Is Achieving 2300 amps possible?

[DaWiz]

I'm currently working on a project to make a small scale car, potentially Remote Controlled, that runs off Hydrogen that I produce by electrolysis ON THE CAR but I calculated that I need 2300 or so amps for peak performance (12000rpm). Here's my project idea (minus a few after-details):

 

Take five 9V batteries and run them three step-up transformers each with a 20:1 coil ratio to theoretically yield 360000V...I have not done the calculation telling me how many amps that is, but I would think it would be quite a bit since I'm using copper wire (resistivity of 1.7x10^-8 ohm/m). Run the electricity into a sodium sulfate solution to put into a 4.4cc engine. This idea includes the fuel and exhaust to be a closed system (the "burned" water returns to be re-electrolyzed).

 

Here's my calculation that leads me to need 2300 amps

 

(12000rev/min) x (1 power stroke/2 rev) x (0.00017873mol gas/1 power stroke) x (2mol H2/3 mol gas) x (2 mol e-/1mol H2) x (6.022x10^23 e-/1mol e-) x (1.6x10^-19C/1e-) x (1 min/60sec)= 2296 C/sec = 2296 amperes

 

This calculation uses a value derived from PV=nRT using 1atm and 300K

 

Please let me know what you think. And I realize that I need to pulse my battery's DC current or otherwise convert it to AC for the transformer(s) to work.

Edited April 27, 2009 by DaWiz

[UC]

I'm currently working on a project to make a small scale car, potentially Remote Controlled, that runs off Hydrogen that I produce by electrolysis ON THE CAR

 

That's like saying "I'm going to eat this full course dinner so I have enough energy to run several miles to a McDonalds to buy a hamburger."

 

It would be vastly more efficient to just use an electric motor, not to mention lighter in weight and far less complex.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Assuming you wire your batteries in parallel and use expensive lithium nine-volts, I calculate you will be able to draw 2300 amps for roughly nine seconds until the batteries go flat. (If nine-volt batteries can supply that much current that quickly.) Something seems a bit unsustainable here.

[DaWiz]

I am running my batteries in parallel, but I'm just using Duracell coppertops. I don't know if it's ironic or not, but I have connected the five batteries' terminals with a thin piece of copper wire. The wire glowed red and the batteries got somewhat drained pretty quickly, but they still work. Also, I have acquired two transformers...one of which doesn't work and one of which I blew/shorted/melted/whatever. From pulsing my parallel setup, I have gotten readings off of my multimeter's scale: both in volts (AC exceeding 2000) and in amps (exceeding somewhere around 20). By the way, don't touch the wires on transformers....they hurt.

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Okay, I took my transformer and dipped the output leads into a solution of sodium sulfate (these leads have the readings off the scale)...but the was little to no action as far as electrolysis is concerned? Any ideas on why it's not working?

[John Cuthber]

The complicated answer is a thing called reflected impedance. The simple answer is you just can't get enough power out of a few duracells to compensate for the huge losses and produce electrolysis.

Incidentally, most meters absolutely suck when it comes to measuring pulsed currents and voltages.

[Jacques]

Also you cannot hookup some batery to a transformer and expect to have something comming out, except for a brief moment when you hook the batteries. Transformers needs AC current to work, and batteries are DC.

[Megabrain]

2300 amps eh? could you tellus how many tons you are trying to pull and what the gradient of the hill is?

[DaWiz]

it's about a 2-3 pound car on a tiled hallway

[John Cuthber]

Call it 2.2 pounds ie a kilogram to make the maths easy.

You seem to be planning to use 5 batteries in series which will give you 45 volts. Also you plan to draw 2300 amps from them; they won't do that but never mind.

That means that you are planning to run something like 2300 * 45 =100000 w of power. That's about 130 horsepower for those unfamiliar with the kilowatt as it applies to vehicle engines or, in broad terms, this

http://www.ford.co.uk/Cars/Focus

 

 

In the first second that would (assunimg perfect energy transfer) deliver 100KJ of energy to the car.

That energy would have to be kinetic energy ie 1/2 MV^2 .

Now M is roughly 1 KG so the equation is

100000=0.5*1*V^2

so V = about 450 m/s; about Mach 1.4

 

So this raises a couple of questions.

How long is your hallway and

Is your car designed for supersonic flight?

I say flight because I bet you haven't included spoilers to keep it on the ground.

Assuming that the calculation for nine seconds of total stored energy is correct (and I think it's the right ballpark) the car would have a final velocity (and I do mean final) for roughly 3 times that i.e. about 1400m/sec.

Your toy car would reach just over 3000 miles per hour-have you contacted NASA about the tiles they use on the space shuttle?

 

Somehow I get the feeling that you have screwed up on the maths somewhere.

Edited May 3, 2009 by John Cuthber

[DaWiz]

wow...uh...Thanks John for your reply...however, I am running my batteries in parallel, not series...not that it really makes THAT much of a difference, I know. And to everyone else, YES! I KNOW THIS IS INEFFICIENT AND IMPRACTICAL! I just want to do it (who knows, maybe it'll eventually become practical with new technology). I'm in a friendly competition with a friend to see who can build a better small scale car and have always liked messing with H2...and my friend is using an electric motor setup (so that's why I'm not using a motor UC)