Hydrogen Generator Experiment

[Sakmeht]

Just wanted to say that a car mechanic friend of ours is using HHO on his newer Dodge pick-up truck and went from 12 to 19mpg. My husband was totally against the idea of it working until he took his Geo engine over there for some work and saw the guys set-up. He didn't use a kit, but built it on his own. He was using the steel plates/electrodes/distilled water, etc... Hubby came home all impressed and wanting to try it. We're going to give it a go when the engine is back in the car and running. I told him when he does, he needs to make a video diary that we can post.

[smartzuuk]

I've been drenched with questions, conversations and buffoonish hype about water4gas as of late... to the point I have sifted the internet, found the smackdowns of choice, and have now taken a bullish anti-HHO position...

» Don’t be fuelish: HHO - Brown’s Gas - Run your car on water

I am trying to drum up some media interest in getting the word out about this fraud/internet scam/rubbish

[metro094]

The idea with hydrogen injection isn't fuel replacement. Its that it is supposed to work as a catalyst to make the fuel burn much better, faster, more completely while its in the chamber.

You can add platinum particles to your fuel and get it to burn much more completely, reducing emissions and increasing power. Problem is that platinum is terribly expensive. Hence the platinum plate in your converter - much cheaper than an ongoing gas additive.

You don't see anyone trying to calculate fuel replacement ratios for NO2, do you?

I hear people say that 99% of the fuel is being burned in your engine, so there's no room for improvement, but I don't think that 99% is burning at the right time and place in the engine to all be applied as force against the piston, so there should be room for improvement to the actual combustion event itself.

I haven't seen any credible proof yet that the hyrdogen injection works, but the possiblilty certainly is there. I have watched while a guy ran an engine on straight water. The problem is that it won't start that way, and it won't operate under load. It just keeps it from stalling.

The argument of "if it worked, they'd be doing it" doesn't hold either. Most of what is being done is due to the narrowmindednes and inflexibility of the EPA, not for the purpose of saving fuel. All of our engines come with preset f/a mixture settings that minimize emissions, and the minimimal emission mixture is not the same as the highest fuel economy mixture before overheat.

I think we could all get about an instant 10% improvement in mileage just by reprogramming our computers or by altering O2 sensor output. We would just increase our emissions.

[fshagan]

In chemical notation, or whatever the heck its called, isn't "HHO" the same as "H2O"? I mean, its two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Sort of like calling it Dihydrogen Monoxide.

[cfg83]

fshagan -

Originally Posted by fshagan

In chemical notation, or whatever the heck its called, isn't "HHO" the same as "H2O"? I mean, its two atoms of hydrogen and one of oxygen. Sort of like calling it Dihydrogen Monoxide.

Think of HHO as a slang term that has caught on. By distinguishing each "H" separately in the acronym, they are distinguishing the idea that they are "breaking up" the H2O molecule.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it!!!!!!!!!!

Like it or not, if you Google HHO, that is what you will see.

CarloSW2

[ConnClark]

Originally Posted by metro094

The idea with hydrogen injection isn't fuel replacement. Its that it is supposed to work as a catalyst to make the fuel burn much better, faster, more completely while its in the chamber.

You can add platinum particles to your fuel and get it to burn much more completely, reducing emissions and increasing power. Problem is that platinum is terribly expensive. Hence the platinum plate in your converter - much cheaper than an ongoing gas additive.

You don't see anyone trying to calculate fuel replacement ratios for NO2, do you?

I hear people say that 99% of the fuel is being burned in your engine, so there's no room for improvement, but I don't think that 99% is burning at the right time and place in the engine to all be applied as force against the piston, so there should be room for improvement to the actual combustion event itself.

As far as adding platinum particles to the fuel it doesn't burn much more completely or reduce emissions much. If you look on page 14 of this epa report on a platinum system you will see that fuel economy only improves about 1 to 2 percent. This is well within the margin of error of the test.

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/devices/pb92104413.pdf

As far as burning fuel at the right time during the cycle it is true that some improvements can be made here. If you look at the efficiency of an ideal Otto cycle and an ideal Diesel cycle of the same compression ratio the diesel cycle will be more efficient. Changing an existing gas engine to work like a diesel isn't practical though.

As far as improving combustion to better approximate an ideal Otto cycle there are problems with building an engine out of real materials. Instantaneous combustion not only delivers a hefty blow to engine components, it also sends shock waves through the combustion chamber scrubbing the hot gases against the walls and transferring heat to them.

I haven't seen any credible proof yet that the hyrdogen injection works, but the possiblilty certainly is there. I have watched while a guy ran an engine on straight water. The problem is that it won't start that way, and it won't operate under load. It just keeps it from stalling.

The possibility of this thing working is slim and none. Running an engine off straight water that is split by electrolysis that is powered off of the engine violates the 1st law of thermal dynamics. It would be a perpetual motion machine. If it ran at all it would be off residual fuel in the fuel system.

The argument of "if it worked, they'd be doing it" doesn't hold either. Most of what is being done is due to the narrowmindednes and inflexibility of the EPA, not for the purpose of saving fuel. All of our engines come with preset f/a mixture settings that minimize emissions, and the minimimal emission mixture is not the same as the highest fuel economy mixture before overheat.

I think we could all get about an instant 10% improvement in mileage just by reprogramming our computers or by altering O2 sensor output. We would just increase our emissions.

If this worked at all it would be mandated by the EPA to reduce emissions.

[metro094]

Citing one study that didn't pan out is unimpressive. The fact is that the whole concept of the catalytic converter evolved from a platinum additive test which was effective - just too expensive.

There is a reason why diesel engines get so much better mileage than gasoline/ignition engines.

Every vehicle sold to consumers is a compromise between performance, emissions production, safety, efficiency, economy, longevity, functionality, and profitibility. If we want to improve our efficiency only, we can easily do that at the expense of one or more of the other factors of compromise. To say that we can't is ignorant. To reference physics without understanding it is foolish.

[whitevette]

Originally Posted by cfg83

88CRX -

The reason I am curious about it is that it *claims* to separate the H2 from the 02. If the gizmo is only sending H2 into the air intake, this would remove the need to modify the 02 sensor, which I like, . But, I wouldn't pump the 02 into the cabin of the car, that's for sure.

CarloSW2

To send only the hydrogen to the intake is not to say the O2 sensor needs no voltage output mods. We're talking different "Os", here. The sensor sees a change in oxygen level from any altered combustion...either higher or lower, thereby telling the ignition computer more ( or less) fuel needs to be pulsed by the injector signal to force this A/F ratio / signal voltage to return to its preset value.
You wouldn't like a flow of "clean" oxygen in your cockpit? 20% of the air in there is oxygen, anyway. This "boost" may bump the O2 level to 22%. 23%? Your heater or A/C ... if the windows are closed ... is going to mix this small amount to barely measurable levels. And you're constantly adding carbon dioxide ( some similar small amount) as you exhale, anyway. Is this bad? Nobody worries about exhaling this gas which doesn't support life. Nobody.
-whitevette

[justpassntime]

Why do you guys insist on messing with O2 sensors to lean fuel ratio?

There is an easier way. It's called the atmospheric or barometric pressure sensor. If you put a 25k pot switch on it you turn it down until the idle speed lowers. There are no funky lights or warnings to contend with. You are simply telling the ecu you are driving at a higher altitude than you really are.

They are usually three wire, ground, 12v, and one thats around 2-5v. The lower voltage one is the one you want to put the switch on.

[whitevette]

Originally Posted by Daox

I've heard of a lot of people try it, but none have gotten good results from it. However, hydrogen has been proven to improve a gasoline engine's efficiency. The problem with many kits IMO is none of them allow you to retune the engine to account for the changes in combustion characteristics.

One thing they all do...lighten one's wallet. Have you seen some of these prices? Wow! P.T. Barnam sold H2 generators? LOL!