The engine's response to HHO injection - Page 2 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-10-2008, 01:16 PM   #11
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2
Country: United States
Talking My engine results

All,

I built my first HHO unit using stainless steel 304 washers. My test results were as follows:

1) Stopped at gas station and topped off gas until it spilled out.
2) Drove 20 miles on expressway to new destination... Topped off until it spilled out again. Total fuel was .981 gal.
3) The above was done with unit turned off.
4) Return trip was about the same... No major diff in hills or wind (calm day).
5) Fired up fuel cell and allowed it to warm up 3 minutes with engine at idle.
6) Returned to same gas station as #1 and topped off again. .618 gal used.

So..
With unit turned off .981 gal for 20 miles
With unit turned on .618 gal for 20 miles

I have a 15 gal tank in my KIA that is rated at 15MPG in the city. My last two takes have yielded approximatley 22-25mpg consumption with the unit in place. Total distilled water used has been 1/2 gal and 1 tablesppon of baking soda.

Total cost to build unit was about 160.00.

At an average of 6 MPG savings on a 15 gal tank... i estimate the cost savings per tank to be about 90 extra miles. Where normally 90 extra miles would cost me about 5 gal of fuel. With gas being 3.50 a gal... That is a savings of about 15.00-18.00 per tank of fuel.

This is not the savings I wanted... But then again I am only doing straight HHO into the throttle body with no pcv hookup or electronic modifications to the vehicle.

Vehicle type is a 2006 KIA Sorento with a 3.5L V6.

My newest cell appears to have double to tripple the output of my first unit and it uses ALL stainless steel components (plates and wires) and takes up far less space. It is made out of martha steward steamer plates (approx 2X3 inch perforated plates).

Where total amp consumption on the plates is about 7 amps with a fuel cell temp of 102'F. Unit ran over five hours without a thermal run away or peak.

My concern is... if you generate TOO MUCH HHO into the engine, then you will end up with a retarded firing and this will decrease your fuel consumption and result in stress on the pushrods, pistons and various components.

I would very much like to get a computer hookup into the ECM so I can see the vehicle performing LIVE as I regulate the PSI of HHO into the throttle body at various RPMs.

==Zowwie
__________________

zowwie438 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2008, 01:52 PM   #12
Registered Member
 
flapdoodle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 183
Country: United States
Sounds great! I figure you used about 63% fuel with it on.
Is it under-the-hood install?
Approximately what was the ambient temperature?
__________________

flapdoodle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2008, 02:25 PM   #13
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3
Country: United States
Got any pics?
MoHHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2008, 05:29 PM   #14
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 110
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by zowwie438 View Post
All,

I built my first HHO unit using stainless steel 304 washers. My test results were as follows:

1) Stopped at gas station and topped off gas until it spilled out.
2) Drove 20 miles on expressway to new destination... Topped off until it spilled out again. Total fuel was .981 gal.
3) The above was done with unit turned off.
4) Return trip was about the same... No major diff in hills or wind (calm day).
5) Fired up fuel cell and allowed it to warm up 3 minutes with engine at idle.
6) Returned to same gas station as #1 and topped off again. .618 gal used.

==Zowwie
So with HHO -- 32.36 mpg, Without - 20.38mpg, EPA rating is 23 mpg.

Hang around for a while and create a gas log in the garage. Use full tanks for the measurements please.
__________________
http://www.maxxgraphix.net
maxxgraphix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2008, 07:20 PM   #15
Registered Member
 
Snax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 758
Country: United States
This is my theory on things as a non-chemist/engineer:

Looking at this logically, merely injecting HHO should not theoretically alter the raw oxygen content in the exhaust, as it is a perfectly stoichiometric ratio. And it presumeably all recombines in the combustion process. The ratio of oxides of nitrogen to hydrocarbons should also remain the same with all else the same. The question is what happens when you lean out the mixture to compensate for extra bang fostered by the HHO.

Essentially you should get the same reading from the oxygen sensor as if you leaned it out without the HHO injection.

So, being that you need less gasoline to spin the motor with HHO injection, yes, it will produce a lean reading for the oxygen sensor when reducing the amount of gasoline injected. For modern EFI motors, this means you will need to either recalibrate the way the computer deals with a lean signal, or alter the signal to the computer. So in essence, if you are able to lean out the gasoline by x%, you will likely need to skew the oxygen sensor signal back by x% to what the computer is looking for. I'd guess that would be easiest to do by using a wide band sensor - which most newer cars are already equipped with. Older EFI motors with narrow band sensors will likely require a retrofit.

With respect to the volume of HHO needed, I don't believe it requires nearly the amount of HHO enrichment as calculated for hydrogen for the following reasons: The combination of oxygen and hydrogen is a very fast burning gas, and when entering the combustion chamber, it distributes very evenly throughout the entire cylinder with the incoming air - unlike the gasoline which has a higher mass and slower disbursement rate. Once sparked, it's rapid burn speed essentially acts as a primer to 'flash ignite' the real power generating mixture of gasoline and the atmospheric air. This enhanced ignition of the gasoline mixture promotes more complete combustion, which is where the improved power and efficiency really comes from - NOT from the energy of the HHO combustion itself.
__________________
LiberalImage.com

I think, therefore I doubt.
Snax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2008, 07:54 PM   #16
Registered Member
 
flapdoodle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 183
Country: United States
I think you have pretty much nailed it. If I may throw 2 cents more in, I think we are hoping to make the cylinder pressure peak when the crank throw is near or a little before the 90 degree point (ATDC) to maximize output while at the same time avoiding detonation. There are instruments (pull card) that record cylinder pressure for large stationary diesels, but unfortunately none for automotive use. We have to rely on intuition and a little detective work.
flapdoodle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2008, 09:07 PM   #17
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 9
Country: United States
I've been doing research trying to find a way to either remap my fuel system or to fool my ecu into thinking that I'm way rich. I'll probably end up fooling my ecu by sending a bogus voltage to it. Probably by manipulating the actual signal sent by the o2 sensor.

I'm trying to figure out what the most lean mixture my computer can even interpret. If it can only deal with voltages that are telling it 16:1 or something, I don't think I'll be able to use this car.

Does anyone know how to check if you've got a wide band o2 sensor? I've got a 2001 altima, and I've been assuming that it's typical narrow band, but maybe it's not.

I'm going to be installing an EGT gage and an A/F gage as well in the near future so I can monitor what is happening if I'm able to manually manipulate the o2 sensor's signal.
GasSavers_kyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 06:04 PM   #18
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1
Country: United States
I've been doing affiliate marketing for awhile and have a couple of sites that sell these HHO units. I don't sell things I don't believe in, so I did quite a bit of research on them and have really been completely sold on the idea.

It's important to keep in mind that you aren't really looking to use the HHO as a suplemental fuel - though a lot of sites will talk like it is really fueling your car. The small electrolysers that you see most sites promoting are probably only capable of creating 500mL a minute of HHO, which obviously is nowhere near enough to run your car.

The best place to really get a great idea of what you can do, how they install and what mileage you'll get from them is on youtube.

I've started up a new site to track that and a few other alternative fuels and put up a few vids from youtube where a guy goes into quite a bit of detail on how many plates to use, what the threshold of voltage per plate you need to have to generate good HHO production is, etc... The videos are 41, 42 and 43 out of what so far is 84 videos he has done on his HHO adventure.

http://alternativefuelsupdate.com/co...ersion-process

I also think that Snax really got it bang on, the HHO causes a more complete burn of the fuel and delivers more power by causing that burn to be faster. The speed of the burn is a very large part of your engine's performance as gas that combusts after the piston has already begun its downstroke is nearly wasted.

The Oxy sensor is something that concerns me as well. One of the things that I think is possible is that a better burn causes more of the O2 pulled in from the atmosphere to burn as well in the combustion process with the gasoline vapor. In theory this should cause a lower O2 in the exhaust manifold than normal, which would cause the computer to lean the engine out a bit more to compensate. The O2 sensor is really there to mainly look for too much O2 and richen the mix to get a better burn as too much O2 will burn out the catalytic convertor.

Does that make any sense, or am I way off base on that?
Soyarma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2008, 10:55 PM   #19
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 55
Country: United States
for anyone interested, i am building a hho generator now and will be testing it on my 2001 chevy s-10 5 speed man with 85k. i know my mpg's for all my driving conditions and i plan on testing with a critical eye. this is one of those things i have to see for myself, and would be crazy not to try. hope i'll be of help.
__________________


2001 Chevy S10 2.2 5 spd man
85,000 Miles
28-34 MPG with HHO
GasSavers_Ven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2008, 05:54 PM   #20
Registered Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 9
Country: United States
Hello all, I am new to this...BUT very excited about HHO...

First a little baout myself...

I am a 38 yr old published writer and am very interested in some of the great inventions and inventors...

I was in championship truck and tractor pulling for 10 yrs. I would like to think i know a lot about motors and have extensive experience with alcohol powered 600+ cu in mountain motors.

I believe in HHO technology but have been told by some that the process is impossible with an Alt like on a car. Here's what one of my friends said:

----------------------------------------
Don, it in fact does cost more to produce than the energy you get from it. The stuff I found shows that if you do the electrical conversion to produced hydrogen btu's, then you wind up with about a 33% loss.

I also found that it takes about 50 kw-hr of electricity to produce 1 kilogram of hydrogen.

Now, Power = E x I

Using a 12 volt system, it would require 4167 amps of electricity to produce 1 kilogram of hydrogen in one hour. How many automobile electricial systems have you ever seen that can handle 4167 amps?

AND........

Nightwish, it takes 50kw of power for 1 hour to produce the hydrogen equivalent of 1 gallon of gas. That means that in a 12 volt system, the current would have to be 4167 amps. The amount of hydrogen released is directly proportial to the current. So, if you were running on, say, 20 amps in your car, you could produce enough hydrogen to equal the energy of 1/250 gallon of gas in one hour.

But, you have to remember, that your engine is now working harder to produce that 20 amps. You don't get amps from nowhere. And it actually takes more gasoline to produce that 20 amps for an hour than the 1/250th gallons of fuel you would save.

-------------------------------

OK, so can someone tell me about how this works...

How much water would a normal car use if its creating a fair abmount of Hydrogen?

How much current...Amps does it take to create this HHO gas and why does everyone say it defies physics?

How much would you have to put in the motor, to get near 40% more MPG? Would that take a BIG Alt,....and more AMPS?

Thanks in advance !!!!!!!
__________________

Nightwish is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How often do you change your manual transmission fluid? Peakster General Maintenance and Repair 32 11-27-2012 04:38 PM
Incorrect Milage Calcuatlion PatM Fuelly Web Support and Community News 4 07-17-2009 08:21 PM
Missing Fuelup jmonty Fuelly Web Support and Community News 3 05-27-2009 05:10 AM
Air scoop for mpg? ZugyNA Experiments, Modifications and DIY 10 12-05-2007 10:40 AM
BIG car Andy-Paul Transmissions and Running Gear 30 10-24-2007 02:25 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.