Ecu
 

Doesn't ECU react to HHO by adding more fuel?
Wouldn't the AFR need to be leaned out? Timing adjusted, hydrogen is a catalyst after all? :banghead:

ECU shouldn't add more fuel with HHO. Burning HHO is exactly the opposite reaction of making it; the energy that was used to make it is released and the molecules combine into water. The O2 sensor shouldn't see any change.

Doesn't it see more Oxygen in the exhaust and therefore sees 'lean'?

Why would it see more oxygen?

ECU oxygen
 

Because HHO is part oxygen... Why would it not see it, because after combustion it immediately bonds back to water? Even if it doesn't see it, why keep injecting extra fuel if there is already increased power from 'extra' HHO, this is asking for leaning the mixture, no?
in any case, how is AFR leaned out by remapping? which AFR table is a root table, and generally what has to be done to actually change it if it requires changing more than one table?
Thanks for your response.

If HHO truly did what all these people said it would do, the end product should be the same as far as exhaust is concerned. There shouldn't be extra oxygen in the exhaust if it is actually burned as a fuel.

if it were acting as an extra fuel source and burning more of the air coming in, the system would react seeing it as a rich condition and adjust accordingly. That is the beauty of a closed loop system.

Remapping an ECU can be done but it is extremely hard. there is quite a bit of code involved and each manufacturer has a different standard for that code. they also change it from time to time with newer models. That is the reason that those "super chips" guys (there are a few of them out there) have tuners for some cars but not all cars and nobody makes anything for a freakin' toyota. They are very funny about theirs. I know several guys that have burned up dozens of ECUs trying to hack into them.

No offense, I have yet to see anyone with any viable gains from HHO. There was a while back when a guy was playing with HHO and the EFIE modification and he ditched the HHO as he got just as much of a gain with the EFIE alone. he was just leaning out his mixture though ever so slightly. I am on a few different forums so I can't remember if it was this forum or a different one.

***edit***

and what's with the spamming? you have posted several different threads on the same subject in different subsections of the forum. I do hope you find the answer to your issue even if it isn't the answer you were expecting.

Here's my personal take on HHO. I for the most part agree with BEEF. Extra oxygen entering the cylinders via HHO means that more fuel SHOULD be added to maintain the proper air/fuel ratio. HHO in theory should act in a similar fashion as a cold air intake. For this reason, I don't see HHO as a viable option when the goal is increased fuel economy.

I am 'spamming' because I am not getting the answers I am looking for.
HHO is one example, but concerning HHO, oxygen is not the only gas there is, there is also Hydrogen, a known catalyst, - well, we discussed oxygen in regards to oxygen sensor seeing it, or not seeing it.
If you know engine tuners/calibrators or whatever they are called these days, would you kindly refer me to them?
Thanks and all the best to both of you.

have you ever thought you are "looking for" the wrong answers?

talk of HHO has been around for a while. If there were an easy solution, it would have already been established. the aftermarket seems to pickup on easy solutions and sell it to the masses (resistor modification on the IAT, caps on the dc circuit, magnets on fuel lines) though I will say many of the "easy" aftermarket solutions are quite fruitless.

have you noticed that you have the same 3 or 4 guys talking to you in all the threads you are posting? maybe we're on to something. I personally have been on these forums for some 5 years. I have seen HHO guys come and HHO guys go. never seeing any descent results.

The answer to your question about remapping an ECU is not a simple one. It is a very complex thing to do... period. If any idiot could remap their ECU then there would be a plethora of cars out there with blown engines or engines running like crap. The general public doesn't need to remap their cars so they make it to where they can't just do it on a whim.

If you ever do figure out how to remap a given ECU, a different manufacturer will be different, and so will different models of the same manufacturer. There really is no easy answer. I have friends that play with aftermarket turbos and they will tell you the same. Nobody will pay the price to professionally tune a car just to get better mileage. that cost could be in the thousands and would require quite a bit of labor to wire in a stand alone computer (and you have to buy the standalone). turbo guys trying to make huge numbers will pay that cost (and do) though there doesn't seem to be many solutions that don't require either a standalone computer or piggyback. I don't know anyone using a stock ECU to control anything. The manufacturers don't give you that capability for a reason.

Almost right. Combustion IS the process of bonding it back into water. The O2 sensor looks for O2, not H2O.

Assuming that it works as one might wish it to (I share the skepticism expressed by the others, but I can speak theoretically), it wouldn't inject extra fuel; you are the one injecting extra fuel (two atoms of Hydrogen) along with the oxygen necessary to burn that fuel and produce water.

Come to think of it, after you split it into HHO, would the oxygen bind to itself to become O2 or would it just be O? I don't know if an O2 sensor would even measure any O (that could be an interesting question actually), and I also don't know if O will combine with the two atoms of H; the H might burn with O2 from the air rather than the O that came in along with the H.

Either way, if HHO is operating as promised then there's no reason to think that the ECU will inject more gasoline. If "there is already increased power from 'extra' HHO" then the driver will reduce air intake (and therefore fuel injected) by closing the throttle until only enough power is being produced. That is supposed to be the whole reason to use HHO.

In reality, any power gained from HHO doesn't come from magic, it comes from the alternator which drags more on the engine to produce the electricity used to split the water. That drag, in turn, means opening the throttle more -- and since the processes of splitting water and burning HHO back into water are not 100% efficient, energy is lost in those conversions, you'll have to produce more energy by burning more gasoline.

The answer is different depending on what ECU you have. I don't know details about changing the tables but I can tell you about some of the tools used...

Modern GM V8 engines can be adjusted with an expensive system called EFILive. There are professional tuning companies that will tune you with EFILive for a few hundred bucks if you don't want to purchase the system yourself.

For modern Volkswagens there is a similar system called Vag-Com/VCDS. Vag Tool Finder may be able to hook you up with someone who has it and will help you. (Before posting this message I noticed your other post; this should answer that question.)

I bet similar stuff exists for other manufacturers.

Otherwise, you could go a different direction: Megasquirt. Then you're completely in control.

However, if you're not looking to customize everything and only want a simple way to destroy your engine by running very lean in an engine not designed to run that way, the term you need to google is EFIE (as mentioned by BEEF). I'm not sure how well they work since AFAIK they only affect the signal from the O2 sensors; the ECU should see spurious data from the O2 sensors and ignore them, using whatever good data it can find (MAF, etc) and throwing a code.

Assuming it works (an assumption of which I've seen no meaningful proof despite seeing plenty of activity), there should be no need to add fuel to use that extra oxygen since the hydrogen comes in along with the extra oxygen...and we already know that's at the right ratio since it was water when it started.

Thanks a lot everyone for enthusiastic responses. Any discussion helps not only to crystalize a point, but raise more questions.
On HHO. Beef and HolyCow.
Alternator argument have been dodged long ago by Stan Mayers and by many of those who have been working HHO systems using their alternators as power supply in straight forward electrolysis, not even Stan's circuits. Somehow, physicists can't explain why 2nd law of thermodynamics don't work here. Well, there is Tom Bearden, go argue with him, if you have time. Recent research by prof. Bolotov suggests viability of Stan 'electrical bombardment' method if I can call it that.
2) I brought HHO just as an example of additional power from other fuels/mods. As Holy Cow quotes me "Even if it doesn't see it, why keep injecting extra fuel if there is already increased power from 'extra' HHO, this is asking for leaning the mixture, no?"
I want to remind us that this is not the Racing forum, but a Fuel Efficiency one, so when I mention extra power from outside, I assume that to keep the same level of output we now need less original input, AF mixture that is. This is why I am concerned with leaning the mixture. Keep in mind the mixture is not actually lean, since it is supplied with HHO, for example, the ECU might figure it is 'lean', but the combustion may be as stoich as before.
3)Remapping. Thanks for cautioning me, BEEF, I appreciate it, I know of dangers involved in lean burn and all the blown engines out there, but this is why I am on this forum, to find out how it is done right, not that it is impossible. Also, not least a factor - even though not born in US, I am very much an American, so don't tell me there is something impossible to do.
Mr. BEEF, isn't remapping nowdays simplified enough so we can change the x,y tables, or does it still require coding? I've seen FORD and GM software that uses simple spreadsheets to change the number parameters.
Thanks, everyone.
All the best.

ok, after retyping and erasing and retyping and erasing several times. let me try and just write simple things.

-Your country of origin doesn't matter. The majority of the people I work with on a daily basis are not US citizens. Many of them are from China. We do have quite a few from India as well as the Middle east (Pakistan, Israel, and Palestine). Most of which hold at least a Master's Degree and a hand full of PhDs around.

-You say you have seen the software...Have you ever priced it?

-It is much more complicated than a simple map as well. There are several maps depending on conditions and you have to know what the engine can handle at a given condition. Lean burn only kicks in during certain conditions where it is sustainable. You can change a parameter here and there and see if it works but if you are wrong, BOOM!!!!

-Also, any fuel map/curve is just X and Y coordinates... it always has been. They encrypt the hell out of it so that regular people can't just do it themselves. That is the reason most people take it to the dealership if they have an ECU problem... and the reason that people that have figured out how to tune them charge an arm and a leg for a retune. (they are usually very specific towards performance and certain upgrades so the engine will react better to those upgrades)

-HHO is a whole different argument as I would think if you could increase efficiency by 40% or better, you would have one hell of a business case and be making millions over night. I would think the government which is cracking down on car companies about EPA MPG numbers would jump all over this sort of technology. I am still waiting for someone to "silence the skeptics" as I am a very science oriented person and thus I am waiting eagarly for the evidence.

-furthermore, I am not trying to discourage you from experimenting. Be my guest. Just realize what work has already been done and what information is out there... real information. I don't have magnets on my fuel lines or an obstruction in my intake because I know they don't work. There are marketing teams devoted to changing that thought though evidence doesn't change. There are products all over the internet that just flat out don't work. There are people that get rich off of selling products that don't work and never have.

Good luck to you in all your experiments. Please do be careful and keep a fire extinguisher handy.

Thanks BEEF!
I have not priced the software, not yet, not before I figure what needs to be done and not before I have enough recommendation and advice. Maybe people you work with may suggest best? (and cheapest or free to download. do you have info on ECUEDIT and WINOLS?)
HHO. The problems with HHO are not the production of enough gas. HHO people agree half a litre of gas a minute per liter of engine displacement is enough to deal without ANY fuel. the question that so far nobody answered me is what is the combustion temp with HHO, too hot burns rings and valves and HHO is a very peculiar gas concerning temps.
in any case, thanks. I still need advice on software and tuning. I will look on other forums, more specific to tuning.
You mention that you work with many people. What exactly do you do with engines?

There is no need to lean the mixture. Since the driver is not racing, any extra power from HHO will be compensated by the driver reducing accelerator input.

Reduced accelerator input = reduced air intake = reduced fuel injected.

I do nothing with engines but realize that people of a certain mindset tend to gravitate towards certain hobbies.

I actually work for a communications chip design firm. We have the largest GaAs fabrication facility in the US (and maybe the world).

Many of my colleagues are on the power side of cars. I have a friend with a supercharged mustang (that he supercharged), another with a 1980 corvette, another with a 4cylinder turbo mustang, another with a race ready corvette that has more money in the suspension than my car cost new.

A few have contemplated HHO themselves but always come up with a negative equation and thus drop the idea. There are just too many losses. I have lived on a gas saving forum for 5 years and have never seen anyone positively gain from it. There was one guy running an old carbed vehicle that claimed some gains but there aren't too many carbed engines still around.

Engineering types are skeptic by nature, it's what we do.

I just can't see an engine running purely on water as you so state. the idea of an engine running just on electrolycized water would be a great one but I have no idea how you would actually achieve it. Has anyone came up with a current number for that sort of output? You could actually cool the engine with meth injection or water injection. that is a trick that the turbo guys use.

You may want to broaden you research on HHO to sites that are less favorable towards it. There are too many sites that talk about the good it does but focus little on the fact that it doesn't really work. I am still waiting to see a gas log of unbelievably high numbers running HHO. I have seen a few claiming better numbers but their start numbers are ususally well below EPA ratings for the given car and the end numbers usually aren't as good as a comperable gassaver member with the same car. around here, beating EPA is almost a given.

Ecu
 

@BEEF.

I suggest checking out Stan Mayers and his way of turning water into HHO.
Arabs offered him a billion dollars to stay quiet. He is dead now. Maybe it is the conspiracy theories...I don't know, but the method resembles research of russian professor Bolotov. Bolotov, as a teenager noticed that radio lamps give out more heat than they use power. Among million other things this man invented, he bombarded electrodes with huge amounts of current.
IN any case, check out Stan Mayers and his story. Wikipedia article, I am not sure you can trust.
here is youtube vid .com/watch?v=S44eRCr-O7o
but there a lot of stuff to read.

HOLY COW.
There is no need to lean the mixture. Since the driver is not racing, any extra power from HHO will be compensated by the driver reducing accelerator input.

Reduced accelerator input = reduced air intake = reduced fuel injected.

Can you prove that computer not add extra fuel?

extrordinary claims require extrordinary evidence -carl sagan-

It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. -Richard Feynman-

Without repeatability, there is no Theory. -Me-

In God we trust...All others bring data. -My former Engineering Manager-

The only method of using hydrogen to improve fuel economy I saw that might work was a slide show on a plasma generator that cracked the hydrogen free from a fraction of the vehicle's gasoline. It might work because it should take less energy than freeing the hydrogen from water and it might side step some of the conversion losses of electrolysis.

Another method is just use a tank of hydrogen to see if there is any synergistic reaction going on to improve the engine's efficiency. I haven't seen a post from a HHO proponent that has done so.

Running a car on hydrogen alone is going to require a fair amount of fuel. The Honda Clarity is certified 240miles of range on 4.1kg of hydrogen by the EPA. That's a fuel cell. For an ICE there is the hydrogen RX8. It can go 62miles on the 2.4kg it carriers, and that might be by the more optomistic Japanese test.

Ecu
 

@BEEF.

I suggest checking out Stan Mayers and his way of turning water into HHO.
Arabs offered him a billion dollars to stay quiet. He is dead now. Maybe it is the conspiracy theories...I don't know, but the method resembles research of russian professor Bolotov. Bolotov, as a teenager noticed that radio lamps give out more heat than they use power. Among million other things this man invented, he bombarded electrodes with huge amounts of current.
IN any case, check out Stan Mayers and his story. Wikipedia article, I am not sure you can trust.
here is youtube vid .com/watch?v=S44eRCr-O7o
but there a lot of stuff to read.

Still, I have not found the necessary software for SKODA TDI. I need to be able to access and alter ECU maps. Guys from GM's HPtuners have not answered my requests so far. The other source someone suggested - I am still researching, but frankly, it doesn't look promising. Please, if anyone has a good info on a software program that allows access and remapping, (data logging would be also very useful) let me know.
HHO. I think producing copious amounts of HHO gas is in domain of 'alternative energy'. The best explanation of this 'alternative energy' for a tech person, I've seen on Tom Bearden's website. He is a PH.D in both math and physics.

Well, you can at least do the data logging with this, not sure how deep into fuel maps you can get...
Ross-Tech: VAG-COM: TDI VAG-COM Info

If the computer detected a lean condition and added more fuel then the HHO didn't burn. If the HHO burns, the oxygen is no longer there to cause a lean condition.

It seems as if I am repeating myself and the OP is repeating himself in his responses(posts 17 and 21 are the exact same). I can't believe we are actually talking about HHO again....

Holy cow
 

Thanks, but it seems that it doesn't let you remap, just datalog.

TO BEEF.
who knows, maybe HHO is possible after all. Of all the people that you talked to, and I talked to, there are some that run it complete on water. Did you talk to them?

I've never seen any credible evidence of anyone running completely on water. Burden of proof is higher for such an extreme claim but people haven't even posted the sort of proof you would expect for a minor claim. The only time I've ever seen any attempt at it was when somebody had a product to sell, in which case it was obvious that it was fabricated.

However, for whatever my opinion is worth, please do experiment with it as long as you're not going to support the scam industry that is associated with HHO; use all homebrew equipment with parts and plans not bought from any company in the HHO or other related market. I would love to be proven wrong in a way that convinces me beyond doubt and does not have any marketing or company involved, just a backyard experimenter like me disseminating free information for use with generic parts by all DIYers. I know running a car on water won't work, just as it hasn't worked for the many decades that so many people have been experimenting with it, but I'd love for history and me to be wrong. You could be the one who finally gets it right.

Something long forgotten but brought back up (and at least somewhat relavent).

here is a thread on the yaris forum where they are talking about reflashing a yaris ECU. It really is this hard.

Turbotrix working on ECU Flash - Page 2 - Toyota Yaris Forums - Ultimate Yaris Enthusiast Site

When I was in high school a kid in the science fair built an HHO setup that powered a 3HP Briggs & Stratton lawnmower motor. Only problem was that the HHO setup had to be plugged into an AC outlet, and took about 8 hours to produce enough gas to run the motor for a minute.

Hho works
 

B"H
Truck runs 100 % on water not on Gasoline - YouTube

... and Cell phones pop popcorn. You can't believe everything you see on the internet and especially youtube.

Pop corn with cell phones - YouTube

How they did it.

Popcorn Cell Phone Trick Revealed See How Its Done - YouTube

unless it is your video, how do you know...

i don't believe it, i don't. i do not believe.
 

what, you thought I believe it?
NO! absolutely not. Car can't run on water. Water is to drink, cars don't drink water. This is a scam, these people are just rich jokers, they have nothing better to do than to entertain us. :lol::rofl::dance:

Engine is an air pump, it just passes air through itself, gas is not needed, it's just to explode air, simply.
So what difference does it make what is setting off the reaction - gasoline, diesel, alcohol, propane, methane, hydrogen (octane number 120) or HHO?
Or ozone, for example. Also, pretty combustible substance...

As far as producing enough HHO, it's not a mystery, that has also been solved by Stan Mayers.

Never mind. If car can't run on water, then this clearly is fake. Do not believe it. I wouldn't even research it further, because it can not be - it can never be. Just the waist of time.

HHO is peculiar very peculiar gas, though.

There is a man in Russia that added to Mendeleev's table. I don't mean he filled up the empty slots, he actually stretched the table in depth in a way.
But that also can not be, because that can never be.
Period.

In the same Russia they would burn people attempting to fly with help of gas, or moving wings. Because the church said that man can't fly. Period.

So you've been researching this for all of 2 months or so and you have "UNLOCKED THE SECRET". You have done the impossible. You have figured out what countless people before you have not been able to do.

Great...

Now prove it to us, run your car off of water.

The 3 guys still responding to you have been here 5+ years (2 of which are moderators) and are actually trying to help you... we really are.

Side note:: this is freeware and they claim they aren't making money on it but they are youtube partners and are making money on every view they get on that video (which is actually sad as it has been there for 6 months and has less than 250 views). They also claim that this is pre-production stuff and they plan to sell it.

This isn't worth my time... have fun and I really hope you don't blow your engine.:facepalm:

Your constant "downer" to HHO technology....why don't you leave the HHO forum if you feel it "bogus" technology? maybe because you have control issues or need to be the center of attention...

such being said...please if you have any more arguing like my statements above and all of your statements throughout the current thread...please do so privately to me....and please save the integrady of the thread and the HHO forum (only logical an HHO forum be headed in the right direction for people who believe in the technolog and not full of page after page of back and forth arguing for people who say it doesn't work) Enstein said things worked before he had to prove everything....any other example of scientiest who stated a certain theordical technology could work, who then was doubted by the scientific community, then later, the technology proved to be right, and all who doubted were wrong as hell?)