HHO: Good, bad, or ugly?

[spacer]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

LOL, I was thinking about my older brother who bought a 55 gallon drum of used wheel weights for reloading. I figured it was something like 150,000 30 cal. 150 grain bullets. They ripped the flanges off the drum trying to get it out of his truck, finally welded tabs on it to get it out, think it weighed 3300 pounds. Scrap value today would probably get him a couple of ounces of gold these days.

regards
Mech

I'll need to do that one of these days. Factory .44 mag is hella expensive.

[Ken Fry]

Originally Posted by spacer

Ooh. Wait a minute there... what time of the year was that sunshine collected, and was it gathered by a virgin?
Gotta be careful with that stuff. Mess it up and *real* bad stuff can happen.

We were careful to collect it at noon on the northern hemisphere summer solstice. There were no virgins within 30 miles who were older than age 5, (and the young ones were too busy learning sexy moves from Britney Spears videos) so we went to plan B. We used extra virgin (not mere virgin) olive oil to lube the cap, enabling us to get it extra tight, to assure that no leakage occurs. Rest assured that this is some good stuff.

[UFO]

Originally Posted by IsaacMTSU

I know I have no proof, I'm really just throwing this out there to get my post count up...

Well, long story short, it really made a difference in the fuel economy at idle. The injectors were pulsing about 1/8th the normal rate while maintaining the same idle speed. We kept upping the output by dumping more lye in the mix until eventually it melted the o-ring on the output hose and exploded everywhere! I think it would really help MPG if you could make a reliable unit with consistent mixtures.

That's amusing. I can improve my fuel economy even better at idle - turn off the ignition key.

LOL

[IsaacMTSU]

I'm not saying this stuff works, I didn't really test it out, but I would assume that if uses 1/8th less fuel to idle that it would use less fuel throughout the RPM range...

[IsaacMTSU]

Sorry, Fastegg, I didn't see your post until after I posted. Yeah, TuneBoy is awesome. I've never used the power commander though to compare, but creating maps with TuneBoy and trading them around on the forums is pretty cool. As for the HHO, I ran a 1/2" tube into the ram air intake as far as I could until it hit the air filter. The generator...or IED as it turned out to be...was hooked to the battery and just sitting on floor beside the bike. What I used the tune boy for was just to monitor how the engine was running. At idle, the the injectors pulse for a certain duration to maintain the set idle speed, if the bike is idling too high/low the injectors pulse less/more to change the idle speed back to the set value. As we added HHO, the injectors had to pulse less and less as we kept upping the output. Eventually, as the generator was getting really hot and bubbly, the injectors were pulsing around 1/8th the duration they were without the HHO while maintaining the same idle speed, i.e. less fuel, same RPM. I don't have proof and I'm not doing it again, because I could never trust myself to make one that won't blow up and I sure as h*** won't strap one to the bike and go for a ride

[Ken Fry]

Originally Posted by IsaacMTSU

The injectors were pulsing about 1/8th the normal rate while maintaining the same idle speed.

Is the Triumph system that much different than the others? In most closed loop fuel injection systems, pulse width determines mixture, and pulse rate relates directly to rpm. Injection occurs when the intake valve is open.

How is this set up in the Triumph? What was their reasoning for going with this different route when the standard system has been shown to work so well?

How was your "HHO" unit powered? Directly from the alternator?

The Dennis-Lee-promoted "HHO" unit was reliable and provided consistent mixtures, but was shown by John Heywood to have no effect at all when tested in an EPA-certified dynomometer lab. This is exactly in keeping with the science involved, because the 1 liter/minute input of H2/O2 would be expected to have no measurable effect at all, even if the power source for the "HHO" unit was offboard (such as a battery charger, external battery, etc.)... or if 1 liter per minute of H2 was supplied by from a tank. The quantity is almost an order of magnitude too small to have a measurable effect.

With a 1000 watt electroyser (14.5 v x 69 amps) then the net fuel economy loss would be measurable only by the very best $25,000 per day dynos: you'd need to apply (e.g.) a constant 30 hp load, and cycle the HHO unit on and off to see that with it on, fuel consumption would go up slightly.

To get 1000 watts (1.34 hp) out of the alternator requires about 2 hp from the engine (because the alternator is cheap and lossy). This 2 hp of engine output requires 8 hp (6000 watts) worth of fuel (assuming 25% engine efficiency). The 1000 watt electrolyzer, if it is well built, will supply 600 watts worth of H2. So the net loss is (6000 watts in - 600 watts out) 5400 watts. This is big enough to measure. But as John Heywood found, the loss from using a standard ( ~ 10 amp) HHO unit is just too small to measure with a sophisticated chassis dyno.

[ConnClark]

Originally Posted by Old Mechanic

I can make Gold out of Lead.

regards
Mech

Glenn T. Seaborg did it

Glenn T. Seaborg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Ken Fry]

I'm not saying this stuff works, I didn't really test it out, but I would assume that if uses 1/8th less fuel to idle that it would use less fuel throughout the RPM range...

You've written two different things.

"that if uses 1/8th less fuel to idle" means that it used 7/8 as much fuel as before

"the injectors were pulsing around 1/8th the duration" means that it used 1/8 as much fuel as before

Which did you intend?

[Frank Lee]

I think he meant "I'm not saying it works but I'm saying it works".

[oil pan 4]

It is crap and I am going to say it is crap.