HHO volume testing

[fuelcatalyst]

I decided not to hyjack Larry's magnet thread.


Some observations after 8 days without even looking at this cell. Here is a video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKZq6Jb17t0

Larry

Hey Larry, glad to see you back at it, (if even for a bit).

You don't know me but I'm trying to learn and you are one of my heros, (as you document many of your experiences and I always learn from what you say and share). Thank you very much.

I have a question for you and others.

I have been trying to devise a basic water displacement measurement device, as many of the manufacturers of the cells I am measuring claim the device we are using is not accurate. I agree: it is not, but it does show relative performance as all tests are nearly the same time at near sea level and nearly the same tempurature.

We initially used a 2 liter bottle and displaced water from the top of the bottle though the neck, (which I still feel was fairly acurate for back yard relative measurements to gain insight of the gas production generator to generator), as any error, (timing et al), on a two liter bottle maybe smaller then a potentially larger error on a one liter bottle.

I found two acrilic cylinders that fit a one liter bottle very well that we now use, and I was going to drill a hole in the bottom of one cylinder and fit a tube (like the one in your video), which is similar to many youtube videos used to show gas production.

Here is my problem with that, (and all similar) devices.

The gas in the tube in the start of the test is already within the bottle displacing volume and would mean the fill during the test is less then one liter.

We put a nipple on the cap of the one liter bottle and purged the gas in the line with HHO/H2O(steam) from each respective cell we were testing. The gas did have the weight of the nipple, (barb) and the line to lift as water was displaced. If the gas were not purged it would be part air part HHO which could effect buoyancy and test results as well.

Thoughts?

[H2OPWR]

I decided not to hyjack Larry's magnet thread.



Hey Larry, glad to see you back at it, (if even for a bit).

You don't know me but I'm trying to learn and you are one of my heros, (as you document many of your experiences and I always learn from what you say and share). Thank you very much.

I have a question for you and others.

I have been trying to devise a basic water displacement measurement device, as many of the manufacturers of the cells I am measuring claim the device we are using is not accurate. I agree: it is not, but it does show relative performance as all tests are nearly the same time at near sea level and nearly the same tempurature.

We initially used a 2 liter bottle and displaced water from the top of the bottle though the neck, (which I still feel was fairly acurate for back yard relative measurements to gain insight of the gas production generator to generator), as any error, (timing et al), on a two liter bottle maybe smaller then a potentially larger error on a one liter bottle.

I found two acrilic cylinders that fit a one liter bottle very well that we now use, and I was going to drill a hole in the bottom of one cylinder and fit a tube (like the one in your video), which is similar to many youtube videos used to show gas production.

Here is my problem with that, (and all similar) devices.

The gas in the tube in the start of the test is already within the bottle displacing volume and would mean the fill during the test is less then one liter.

We put a nipple on the cap of the one liter bottle and purged the gas in the line with HHO/H2O(steam) from each respective cell we were testing. The gas did have the weight of the nipple, (barb) and the line to lift as water was displaced. If the gas were not purged it would be part air part HHO which could effect buoyancy and test results as well.

Thoughts?

Thanks for the kind comments. I think the small amount of pressure it takes to lift the bottle will help and overcome the gas in the pipe. I understand your concerns but it is about all we have and much better than those who show the water dumping out of an upside down bottle.

Larry

[Roland Jacques]

I decided not to hyjack Larry's magnet thread.


The gas in the tube in the start of the test is already within the bottle displacing volume and would mean the fill during the test is less then one liter.

Thoughts? You have a great point. especially when some use 1/2" tubes and others use 1/4"
You could determine the volume of the gas in the tube and subtract it from from your calculations.

Like you say if we really want better accuracy larger bottle could be used, (or even more bottles in series) some of these 10 and 15 second texts are ridiculous for accuracy.

[fuelcatalyst]

You have a great point. especially when some use 1/2" tubes and others use 1/4"
You could determine the volume of the gas in the tube and subtract it from from your calculations.

Like you say if we really want better accuracy larger bottle could be used, (or even more bottles in series) some of these 10 and 15 second texts are ridiculous for accuracy.

Thanks for seeing my point. :D

The water displacement method is crude at best, but if the fill comes from the top of the bottle, (the larger the bottle the better as it would decrease timing errors), then the errors are from air in the supply line, (if one doesn't purge the line with HHO/steam prior to the start of the test), which would potentially have an effect on buoyancy, but that is still very minor. (Superior to having a column of gas in a tube within the bottle at the start of the test), IMHO.

We are going to hook a nipple/barb to the cap of the bottle (without the supply line attached) as we now do, (with the bottom of the bottle cut out to let the gas easily displace the water), then the purge issue is not relevent as the HHO supply line would then be forced on the barb to start the test.

I don't think H2 compresses very easily and it is very light which makes the test bottle buoyant, (dunno about O2, [compressibility factor] which has very different characteristics then H2 and is a heavy gas), so the weight of the barb/gas line and bottle are the only proplems for any potential HHO compression, (which is an argument about accuracy we get from some of the cell manufacturers we are testing).

The components of H2; O2 and H2O vapor from each cell will vary and without a mass spectrometer we can't really tell the actual proportions of the components. That said a water displacement test does show the relative production of total gas, (H2;O2; H2O stream) from the various cells side by side.

A cell producing gas at less the 100 degrees F is very likely more H2 O2 vs
H20 steam then a cell @ 140 degrees F.

[Roland Jacques]

I thought some more on the tube displacement concerns, They really do NOT effect your measurements much. Only the part of tube that is above the water line could effect the gas volume measurements.

Temperature, water vapor, and timing are week points in accuracy IMO.

[fuelcatalyst]

I thought some more on the tube displacement concerns, They really do NOT effect your measurements much. Only the part of tube that is above the water line could effect the gas volume measurements.

Temperature, water vapor, and timing are week points in accuracy IMO.

Well I guess we will have to agree to disagree then.

Larry's tube, (looks to be 1/2" od), is all the way to the top of a one liter bottle INSIDE THE BOTTLE, (3%-5% or more error of a one liter displacement).

One of the manufacturers who makes big online claims about gas production uses a tube in the test bottle that looks on the video to be 3/4 or 1" od so it would be even more of an issue then Larry's if the one liter bottle is 2/3/4" to 3" in dia say 10% give or take. That plus a timing error and you get some wild results.

As said: these water displacement tests are crude at best. Most people who are selling HHO generators seem to exaggerate some by a factor of three to four, (300% to 400%).

BTW: I don't thnk Larry exaggerates at all. He seems to be a class act straight shooter to me.

[Roland Jacques]

Well I guess we will have to agree to disagree then.

Larry's tube, (looks to be 1/2" od), is all the way to the top of a one liter bottle INSIDE THE BOTTLE, (3%-5% or more error of a one liter displacement).

One of the manufacturers who makes big online claims about gas production uses a tube in the test bottle that looks on the video to be 3/4 or 1" od so it would be even more of an issue then Larry's if the one liter bottle is 2/3/4" to 3" in dia say 10% give or take. That plus a timing error and you get some wild results.

As said: these water displacement tests are crude at best. Most people who are selling HHO generators seem to exaggerate some by a factor of three to four, (300% to 400%).

BTW: I don't think Larry exaggerates at all. He seems to be a class act straight shooter to me.

This is a good topic, and it cool if we disagree.

But I'll make the case anyway. Larry's bottle appears to actually be corrected for the tube and gas above the water line. If you look at the bottle, it is marked 0 while there is still gases in the bottle, "the starting point". So any gases in the tube or lines/hose or reservoir will have no impact on the test. (unless those gases where heated by a outside force during the test. Not very likely)

Remember to do the bottle method correctly, you should per-measure and mark your bottle.

The bottle method is not crude IMO. As a matter of fact, in commercial aviation we had hundreds of thousands of dollars of testing equipment, flow meters ... At times still used the bottle method when we needed highly accurate measurements with high tolerance valves. (we are talking 0.1 LPM and lower flows) Now we were testing for leakage volume of a controlled gas, no steam heat, WV, so not quite the same as what we are doing but... Just saying their are wrong and right ways of testing, no matter what you use to test with.

[Roland Jacques]

FWIW

My new Mentor believes his H2 measuring equipment can not only can measure H2, but he believes with his modifications it can measure HHO AND monatomic Hydrogen also. So i Hope to be able to do many tests with him to see what up with "monatomic Hydrogen".