Hydrogen on demand system?

[acparker]

Sorry to revisit hydrogen as a fuel, but I remembered a fuel comparison chart that I downloaded from the Dept of Energy's Alternative Fuels Data Center website. It showed hydrogen with higher energy density than natural gas, but less than propane. So, hydrogen (and by extension, hho) is a fuel, but not a particularly practical fuel.

Much discussion of producing hydrogen relates to unneeded electricity at base-load generating facilities. That would make economic sense, as the energy generated would otherwise be lost, but improved energy storage would probably be a better option (two unicorns in one paragraph).

Back to the topic, the article, "Effect of hydrogen-diesel fuel co-combustion on exhaust emissions with verification using an in-cylinder gas sampling technique," mentions that injecting hydrogen into the intake diluted the oxygen in the combustion mix. I wondered if the oxygen in the hho would be sufficient to compensate for that dilution?

[ChazInMT]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

That engine needed 230 cc of HHO gas to produce that 22 HP along with the attendant fuel. That 230 cc of HHO was produced by running 10 amperes through a 4 cell series electrolyzer. At 14v alternator output, that represents 140 watts. Even with gross conversion efficiencies as low as 33%, you would spend 420 watts to produce a gain of 1490 for a net gain of 1070 watts

OK, Now we can discuss something since you're using numbers instead of a bunch of technical terms to describe how the HHO "Makes the gasoline burn better and it helps like Soooooo much".

230 CC per Minute? Second? Hour? This is at STP I trust? How do you know it's 10 amps? How do you know it's 230 CC per (?)

Something that gives me serious concern is if it's 230cc per minute, you are diluting the fuel by ~2,500:1 in relation to the air and 160:1 in relation to the fuel. I'd like to hear how the theory of O³-H² enhanced combustion can improve the HP by 10% when it is 0.6% of the fuel stream.

Also, the efficiency of the engine is 30%, generous efficiency of the alternator is 70%. Sooooo 10 amps =140 watts /.21 which is more like 667 watts of engine power needed.

I'm trying to wrap my head around how it takes 180 MJ to electrolyze 9 liters of water, which would require about 6.6 Gallons of gasoline. Reduced down, this is 3/8ths of a gallon per hour to generate your 230cc per minute. At 40 mpg and 60 MPH, this would be a 8mpg loss to your vehicle to generate 230 CC per minute. These numbers assume the gasoline has 129 MJ/Gallon and you get 1,800 Liters of HHO per liter of water. It assumes the energy conversion of gasoline to electricity is 21%.

Hmm. Did I do something wrong?

Lemme know.

[oil pan 4]

And remember that alternator spinning at say 9,000RPM at partial load may only be 40% efficient.
Vehicle alternator efficiency peaks at about 70% but that is only at 2,000 to 3,000 alternator RPMs (not vehicle RPMs) and at around half load, this is not the speed the alternator turns at while the vehicle is driving down the highway.
At highway drivng speed and partial load I would expect the alternator to be between 50% to 35% efficient.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

And the results are erratic. Software has a lot to do with this. Short term fuel trim is the best indicator. Using a variable output electrolyzer is imperative. Use too much HHO and the engine bogs if timing is not adjusted and the engine computer does things to compensate. Use too little and nothing happens. There is simply too much going on to even begin to "tune" for HHO. The work of pfgpro and others who have the ability to control their engine tune may answer more than simply dumping the gas into the intake of the common car.

Sounds like the HHO ruins the gasolines detonation and pre-ignition resistance.
This effect could be achieved by adding diesel to the vehicles gasoline or raising the compression on a gasoline engine.

[pgfpro]

I wish we could have this discussion in a more civil manner?

RustyLugNut has giving in detail how and why HHO can help in combustion. Especially in a lean burn engine!!!

Accelerating combustion in a lean burn is the answer to a more fuel efficient engine. F1 has proven this in their lean burn engine design this year!!!

As some of you know I'm in the process of using N2O for accelerating the flame front during lean burn on my engine at light load freeway speed. I have been doing ABA testing with this for the last 2 months and so far the gains are substantial. The Nitrous cost is not worth it, so far I have used (40+lbs@$6.00/lb) but lucky for me the cost is zero because of a generous research donation.

Now if HHO can give close, better or the same results that I'm seeing now then we have something, if the generation cost of HHO does not out weigh the fuel savings from the improved combustion.

[ctmaybury@yahoo.com]

Rustylugnuts explanation of the excelerated burn might explain what Ive been working on with lpg fumigation on my turbo diesel truck engine. The results are dramatic in terms of power. They seem promising in terms of economy, but no aba testing yet so I can't post any numbers yet. I think the gassous fuel helps with speeding up the burn and helps give a more complete burn. The btu content of the lpg is small compared to the diesel, so performance gains would be cheaper to dump more diesel. Thinking of the addition of lpg as more fuel didn't explain the results, but thinking about it like an ingredient in the complex combustion process helps. The lpg acts like another charge air cooler. Before I thought that was the main effect I was seeing.

Thankyou rustylugnut for your work on this.

As far as hho is concerned, I think on board generation takes it out of the running. The alternator isnt up to the huge load. Generate it at home with grid power or solar. I'm not sure how safe storing hho would be, but you can store the hydrogen and oxygen in separate tanks and mix at the air intake. That might be dangerous too. Lot of bugs to work out, but it seems worth the effort.

[oil pan 4]

Safest thing to do would be to keep using propane or water/alcohol on your diesel.

[ctmaybury@yahoo.com]

I will. No intentions to experiment with hho. Just like to see others work on it. I've read your build thread. You might give lpg a try. It's not really an experiment. People have been using on ci engines for at least 50 years. I don't have numbers to throw out there, but it is a definite economy gain in the 15 percent range. I've run about 20 tanks with it, but they vary widely from pulling my 25 foot travel trailer at 75 mph to cruising around town to truck in work mode with tools and lumber. I need to do an aba test with one type of load. Seat of the pants dyno test it gets 2 thumbs up. Truck is quieter and less smokey too. It lengthens the oil change interval too (so I've read). If you're interested, I'll give you all the details of the multi stage system I designed.

[oil pan 4]

Oh then if you want to talk about propane intake fumigation I have done it, built the propane injection rig my self. What kind of diesel is it going on?

[ctmaybury@yahoo.com]

I didn't plan to hijack the thread. Sorry op. I've got a 98 dodge with a 24v 5spd. I use hobbs switchs set to progressively higher pressures to activate the stages. Just 2 stages now, but adding 2 more stages later. Noise filter coming soon to protect the computer. You put compound turbos on your burb, I plan to do the same. More air can't hurt. I think a similar effect to what rustylugnuts found with hho is happening with lpg, accelerated burn. I need to play with injection timing to optimize. I've been playing with jet size and lp pressure so far. I wish I had the time to fully develope it, as I've been thinking about it for years. Just put the first generation on the truck 3 months ago. I think diesels like lpg. Warning about too much lpg and you get blown head gaskets or much worse.