DIY Water for Gas kit (spam)

[NachtRitter]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

I was going to kill this thread, but I'd like to know more. Sounds similar to a prize I learned about recently that's directed at "clairvoyants".

That's James Randi's "One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge" (see Challenge Info) you're talking about there...

[MetroMPG]

NachtRitter: that's the one!

zoltanbod: thanks for that link. I love the concept. Put up (scientifically verifiable by a 3rd party), or shut up!

[Dr. Jerryrigger]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

NachtRitter: that's the one!

zoltanbod: thanks for that link. I love the concept. Put up (scientifically verifiable by a 3rd party), or shut up!

I've done a lot of research on this topic, and I'm a regular at HHOforums.com (where water-for-gas is a running joke). I see a potential for HHO to work (in the 10-20% FE improvement range). It really has had a bad name, as so many people are trying to sell crap cells. I have to say water for gas is the worst one i've seen. I really can't see that system doing anything but killing FE, and then they will sell you a kit to lean out your fuel mix so it looks like it did something, until you burn out your valves.

Any HHO system waists energy, anyone who with a high school diploma should recognize this right off. The way it helps is by improving the burn of fuel mist, the same way supplemental propane injection works.
In fact supplemental propane injection (SPI) is a excellent example for this. With SPI you use you're normal fuel, you just add a little propane. This improves FE even if you factor in the BTU's of the propane you use. The idea is to burn more fuel in the cylinder, and send less of it to the cat.
With HHO you make the supplemental fuel. So, with a typical set up on a small to mid sized car you'll be using about 1/2hp off your alternator. The alternator has about a 15% loss, a really good HHO cell has a loss of about 20% (i would guess a water for gas cell has about a 90% loss), and then you put it into an engine that has a loss of about 80%. So the aim to make your own fuel dumb, it's just to improve the burn.
People have found that with HHO they can get away with a leaner mix, which is where some improvements come from. Though a water mister may work just as well.

I don't use HHO on my car, yet. I use acetone as a fuel additive which gives similar gains (very minimal 3-6%) from the same inefficiency.

[RobertSmalls]

Originally Posted by Dr. Jerryrigger

...The alternator has about a 15% loss...

Typical alternators have 50% loss, and they're attached to combustion engines with 70% loss.

HHO is a scam, and I won't believe otherwise until I read about it in a scientific journal or see it installed as original equipment by a major automaker.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by RobertSmalls

Typical alternators have 50% loss, and they're attached to combustion engines with 70% loss.

...I believe he was referring to the electrical efficiency of an alternator, not it's in-situ efficiency including the engine, its driving force.

[cfg83]

Dr. Jerryrigger -

Originally Posted by Dr. Jerryrigger

...

Any HHO system waists energy, anyone who with a high school diploma should recognize this right off. The way it helps is by improving the burn of fuel mist, the same way supplemental propane injection works.
In fact supplemental propane injection (SPI) is a excellent example for this. With SPI you use you're normal fuel, you just add a little propane. This improves FE even if you factor in the BTU's of the propane you use. The idea is to burn more fuel in the cylinder, and send less of it to the cat.
...

Does SPI increase how much oxygen the oxygen sensor sees in the exhaust?

CarloSW2

[RobertSmalls]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

...I believe he was referring to the electrical efficiency of an alternator, not it's in-situ efficiency including the engine, its driving force.

So was I. Two kW of torque in for each kW of electricity out. The combined efficiency would be 15%, for an 85% loss from gasoline to electricity.

[Dr. Jerryrigger]

Originally Posted by RobertSmalls

So was I. Two kW of torque in for each kW of electricity out. The combined efficiency would be 15%, for an 85% loss from gasoline to electricity.

Stop picking at the details, the original statement was not necessarily 100% accurate, but was written to illustrate the same point that you are trying to make: HHO has a low energy return to consumption ratio, for this discussion it doesn't matter if it's 0.1:1 or .07:1.

Not all alternators are equal, some are 85% efficient, and I stated the ICE as 80% loss, and you at 70% so things balance out a little there.

[Deyeme]

Originally Posted by zoltanbod

There is a one million dollar prize awaiting for the first supplimental hydrogen gas system that improves fuel efficiency by 30% .The vehicle must be tested by a university for 6 months to varify the claims.Then the engine is inspected for any internal damage.If everything checks out you receive the one million! Guess how many HHO claiments have registered for the prize---ZERO!

30% would be really impressive for any hybrid device, even one that required another fuel or an expendable catalyst. Maybe they set their sights unrealistically high to beat down proponents of real hybrid solutions?

The hokey devices I've seen make and use the hydrogen/oxygen gas at once, rather than splitting the water during low load and making use of the stored energy (the split H2 and O2 gas) during high load. The only way to make a true hybrid system would be to control it so that it was only using electricity to make and store the gasses (in separate tanks!) the same way that kenetic energy is returned to the battery of an EV- during coasting, downhill cruising, braking, etc. THEN when the engine is loaded up (highway merging, hill climbing, etc.) the gasses are conservatively metered into the engine. Since you've taken a car that normally had to be fueled up with one fuel (gasoline) and made it into a car that needs to be filled up with two fuels (gasoline and water) you've made a system that is undesirably more complex for the average user.

[Dr. Jerryrigger]

Originally Posted by cfg83

Dr. Jerryrigger -



Does SPI increase how much oxygen the oxygen sensor sees in the exhaust?

CarloSW2

It shouldn't, if anything it should see less.
The thing with HHO and O2 is a little questionable. I've never found a satisfying answer to; what is really going on. Theoretically you have enough H to make a complete burn of the HHO so it shouldn't change anything.
Also if your'e really burning fuel that would normally burn in the cat, than you should see less O2.
I've heard people claim that the O2 sensor reads the H2O as O2, but I can fined no mention of this from water injection guys, so I'm pretty sure this is bogus (also the amount of H2O in normal exhaust makes this one rather questionable)
I think the real issue it that you can get away with a leaner burn with HHO, and that is where you see real FE improvements.