PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2019-07-20, 23:41:03
News: Registration with the OUR forum is now by invitation only.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: Fast Freddy's car runs on water!  (Read 42691 times)

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 490
Yes absolutely MH, I have thought of all this stuff and priced out more then you suggest.  Heating the car is indeed a sticky point but not insurmountable, Volks Wagon had a small gas heater they used here in the old beatles (air cooled) for example.  Why do you think I am interested in things like the TPU?


---------------------------
"Whatever our resources of primary energy may be in the future, we must, to be rational, obtain it without consumption of any material"  Nicola Tesla

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Edmund Burke
   
Group: Guest
Room3327:

I am quite suspicious about the price of solar panels.  You look at things like cell phones as an example, and the features they offer on an annualized basis and you sometimes wonder.  On one hand, there really are limits on how much engineering development that you can do in a single year to release new features.  On the other hand, the marketing people know all about mass-marketed devices, and the "disposability" of cell phones.  They intentionally will hold back on releasing certain features and keep them for next year's model.  They are trying to ride a "maximum revenue wave" and surf like that all the time.  It's the so-called "price-point" and the migrating feature set working together to maximize revenue.  Price-point is actually a quite often abused term.

This is how Capitalism works and it has its benefits and disadvantages.  Solar panels don't really have new feature sets that get upgraded every year.  So right now it appears to me that the price-point for maximum revenue is lower volume at a higher price.  If they lowered the price the volume would go up but the profits would be lower, so they don't want to do that.  A "socialist push" from Big Government might be quite beneficial here.  I am simply not convinced that the manufacturing process is so expensive such that the price for solar panels has to remain so high.

In 10 or 20 years things may really change.  I think we may see a revolution for domestic electrical generation that mates solar panels with fairly large composite-carbon flywheel motor/generators that spin at super high speeds in vacuum chambers that are buried below ground.  (That way if it fails and flies apart it does not slice anybody in two.)  A half-dozen houses could pool their roof solar collection like that and be nearly 100% off the grid and also sell surplus energy back to the grid.  That could charge your car for sure.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
  What is clearly implicit in what I am saying is that there has to be a burden of proof imposed on the proponents of 2 H2 + O2 systems.  They have to come up with a logical reason and explain it.  I don't have to impose any constraints on them besides that.  That's the logic behind my argument.

For example, suppose you say that you are tapping into the "water's resonance" with your excitation signal and that gives you electrolysis above and beyond what is expected.  OK, go ahead and make your case.  What is the resonance of the water?  How does your signal interact with it?  Explain the mechanism.  Show some data to back up your claim.  Submit it for peer review.

MileHigh

This is probably my single biggest gripe. That is, no one can ever explain in anything remotely resembling science just what is occuring and why. And there never seems to be any genuine attempt to establish any real science or facts, instead we get a mish-mash of conjecture and mindless nonsense. Ok, the sad truth is that not many of the people that ever make these claims are up to the science that is involved, most obviously struggle to understand even the most basic of chemical reactions, but that is no excuse to spout gibberish as if it's all substantiated fact.   I cringed when I noticed Fast Freddy has now coined the phrase HHOi to indicate that the gas is ionised in someway, when it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that he wouldn't have a clue about this - just wild and meaningless speculation. Give me strength!

   
Newbie
*

Posts: 43
Over two visits we recently sent three people to visit Fast Freedie -- I wont detail the string of excuses we were given --  the net result is that we are still waiting to see confirmation of any of his claims.
   
Group: Guest
Over two visits we recently sent three people to visit Fast Freedie -- I wont detail the string of excuses we were given --  the net result is that we are still waiting to see confirmation of any of his claims.

Hi Mark, I was aware that a planned demonstration had fell through supposedly due Freddy's ill health, although later it was stated that the electrolyser had broken. Whatever, it is not the most encouraging of starts, and real fuel for the sceptics.

He doesn't have to show the system running in situ in the vehicle to gain some credibility, just showing that his electrolyser can actually make 55 litres of hydroxy in a minute should be easy enough for him to demonstrate and silence the critics.

Watching his videos, he seems to me to be talking too much about experimenting... why I wonder if he already has the set up to do the job?  If he had given out the full specs, many of us could have replicated it by now. Something is just not adding up (and that's apart from Freddy's maths)!
« Last Edit: 2010-10-03, 12:46:58 by Farrah Day »
   
Group: Guest
Well here's Freddy's latest pointless video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mms0GY3tus&playnext=1&videos=A7ZZ7lPmPuk&feature=mfu_in_order

Interestingly this is update 11, and the previous video was update 9... what was I saying previously about Freddy's maths! ;)
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 266
Hi All,
Thinking about the ambient pressure, it may be correct that his stated volume of production is correct. As I see it this may be true in remote places similar to that found on the moon.
55 litres per min would conventionally require around 8KW with estimated results from a test cell. If however he has found a way to make a tiny cell generate this amount of gas then the volume of water used would show itself. 0.03 litres of water per min would be used when running at this rate.  (Assuming reported conversion maths are correct).
I am sure theres more to this than the eye has seen, paypal, donations, prayer,...  Who is the winner here?
Lets wait and see.
The ball is his at this time so hopefully... Dont wait up though, I think we all know where this one may end up lol.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
They claim to have driven the 2004 Dodge 3000 miles with the HHO rig alone.

If true, that would be convincing enough. Are there holes in their claims/stories?

.99


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   
Group: Guest
They claim to have driven the 2004 Dodge 3000 miles with the HHO rig alone.

If true, that would be convincing enough. Are there holes in their claims/stories?

.99

Just the biggest hole of them all at present .99. Namely there has been no independent verification of their claims and no demonstration of the working vehicle and/or the electrolyser producing 55 litres of gas per minute!
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Understood.

Seems to me there is enough enough to build his unit. Tough part being that he tuned all those tubes by lathe. Not many of us have access to the wonderful workshop he has. I've not checked into SS piping, hopefully there are a few sizes available to get close.

Only foggy area for me I think is what exactly was done in the lower portion of the vessel.

What is the theoretical litres per minute for 55 Amps draw?

.99
« Last Edit: 2010-10-03, 16:30:47 by poynt99 »


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
In one video, I believe he says that if the specified SS tubing is used and all cut to the proper lengths, tuning should not be required. Also, some degree of tuning is achieved by adjusting the lengths slightly.

.99


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   
Group: Guest
Understood.

Seems to me there is enough enough to build his unit. Tough part being that he tuned all those tubes by lathe. Not many of us have access to the wonderful workshop he has. I've not checked into SS piping, hopefully there are a few sizes available to get close.

Only foggy area for me I think is what exactly was done in the lower portion of the vessel.

What is the theoretical litres per minute for 55 Amps draw?

.99

Implementing Faraday's laws - and off the top of my head - I would think we are looking at around 6KW to provide 55 litres of hydroxy gas in a minute. Assuming he is using 12 volts then of course we are looking at passing 500 amps through the electrolyser. This also assumes 100% efficiency!

But of course Freddy is not using straight DC, but a Pulse Width Modulator to power his electrolyser. Details of this might hold the key, but no details have yet been posted. That said, even with the magic of pulsing, 55 lpm is pushing the boundaries of reality, especially when you take into account he says he's achieving this with a mere 55 amps! ???

.99, I'm reluctant to call Freddy a liar or a scammer in case his claims bear fruit, but let's just say, irrespective of whether his claims are genuine or not,  you do have to take what he says with a pinch of salt.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
My observation and gut feel is that he is not intentionally scamming us.

Regarding my question:
From what I found so far, it appears that a rule of thumb is about 1 LPM per 10 Amperes of current. So Freddie's theoretical output should be about 5.5 LPM for his 55 Ampere input.

So he seems to be claiming a gain of roughly 10x the theoretical amount.

.99


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
A revision to the above post.

A gain factor of 10 is based on 12V @55A, or about 660 Watts.

Freddie claims to be using 3.02V @55A, or about 166 Watts.

I assume Freddie is basing the 3.02V on a mark/space ratio (duty cycle) of about 25%.

660W/166W ~ 4

So together with the initial gain of 10 (based on 12V) and factoring in the actual power being claimed:

6600W (approximate theoretical) / 166W ~ 40x  :o

.99


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Freddy's basic description from his website and from Peswiki:

Quote
Basically the water is pumped into the pressure vessel when the internal float switch is closed. The PWM is used to produce an electrical pulse which is tuned to the resonant frequency of the inner electrodes. This vibrates the water trapped between the outer and inner tubes. The outer tube is charged positive and is tuned exactly 180 degrees out of phase with the inner tube. The vibration wave is propelled by the positive charge towards the outer tubes just to be attenuated by the outer tube tuning.

The excited water molecules 2(H2O) now only require a fraction of the amperage to be converted into (2H2 + O2). Also experimentation of harmonic frequencies have produced interesting results, sometimes exceeding HHO production of the tubes at resonance. The vessel has a large inner and outer tube which is tuned 4 octaves lower than the outer tubes and has a clearance between the tubes of only 1mm. This tube produces the most heat and HHO. The smaller outer tubes have a 2mm clearance and run cooler and take less amperage and are mounted around the large tube assembly. The epoxy used to seal the bottom inside of the vessel and bottom of the electrical enclosure is laced with ferrous oxide dust 10% by weight which creates an capacitor which smoothes out the square wave pattern to a sine wave pattern which helps the transition between off and on for the PWM. Experimentation with an air coil after the mosfet drivers and before the load also resulted in an increase of efficiency.

Unfortunately, some of the description is unclear as to what is meant exactly (esp. the bold). The problem of deciphering the description is compounded by the fact that there is a central inner electrode pair, and several outer peripheral electrode pairs, and each has an inner and outer tube.

.99


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   
Group: Guest
Freddy's basic description from his website and from Peswiki:

Unfortunately, some of the description is unclear as to what is meant exactly (esp. the bold). The problem of deciphering the description is compounded by the fact that there is a central inner electrode pair, and several outer peripheral electrode pairs, and each has an inner and outer tube.

.99

This is the problem .99, unfortunately there is not even enough basic information to make an informed judgement is there? I mean where does he get that 3.2 volts from? He seems to be using 9 smaller tube pairs and a larger central pair, so could it be that he's got three outer pairs in parallel and the large inner by itself, but in series with the other three parallel combinations. Perhaps, but we're only guessing unless he details things properly. The PWM is designed to operate at heavy currents, but I assume the output voltage is simply that of the deep cycle battery, ie 12 volts.

Yep, got to agree, I too am totally baffled by his talk of the inner and outer tubes being 180 degree out of phase with each other. And I'd bet if you asked him face to face he wouldn't be able to fully explain what he means by this.

However, of even more intrigue to me is his apparent doping of the epoxy resin at the base of the unit with rust... sorry, ferrous oxide dust, which he claims makes a capacitor -  I mean, what the hell is all that about... a capacitor?  ???

I've seen or heard nothing yet from FF that instills any great confidence in me, and I'm getting a really funny feeling that nothings going to change in the near future. :)
   
Group: Guest
Regarding my question:
From what I found so far, it appears that a rule of thumb is about 1 LPM per 10 Amperes of current. So Freddie's theoretical output should be about 5.5 LPM for his 55 Ampere input.

So he seems to be claiming a gain of roughly 10x the theoretical amount.

.99

Yep that's a good ball park figure, which equates closely to the 6KW I guestimated above. The actual power of course depends on the voltage, but you have to remember that when people talk about the theoretical power it will take to evolve a certain volume of gas, they are assuming the minimum voltage for electrolysis to take place, ie, around 1.27 volts and 100% efficiency.  Any voltage above the minimum threshold will immediately reduce overall efficiency.  So in reality, it is likely that Freddy's electrolyser would not even be producing 100% Faraday, let alone 1000%!!
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
I mean where does he get that 3.2 volts from?

I think that's straight-forward:

With a PWM duty cycle of 25% (and an assumed V+ of 12V), this equates to an average of 3V. His total cell impedance would have to be roughly 0.055 Ohms.

.99


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   
Group: Guest
Poynt:

I am not following the discussion in great detail here but if the 3V is being used for any power calculations, shouldn't this all be RMS-based?  i.e.; the RMS equivalent of 12 volts at a 25% duty cycle is 6 volts RMS.

MileHigh
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2817
It's not as complicated as it may seem...
Indeed MH.

However, I am guessing that Freddy used a regular voltage meter and it probably read out 3.02V directly, and this would be an average value. Of course RMS values of voltage and current need to be used for power.

How did he measure the 55 Amperes of current? I know he used a CSR, but using a voltage meter across it would also produce an average current value.

If Freddy took a scope and measured the peak voltage across the cell (which could be 3V if the cell impedance is lower than that of the interconnecting wires), and the peak current through the cell, he would then have made the measurements the correct way.

As usual and as Farrah mentioned, not enough information is available to make a proper evaluation of the claims.

.99


---------------------------
Never let your belligerence get in the way of your brilliance!
   
Group: Guest
Irrespective of what cell configuration he is using I would expect to see 12ish volts across the electrolyser input as a whole.  I doubt that he has any fancy equipment, so would see him as reading 12ish volts across the whole electrolyser, and perhaps 3ish volts across each parallel bank of tubes. If he's using pulsed square wave 12v dc, then surely the meter will still read 12v at the electrolyser input. Wouldn't it then just be a matter of determining the gating and mark/space ratios in order to determine the power dissipated.  

One thing for sure, 3 volts is not enough to operate all the cells in series, and of course to get this voltage in the first place would mean transforming down the 12volts.  3 volts suggests to me that this is the voltage across just one bank of cells, and if there are four banks in series then that would give us our 12ish volts input.  So any calculations worked from 3 volts, I would expect to need multiplying by 4.  

However, from what I've seen, I seriously doubt that Freddy has made anything by way of accurate measurements, and that we can speculate for ever and a day on how he has is electrolyser configured and exactly what voltages are where.

It's all painfully slow going and becoming rather tedious now. If this hasn't been properly detailed by Christmas, then I think we can start to consider it as bogus.
   
Group: Guest
I think that's straight-forward:

With a PWM duty cycle of 25% (and an assumed V+ of 12V), this equates to an average of 3V. His total cell impedance would have to be roughly 0.055 Ohms.

.99

.99, wouldn't this be wrong? If you do this the figures become very misleading as 3 volts will not work the electrolyser and indeed is not what the electrolyser would be seeing. A standard voltmeter will surely not be reading an average 3 volts, but the 12 volt pulse. It might be a convenient way of determining the power dissipated, but I doubt this average 3 volts will have any bearing on Freddy's actual voltmeter reading. This is not an AC sinewave, so surely rms does not apply in the same way. To my mind it has to be 12 volts with the power determined by the duty cycle and/or gating, and Freddy must be talking about the voltage across one of 4 banks of cells... but who knows!

   
Group: Guest
Pointless video update #12.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH-VQ3RGydI&playnext=1&videos=mc4Z4FHBR3k&feature=mfu_in_order

Not a single construction detail explained or mentioned, in fact not a word spoken in this video... he doesn't even say 'basically'. Very atmospheric music though! lol
« Last Edit: 2010-10-09, 17:47:05 by Farrah Day »
   
Group: Guest
Well can't deny the guy has engineering skills:

http://www.youtube.com/user/FutureEnergyConcepts#p/u/4/kUTtIEkVepg

But not sure what to make of this next video.  He now claims his cell is making electricity from... fusion...???

http://www.youtube.com/user/FutureEnergyConcepts#p/u/3/iaAAdeqSMFE

He talks about a threshold of around 3 amps setting the process in action, and then electrolysis maintains a healthy gas output when backed down to 25ma. What he does not say, and what is unclear, is exactly what he is doing with the PWM to increase and decrease the current flow in the first place.  FF is clearly talking a lot of invented nonsense, but at least visually this video appears to be showing something interesting happening.
   
Group: Guest
Changing the subject momentarily, Fantastic Freddy seems to have gone a little quiet considering he was going to open source everything. Has anyone seen or heard anything new from this guy?

I just feel sorry for Rick over on EF. He's been ready with his ss tubes for ages, eagerly waiting full disclosure in order to replicate FF's system...  :'(
   
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2019-07-20, 23:41:03