Would HHO work as a fuel in a standard PVC combustion gun? I'm guessing that the force of the explosion would shatter the PVC. Has anyone tried this?
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 8:56 am
by inonickname
Use the search function. This topic has been beaten to death.
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 12:02 pm
by jimmy101
And don't posting anything relating to "HHO", it makes you look like an idiot. Use the proper name of just hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>) plus 1/2 O<sub>2</sub>.
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 12:08 pm
by Technician1002
LOL.. How about 2 H2 and one O2? 1/2 of an O2 is rare as it combines with almost anything even another O2 to become ozone. You can find 1/2 of an O2 in an ozone generator and in a fire, but it doesn't last long.
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 12:11 pm
by Crna Legija
if it work for a ghetto i dont see why it wont work in a good quality pvc cannon
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 12:19 pm
by Labtecpower
Thank you Crna
I strongly advise not to use it in a PVC cannon. The gas burns very fast (above the SOS in air).
I would think the PVC cannon would fail.
This is a nicer vid however
[youtube][/youtube]
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 2:27 pm
by saefroch
inonickname is very correct, this topic has been beaten to death, and the general consensus is that it has a lower energy yield for projectile propulsion for a given volume at atmospheric pressure than does an oxygen/propane mix.
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 2:28 pm
by jimmy101
Technician1002 wrote:LOL.. How about 2 H2 and one O2? 1/2 of an O2 is rare as it combines with almost anything even another O2 to become ozone. You can find 1/2 of an O2 in an ozone generator and in a fire, but it doesn't last long.
So you are comfortable with "HHO"?
To a chemist a molecular formula is assumed to apply to a sample, not to a single molecule. Since a small sample of any molecule contains milliontrillions of atoms the fraction is not a big deal. 1/2O<sub>2</sub> is perfectly OK, though usually the fraction would be removed; 2H<sub>2</sub> + O<sub>2</sub>.
But 47.2156H<sub>2</sub> + 23.6078O<sub>2</sub> is OK to.
Regardless, the point is that HHO is just plain stupid, and inaccurate, since it implies two monoatomic hydrogens and a monoatomic oxygen, or more accruately, it describes water, which isn't a fuel at all.
Posted: Sun May 22, 2011 5:50 pm
by Zeus
I must concur with jimmy101, HHO is an uneducated term used by those who install such things in cars.
In STP it is generally 2H<sub>2</sub> + O<sub>2</sub>. It's a ratio of 2:1 H<sub>2</sub>.
I get slight rages when chemistry terms are abused, HHO being the main one.
Ah the big drama around that omnipresent poison DHMO. That was nearly banned out here (Aus). Possibly the best troll in existance, even better than the Oprah troll.