the geet system

Discussion in 'General Questions' started by machiasmort, Sep 13, 2009.

  1. machiasmort

    machiasmort Active Member

    Wondering if anybody was familiar with this and if anyone could explain the process in a nutshell. If your not familiar, it's a fuel saving device and plans are available for free at this link.

    Download the PDF file!

    http://www.geet.nl/
     

  2. GearNut

    GearNut Active Member

  3. Dilly Bar Rob

    Dilly Bar Rob Member

    I just had a quick look.

    Interesting I thought at first.

    Then I look at the plans and see a "magnet" being used in some magical way....

    That was the end for me - every time you see a magnet being used in some non conventional way something is fishy. Magnets are known for, um, being magnetic. They are not known to give exhaust gasses some special property, reduce limescale in your toilet or save gas when installed on a fuel line.
     
  4. machiasmort

    machiasmort Active Member

    I agree about the hocus pokus w/ magnets.

    Common sense will tell you tho that gasoline is the condensed version of gas which is by it's very name what it turns into when it evaporates!

    Is it possible to get greater energy value by aggitating fuel and letting the motor run on fumes, releasing it's gas??? Is the aggitation enough to break up waste oil for Internal Combustion engine consumption?

    I know that ICE's don't burn all of the gas when they are normally carburated. Some of that gas winds up or at least must lubricate the rings a little? Would running an ICE on fumes hurt it?

    I wouldn't want to be arround for a backfire! Can you say: DUCK!
     
  5. mlcorson

    mlcorson Member

    Here is a technology that is a legitimate approach to extracting hydrogen from certain supplementary fuels by using the heat of the exhaust....Geet principle. Makes sense to me and does not appear to be alchemy. How efficient or cost effective it is is questionable. This Israeli video does a pretty good job explaining it. Necessity is the mother of invention as the Israelis have proved many times with their irrigation technologies.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJIO-n3_Tvc&feature=fvw
     
  6. GearNut

    GearNut Active Member

    All gasoline or deisel ICE's burn air and fuel vapor.
    Liquid gasoline will not burn. I have dropped a cigarette butt in a coffee can of gas and guess what? It went out!
    Fuel injectors, weather for gas or diesel, spray the fuel in a very fine mist, to promote evaporation to attain fuel vapor.
    Carburetors try to do the same, but not as well.
    Look down any good automotive carb and you will see a "ring" in the center if the venturi. The ring is called an annular booster. It breaks up the fuel droplets much better, finer, that just a standard fuel jet emulsion tube.

    The GEET system never lets liquid fuel enter the intake system. Only the desired vapor.
    The oil giants have known of this system for 40+ years. They squashed it faster than you can blink an eye.
    What kind of profits could they make if every car on the road was getting 150-200 MPG? Imagine a lifted truck, 40" tires, 454 big block powering it, getting 160 MPG! Imagine how the fuel industry for cross country trucking would collapse if all the big rigs got 180 MPG!!!???
    This GEET technology could have easily stopped the current gas crunch we are experiencing right now. The fuel comsumpiton around the world would have slowed to a drip. The gas company CEO's would have had to work at McDonalds as a second job just to pay thier mortgage.

    The root of all evil: Greed.

    Heck, They killed Stanley Meyers after he went public with his water powered dune buggy!
    Do a youtube search on his name if you want to learn more.
     
  7. machiasmort

    machiasmort Active Member

    I would really shy away from HHO (hydrogen) due to it's instability.

    Would running a gas bubbler (fuel vaporiser) for a generator be worthwhile?

    If you could double your run time, it would be worth it to make your own electric!
     
  8. GearNut

    GearNut Active Member

    The HHO style of system that Stanley used was in no way similar to what folks are trying to do these days.
    He used steam and electricity and a bunch of other devices that no one has figured out yet.
    The vast majority of his notes and experiments dissapeared after his death, His buggy is still missing. Everything he did just all went *poof* after he was poisoned in a restaraunt.
    He did not trust society, so he was very reclusive during his years of experiments and discovery. He did not share much of his knowledge with friends and family so there is really no way to know what all has been repressed by that horrible fate.

    A gas bubbler will not help much. It is very hard to control the output to attain a 14.7 to 1 stoichiometric fuel to air ratio. It will certainly vaporise gas to an extent though.

    Actually, the HHO generators you see folks experimenting with on youtube, ect. are quite safe when constructed properly with bubblers , flashback suppressors and blow off valves. All are very easy to make.
    The fear of hydrogen that most folks have is due to the Hindenburg disaster.
    They see that old news footage and think hydrogen is horrible.
    The truth is all the hydrogen that was available to burn inside the Hindenburg was consumed in about 1.5 seconds.
    What you see burning is the aluminum oxide paint that the Germans used as a sealing coating on the outside of the cloth skin. Ask anyone who is knowledgable on flammables, especially explosives, what aluminum oxide is capable of.
     
  9. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    mythbusters did a thing on the Hindenburg... totally true about the skin and aluminum oxide.
     
  10. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    if that is real and it really works... that is really cool!!!

    The united arab emirate is gonna love this....
     
  11. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    I think this design would probably work with a carb... not on a fuel injected engine. Would probably be best suited for a small generator.... liked the idea earlier about a backup generator with double the output.

    A modern fuel injected engine has dozens of sensors that tell very sophisticated computers just how much fuel to squirt and when. The small droplets of atomized fuel wont burn until they hit the hot cylinder wall, evaporate and mix with incoming air. Any more and you waste fuel... any less and you run into lean conditions which could grenade your engine.

    With a carb the air coming in sucks fuel into the airstream... there may be a small margin for gains. Could you get 160 mpg in a lifted truck... absolutely not. Diesel engines are actually very efficient by design due to the way fuel burns wile under direct injection, self ignition... only if tuned correctly.

    Direct injection Atkinson cycle engines are the wave of the future... google it.
     
  12. spad4me

    spad4me Member

    Naudin a French site offers a ton of knowledge freely on all aspects of alternative fuels.
    http://bingofuel.online.fr/bingofuel/index.htm
    This stuff actually works.
    If you follow directions and your set up is good enough he will post replications on the web.
    Jnlabs is the real thing not a scam.
     
    Last edited: Sep 14, 2009
  13. mlcorson

    mlcorson Member

    The way I see the Geet technology working is that it uses the heat from the exhaust to generate hydrogen and use that hydrogen to assist the standard fuel and its delivery system. Not replace it. Just vaporizing your primary fuel source in not what it does. That's an uneducated opinion and hope someone with better knowledge will put more illumination on this subject. Am I wrong?
    -Mike
     
  14. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    most of those pictures were of carburated small generators... the tractors had metal boxes attached with the word "spad" on the side in shabby welds. Not very convincing for a claim of 160+ mpg.

    The diagram was basically the same one as on the first post. Since I dont speak French i cant read the article.

    here try this one... all the major manufacturers are investing very heavily in this technology. It is essential to develop something realistic/practical like this to reach future CAFE standards.

    http://www.animatedengines.com/atkinson.shtml
     
  15. spad4me

    spad4me Member

    Vtack that is a French site that was kind enough to post in English as well .
    Did you bother to look .
    The Spad involved is not me.
    The technology reforms hydrogen and carbon with waste heat.
     
  16. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    ok I will look a little closer...
     
  17. give me vtec

    give me vtec Active Member

    so this system works in conjunction with the injectors???? or is this a standalone system???
     
  18. SimpleSimon

    SimpleSimon Active Member

    Normally aspirated IC engines vaporize fuel in three primary ways; 1) Fuel input nozzle design to "atomize" (break up into tiny droplets) the liquid fuel; 2) turbulent flow in the intake path to effectively lengthen that path for any given fuel droplet, thus increasing the time available for vaporization; 3) heat of the intake stream, which speeds vaporization. The more complete the vaporization process is, the more complete combustion will be. While residual heat in the piston and cylinder walls DOES act to increase vaporization of any droplet impigning upon them, primary vaporization is essentially complete before the fuel/air charge enters the cylinder. At ignition, as the flame front propagates across the fuel/air charge, it furthers vaporizes remaining droplets and ignites those vapors. Most of the energy expended in that vaporization process is "lost" in terms of useful mechanical work produced.

    Any carburetor or fuel injector which increase the coefficient of vaporization will increase the available chemical energy during the combustion cycle, which increase the effective mechanical output of the engine per unit of fuel used. There are various ways to achieve that - one of the earliest demonstrated was using "waste" exhaust heat to vaporize the incoming fuel charge. As I'm sure is clear to anyone, vaporizing gasoline, mixing that vapor with air, and applying either a spark or heat of compression to ignite that mix has potential problems. After all, a gasoline pipe bomb is basically what I've just described. The problem with vaporized intake fuel is that in order to introduce a sufficient charge of fully vaporized fuel/air mix to the cylinder one must have a reservoir of baporized fuel - which is potentially explosive and difficult to contain adequately.

    HHO works by doing part of that task chemically; besides being itself a powerfully flammable gas, the free hydrogen in the intake stream does a couple of things 1) it acts to lower the surface tension of the atomized fuel droplets in at least two ways, and it chemically hydrogenates the longer chain carbon molecules in the fuel mix, increasing their combustibility by lowering their flashpoint and drastically decreasing surface tension of the droplet. HHO gas is not itself all that significant a portion of the fuel in the fuel/air intake stream, then; it is instead an additive which causes a given fuel charge to burn more completely and thus more efficiently. More efficient combustion means greater fuel economy.

    It really is just that simple (in the broad strokes), and a properly designed HHO "generator" coupled effectively to the intake system of an IC engine will increase its efficiency, lower its unburned/incompletely burned fuel vapor load in the exhaust stream, and lower the fraction of partially combusted fuel entering the crankcase on each piston cycle.
     
  19. arceeguy

    arceeguy Active Member

    Simon - I am shocked that you would be posting things like that. While your above paragraphs seems scientifically sound and reasonable, so does this explanation of magnetic fuel savers:

    Fuel mainly consists of hydrocarbons. Groupings of hydrocarbons, when flowing through a magnetic field, change their orientations of magnetization in a direction opposite to that of the magnetic field. The molecules of hydrocarbon change their configuration. At the same time intermolecular force is considerably reduced or depressed. These mechanisms are believed to help to disperse oil particles and to become finely divided. In addition, hydrogen ions in fuel and oxygen ions in air or steam are magnetized to form magnetic domains which are believed to assist in atomizing fuel into finer particles.

    Generally a liquid or gas fuel used for an internal combustion engine is composed of a set of molecules. Each molecule includes a number of atoms, which is composed of a nucleus and electrons orbiting around their nucleus. The molecules have magnetic moments in themselves, and the rotating electrons cause magnetic phenomena. Thus, positive (+) and negative (-) electric charges exists in the fuel's molecules. For this reason, the fuel particles of the negative and positive electric charges are not split into more minute particles. Accordingly, the fuels are not actively interlocked with oxygen during combustion, thereby causing incomplete combustion. To improve the above, the fuels have been required to be decomposed and ionized. The ionization of the fuel particles is accomplished by the supply of magnetic force from a magnet.

    The resultant conditioned fuel / air mixture magnetized burns more completely, producing higher engine output, better fuel economy, more power and most importantly reduces the amount of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust. Another benefits if these devices is that magnetically charged fuel molecules with opposite polarities dissolve carbon build-up in carburetor jets, fuel injectors, and combustion chambers help to clean up the engine and maintain the clean condition.




    HHO, magnets, acetone are all bunk. There is no "big oil" conspiracy keeping this technology away from us. Just a bunch of P.T. Barnums making an easy buck.
     
  20. Chris Crew

    Chris Crew Member

    geet

    A buddy of mine in college fabbed up a gizmo for his Ford Galaxie that consisted of an aluminum manifold machined in two halves with a channel passing around the inside and fins on the outside. This was bolted to the block and the fuel pump hooked into one side, the other exited into the intake.

    When it got hot, it vaporized the fuel and seemed to increase mileage by about 20%. He sent the specs to Ford and they replied that it would never work.
     
Loading...