confusion oh boy confusion

[fuel worrior]

Hello everyone ,i'v been reading a lot recently about hho generators in fact i bought one from ebay ,however the info on a lot of sites is very worrying and confusing , one guy said that you cant get out more than you put in ok fair enough and that hydrogen has;nt got the same energy as petrol or diesel,ok well i dont know any thing abot that, then another guy said that remember the hindenberg well we all know what happened to that , from what we are taught in school we know that hydrogen is very combustable so surely only a small amount of hydrogen together with the oxygen produced would be needed to SUPLIMENT our regular fuel be it petrol or diesel and not replace it ,i have a 2.8 pajero turbo diesel and would love to try this device however i dont know where to inject the hydrogen a lot of people say at the air intake before the turbo (would the hydrogen and oxygen not ignite in the turbo injecting it this way ) please please please help rest my confusion kind regards steve from the north east :confused:

[Helz_McFugly]

yea it burns 10 times faster then gas. for a 2.8 liter engine 1.4 LPM of HHO would be perfect for it. I think you would be safe to put it in before the turbo but be sure and have a flashback arrestor. If you go in after the turbo, which you can, be sure its air tight and you have a good check valve or youll lose HP. but I think youre safe going in before the turbo. Ive never heard of HHO igniting inside of a turbo and most that Ive seen go in before the turbo and have had no problems. hope that helps.

just out of curiosity, what system did you get off ebay? do you have a link? there are alot of crap products out there and alot of missiformed people who speak about HHO. dont be fooled, it works, ya just have to do it right.

[Buster]

We now always place the HHO tube into the air box and we've never had any problems with Turbos so far. The good thing about inputting there is that if there is any overspill of fluid it will just run out the air filter box drain hole underneath.Also, the HHO is well mixed with your air intake this way, plus any unused HHO is disapated more safely into the outside air when the engine's switched off, which makes it safer.
Don't let the negative comments you hear about HHO stop you. Admittedly it is easy for this technology not to work, but when you do it right it is really good.
I find the key is to build an efficient cell and to keep the amps no more than 20A draw.
If you're getting a good 1+ litres per minute then you should find that you get results provided that the MPG test comparisons are done at the same speeds and also provided that your car's electronics system isn't cancelling out the gain by adding more fuel.
I've personally got more than 50% improvement on the same journeys and speeds with HHO.
This reverts back down to normal MPG when without the HHO, no matter how hard I try. I can also say from experience that different configurations of HHO kits which we have experimented with gave drastically different results. Doubling the HHO production and Amps draw actually dropped MPG, proving that you have to get the set-up right, and also allow for different vehicle types possibly needing a different setup.
Just carefully work things through and I'm sure you'll get there.
-Buster

[Philldpapill]

Helz, where are you getting that "burns 10x faster"? I made a thread a while back about what is going on inside the combustion chamber, and I was looking for some data about the flamefront speed. I know that the speed of sound in hydrogen is much faster than normal air(hence the reason your voice sounds high pitch when you inhale hydrogen or helium). However, I couldn't find any supporting data for the actual flamefront speed. 10X sounds rather high, but who knows... Any citations? I'm intersted...

[Helz_McFugly]

gas burnes at 10000 fps and hydrogen burned at 40000 fps. I got that info from a cd with Roy McAlister and Steven Harris, that retired from Chrysler.
I have their DVD and its full of usefull info. I saw someone, it may have been those two, do some math about the burn rate of gas and hydrogen and it came out to 10 times faster, inside a IC engine, but I cant tell ya where i saw it so sorry for that bit of misinformation. If i find the source Ill be sure and get back to you with it.

if you can, get this cd. I have a copy I can rip and send to you or you can get it here.

http://www.knowledgepublications.com/h2cdromusawebsite.htm

[Philldpapill]

Hmmm, you sure the gas flamefront isn't ~1,000fps? I say that because any flamefront is limited to the speed of sound through the medium. Even in the atomic bomb blasts, the radial explosion velocity(how fast the fireball expands) is limited to the speed of sound through the medium(air). Typically, when you see an explosion(like videos of the war in iraq), you usually see a shockwave on the ground go much faster than the blast in the air... The speed of sound in solids is MUCH faster than that of gases.

Anyway, I don't doubt the flamefront is faster than that of gasoline... HHO is a much lighter, and less dense, gas than gasoline so the speed of sound is going to be higher, and therefore the flamefront is higher. However, 40kfps sounds WAY to fast. Maybe 4kfps?

[Helz_McFugly]

ok i remember now. and it was on that dvd. the math they did showed, hydrogen over gas, that it gives 10 times more efficiency to an IC engine. again sorry for the misinformation. Im one who hates when people make statements they cant back up and here i am making one. can i get a mulligan on that statement. :confused:

[Philldpapill]

Wait, what? 10 times more efficiency? They aren't talking OU, are they? An ICE is about 25-30% effiicient... 250% effiiency then?

Can you send me a DVD image maybe?

[Helz_McFugly]

now youve got me digging for information i thought i knew. man Im going to watch that dvd again so im not spewing misinformation everywhere. but those two guy know their stuff. its the most informative thing ive seen thus far on hydrogen in an IC engine.

here is their youtube profile

http://www.youtube.com/knowpub

[Helz_McFugly]

yea Ill rip it in the morning and send you a iso file of the dvd. its VERY informative about hydrogen.

[Philldpapill]

Helz - FYI - loads of respect man. There are a ton of people that just regurgitate crap that doesn't even logically make sense... i.e. they don't look into what they heard, so they just perpetuate junk/nonsense. Glad to see there are still people who check up on stuff. Thanks!

[Helz_McFugly]

HA, check this out. these guys say it burns 10 times faster but its one of those BS sights trying to sell their crap.

http://www.hybridwaterpower.com

its about half way down the page under the title "Does It Work On Diesels and Turbo Diesel Engines Too?"

[Helz_McFugly]

phill. I found the info I was looking for its on that dvd im sending you. its about 23 minutes into the first chapter. he talkes about burn rate. Gasoline burns at 4K FPS and Hydrogen burns at 40K FPS. not sure about the flame front, is that different then the burn rate? but anywho, thats where i came up with "it burns 10 times faster then gas" I want you to watch this video.

[Helz_McFugly]

you can also see this in paragraph 5 on this site. they say

Fuel Cells provide a CONTROLLED OUTPUT of power. In an internal combustion engine, the oxidation of Hydrogen can and does occur in two VERY different ways! The desired on is by combustion (technically, conflagration), where the laminar flame front speed is around 8 feet per second at standard temperature and pressure. The undesired one is by explosion (technically, detonation), where the flame speed is over 9,000 feet per second, many times the speed of sound and incredibly dangerous!

http://www.mb-soft.com/public2/hydrogen.html

[Philldpapill]

Wow - very good site, Helz. It seems to be very accurate and well thought out. I wish we could make this a sticky of some kind, so more people could read it...

[Helz_McFugly]

lots of indiscrepancies on the burn rate of hydrogen from different sources.

I think the most accurate is on this sight http://www.mb-soft.com/public2/hydrogen.html under "Flame Speed"

says its detonation flame front is 9,255 feet/second but thats not in an ICE. then something about 8 fps. Im trying to wrap my head around it.