HHO May Benefit Kill Switch System

[LittleBlackDuck]

Originally Posted by DragBean

Fellow Ecos,

Recently Ive put an alternator kill switch into my car and a fresh deep cycle. I'm not seeing any noticeable improvements.

I've been trying to figure out a solution to the downside of turning off your alternator - your sparks aren't as powerful and you're losing power due to a slower frame front.

Most alternators put out 13.7 Volts on the battery and when you turn this off you have 12.6V on a new freshly charged battery. That drops the longer you use the batterry without charging.

One solution is to incorporate some type of battery circuit in series with the main battery and ignition coil.

Another I'm considering is an HHO generator. Hydroxy - O2 and H2 mixed is one of the most combustible fuel air mixes and gives a more complete burn and faster flame front for more power earlier in the power stroke.

There's not a whole lot of seasoned ecomodders endorsing HHO and I know the double your mpg claims are myths in 99% of cases.

I've read SAE articles and Canadian Auto Institute research papers on the matter which prove 4-10% gains with TUNED systems (a big factor is that only a 1% HHO mix to fuel/air is required).

So to the post title. An HHO mod could solve the issue of a weaker spark. HHO is so combustible that this will increase your flame front.

I've made hydrogen balloons before and have the perfect car to test this concept. So I'm doing this relatively simple mod for the benefit of you all.

I hoping to get a 10% gain factoring in the kill switch weaker spark losses.

Any advice or comments is greatly appreciated.

The biggest thing that you are missing is that fuel injection systems compensate really well for variations in battery voltage. The ECU has tables that adjust injection time for battery voltage, and the spark intensity is primarily controlled by dwell time, which is also controlled by the ECU. I can tell you that from personal experience with a failed alternator on my Lexus RX350 that the engine ran perfectly until the battery was down around 9 volts and the fuel pressure dropped massively to the extent that the engine lost power. Even then it never misfired.

If you are trying to eke out every horsepower from a highly boosted engine, then spark intensity will make large differences, but at the BMEP levels encountered in an engine being driven for economy it is unlikely to make a difference.

All the hype surrounding HHO is totally unsubstantiated by any credible scientific evidence if my research is accurate.

Simon.

[LittleBlackDuck]

Originally Posted by DragBean

If all the fuel got burnt just a hair after tdc youd have the ideal situation.

Nope, peak combustion pressure should be approximately 10-15 degrees after TDC. If you examine the geometry of the piston, connecting rod and crankshaft, you will,find that there is very little movement of the piston for quite some time (piston dwell at TDC) and having the pressure peaking too early causes detonation, and ultimately loss of efficiency and engine damage.

There is a shed load of research covering this on the Internet.

Simon

[Ecky]

Gumby79, I took a good bit of physics in college and some of the things you've said directly contradict what I learned there. I've also taught chemistry. I was wondering if you could clear a few things up.

Originally Posted by gumby79

The Hocus Pocus mumbo jumboxis the cutting edge of plasma science. There still submitting new words to Webster to described the different aspects of plasma..
The difference between HHO and H2 is simple
H2 is a highly reactive element in gas form (as it applies in this conversation)
HHO is H2O in plasma state . H2O is a moleculein the 4th phase. ... plasma.
Notic the different shape .

I was under the impression that the definition of plasma was when atoms enter a charged state and molecular bonds disassociate. Therefore, there is no "HHO plasma molecule". HHO would instead be two hydrogens and an oxygen moving independently of each other. Can you give a citation showing that molecules can exist in a plasma state? Or did you not mean that HHO is in a plasma state, but rather that it's simply a molecule with a different shape - which would be called an isomer?

Originally Posted by gumby79

The extra attached electrons release more energy escaping orbit than it takes to enter orbit. Eg it takes more energy to escape Earths gravitational force than it takes to enter. Shoemaker-levy 9 took 0.0 enregy to enter Jupiter's atmosphere but released astronomical amounts of energy. Had levy 9 come in the right angle speed ect ect, it would have been a new moon on the first pass or 10+ on the 2nd pass..

The amount of energy released by entering Earth's gravitational field is exactly the same as the amount needed to escape it. Shoemaker-levy 9 released energy as it entered Jupiter's atmosphere, and would have needed the same amount to escape it again. The nearest equivalent to HHO would be to go to Jupiter, build a rocket and carry a chunk of it into space, only to drop it back into the planet. The net energy is exactly the same because you're starting and ending with the same thing, but you've also used energy in creating the rocket and thus are coming out with a net negative.

Originally Posted by gumby79

In order for ignition to occur the extra electrons most both reach escape volisity.

In a sense. Combustion (again as I understand it) happens when you have enough energy to overcome the chemical bonds, and then the atoms rearrange themselves into a lower energy state than they were before:




Turning H20 into a plasma, then "combusting" it back to H20 forms the same bonds again, so the exact amount of energy needed to overcome the bonds is released again. This is why hydrogen can make a good battery. However, to my knowledge, you can only get out of it what you put into it, due to the laws of physics and the nature of chemical bonding.

Originally Posted by gumby79

Your stand seems to be:
It's a brake even technology. You don't lose efficiency, but you don't gain so its a waste.

My stand is:
I agree.
If the charging efficiency improved 5% (from 7%to 12%),however, this would become a viable technology .
Gumby Stay Flexible.

Even if you could convert water to hydrogen completely without loss, and then put it in an engine where it turns back into water again, you would still gain absolutely nothing from the chemical reactions. You add X energy to break water's chemical bonds, then put it back together and gain X energy, for a net change of zero. Again, this is why fuel cells are a thing; you can use energy somewhere else, where it's cheaper to make or use (your home electrical grid for instance) and then release that energy in your car to move it around. You're not gaining any energy.

[gumby79]

Originally Posted by LittleBlackDuck

All the hype surrounding HHO is totally unsubstantiated by any credible scientific evidence if my research is accurate.
Simon.

Affirmative Expert Report
Response to Dr. Heywood’s Report:
“An Assessment of the Fuel Economy
Claims Made for the
Hydro Assist Fuel Cell (HAFC) System”
Jacob Wall
Mechanical Engineer
August 12, 2010

Plasma orbital expansion theory for Brown's gas

Effect of HHO on Four Stroke Petrol Engine Performance | Daniel M. Madyira - Academia.edu

BROWN'S GAS BOOK 2: BROWN'S GAS FACTS ex Scripts from the 2 books published by the discoverer Yull Brown

[oil pan 4]

HHO is more like LOL.

[RustyLugNut]

. . . the link to the Madyira paper Gumby79 linked to?

The paper came to the same conclusions I came to years ago. Single digit gains can be found under certain conditions while losses occur in others.

If any of you have done research at this level, please feel free to share your results if you are able to.

[gumby79]

[QUOTE=Ecky;521578]

I was under the impression that the definition of plasma was when atoms enter a charged state and molecular bonds disassociate. Therefore, there is no "HHO plasma molecule". HHO would instead be two hydrogens and an oxygen moving independently of each other. Can you give a citation showing that molecules can exist in a plasma state? Or did you not mean that HHO is in a plasma state, but rather that it's simply a molecule with a different shape - which would be called an isomer?

Is a Rydberg cluster a isomer or a plasma that contains molecules? Were do the other elements found in HHO mass spec. Analysis come from ? Definitely not from H2O. What are the effects these extra elements having on combustion? The turm used by Christopher Eckman is "electric steam "(add : its flammable form of water that burns @ 130°c but can easily beak the bonds of W Tungsten at over 6000°c)
Scientific model presented for Brown's gas this article may help to un muddy the waters.

The amount of energy released by entering Earth's gravitational field is exactly the same as the amount needed to escape it. Shoemaker-levy 9 released energy as it entered Jupiter's atmosphere, and would have needed the same amount to escape it again. The nearest equivalent to HHO would be to go to Jupiter, build a rocket and carry a chunk of it into space, only to drop it back into the planet. The net energy is exactly the same because you're starting and ending with the same thing, but you've also used energy in creating the rocket and thus are coming out with a net negative.

"The amount of energy released by entering Earth's gravitational field is exactly the same as the amount needed to escape it. " and "but you've also used energy in creating the rocket and thus are coming out with a net negative. " the beginning contradicts the end.

Entry energy duse not =exit especially if you consider manufacturing of supporting equipment ,ship,fuel, we agree that production of H2 cost more than is released.

In a sense. Combustion (again as I understand it) happens when you have enough energy to overcome the chemical bonds, and then the atoms rearrange themselves into a lower energy state than they were before:





Turning H20 into a plasma, then "combusting" it back to H20 forms the same bonds again

Burning HHO takes out the extra electrons to form H2O. Do they disappear. Or do they have a chain reaction effect?

exact amount of energy needed to overcome the bonds is released again. This is why hydrogen can make a good battery. However, to my knowledge, you can only get out of it what you put into it, due to the laws of physics and the nature of chemical bonding.

Even if you could convert water to hydrogen completely without loss, and then put it in an engine where it turns back into water again, you would still gain absolutely nothing from the chemical reactions. You add X energy to break water's chemical bonds, then put it back together and gain X energy, for a net change of zero. Again, this is why fuel cells are a thing; you can use energy somewhere else, where it's cheaper to make or use (your home electrical grid for instance) and then release that energy in your car to move it around. You're not gaining any energy.[/QUOTE.]

Agen you are comparing h2 with HHO and its additional properties .

Eddit : maid requested adjustments and added.
In h2 production you split the bonds.
In HHO production you rearrange the bonds (less effert than braking the bounds) slipping some of that electric energy into the h2o directly..
This has been demonstrated using acoustics to in fuse energy into water. I doubt that any one has actually looked close enough to see any difference in final product composition between electrolysis HHO and acoustic HHO.

[Ecky]

It's difficult to read your post, given the randomly colored text and repeated and broken quotations. Could you clean it up a bit?

I'll do some reading on Rydberg clusters but I suspect I'll find some weak interaction, but no real bonding or bond energies.

[DragBean]

Wow! This thread blew up!
I'm just feeding the excess power from my 250 Watt Solar Panel directly into the cylinders guys.
And probably more.

[gumby79]

Non crankshaft production... Well done