Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > DIY / How-to
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-20-2012, 04:45 AM   #551 (permalink)
Scandinavian creature
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Finland
Posts: 146

Golf ball - '94 Volkswagen Golf III
90 day: 28.46 mpg (US)
Thanks: 4
Thanked 27 Times in 22 Posts
Is'nt it better to just not to make HHO generator, and instead spray the water. Injecting water after every 4-stroke-session, making some sort of 6-stroke engine. It would cool the engine better, and save the fuel. Any thoughts?

__________________

Brrrmm
Now selling preassembled MPGuino's!
http://www.mthtek.net/mpguino/
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 12-20-2012, 08:07 AM   #552 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,024 Times in 1,304 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyLugNut View Post
I assure you, I understand much more about this subject than you realize.
Not quite, simplistic propaganda tactic Rusty, you don't like the message, kill the messenger.

I also was not aware that other members here were "enemies" (your words, previously posted on this thread).
I'm actually glad to see you have a significant understand of combustion turbulence. While that is significant you take the position that others are not nearly as "educated" (kind of arrogant).

Try sticking to impressing others with facts and evidence that supports your facts.

In your previous responses you are now talking about enhancing combustion efficiency with HHO, not improving mileage with HHO. Just another propaganda tactic.

Most HHO proponents think their knowledge is superior to those they need to "convert" to their superior understanding.

Impress me with your knowledge and evidence to support your "assumptions" (do I need to point them out for you?). If you succeed in this endeavor then you will recieve recognition of that success.

If you just want to take simplistic "shots" at people, it will bring, from me at least, an appropriate response. Such "shots" should be beneath your claimed superior knowledge, which without the ability to make your points obvious to others who may lack your supreme educational level, the same knowledge becomes useless, when wrapped in intolerance and arrogance.

regards
Mech
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 01:21 PM   #553 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
So, dissect my post on combustion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Mechanic View Post
Not quite, simplistic propaganda tactic Rusty, you don't like the message, kill the messenger.
I am seeking critical analysis and discussion. If you are capable, do so. If not . . .

Quote:
I also was not aware that other members here were "enemies" (your words, previously posted on this thread).
I quote an ancient Chinese proverb ( supposedly ). I quote another. You find it stings true. Look at your posts, and those of others. It is an antagonistic atmosphere towards anything HHO. I don't mind it. I have been on HHO forums and they are antagonistic towards anything scientific. The problem is when you cannot argue in science. Do so, and the antagonism is welcome.

Quote:
I'm actually glad to see you have a significant understand of combustion turbulence. While that is significant you take the position that others are not nearly as "educated" (kind of arrogant).
My post was not about combustion turbulence as such. And arrogant? Is it not just as arrogant to argue about subjects beyond your understanding?

Quote:
Try sticking to impressing others with facts and evidence that supports your facts.
I am building the scientific case for the possible positive use of HHO as a preamble to the build. The supporting facts and data will come then. The science will be proven or dis-proven, as it may.

Quote:
In your previous responses you are now talking about enhancing combustion efficiency with HHO, not improving mileage with HHO. Just another propaganda tactic.
Look at the end of my post. I talk about the work gain. There should be a measurable gain in mileage that coincides with the measurable increase in the break mean effective pressure (BMEP).


Quote:
Most HHO proponents think their knowledge is superior to those they need to "convert" to their superior understanding.
This is very true. And most opponents use basic science as the argument against HHO, but cannot argue any deeper.

Quote:
Impress me with your knowledge and evidence to support your "assumptions" (do I need to point them out for you?). If you succeed in this endeavor then you will recieve recognition of that success.
Please point them out. I will flesh out my position with the science and mathematics as soon as I figure out how to post the required graphics.

Quote:
If you just want to take simplistic "shots" at people, it will bring, from me at least, an appropriate response. Such "shots" should be beneath your claimed superior knowledge, which without the ability to make your points obvious to others who may lack your supreme educational level, the same knowledge becomes useless, when wrapped in intolerance and arrogance.
People who live in glass houses should not . . .

Oh that's right, you don't like these sayings.

Last edited by RustyLugNut; 12-22-2012 at 07:58 AM.. Reason: Content.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 01:22 PM   #554 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
There has been some discussion of this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quezacotl View Post
Is'nt it better to just not to make HHO generator, and instead spray the water. Injecting water after every 4-stroke-session, making some sort of 6-stroke engine. It would cool the engine better, and save the fuel. Any thoughts?
I believe on another thread, the "Crower" six stroke cycle was discussed to some lengths.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 08:13 PM   #555 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
IamIan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: RI
Posts: 692
Thanks: 371
Thanked 227 Times in 140 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyLugNut View Post
As you can see from the description above, we are not just adding HHO, we have to juggle other parameters. But, it does result in a net energy gain via reduction of lost work.
Forgive me if I misunderstood or am over simplifying ... but your explanation read to me like you are trying to use the faster flame speed of hydrogen in order to sustain Lean Burn operation in a ICE that was not initially designed for Lean Burn Operation ... thus having a net of less unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2012, 08:55 PM   #556 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Afrersize's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Southern Tier, New York
Posts: 47
Thanks: 6
Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Please do before tests

If you don't do a before test your HHO, your test's will be useless as you should know, I have hope for the results weather they're positive or negative I just want to see a thorough before and after HHO test for the first time.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 01:45 AM   #557 (permalink)
gus
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: canada
Posts: 23
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Smile

If you go back to about page 50 you will find my posts which may be of interest to you.
I also posted a couple of links of Dino. tests. They do not show fuel savings but certainly indicate in one case the emission reduction. The other shows the hp gain with the HHO operational.

For what its worth, my experience is cleaner exhaust, much more power.
As far as the fuel savings go, after a very small test I feel safe to say that maybe up to 30% savings will be achieved. I run a 1991 Toyota Hiace 2,4ltr turbo diesel. I don't have much opportunity to get a clear shot a highway driving and these vehicles are guzzlers around town.
Cheers
Gus
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 08:05 AM   #558 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
Overall, your understanding is correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IamIan View Post
Forgive me if I misunderstood or am over simplifying ... but your explanation read to me like you are trying to use the faster flame speed of hydrogen in order to sustain Lean Burn operation in a ICE that was not initially designed for Lean Burn Operation ... thus having a net of less unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust.
However, the speed of the hydrogen flame is not the fulcrum as the mass ratio of H2 that can be added via electrolysis is far below the lower flammability limit (LFL) of hydrogen. I surmise the H2 acts as a reactant that changes the fuel mix properties.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 08:07 AM   #559 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 982
Thanks: 271
Thanked 385 Times in 259 Posts
I agree wholeheartedly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Afrersize View Post
If you don't do a before test your HHO, your test's will be useless as you should know, I have hope for the results weather they're positive or negative I just want to see a thorough before and after HHO test for the first time.
If at all possible, I will run the A-B-A format testing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-2012, 04:30 PM   #560 (permalink)
Corporate imperialist
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 11,175

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 269
Thanked 3,522 Times in 2,796 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyLugNut View Post
If at all possible, I will run the A-B-A format testing.
Since you can turn it on and off with a switch I would hope so.
Almost no one else seems to be able to do this for some reason.

__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
what do you think of hydrogen mods (with video) igo EcoModding Central 18 11-13-2008 01:54 PM
Hydrogen Less than Gas Arminius The Lounge 4 08-03-2008 03:48 PM
GM's new hydrogen car SVOboy Fossil Fuel Free 0 01-08-2008 01:34 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com