The Bottom Line - Does HHO work?

[BoyntonStu]

If someones had asked me a few days ago the following questions, these would have been my replies:

Name two experts in HHO technology? Zero Fossil Fuel and Smart Scarecrow.

Besides Bob Boyce, who builds the best HHO dry cells? RBN run by SSC and Z.

Who has the best data of whether or not HHO will improve your vehicle's MPG? SSC and Z.

Do SSC and Z use their cell in their own cars? NO!

Can Z or SSC point to anyone who purchased their cell and who has enjoyed increased MPG? NO!

Why do they sell their cells? For "experimenting" and for other than car applications.

Do you believe that HHO will increase your MPG? According to Z and SSC no.

What about you?

The only person that proved to me that I could increase the MPG in my car is Lyall Bailey. He suggested restricting the air after the air filter.

I did it over 1,000 miles ago, and my MPG went from 28 to 32. Not too shabby.

I asked Lyall Bailey if his cells increased MPG and this is what he said:

"I was scared selling my units until I installed one in my relative's car. It increased his MPG quite a bit."

I believe Lyall because his suggestion about air restriction worked as he said it would.


I have many doubts and a lot of disappointment.

BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

If someones had asked me a few days ago the following questions, these would have been my replies:

Name two experts in HHO technology? Zero Fossil Fuel and Smart Scarecrow.

Besides Bob Boyce, who builds the best HHO dry cells? RBN run by SSC and Z.

Who has the best data of whether or not HHO will improve your vehicle's MPG? SSC and Z.

Do SSC and Z use their cell in their own cars? NO!

Can Z or SSC point to anyone who purchased their cell and who has enjoyed increased MPG? NO!

Why do they sell their cells? For "experimenting" and for other than car applications.

Do you believe that HHO will increase your MPG? According to Z and SSC no.

What about you?

The only person that proved to me that I could increase the MPG in my car is Lyall Bailey. He suggested restricting the air after the air filter.

I did it over 1,000 miles ago, and my MPG went from 28 to 32. Not too shabby.

I asked Lyall Bailey if his cells increased MPG and this is what he said:

"I was scared selling my units until I installed one in my relative's car. It increased his MPG quite a bit."

I believe Lyall because his suggestion about air restriction worked as he said it would.


I have many doubts and a lot of disappointment.

BoyntonStu

Question for you Stu

Do you believe a engine burns cleaner using HHO?

If so, that means we can cheat and remove a lot of the emission controls that steal MPG, just asking with a open mind

[BoyntonStu]

Question for you Stu



If so, that means we can cheat and remove a lot of the emission controls that steal MPG, just asking with a open mind

Do you believe a engine burns cleaner using HHO? Yes, proven many times.


What I would like to see is an old VW with standard carb and distributor.

Add, HHO, and retard the timing.

Simple, yet effective test.

BoyntonStu

[H2OPWR]

Stu, If you do not beleive HHO will work on your car what are you doing building the Cell's? What is your motivation other than an automotive application?

Larry

[Gary Diamond]

Do you believe a engine burns cleaner using HHO? Yes, proven many times.


What I would like to see is an old VW with standard carb and distributor.

Add, HHO, and retard the timing.

Simple, yet effective test.

BoyntonStu

Why a VW? There's a lot of cars and trucks out there that would fit the bill

[Gary Diamond]

Question, what happened to all the claims about the guys who used a MPG gauge in the car?

[chris1200]

Yes it does work to increase MPG, the problem is that to many people here have focused in producing fancy bench working cells (whatever that means) and are not actually testing them in their cars and compare results of adding little amounts vs large amounts of HHO.

My believe, to much HHO will not benefit your MPG.
There is a balance that works...

Now all the "gurus" go ahead and attack me

My advice: Keep it simple and use it in your car, not on the bench.

[Gary Diamond]

Yes it does work to increase MPG, the problem is that to many people here have focused in producing fancy bench working cells (whatever that means) and are not actually testing them in their cars and compare results of adding little amounts vs large amounts of HHO.

My believe, to much HHO will not benefit your MPG.
There is a balance that works...

Now all the "gurus" go ahead and attack me

My advice: Keep it simple and use it in your car, not on the bench.

I will not attack you

Gary

[Painless]

Stu (and everone else too!),

I believe that the theory of HHO for improving thermal efficiency in an ICE is sound, however, I do also believe there are several groups that people fall into:

1) Those running computerless engines that see a definite benefit.

2) Those whom have modded sensor inputs, but have relied on gauges for fuel consumption data which are now inaccurate as they rely on sensors for their math.

3) Those who have leaned out their vehicles without producing enough HHO and are only realising gains due to this.

4) Those that are producing enough HHO, but not realising gains or only small ones due to a very smart computer.

This is why I plan to collect lots of ECU data, both before and after HHO and different mods. With this data I hope to be able to produce a guide that shows which stages work and, more importantly, WHY they work. As SSC said, hard data is the missing equation.

Russ.

[BoyntonStu]

Stu, If you do not beleive HHO will work on your car what are you doing building the Cell's? What is your motivation other than an automotive application?

Larry

Larry,

Excellent question deserving an answer.

Until this week, I looked up to Zero and Scarecrow for their ideas and their inspiration.

I was as shocked and surprised to learn that they do not use their cells in their cars nor can they point to anyone who has used their cells with success.

How do you think I feel?

I was trying my best, busting my ass, and spending my time and my money to try to make a simpler, more efficient, and easier cell to make and assemble.

Along the road, I found many obstacles to overcome:

How to drill SS?

How to build a cell without using plastic end plates?

How to build a reservoir with no bottom connectors?

How to build an effective flashbck arrestor/blowout?

How to connect tubing to a reservoir or bubbler without using heat, adhesives, or threads?

All of this effort was based on the assumption of catching up to these gurus who had successfully gone down the road first.

SSC made a statement that is now off the thread.

He basically said that HHO was no good for cars but there were other applications.

Well e x c u s e meee!

I am stunned to say the least.

You?

BoyntonStu

P.S. To add insult to injury, I was in fact insulted by the hateful and ignorant statements made on this Forum by otherwise intelligent people.

My respect meter for them went from 100% down to Zero!!

[bigjim56]

It does concern me too that most of the videos that I've seen are of people bench testing their cells. I actively seek out the on-board video demonstrations on youtube, but clearly its not nearly as abundent as the bench tester videos.

I am in it MAINLY for the mpg increase, (nothing would make me happier than to stick it to the oil companies) the cleaner runner engine and the cleaner exhaust are bonuses. The water4gas design with its very low production should be enough to see SOMETHING, but so far its not did much of anything (still toying w/it.) Once the dry cell is completed, I will do some crude bench testing for a week or two, then its to be directly installed.

If this does not give me greater mpg's, I will be thoroughly dissappointed, but will probably continue to run because of the lower emissions and cleaner engine. And did I mention the increased horsepower? I will probably go out and whip up on some unsuspecting teenager driving his daddys musclecar just to relieve some pent up frustration. There's no doubt that HHO is good for horsepower! Too bad I can't put this HHO on my bike, I've seen Smack's set up for his bike, but I'm running a PC3 that fine tunes the fuel delivery every 500 rpm...because of this, I'm sure it would interfere with my set up.

HHO is almost like putting an engine on steroids as far as horsepower is concerned!

bigjim56

[Gary Diamond]

Larry,

Excellent question deserving an answer.

Until this week, I looked up to Zero and Scarecrow for their ideas and their inspiration.

I was as shocked and surprised to learn that they do not use their cells in their cars nor can they point to anyone who has used their cells with success.

How do you think I feel?

I was trying my best, busting my ass, and spending my time and my money to try to make a simpler, more efficient, and easier cell to make and assemble.

Along the road, I found many obstacles to overcome:

How to drill SS?

How to build a cell without using plastic end plates?

How to build a reservoir with no bottom connectors?

How to build an effective flashbck arrestor/blowout?

How to connect tubing to a reservoir or bubbler without using heat, adhesives, or threads?

All of this effort was based on the assumption of catching up to these gurus who had successfully gone down the road first.

SSC made a statement that is now off the thread.

He basically said that HHO was no good for cars but there were other applications.

Well e x c u s e meee!

I am stunned to say the least.

You?

BoyntonStu

P.S. To add insult to injury, I was in fact insulted by the hateful and ignorant statements made on this Forum by otherwise intelligent people.

My respect meter for them went from 100% down to Zero!!

My meter went the same way to ZERO

[BoyntonStu]

It does concern me too that most of the videos that I've seen are of people bench testing their cells. I actively seek out the on-board video demonstrations on youtube, but clearly its not nearly as abundent as the bench tester videos.

I am in it MAINLY for the mpg increase, (nothing would make me happier than to stick it to the oil companies) the cleaner runner engine and the cleaner exhaust are bonuses. The water4gas design with its very low production should be enough to see SOMETHING, but so far its not did much of anything (still toying w/it.) Once the dry cell is completed, I will do some crude bench testing for a week or two, then its to be directly installed.

If this does not give me greater mpg's, I will be thoroughly dissappointed, but will probably continue to run because of the lower emissions and cleaner engine. And did I mention the increased horsepower? I will probably go out and whip up on some unsuspecting teenager driving his daddys musclecar just to relieve some pent up frustration. There's no doubt that HHO is good for horsepower! Too bad I can't put this HHO on my bike, I've seen Smack's set up for his bike, but I'm running a PC3 that fine tunes the fuel delivery every 500 rpm...because of this, I'm sure it would interfere with my set up.

HHO is almost like putting an engine on steroids as far as horsepower is concerned!

bigjim56

bigjim,

A little data?

1/4 mile time with/without?

Dynamometer readings with/without?

0-60 with/without?

Anything other that 'feels more powerful'?

BoyntonStu

[Gary Diamond]

Is this HHO field now driven by people who just want to make money from it, fine i don't have a problem with that, except some products are worthless.

Like PWM devices to control a run away cell from heat, there should be no need for them, if the cell is built right to start with. Its like putting a patch on a brand new tire because it has a leak :D:D:D:D

[H2OPWR]

Is this HHO field now driven by people who just want to make money from it, fine i don't have a problem with that, except some products are worthless.

Like PWM devices to control a run away cell from heat, there should be no need for them, if the cell is built right to start with. Its like putting a patch on a brand new tire because it has a leak :D:D:D:D

Gary, I could not disagree more about the PWM question for those of un that have to deal with very cold temps. Even with a well designed cell and low KOH there your cell will draw more amps when hot than cold. If you are shooting for a consistant amp draw from your cell there simply is no other way. More KOH in the distilled water and you can protect the cell from freezing without heavy concentrations of alcohol (which I know hurts effeciency). The problem with max KOH is that your device will pull too many amps thus the need for a PWM.

Larry

[bigjim56]

No Stu, no actual data. Just seat of the pants feel of the car before and after the HHO addition. It was either the HHO or the addition of water vapor molecules that resulted in the big performance increase. I'm not after power, for my car, I'm after mpg's. I've got a big bike for my power addiction.

I'm currently on the water4gas design until the dry cell is built and tested. It IS better than nothing for now. It was put in during the heat of last summer, and with the warmer temps the wet cell did make the car perform much better, just no additional mpg's, even w/the map sensor installed.

I think its been fairly recognized that Hydrogen is a much better fuel than regular gasoline, it allows some to use regular rather than premium (save $ there), steam cleans the internal side of the engine, and lowers the emissions by allowing for a more complete burn (EFIE/MAP sensor maybe needed). So from those points alone, it looks worthwhile to run HHO.

I am not a scientist Stu, just a tree hugging HHO enthusiast.

bigjim56

[H2OPWR]

Larry,

Excellent question deserving an answer.

Until this week, I looked up to Zero and Scarecrow for their ideas and their inspiration.

I was as shocked and surprised to learn that they do not use their cells in their cars nor can they point to anyone who has used their cells with success.

How do you think I feel?

I was trying my best, busting my ass, and spending my time and my money to try to make a simpler, more efficient, and easier cell to make and assemble.

Along the road, I found many obstacles to overcome:

How to drill SS?

How to build a cell without using plastic end plates?

How to build a reservoir with no bottom connectors?

How to build an effective flashbck arrestor/blowout?

How to connect tubing to a reservoir or bubbler without using heat, adhesives, or threads?

All of this effort was based on the assumption of catching up to these gurus who had successfully gone down the road first.

SSC made a statement that is now off the thread.

He basically said that HHO was no good for cars but there were other applications.

Well e x c u s e meee!

I am stunned to say the least.

You?

BoyntonStu

P.S. To add insult to injury, I was in fact insulted by the hateful and ignorant statements made on this Forum by otherwise intelligent people.

My respect meter for them went from 100% down to Zero!!


BoyntonStu

I manage a 1.5 million dollar annual advertising budget and the very promotions that the budget pays for. That is one of the biggest challenges with my job. There are so many state and federal quidelines to follow in the interest of not misleading the consumer that it makes my head hurt every day just to make sure that I am compliant. In fact the only fuel economy number that is lawful to represent to the consumer is the Federal EPA rating. In addition we must keep and display origional EPA ratings for the used cars that we sell in case the consumer requests the number. If you wanted to buy a 10 year old truck from me and asked what kind of mileage that you could expect. I am only allowed to quote the EPA rating and that is federal law.

So with that in mind I am not surprised in the least that EBN does not promote the use of their devices for an automotive application to improve fuel economy. What shocks me is those that do. They know that in most cases in order to make the mileage work that the end user will have to modify the federally mandated emission control equipment just to realize the gains. I would suspect that SSC, Zero, and the many other EBN members are instructed not to talk about mileage gains. I do beleive that they know just who is buying their products and just what they are using them for. If you watched Zero's video's before he became an EBM member he did show fuel economy gains. Then later recanted them. First I do not know him but doubt that he was not being truthful in those video's. There was no clear reason for him to be untruthful about those gains. And yes I am sure that with no mod's those gains went away as they always do so his recants were again truthful.

What I am saying is that if I was marketing these devices I would NOT quote fuel savings. I know that it is unlawful and eventually you could end up in deep trouble unless you had hard data to prove it and that would include every model that you advocated installing the devices on. I would sound just like SSC if asked the same question. These are facts that I know because of the industry that I am employed in.

As for the other stuff. I have learned long ago to keep my political and religous thoughts to my self. I choose to stay out of those types of discussions. They can drive a knife in the heart of even the best of friendships.

Larry

[BoyntonStu]

No Stu, no actual data. Just seat of the pants feel of the car before and after the HHO addition. It was either the HHO or the addition of water vapor molecules that resulted in the big performance increase. I'm not after power, for my car, I'm after mpg's. I've got a big bike for my power addiction.

I'm currently on the water4gas design until the dry cell is built and tested. It IS better than nothing for now. It was put in during the heat of last summer, and with the warmer temps the wet cell did make the car perform much better, just no additional mpg's, even w/the map sensor installed.

I think its been fairly recognized that Hydrogen is a much better fuel than regular gasoline, it allows some to use regular rather than premium (save $ there), steam cleans the internal side of the engine, and lowers the emissions by allowing for a more complete burn (EFIE/MAP sensor maybe needed). So from those points alone, it looks worthwhile to run HHO.

I am not a scientist Stu, just a tree hugging HHO enthusiast.

bigjim56

I think its been fairly recognized that Hydrogen is a much better fuel than regular gasoline,

What does better fuel mean? Source?


it allows some to use regular rather than premium (save $ there),

Source?

steam cleans the internal side of the engine,

Source? Does the steam emulsify the oil?

and lowers the emissions Yes, that has been measured.


by allowing for a more complete burn (EFIE/MAP sensor maybe needed). So from those points alone, it looks worthwhile to run HHO

It IS better than nothing for now. Why?


BoyntonStu

[daddymikey1975]

Stu..

regarding your disappointment with SSC and Zero..

I'm wondering if it ever crossed your mind that possibly zero and SSC don't have the necessary time, money, equipment, or knowledge to tackle the car's computer yet...

I believe they're contributing to the technology of 'creating' HHO... but not necessarily the technology behind 'using' HHO...

Larry has been very vigilant (as well as yourself, and Russ and a few others) in trying to ascertain the most efficient way to 'creat' HHO...

only Russ (painless) has been down the 'crappy computer' road as of yet.. (not counting Smith03Jetta)

I don't think (and I could be wrong) that SSC and that company have the resources as of yet to begin to tackle the steps to efficiently 'use' HHO in a car... Everything has to come in steps/stages and right now we're on the brink of 'creating' HHO in the most efficient manner... then we'll see all the determination to fool the computer...

no one has really ventured down that road wit hany conclusive evidence besides Painless and Smith03jetta...

Smith had to basically rewrite the computer program in his car to effectively use the HHO to its potential...

Russ and Larry are about to go down that long and windy road...

and i'm not trying to defend Zero or SSC's positions, just pointing out another aspect from a different point of view.. (and it's already clear to me that my points of view aren't necessarily very well received here, but I figured I'd offer anyhow.)

I hope this helps
respectfully,
mike

[daddymikey1975]

No because you and others, went way off topic, even after i warned them that they were way off topic and when they said that it's ok to continue, even when i felt it was not. And when all the sh*t came out the horse's ASS then it was to late, and you should know you can't put it back into the horse. That's the respect that is lost, if you can figure how to get the sh*t back into the horse, then fine, respect will be back.

now this is the type of thing that this forum can do without. I've made a valiant attempt to maintain the topic of the thread in which I post.

While posting, I make an attempt to maintain a certain level of respect with every one's ideas and opinions.

At no time did I cross the line with a bunch of name calling or disrespect. I am not going to lose any sleep this evening knowing that Gary doesn't respect me.

The post you responded to (from ME) was for Stu, and it was to point out a different opinion. (which, last time I checked, is what 'general discussion' is all about... yes??)

RESPECTFULLY
mike

[1973dodger]

Stu, It has been a few months since I have posted anything, because I have so little to offer. As well as, reaching the same conclusions as yourself. While many of us bring differing degrees of expertise to the table. Few, if any of us, have the real expertise required to make a real go of this. Most of us are just shade tree scientist with varying degrees of expertise. Youself, Painless, and a few others are the only ones left on this forum from the days, weeks and months from when I was an active member of this forum. Have you asked yourself why so many of the old active members has dropped off so? I suspect many have reached the same conclusion as yourself. Either hho does not work and is a pipe dream or we lack the expertise to take it any further.

For myself, I have wasted a good deal of money and time with no real breakthroughs and now consider the risks to the engine for the minimal possible rewards to be folly. The experience and knowledge gained I consider to be my only real benefit. As to the question of can it be done successfully, possibly, but not with current ICE designs. When did it all come to an end for me, read the "Dangling Carrot" thread. I am usually one to sink my teeth into something and not let go, but this is one won. I did find the complexities of water to be very intrigueing. They have a saying in the building industry, water will eventually always win. I guess it still holds true in hho industry as well.

1973dodger

[SmartScarecrow]

Stu, It has been a few months since I have posted anything, because I have so little to offer. As well as, reaching the same conclusions as yourself. While many of us bring differing degrees of expertise to the table. Few, if any of us, have the real expertise required to make a real go of this. Most of us are just shade tree scientist with varying degrees of expertise. Youself, Painless, and a few others are the only ones left on this forum from the days, weeks and months from when I was an active member of this forum. Have you asked yourself why so many of the old active members has dropped off so? I suspect many have reached the same conclusion as yourself. Either hho does not work and is a pipe dream or we lack the expertise to take it any further.

For myself, I have wasted a good deal of money and time with no real breakthroughs and now consider the risks to the engine for the minimal possible rewards to be folly. The experience and knowledge gained I consider to be my only real benefit. As to the question of can it be done successfully, possibly, but not with current ICE designs. When did it all come to an end for me, read the "Dangling Carrot" thread. I am usually one to sink my teeth into something and not let go, but this is one won. I did find the complexities of water to be very intrigueing. They have a saying in the building industry, water will eventually always win. I guess it still holds true in hho industry as well.

1973dodger


get yourself a gasoline powered golf cart, no computers, simple carborator, play with it ... you might be surprised ... does it work, yes ... does it work in a modern automobile, not as far as I can tell ... many seem convinced, but I have never seen any real proof ...

now diesel ??? that is a whole 'nuther story ... that one, I am pretty sure at this point actually works ... I have recently seen very convincing evidence ... and my own small engine tests have produced some very intriguing numbers that would indicate that when burning 100% HHO, the over system efficiency is increased over the use of gasoline ... and this is with no optimization specific to HHO ...

its a shame so many come into this with blinders on ... if it dont increase the mileage of their current 2001 F150 pick up truck, it dont work ... wrong ... there are many practical uses for this technology ... the quest must continue ...

[Smokem]

I fall into the frustrated category.
I have a vehicle that gets better mileage and one that didn't. but then again I was tryng a new cell idea on it.

I believe HHO does work. I know it does.
Part of me wants to ditch my 2006 and buy a 1986 Chevrolet pickup, restore it to new condition. Put a nice built engine making 400 horse and get 20+mpg. There's one down the road fully restored sitting on 33's and is a 4 door. I could have the best of both worlds.
I know it works on older engines. The problem is getting it to work on newer ones.

I have been researching through a local speed shop about what it takes to put a set of O2 dummy sensors in my new truck and fool that darned computer into thinking everything is perfect and that it should do as it is told instead of what it wants.

I think that may be the thing to get HHO on vehicles mainstream.

[1973dodger]

SSC,

I do not own a F-150, so not sure where your coming from. I own a dodge diesel and have tried it on a chevy pick-up. The question which bugged me from the beginning is this; since the hho coming off the bubbler is only ignitable within a few inches, then becomes diluted into the air. Then how is there any benefit coming from our paltry 1 lpm to 3 lpm considering how much air is required for combustion, not to mention the air required for a diesel. So, how is that incoming air not diluting our hho to a point it is rendered ineffective? Is there some possible benefit for an alternative use for hho, sure. But that was not what I was in it for. Trust me when I say, no blinders were on, much the opposite, I truly expected and wanted for this to work.

1973dodger

[SmartScarecrow]

SSC,

I do not own a F-150, so not sure where your coming from. I own a dodge diesel and have tried it on a chevy pick-up. The question which bugged me from the beginning is this; since the hho coming off the bubbler is only ignitable within a few inches, then becomes diluted into the air. Then how is there any benefit coming from our paltry 1 lpm to 3 lpm considering how much air is required for combustion, not to mention the air required for a diesel. So, how is that incoming air not diluting our hho to a point it is rendered ineffective? Is there some possible benefit for an alternative use for hho, sure. But that was not what I was in it for. Trust me when I say, no blinders were on, much the opposite, I truly expected and wanted for this to work.

1973dodger



I dont do much with automotive type systems so am not sure I can address your question directly ... but I might be able to help back into an answer by giving you examples of what I have seen with my stationary engine tests ...

in an 8:1 compression engine run on 100% HHO, no gasoline in the mix, it ran best, as in was able to handle the most load, with an air:HHO ratio of 5:1 ... an richer mix, and she would flood out and not run ... I know its hard to believe but I even posted a video on YouTube to show it happening ... we were feeding the engine about 10 lpm and decided "what the hell" so kicked on a couple more gizmos and fed her about 20 lpm ... she coughed, sputtered and conked out just like being flooded with too much gasoline ...

with a modified head, we were able to increase the compression ratio to 13:1, getting a little closer to your diesel ... our optimum air:HHO ratio with the high compression head turned out to be closer to 10:1 ... so the higher compression was able to run on a much leaner shot of HHO and still handle the same load that the 8:1 compression gave us with the 5:1 air:HHO mix ...

it appears that a fairly small amount of HHO goes a long way particularly when you dealing with higher compressions ... but I would agree with you that 1.5 to 3 lpm in a large V8 diesel is gnat on an elephants butt ... based on some of the reports I have seen, it looks like you really need to be somewhere close to 1 lpm per 1 liter of engine displacement to get any noticeable effect ...

but you have to remember that this is all guess work at this point ... no one really knows for sure ... particularly in modern cars and trucks there are all sorts of things working against us ... you have an edge in that you are working with a diesel ... the most encouraging reports I am seeing right now related to normally aspirated diesel engines ... the turbos are still fighting us, but the easy breathers seem to be responding quite well ...

hope some few bits of this rambling post contained tid bits you find useful ... wish you luck with your project and hope you figure out how to make it work ... then tell the rest of us please ... treat it like a science fair project and document everything ... what worked and what did not work ... we need to know both so we all dont keep screwing it up the same way ... that is what these forums are for ... tell folks what worked for you and what did not so they move more quickly to eliminate the possibilities ...

[BoyntonStu]

I dont do much with automotive type systems so am not sure I can address your question directly ... but I might be able to help back into an answer by giving you examples of what I have seen with my stationary engine tests ...

in an 8:1 compression engine run on 100% HHO, no gasoline in the mix, it ran best, as in was able to handle the most load, with an air:HHO ratio of 5:1 ... an richer mix, and she would flood out and not run ... I know its hard to believe but I even posted a video on YouTube to show it happening ... we were feeding the engine about 10 lpm and decided "what the hell" so kicked on a couple more gizmos and fed her about 20 lpm ... she coughed, sputtered and conked out just like being flooded with too much gasoline ...

with a modified head, we were able to increase the compression ratio to 13:1, getting a little closer to your diesel ... our optimum air:HHO ratio with the high compression head turned out to be closer to 10:1 ... so the higher compression was able to run on a much leaner shot of HHO and still handle the same load that the 8:1 compression gave us with the 5:1 air:HHO mix ...

it appears that a fairly small amount of HHO goes a long way particularly when you dealing with higher compressions ... but I would agree with you that 1.5 to 3 lpm in a large V8 diesel is gnat on an elephants butt ... based on some of the reports I have seen, it looks like you really need to be somewhere close to 1 lpm per 1 liter of engine displacement to get any noticeable effect ...

but you have to remember that this is all guess work at this point ... no one really knows for sure ... particularly in modern cars and trucks there are all sorts of things working against us ... you have an edge in that you are working with a diesel ... the most encouraging reports I am seeing right now related to normally aspirated diesel engines ... the turbos are still fighting us, but the easy breathers seem to be responding quite well ...

hope some few bits of this rambling post contained tid bits you find useful ... wish you luck with your project and hope you figure out how to make it work ... then tell the rest of us please ... treat it like a science fair project and document everything ... what worked and what did not work ... we need to know both so we all dont keep screwing it up the same way ... that is what these forums are for ... tell folks what worked for you and what did not so they move more quickly to eliminate the possibilities ...

Why no pre-ignition with compressed HHO?

IOW To what PSI can HHO be 'safely' compressed?

BoyntonStu

P.S.
in an 8:1 compression engine run on 100% HHO, no gasoline in the mix, it ran best, as in was able to handle the most load, with an air:HHO ratio of 5:1 ... an richer mix, and she would flood out and not run.

Did you mean leaner?

[SmartScarecrow]

Why no pre-ignition with compressed HHO?

IOW To what PSI can HHO be 'safely' compressed?

BoyntonStu

P.S.
in an 8:1 compression engine run on 100% HHO, no gasoline in the mix, it ran best, as in was able to handle the most load, with an air:HHO ratio of 5:1 ... an richer mix, and she would flood out and not run.

Did you mean leaner?


no ... we managed to flood the engine by feeding too close to a stoich mix ... the mix was too much HHO for the amount of air ...

I have never seen HHO auto ignite from being pressurized ... am sure its possible, but have never seen it ... I know for sure it will not auto ignite in a diesel engine at 25:1 compression, that much I know for sure ...

it is dangerous to handle contained HHO under pressure, but not impossible ...

[BoyntonStu]

no ... we managed to flood the engine by feeding too close to a stoich mix ... the mix was too much HHO for the amount of air ...

I have never seen HHO auto ignite from being pressurized ... am sure its possible, but have never seen it ... I know for sure it will not auto ignite in a diesel engine at 25:1 compression, that much I know for sure ...

it is dangerous to handle contained HHO under pressure, but not impossible ...

Sorry, this is what I read:

"in an 8:1 compression engine run on 100% HHO, no gasoline in the mix, it ran best, "

I 'saw' a period instead of a comma.

OK 5:1 air/HHO at 8:1 is an important data point.


However, it raises questions:

What happens to the air during combustion?

Why is air necessary?

If you could supply 14.7/1 air/gas vapor the engine should run fine.

Why shouldn't 2/1 H/O work as well?

Is it possible pre-ignition of HHO is avoided by dilution?

Good thread.

BoyntonStu

[SmartScarecrow]

Sorry, this is what I read:

"in an 8:1 compression engine run on 100% HHO, no gasoline in the mix, it ran best, "

I 'saw' a period instead of a comma.

OK 5:1 air/HHO at 8:1 is an important data point.


However, it raises questions:

What happens to the air during combustion?

Why is air necessary?

If you could supply 14.7/1 air/gas vapor the engine should run fine.

Why shouldn't 2/1 H/O work as well?

Is it possible pre-ignition of HHO is avoided by dilution?

Good thread.

BoyntonStu



a piston engine is basically a pump ... to operate it requires a certain volume of working fluid ... it sucks in this volume, compresses it, ignites it, then exhausts the leftovers ... the old suck, squeeze, pop, phooey routine we all know and love ...

HHO burns very fast ... faster than any other potential fuel I am aware of ... I am sure there are high performance explosives that produce a faster flame front than HHO but for our poor piston engines, HHO burn way too fast for the impulse to be absorbed and converted to mechanical energy ... the pop is over before have a chance to overcome inertia ...

so the trick is to slow down the burn rate of the HHO by giving it a volume of inert gas to heat up ... the idea we were working on was to find a volume HHO and inert gas that would moderate the fast burning HHO to a point where we could extract some of the energy from that pop ... being cheap experimenters, we used an inert gas that is plentiful and easily available, air ...

so our HHO goes pop and we use that energy to heat the volume of air drawn in with the HHO ... it is the expansion of the heated air that is driving the piston down ... we have also worked with fully closed systems that re-breath the exhaust emitting NO pollution at all ... we have worked with a variety of inert gases including CO2, Argon and a few others ... you just to provide enough working fluid to keep the engine happy and enough HHO to make it expand when it goes pop ...

too much HHO, and you once again are confronted with the very fast POP that you just cant get full benefit out of ... its over before the energy is imparted to the piston ... so when you no longer have that quantity of inert working fluid available to heat up and expand, the engine stalls ...

anyway, that is what we think is going on ... we really do not know 100% for certain ... but its the best guess we have been able to come up with ... I would be thrilled if others would take up the quest and repeat some of the experiments we did ... if we had three of four more fellows seeing what we saw, new insights might come out that fill in some of the holes in our explanation ...

[BoyntonStu]

a piston engine is basically a pump ... to operate it requires a certain volume of working fluid ... it sucks in this volume, compresses it, ignites it, then exhausts the leftovers ... the old suck, squeeze, pop, phooey routine we all know and love ...

HHO burns very fast ... faster than any other potential fuel I am aware of ... I am sure there are high performance explosives that produce a faster flame front than HHO but for our poor piston engines, HHO burn way too fast for the impulse to be absorbed and converted to mechanical energy ... the pop is over before have a chance to overcome inertia ...

so the trick is to slow down the burn rate of the HHO by giving it a volume of inert gas to heat up ... the idea we were working on was to find a volume HHO and inert gas that would moderate the fast burning HHO to a point where we could extract some of the energy from that pop ... being cheap experimenters, we used an inert gas that is plentiful and easily available, air ...

so our HHO goes pop and we use that energy to heat the volume of air drawn in with the HHO ... it is the expansion of the heated air that is driving the piston down ... we have also worked with fully closed systems that re-breath the exhaust emitting NO pollution at all ... we have worked with a variety of inert gases including CO2, Argon and a few others ... you just to provide enough working fluid to keep the engine happy and enough HHO to make it expand when it goes pop ...

too much HHO, and you once again are confronted with the very fast POP that you just cant get full benefit out of ... its over before the energy is imparted to the piston ... so when you no longer have that quantity of inert working fluid available to heat up and expand, the engine stalls ...

anyway, that is what we think is going on ... we really do not know 100% for certain ... but its the best guess we have been able to come up with ... I would be thrilled if others would take up the quest and repeat some of the experiments we did ... if we had three of four more fellows seeing what we saw, new insights might come out that fill in some of the holes in our explanation ...

OK We are attempting to slow down the pop.

However, if you draw in diluted HHO the energy available is less than pure HHO.

If you added 5x the amount of air to gasoline and it was way over 14.7:1, it would be very, very lean and it would have almost no power.

"HHO burn way too fast for the impulse to be absorbed and converted to mechanical energy ... the pop is over before have a chance to overcome inertia ..."

This doesn't sound right. A cartridge in a rifle using HHO.

When the primer is hit, the HHO explodes really fast. Would the bullet travel out the barrel at high speed?

Using slower burning gunpowder a great pressure is created.

Why doesn't HHO of the same caloric value as gunpowder create the same pressure?

BoyntonStu

Have you heard about the 6 stroke engine?

[SmartScarecrow]

OK We are attempting to slow down the pop.

However, if you draw in diluted HHO the energy available is less than pure HHO.

If you added 5x the amount of air to gasoline and it was way over 14.7:1, it would be very, very lean and it would have almost no power.

"HHO burn way too fast for the impulse to be absorbed and converted to mechanical energy ... the pop is over before have a chance to overcome inertia ..."

This doesn't sound right. A cartridge in a rifle using HHO.

When the primer is hit, the HHO explodes really fast. Would the bullet travel out the barrel at high speed?

Using slower burning gunpowder a great pressure is created.

Why doesn't HHO of the same caloric value as gunpowder create the same pressure?

BoyntonStu

Have you heard about the 6 stroke engine?

I have seen discussions of what folks refer to as a 6-stroke engine ... I am not sure if anyone is working with that design with HHO as the fuel ... I am on a different path working a linear engine design at this time ... more or less a no stroke engine ... there is also some work being done with 2 stroke diesels that I am aware of ... we are working with very limited budgets and must deal with test subjects that we can readily obtain for prices we can afford ... I fear that more exotic power plants that might offer promise are beyond our means to test at this time ...

however, I have no doubt but that an engine could be designed around the unique characteristics of HHO that would perform as well or perhaps better than the engines currently designed for gasoline ... a piston engine might just be the way to go although my intuition tells me that a rotary might work better ...

one of the characteristics that it would be very interesting to take advantage of is the push/pull effect you get from straight HHO ... when you ignite stoich HHO, you get a pop as energy is released, then a suck as the by products condense into water ... so you could if you were very clever take advantage of two impulses for the price of one ... the first would be a rapid expansion, followed by a rapid contraction ... if that could be controlled and harnessed in an engine of some type, it could be very interesting ... but that would require a bit more expensive fabrication than I am able to deal with ...

on the volume of air to HHO in a more conventional engine ... I wish I was able to explain the phenomena better ... all I can really do is report back as best I can what I observed and the conditions under which the tests were performed ... this I have done ... if you can think of an alternative explanation for the effects observed, I would love to hear them ... I do not claim to be the sharpest tool in the shed and would appreciate hearing alternative explanations even if I might disagree with them ...

[jriggs_18]

HHO does work on diesels, as for automotive gasoline engines, I have little to no knowledge as the whether or not it works.

[SmartScarecrow]

HHO does work on diesels, as for automotive gasoline engines, I have little to no knowledge as the whether or not it works.


if you are running a diesel with HHO boost, there are some fellows within EBN that would sure like access to your data ... if you are not sure how to collect data for comparison with others so we can establish baselines for statistical analysis, I can put you in touch with fellows who are able to help you ... there is precious little good solid data out there that is objective and reliable ... if you would be willing to participate, your contribution will eventually help everyone working on this application ...

some of the most exciting results reported are with normally aspirated diesel engines in the 6-11 liter displacement range ... if we can refine the methods used, this could help everyone who buys anything ... everything moves by truck ... if we can figure out a reliable way to save the truckers just a lousy 10% on their average fuel bill, everyone would benefit from reduced prices to move goods ... its probably one of the most important things we are working on right now ...

if you are willing to participate, send me a private message and I will put you in touch with the fellows who are compiling the data ...