View Single Post
Old 11-19-2008, 02:39 AM   #221 (permalink)
Christ
Moderate your Moderation.
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,919

Pasta - '96 Volkswagen Passat TDi
90 day: 45.22 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,369
Thanked 430 Times in 353 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coyote X View Post
How about before making a HHO powered/assisted car someone actually designs an experiment mythbusters style that does away with the engine all together and just combusts some gasoline in a 14.7:1 AFR and measure the energy output.
I'm just interested to find out why you chose stoichiometric to use for an experiment pertaining to energy output, when the "science" you refer to has proven time and time again that stoich is and has ne'er been the most efficient, nor has it been the best for power production on a specific amount of fuel.

Under no circumstances is stoich mixture ideal for any engine. Especially considering that engines these days run on a richer mixture than that, just to keep the cats heated to a nominal temp.

The exception to the rule is the lean-burn designs, and the GDI designs, which now can run engines at AFR's of 60:1 efficiently. Also, swirl injection/combustion reduce necessary a/f ratios to produce the same power/efficiency per volume.

This is also to say that the "stoichiometric mixture" for different fuels differs as well. Hydrogen mixtures may have a less or more ratio requirement to be "stoichiometric". That term makes me cringe... the thought that so many people rely on it as a facet of tuning for "|\/|()' P()\/\//-\|-|" LOL.

Anyway, to clarify, stoichiometric is only a bench number. That is to say that it's only ideal in ideal circumstances, which, most certainly, does not refer to real world application.

__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"

  Reply With Quote