Myth Busters SUCKS! (HHO mod, does it work?)

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Feel free to waste your time on HHO.
One of the long gone HHO advocates posted a link showing a test where NASA bottle fed hydrogen at a volume unobtainable with HHO generators into a piston engine and it only saw a 3% FE gain.

So no one killed it.

If running HHO makes you feel any better than go for it.

There are plenty of people who show up on here and claim they will build a HHO machine and prove that it works and we never hear back from them so:
The hho generator blew up and killed them
Or
It didn't work
Or
They never had to motivation to ever even start building it

. . . and on yours.

I am familiar with that NASA paper which both sides quote to support their viewpoint.

Liquid hydrocarbon combustion is much more complex than this.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

. . . Liquid hydrocarbon combustion is much more complex than this.

How so?
The engine doesn't care where the hydrogen comes from.
What are we missing?

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

How so?
The engine doesn't care where the hydrogen comes from.
What are we missing?

You focus on the engine's fuel as if they are separate and non-interactive, but that is not what is taught in graduate level classical combustion.

This can be seen in EGR. Small traces of recirculated CO2 and H2O can change the combustion characteristics of the fuel/air mix. Large amounts result in the heat capacity quench as the dominant effect along with oxygen depletion.

Small quantities of water injection result in a portion of the water going through thermolysis and producing active radicals such as H+ and OH- which are part of the precursors to the final oxidation step. This changes your combustion characteristics, that is until so much water is added that heat capacity quench becomes the dominant characteristics. You have threads on this forum touting the effectiveness of water injection for mileage purposes.

The so called HHO generators produce hydrogen and oxygen that easily form the active radicals. Along with the small amount of water these inefficient generators produce, you have the ability to form effective amounts of active radicals to change the combustion characteristics under the right set of parameters.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

you have the ability to form effective amounts of active radicals to change the combustion characteristics under the right set of parameters.

And that amount is and those parameters are what?
Because no one seems able or willing to divulge that info.

Also EGR doesn't introduce traces of exhaust gases into the engines intake tract, its more like 5% to 15% of the intake volume.

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

You have threads on this forum touting the effectiveness of water injection for mileage purposes.

Yes for diesel engine only. It does not work on gas engines.
It does work on diesel and gas turbines but not because of any of this sillyness:

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

a portion of the water going through thermolysis and producing active radicals such as H+ and OH- which are part of the precursors to the final oxidation step.

Water injection only shows fuel economy losses when added to production gasoline engines, no matter if its a single cylinder gasoline generator or 2000+ fuel injected gasser.

It may be possible to build a gas engine that can benefit from water or water/methanol injection but the vehicle driveability will be greatly compromised and engine longevity my suffer if the additional liquid is allowed to run dry.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

And that amount is and those parameters are what?
Because no one seems able or willing to divulge that info.

Suffice it to say that the engine cycle can be measured in milli-seconds while chemical combustion reactions can be measured in nanoseconds. A single radical can cause the production of another radical and so forth in a geometric progression that results in a significant change of radical concentration by the time lapse of only a milli-second.

So, time is a parameter. The more time, the more pre-combustion reactions can occur. So is turbulence. The greater the turbulence the greater the energy available for reactions. So is temperature. It is common knowledge that reactions proceed more rapidly with increasing temperature.

A proper application will see positive results if these parameters are taken into account - most HHO applications do not.

Also EGR doesn't introduce traces of exhaust gases into the engines intake tract, its more like 5% to 15% of the intake volume.

There is a large amount of research dealing with trapped EGR as it occurs in common engine operation regimes. The percentages are less than 1%.

Yes for diesel engine only. It does not work on gas engines.
It does work on diesel and gas turbines but not because of any of this sillyness:

Do you understand why it works in diesels? Please give me your understanding of how this works. Do you understand that a sub 1:100 mass ratio of water to gasoline can show an increase in BMEP?

And pretty much everything I have said is mundane academia. "Sillyness" must be your word for things you don't understand. Please use terms with more clarity.

Water injection only shows fuel economy losses when added to production gasoline engines, no matter if its a single cylinder gasoline generator or 2000+ fuel injected gasser.

Again, it depends on the mass ratio and the above mentioned parameters.

It may be possible to build a gas engine that can benefit from water or water/methanol injection but the vehicle driveability will be greatly compromised and engine longevity my suffer if the additional liquid is allowed to run dry.

Why such an engine could not be built is not due to a lack of supporting physical principles. I have given enough reasons to build it. It is just an exercise in engineering it.

[Frank Lee]

You should build one, or at least detail how a functional one would be built.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

Again, it depends on the mass ratio and the above mentioned parameters.

The guys on here have documented that hot humid air gives better fuel economy, but introducing liquid water to the intake stream does not.
I have chased down enough dead ends looking for real gains on water injected gassers to know they just aren't possible in the real world on road.
We are looking for MPG boosting mods that will produce real on road results in engines that were made for the masses at a factory, not custom built experiments that might produce a result in a lab setting.

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

Why such an engine could not be built is not due to a lack of supporting physical principles. I have given enough reasons to build it. It is just an exercise in engineering it.

Seems simple enough to me. Build a fairly small high compression engine that can be put in a car, size and gear it so it can cruise near the edge of pre-ignition with regular gasoline. Then it requires water to further cool the intake air to prevent detonation at higher load such as going up hills or getting up to speed.
MPG boost mainly from indirect use of water injection.

This is why I think it works.
The Theory behind water injection improving power out put and fuel economy at least in diesel and brayton or combined cycle heat engines is based on enhancing the second law of thermodynamics. Water evaporation makes the cold half of your heat reservoir colder with very minimal energy, cost or effort input from the owner/operator. Usually all the focus is put on making the hot side hotter. The problem with that is more heat just about always means you have to burn more fuel which is no good for fuel economy or the excess heat strains, weakens or breaks down engine system materials and chemical compounds. A heat engines power and efficiency is based off the temperature differential between the hot and cold thermal reservoirs. Water injection enhances the systems measurable heat transfer.

There is also talk that droplet of water going into the cylinder and staying liquid until fuel ignition flashes it to superheated steam increases expansion ratio too.

Its been tested by other people and it works. I ran it and it produced results.

Since I have no way to alter the way air and fuel burn and no one else seems to be able to build a better mouse trap in that department that works under real world conditions. So I have no need to break it down any where near the level of classical combustion.
If something works use it. If it doesn't work and no one else can make it work then abandon it.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

You should build one, or at least detail how a functional one would be built.

Because of resources, we will have to use a retro fitted production engine to test and verify.

[RustyLugNut]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

The guys on here have documented that hot humid air gives better fuel economy, but introducing liquid water to the intake stream does not.

Understand that this corroborates my point to a large degree. I never said to inject liquid water. You assumed as much. I am saying a small amount of water in a situation that allows it to react chemically can be beneficial. This would preclude liquid water and would necessitate steam.

I have chased down enough dead ends looking for real gains on water injected gassers to know they just aren't possible in the real world on road.
We are looking for MPG boosting mods that will produce real on road results in engines that were made for the masses at a factory, not custom built experiments that might produce a result in a lab setting.

This of course is the goal - to make something useful for daily use. Companies such as Transonic and Caterpillar are working to develop new combustion regimes. How about the numerous universities? Someone had to do the basic research to make current daily tech functional. And, some of that research eventually makes it into our hands.

Seems simple enough to me. Build a fairly small high compression engine that can be put in a car, size and gear it so it can cruise near the edge of pre-ignition with regular gasoline. Then it requires water to further cool the intake air to prevent detonation at higher load such as going up hills or getting up to speed.
MPG boost mainly from indirect use of water injection.

Good hot-rodder design. This is essentially what the Edison VLC engine was designed to do but on E85. What I am proposing is more subtle.

This is why I think it works.
The Theory behind water injection improving power out put and fuel economy at least in diesel and brayton or combined cycle heat engines is based on enhancing the second law of thermodynamics. Water evaporation makes the cold half of your heat reservoir colder with very minimal energy, cost or effort input from the owner/operator. Usually all the focus is put on making the hot side hotter. The problem with that is more heat just about always means you have to burn more fuel which is no good for fuel economy or the excess heat strains, weakens or breaks down engine system materials and chemical compounds. A heat engines power and efficiency is based off the temperature differential between the hot and cold thermal reservoirs. Water injection enhances the systems measurable heat transfer.

There is also talk that droplet of water going into the cylinder and staying liquid until fuel ignition flashes it to superheated steam increases expansion ratio too.

Its been tested by other people and it works. I ran it and it produced results.

Again, good answers. Especially the part about droplet expansion. But, what I am proposing is a chemical reaction that we can use to benefit.

Since I have no way to alter the way air and fuel burn and no one else seems to be able to build a better mouse trap in that department that works under real world conditions. So I have no need to break it down any where near the level of classical combustion.
If something works use it. If it doesn't work and no one else can make it work then abandon it.

There is a plethora of research to alter the fuel burn. I already mentioned it in the above posts. The particular area that I see could be useful to us on this forum is the extended lean burn. There are already Honda gas engines that use this and forum members are probing the limits in various threads. This is where I feel the use of HHO and it's steam component can extend the benefits of lean burn to more gasoline engine/vehicle types.

So, what I am proposing is nothing new, but extends the capabilities of an existing proven system - lean burn gasoline engines. Augmenting the lean fuel mix with trace amounts of steam and hydrogen will stabilize and strengthen the flame front and extend the lean limits while allowing the extraction of useful work.

[oil pan 4]

Unfortunatly the little kubotas only manage 14% running at 1/3 load.
1/3 of a gallon of diesel in, 2kw out over 1hr.
Typically from governed speed at no load to 100% load you see fuel consumption double.
When you compair no load to 1/3 load there is usually about a 10% difference in fuel consumption. Using that rule of thumb at full load they should be about 23% to 24% efficient. This is real world output and is good considering the engine is supplying power to turn the radiator fan, gives the coolant pump its power to turn, the engine effectivly providing all its own cooling, the generator is moving air to cool its self, the battery charging alternator is turning at 2x to 3x crank speed moving air plus only generates power with about 50% efficiency at best.

When an engine is efficiency tested that engine is tested at all speeds usually only has to pump its own oil, some times its own coolant and they post the peak number. Thats it, no radiator fans, alternators and such to rob shaft power or set speed to limit efficiency.

I have one of these and work on them all the time. I know big improvements could be made with out reinventing the combustion process.
Simple things like dropping down to 50Hz at least for light loads. Installing an over sized cooling system that usually doesn't require use of a fan and add a thermal switch controled electric fan, we see good gains on belt driven fan deletes with on road vehicles. It would apply here too.
Delete the battery charging alternator and replace it with a 110 volt plug in battery charger, it does the same thing as the battery charging alt with no moving parts and 90% or better efficiency.
Replace the exhaust manifold with a header. If the engine will be ran under medium to heavy load maybe install a more efficient 3 phase generator, run mild water injection, add a turbo and intercooler.