Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyLugNut
The carburetor , by their report, was adjusted to stoichiometric at each test point. They made an addition of HHO of up to 0.45% by volume.
<snip>
I have tested it on a 1990 Daihatsu Charade with the CB90 engine which has a relatively "lazy" combustion chamber comprised of a hemispherical head and straight shot intake passages. Running at 22:1 AFR resulted in missed ignition cycles and a COV ( co-efficient of variability ) well above the 5% rule of thumb for a good running engine. The engine could barely run at 24:1 AFR. It must be pointed out that engines designed to run in lean burn, such as the Honda engines, can run up to this point with reasonable COV, but the CB90 could not. Now, the addition of some HHO via an alternator powered electrolysis cell results in a smooth running engine up to 28:1 AFR. That was the limit of the Innovate Wideband O2 sensor we were using. You ask if I did ABA testing? Sure, turn off the HHO generator at 28:1 AFR and the engine cannot run.
|
Not disputing the findings but the interpretation. Doesn't the introduction of HHO in place of air richen up the mixture and potentially explain the improved running? What was the change in Lambda when the HHO was introduced? What was the power produced or was this just at idle? As far as I know lean burn needs higher BMEP and cylinder temperatures to work effectively.
Just seeking to unpack the hype around this.
Simon