Hydrogen production

need a picture or drawing of the
>hydrogen produktion "machine".

If you're building it to make a vehicle run on water, forget it.

no, we´re just using it, to make gas and blow things up

wait, I found a solution, nevermind

>>1138403
>to make gas and blow things up
>>1138403
>blow things up

Now it's more interesting.

>>1138392
It sounds like either you're using a metal housing that's too close to the stainless electrolysis plates, or the housing itself is an electrode, so a picture to clarify would be helpful. I'd also like to know what electrolyte you're using, because if you're using table salt you'll be producing chlorine instead of oxygen as well as hydrogen. If you're just siphoning off the hydrogen then that's fine, but siphoning off the perfectly stoichiometric hydroxy gas is much better for detonations, and while it will do the same thing with chlorine, I wouldn't want to be piping that sort of gas around. Recommended electrolytes include H2SO4, NaOH, and very little else. Here the H+ ions from the acid are reduced to more hydrogen gas, and the solution itself is a pretty good conductor, and the OH- ions from the base are oxidised into oxygen gas, and the solution is a mildly good conductor. If you just use pure/tap water, your generator will be very slow. If your generator has enough gas output, then you could probably run a little oxy-hydrogen torch off it, and those things can melt tungsten.

>>1138396
Not op, but why? I see a lot of articles on it. Is it a scam?

>>1138417
y e s

>>1138417
People run the battery power to a water splitter, and feed the gas into their intake manifold to produce more power. It doesn't work because the engine has to work harder to produce that energy, like how your revs go up when you turn on the AC.

>>1138451
Ah, yeah, makes sense. "Something for nothing" doesn't work. I could see it making sense if you have a fuck ton of external batteries and want to make an "electric car" but don't have an electric motor. Possibly electricity from the wall to hydrogen gas could be more efficient than gasoline. You'd probably have to have a hefty hydrogen generator though to produce hydrogen gas fast enough, or generate and store it beforehand. And even then, it may be no more cost effective than gasoline. I'd be interested in doing the math on that one though.

>>1138696
You could try and use that to make an "electric combustion engine", but it probably isn't as efficient as an electric motor, and getting enough gas flow from the hydrolysis machine would require it to be large and heavy. It's essentially the opposite of a hydrogen fuel cell car. One of the big disadvantages is that you're expending energy to make oxygen gas as well as hydrogen, when you could just use the oxygen from the air, as fuel cell cars do. They're called HHO generators if you want to search it and look at deluded hippies on free energy forums.

I hope you all blow yourselves up lol

>>1138696
>Possibly electricity from the wall to hydrogen gas could be more efficient than gasoline.
This is one of the few sensible ways to do it with hydrogen. Lower cost, renewable energy source produces hydrogen, possibly during off-peak hours, then the car uses it as fuel.

Hydrogen, in this case, is effectively more like a battery - it is the storage medium, not an energy source.

>>1138417
If they were to work then there would be nothing stopping you from turning it into a perpetual motion machine, as the product of 2H2+O2 -> 2H2O + Energy, meaning that you can take the water and put it back in the tank. In reality it takes more energy to separate H2O that what is produced during combustion.

With that out of the way, I am interested in Hydrogen production. What would be better? Electrolysis or a Chemical Reaction?

>The Hindenburg shall fly again