But yes, I'm right and they're all wrong. :P
I see where your mistake begins.
you assume that the input power is 3kW
1 H.P. = 0.745 kW
5.5 H.P. = 4.09 kW
Michael Faraday was an exceptional and highly respected researcher who investigated the electric current needed to convert water into hydrogen gas and oxygen gas by electrolysis. His results are accepted by pretty much every scientist everywhere. While he expressed the results of his work in terms which would be meaningless to the average person, his result is that an electrical input of 2.34 watts produces one litre of hydroxy gas in one hour.
In practical terms, that means that a current of 0.195 amps at 12 volts will produce 1 litre of hydroxy gas in one hour. In passing, only a nearly discharged lead-acid battery would have a voltage of 12 volts as the fully charged state is 12.85 volts and a vehicle alternator produces about 14 volts in order to charge the battery.
It is easier then, to compare the gas output of electrolysers directly to the figures produced by Faraday as shown here, based on a gas output of 15 litres per minute which is 900 litres per hour:
Faraday: 900 litres in one hour, takes 2,106 watts or 100% Faraday
Boyce: 900 litres in one hour, takes 998 watts or 211% Faraday without pulsing
Boyce: 900 litres in one hour, takes 180 watts or 1,170% Faraday with pulsing
Cramton: 900 litres in one hour, takes 90 watts or 2,340% Faraday
I presume that the people who are making the browns gas machines are not getting 100% faraday , but that still leaves us with who or what you believe to be true.
the above 900 litres an hour represents a 100% faraday conversion of liquid water into HHO gas , which uses
2,106 watts , the 600 lph machine must have other electrical equipment that the 2000 watt input power consumes.
still thats pretty close and gives an example of decissions based on gathered data vs decissions based on incorrect math or assumptions.
You said the intake and compression strokes of a 4-stroke wasted power. I agree they use power. If you avoid these by compressing the gas before it enters the engine then the compressor that originally compressed the gas was doing those intake and compressions strokes itself, and it used power for that.
you dont need to apply a mechanical compression when the gas you are compressing is an explosive , you can simply use a small portion of the gas to compress te gas that enters the cylinder.
The guy used a no-fuel generator for 2 1/2 years, but in a fit of madness he 'upgraded' to a 15% diesel one to get more power?!?!! Why not just use a bigger no-fuel generator and save 100% of that diesel bill?
I dont know , it doesnt make any sence to me either.
maybe it was the only engine he could afford a diesel engine works alot different than a gas engine , if
I were going to step up to a better power plant I would use a turbine , this way the wasted energy from constantly stopping the pistons and then accelerating them in the opposite direction would be removed from the picture.
but I suppose that will come later.
