HHO Mod, Does it work?

[UltArc]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

The science gets buried under the pile of scammer dung only to be pompously buried even more by "experts" who have not done any work at all in the field of discussion. You say this forum has found "zero" results? I see little work on this forum as far as engine development, how much more HHO applications. Yes, the scammers need chastising, but people do need to temper their keyboards when visitors make an honest inquiry.

And I am willing to stake my reputation against yours and anyone else on here.

I hope you didn't take personal offense from that!

I think more of the frustration from the group has come from the lack of research before hand. I have no knowledge of the topic other than what I have found here, or was directed to from here (both scammers and reputable people).

My post up there was not meant to be rude to people who have used it, rather I have no knowledge of any real results on here, let alone something believable. Had you posted your results and situation before my post, I wouldn't have written it that way, I hope you know. I was sincere in there. I meant everyone posting "here's how to search" (me included) and saying "it doesn't work" (me included) should just leave it alone, since clearly the OP A) couldn't find what he wanted through search or B) doesn't know how to search.

EDIT: I reread your post, could you direct me to some reputable results on HHO success? I am not familiar with any, though I have not searched the 1,000+ results.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

The bottom line is that considerable work will need to be done to gain a 5-15% advantage. An outlier engine returned 30-50% with HHO but that was in conjunction with added intake heat, mixture turbulence and lean combustion mixtures at relatively low engine revolution rates.

Sounds like everything but the HHO was improving fuel economy.
Up to 15% is what I would expect from WAI, lean burn and cruise RPM reduction.

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

The science gets buried under the pile of scammer dung only to be pompously buried even more by "experts" who have not done any work at all in the field of discussion. You say this forum has found "zero" results? I see little work on this forum as far as engine development, how much more HHO applications. Yes, the scammers need chastising, but people do need to temper their keyboards when visitors make an honest inquiry.

And I am willing to stake my reputation against yours and anyone else on here.

I don't have to build a rocket and fly it to the moon to know and say to others that it can be done.

It's quite simple: HHOers have been challenged time and time again to prove it works.

The proof has yet to arrive even though it is my understanding that a hefty prize was offered.

I don't have to go out to the garage and build a POS HHO system to add to the noise.

[Frank Lee]

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy!!! George Wiseman LIED! He's NOT on sabbatical!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnXuhTaay_I

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Sounds like everything but the HHO was improving fuel economy but the HHO.
Up to 15% is what I would expect from WAI, lean burn and cruise RPM reduction.

WITHOUT warm air intake (WAI), lean burn and engine speed reduction, there can be measured gains up to 15% depending on the engine design. This is simply the addition of controlled amounts of HHO along with adjustments in engine timing. The only gain to be seen is the contraction of the wasted "ignition lead" pressure rise as well as post combustion pressure. You will agree that a rapid combustion event is advantageous in reducing the lead time needed to peak combustion pressures after top dead center (TDC). An engine that has a lazy ignition lead of 20 degrees before TDC versus one that needs only 10 degrees will waste energy in negative working pressure.

It is well known that hydrogen accelerates flame fronts. However, most of the classic work is done with hydrogen mixtures of 4% or greater as that is the limit of flammability in air. So what? These tiny HHO generators cannot even begin to approach a production volume that would allow the generator's output to affect combustion in the classic regimes. We must remember that we are adding the small HHO mixture to a combustible hydrocarbon soup. The interaction before combustion is the key.

Government lab work - who's links unfortunately escape me at the moment - show that the addition of ozone in amounts as small as 40 ppm (parts per million) can cause a measurable acceleration in hydrocarbon combustion rates. One of our own forum members, pgfpro, showed with his leaky N2 experiment, that a small amount of N2O2 reduced ignition lead time tremendously. HHO pundits, as well as opponents, tend to forget that O2 gas is also produced and a percentage of this evolves as O3, which, like N2O2 easily dissociates to release oxygen radicals.

These oxygen radicals as well as the H2 gas which easily dissociates into H+ radicals, are usually found after the ignition event has started. Unfortunately, most basic texts on combustion leave the reader with the impression that the carbon and hydrogen in a hydrocarbon chain oxidize in one single step to CO2 and water releasing their potential energy as heat. This is the case only in the simplest of fuel mixtures ( CO and H2 combustion ). The longer and more complex the carbon chain, the more pathways of decomposition it can take before the final ash of combustion is reached. Iso octane with it's C8H18 chain has hundreds of decomposition pathways. Some are exothermic, some are endothermic. And they all feed off each other in a complex dance that is only starting to be fully understood with the aid of supercomputer modelling and advanced detection techniques.

But what if we introduce some of these radicals of combustion before the mixture is ignited? The products of HHO decompose to H+, OH-, HOOH, and so forth - short lived and highly reactive radicals - that fast track the combustion reducing the number of pathways and resulting in a contraction of the needed ignition lead time. In another thread, I asked the readers to make a calculation to see the power gained with just an increase of a few pounds per square inch in the classic BMEP (brake mean effective pressure) formula. It was surprising how a small pressure gain could result in a significant horsepower gain. Imagine recovering just a small amount of the lost pressure rise in an engine's ignition lead and transferring this to the useful area after TDC. With a fast enough combustion event, you can also minimize the exhaust pressure at low horsepower production much as in an Atkinson cycle engine.

By adding sufficient heat and turbulence, you can start the thermal depolymerization of the hydrocarbon fuel even before the start of combustion. This is the principle behind the "hot fuel" engines such as Smokey's Adiabatic engine. Provide enough energy to your fuel mixture, and you don't need HHO to start decomposing the fuel soup and accelerating the combustion. Another forum member, dustyfirewalker, is on the path to an engineering degree and is energetically building a "smoke fueled" engine. I may not agree in detail to his execution, but I do agree in principle - heat up that fuel and air mix and accelerate your combustion.

[oil pan 4]

And that's why its in the unicorn corral.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I don't have to build a rocket and fly it to the moon to know and say to others that it can be done.

It's quite simple: HHOers have been challenged time and time again to prove it works.

The proof has yet to arrive even though it is my understanding that a hefty prize was offered.

I don't have to go out to the garage and build a POS HHO system to add to the noise.

I approached them to test - on a dynamometer - a simple example of a working HHO system without the need to meet emissions certification, production quotas and 100k mileage warranties. It was a simple test of "does it increase fuel efficiency".

They banned me from further discussion and communication. It also turns out they did not have " a million dollars in cash" to payout to the winner. Basically, they made the "level of proof" so high as to be unreachable by anyone with common resources. Of course, HHO is so limited that a major manufacturer would produce it only if it was marketable, and then, they wouldn't mess with a piddly million dollar prize. Look at what happened with the Auto Xprize. The prize promoters know this and stacked the challenge against anyone less than a corporate funded entity.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

And that's why its in the unicorn corral.

Just because you don't understand the science, doesn't mean it isn't so. I did say it was complex even if I have simplified it to the point of erroneous imagery.

HHO bears further study even if it doesn't "double your mileage".

[oil pan 4]

With all that science why is it in the unicorn corral?

I think it has something to do with being the absolute best case scenario mod for A-B-A testing and it still can't produce results.

[Frank Lee]

I do know that hydrogen aids ultra lean-burn strategies.

None of it has made it outta the lab.

So there ya are.