| Author |
Topic |
|
Keithturtle
Senior Member
USA
348 Posts |
 Posted - Jul 18 2010 : 9:40:56 PM
|
You're learning, and that's good
Keep at it
Turtle |
 |
|
|
bobt
Q&A Moderator
USA
381 Posts |
Posted - Apr 16 2011 : 7:41:03 PM
|
I think that an update is due about now. I have found one major problem with the materials that I am using for the converter. The ceramic tubes that I have are prone to THERMAL SHOCK. The limit is 200 degrees C per hour and also per inch change. There goes the hot spot for the conversion and we are talking about 15 hours to bring the unit up to temp. Way to long to do the job. I think that I have found another ceramic material after talking the an engineer that knows all about the material that I am trying to use. I will be testing this in about 1 month and hope to have a much better result from my testing. My backup plan is to spend the money and get a Tungsten metal tube if this does not work. But it is a lot of money to spend. But it will stand 6000 degrees F and should work like a champ. Also at this time we are going to mix the burn gases of hydrogen and propane to extend the quantity of hydrogen that is available to burn. By using a 10% mix of hydrogen to propane we should be able to extend our burn time to about 3 hours with the quantity of gas that we have on hand. 5 20# cylinders of propane to 1 192 cuft cylinder of hydrogen should work just fine. If this test gets to the temp range that we need. The next test will be a full conversion test to generate carbon black powder and hydrogen. If that works then we will set up a trail system to generate hydrogen and carbon black. We think we have found a buyer for the carbon black and that will pay for all the test costs and more. We also will take the conversion gases and bring them around for the heat source. At this point we will have reduced the CO2 by 70% and generated a sale able product to fund our further research.
Bob Teeter |
What BOX???? |
Edited by - bobt on Apr 16 2011 7:43:10 PM |
|
|
|
bobt
Q&A Moderator
USA
381 Posts |
Posted - Mar 25 2012 : 7:04:52 PM
|
Update again/still: The newer ceramic tubes have been tested. They have failed just like the original tubes. We finally found the problem with the ceramic tubes. The tubes are made from clays that contain metal oxides. The hydrogen flame that we have been using is at 2200 degrees F at this time. We have been reducing the oxide with a hot hydrogen flame. We have actually been removing material from the tube and thus making the tube physically weaker because of the flame. I have done the search for the tungsten tubing but the only thing that I can find is 9" long and an arm and a leg in cost. I have since obtained some titanium tubing which is good to about 3000 degrees F. We have also moved to a design that uses an indirect flame for the heat source. Now on to the next test.
Bob Teeter |
What BOX???? |
|
|
|
bobt
Q&A Moderator
USA
381 Posts |
Posted - Jul 21 2012 : 7:49:32 PM
|
Just another update on the Hydrogen project. We have gotten to 2500 degrees in our test frame. Next we need to test the new titanium tubes to see if any additional problems beyond the problem of oxidation of the outside of the tube occurs. We have also redesigned the layout to recirculate more of the output heat back into the input to increase the temp further. Just a quick note for now.
Bob Teeter |
What BOX???? |
|
|
|
Keithturtle
Senior Member
USA
348 Posts |
Posted - Jul 24 2012 : 7:44:36 PM
|
Good to hear this project is moving forward. I am on hold right now, dealing with some other things but will return to the separating electrolyser as time permits.
Keep at it, bro
Turtle |
|
|
|
bobt
Q&A Moderator
USA
381 Posts |
Posted - Sep 23 2012 : 1:45:42 PM
|
We have achieved temp for conversion. The tubes do oxidize but that can be worked on. The inlet temp was 850 degrees F with the wrap around. We also had 2 temp probes fail do to continuous high temp. Well thats $80.00 down the drain. Will have to get some B thermocouples to test with because the K thermocouples failed.
Bob Teeter |
What BOX???? |
Edited by - bobt on Sep 23 2012 1:46:48 PM |
|
|
|
Tdolan
Senior Member
USA
267 Posts |
Posted - Sep 26 2012 : 3:06:11 PM
|
Bob,
Your latest post is a bit discouraging from where I sit....but I don't want to discourage your efforts.
You mention in the very beginning that you don't want to waste anything and have devised a way to achieve that goal...its just seems to be taking a hell of a lot of effort, time and $ to accomplish it.
There may be an easier way to accomplish your goal of wasting nothing...Heres my approach:
I built a renewable powered electrolysis system and created or modified many existing devices to run on the H2 and, here's the rationale for not wasting anything...except sunlight.
***note: the following numbers are in the ballpark but not precise***
Physics/chemistry tells us that it takes about 2.25 gallons of water and somewhere around 55 kwh of electrical energy to make a 1 kg of H2 and 8 kg of O2. When I use the H2, it recombines with the oxygen and reforms into the original 9 kg of water. I can't change that and either can you. The water I can drink or reuse in other ways.
In your approach, you are starting with a fossil fuel and changing/using it for something else and the best you can hope for is an economic return on the carbon which you hope to capture and market.
Again I don't want to discourage you or get into some kind of pissing match as to which approach is "better". I'm simply looking at the problem from the other side of the looking glass.
Stay well, stay happy and keep up the good work.
Tim
|
|
|
|
H2Powerman
President / Education Director
USA
1082 Posts |
Posted - Sep 26 2012 : 10:37:03 PM
|
| Man, honestly I am just so happy to see you guys are putting up the good fight, working on projects, experimenting and pushing the ball forward so that others can learn from your sheer awesomeness. I haven't done that in a while, at least not for hydrogen. You inspire me guys, we'll see if I get off my ass someday and join you. Take care buds and keep up the great work. |
Abe Fouhy
AHANW President / Education Director
Abe@ahanw.org |
|
|
|
Tdolan
Senior Member
USA
267 Posts |
Posted - Sep 28 2012 : 10:08:30 AM
|
Abe,
Give yourself some credit.
You've been making and teaching folks how to make wind systems.
That's out of my league.
Keep up the good work.
Tim |
|
|
|
H2Powerman
President / Education Director
USA
1082 Posts |
Posted - Sep 30 2012 : 8:20:27 PM
|
| Thanks Tim, we're all progressing, just happy to see you guys working away. A cool project at school is that my students are building a 1kw water turbine from scratch, looks pretty good so far. :) |
Abe Fouhy
AHANW President / Education Director
Abe@ahanw.org |
|
|
|
bobt
Q&A Moderator
USA
381 Posts |
Posted - Oct 02 2012 : 3:58:22 PM
|
Tim - no problem with your approach. But the question that I ask is - Can you generate enough energy to power your house and 7 others for 24x7x365 with your installation resized to fit your house. IE - 40Kw around the clock and have no pollution when done. The answer to to the second part is yes but what size of collection field will you have? Will it fit on your roof. Will it also generate enough heat to heat a house in Minnesota in winter?
So back to my basic premise - Power my house for 24 hours a day and also generate additional income while at it.
The source of the methane is geo, biodigester, cow-farts, people-farts ( I know just try to collect Uncle Joe's but he is a good source ). All plant/human material will break down into methane given the right conditions. In Minnesota under Net Metering the electric company pays $.07 per kilowatt hour. With a house using about 5Kw per hour on average with the excess you will generate about $21,000.00 a year and they have to pay for it by law. The carbon is worth about $1.00 per pound and the system will generate about 2,000 pounds per week. Just run the numbers it is not small potatoes.
I am not saying that your method does not work but when I got into the nuts and bolts of what I was looking at it still is worth it to do it. My problem is having a life and making an living is just interfering with the research.
Thanks for the comments guys and keep on trucking.
Bob Teeter |
What BOX???? |
|
|
|
Keithturtle
Senior Member
USA
348 Posts |
Posted - Oct 02 2012 : 9:30:05 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by bobt
My problem is having a life and making an living is just interfering with the research.
I suppose I can echo that sentiment quite loudly. One thing I regularly do is to pounce on the materials I need, or think I may need, as opportunity presents itself.
Then when the time is available, I can proceed with the part stock at hand.
I'm building quite an inventory; at least I'm not getting taxed on that inventory
Turtle |
Edited by - Keithturtle on Oct 02 2012 9:30:44 PM |
|
|
|
bobt
Q&A Moderator
USA
381 Posts |
Posted - Nov 06 2012 : 07:54:21 AM
|
OK I finally remembered to take a picture of what we have built so far.
http://www.teeterconsulting.com/converter_photo.JPG
We have hit the working temp we were after. Now to complete the methane conversion setup.
Bob Teeter |
What BOX???? |
|
|
|
Tdolan
Senior Member
USA
267 Posts |
Posted - Nov 11 2012 : 1:39:33 PM
|
Bob, Nice Pic!
You significant other MUST adore you ..
..to keep that in the yard
Best of Luck...
Keep going.
Tim.
As a quick reply to your last question and observations...
My 2 Kw gizmo has made 30 MWhrs of Zero emission energy over the last 40,000 hrs...divide that by 5 kw ...I get somewhere around 6000 hrs.
I may have a long way to go but...its a hell of a start.
|
|
|
|
Keithturtle
Senior Member
USA
348 Posts |
Posted - Nov 13 2012 : 10:47:56 PM
|
Gotta love progress. Keep it up, I'll catch up
Turtle |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Methane Conversion & Generation of H2 pt2
