion machines, or entirely new physics that would completely change the course of the future for everyone. These are the kinds of things that, if they happen at all, are going to happen based on man-centuries of work by PhD's at particle accelerator labs. It would be completely unheard of for physics to be upended by a simple car engineering experiment.

What's questionable is the other little engineering bits: it's possible he could be making a net gain on the whole car system by exploiting *other* inefficiencies (e.g. engine tuning, waste heat) that have nothing to do with the "HHO" conversion, which give him a net positive result overall. If that's the case, I would argue those changes would be even more effective without wasting energy on the HHO step.

__________________
7AT Track Car!
Journal thread / Car setup details

lorenz1955

Dear WSTAR,
your theory is correct, perfect and known by us all.I have not violated any law of physics.I've only had luck in finding a new power system for low energy electrolysis.
The results that you see are the real test of what I did.
The tests are not homemade.Every car company, brings the car by National Office consumption and emissions control,that certifies, leave the car and after one day back to pick up the car with the report file.End.
Anyway, read the attachement of my system, you will have much clearer ideas.
This is the reply of my Patent report.
Best regards
Lorenz

Attached Images

Patent Result TO2011A000404.jpg (73.8 KB, 19 views)

__________________
info@hydromoving.com