2 small units vs 1 large for Diesel. [Archive]

Oshawapilot

03-17-2011, 05:50 AM

Hey everyone, new here, although I've been lurking for a week or so.

I'm A staff member at large diesel message forum (don't want to mention it unless the admins here don't have an issue with it) and was steered here by another member while discussing HHO generators. Loving all the info here so far.

I'm planning on constructing a HHO setup for my late 90's 6.5 turbo diesel Silverado pickup this weekend and have some questions.

I'm planning to go with the smackbooster design as it seems to be well regarded and documented. My concern is that based on what I've calculated from the info I've gathered I'd need about 3.25L/Min of production to have a good effect on my 6.5L engine.

With the "standard" smackbooster design only putting out about 1.25L/min this will prove to be a problem.

So, am I better to build a larger single generator, or simply build 2 small units and run them parallel to each other? My concern about building one larger one is heat, but on the flipside my concern with building 2 "regular" sized ones is space under the hood to mount everything.

If I go with 2 units, is there any reason I can't/shouldn't run the output from both through a single bubbler, or should I use 2 separate bubblers and them plumb the HHO together only just before injection in the intake?

Amp regulation - I see some people use controllers, and others simply regulate the mix to control amps - what's the best option? Considering it's looking like I'll have 2 separate units, this potentially doubles my build cost if I install 2 separate controllers, so that's a concern from a $$$ perspective.

Lastly, I'm hoping to hunt up some good SS in the coming days (I have access to scrap here and there) but is there a "best" size for the plates, or is it "whatever fits in your tube" ultimately ok so long as you have the number of plates correct? The Smackbooster design uses the switch-cover size, but (for example) if I found 3x12" strips instead, are they suitable? Will a single unit with dramatically larger plates negate the need for a second generator to meet my LPM requirements in the end, or am I just asking for overheating problems?

Thanks in advance for everyones advice here!

Mark

lhazleton

03-17-2011, 06:16 AM

Oshawapilot

03-17-2011, 06:38 AM

Welcome to the forum.
Before you go any further, do more research.
The 'Smackbooster' design is old, open bath style crapola.:mad:
Waste of time & money.
Find out all you can about Drycell Reactors and go with that.

The only issues I have with the drycell units is that they are much more difficult to construct based on the plans I've seen. The DIY factor is dramatically lower unless you order a good portion of it already prefabricated, or have a very well equipped workshop.

lhazleton

03-17-2011, 06:53 AM

They're actually pretty simple to construct.
If you're intent on building an inefficient wet-cell design, that's your call.
Investing time & money into something that won't give you the results you're seeking seems like a waste though.
If you check around, most of us started with wet-cells & changed to dry-cells. There's a good reason for it. Dry-cell reactors are efficient, give good results, and won't blow up.

Oshawapilot

03-17-2011, 07:07 AM

Ok, I'm all ears. Any pointers towards the best DIY plans for a dry unit build then?

lhazleton

03-17-2011, 07:13 AM

They're all over the place.
For diesels, Ben (Koya) is your best bet. He specializes in builds for diesel trucks.

ultra_efficient

03-17-2011, 08:33 AM

if you are trying to save fuel you will need to retune your truck or else you wont see much savings but alot of power, to cut back on the additional power and save fuel you should consider retuning your truck. look into using a Bully Dog for diesel and a Apexi AFC for gasoline

links to Bully Dog
http://www.thoroughbreddiesel.com/bully-dog/GT.htm
http://www.bullydog.com/prodline.php?prodline=electronics

and yes don't waste time and money on a wet cell, i have in the pass. focus on a dry cell, preferably a dry cell with no holes in the plates.

Oshawapilot

03-17-2011, 09:57 AM

The 6.5TD is an old tech IDI diesel that is not easily tuned. Bullydog/H&S (etc) do not make tuners for the 6.5, the only option is a complete ECM swap, and they focus more on power, not fuel mileage. I'm more focused on mileage, any HP gains are completely secondary to me.

With the 6.5 being old tech, and based on everything I've read, it responds well to HHO injection.

BioFarmer93

03-17-2011, 04:17 PM

Mark,
Welcome to the forum. I had to do some looking around based on a guess, -you said late 90's, so I looked for a 1998 6.5 Sierra- close enough? Anyway, apparently you do not have an O2 sensor? (That answer was for a '95) But you are running an OBDII engine management system. IF- you truly do not have O2 sensors, then you are golden. Being a Ford (International) diesel guy, and an even older tech diesel than yours, I don't have these worries, but I can tell you that if you are still running a muffler behind that turbo, go ahead and take it off. Being that you are a staffer at a diesel site, I guess I don't have to tell you that though, do I? Before you dump a bunch of money into HHO, here is a check list of things you can do to to increase your mpg-

Rolling resistance- check all brakes and bearings/tire inflation
Oil- high quality synthetic with Petron Plus diesel oil/metal treatment
Air filter area & cleanliness- upgrade to aftermarket/high flow/large element
Water/meth injection triggered by aftermarket boost gauge. It's not just for performance.
Intercooler- got one yet?
Boost leaks- soapy water test
Transmission fluid- Amsoil + Petron, friction reducers
Consider swapping to higher ratio rear end, manual tranny or both.
Put a pint of high quality two-stroke oil in each tank with every fill up.

Diesels, especially older ones, love HHO. A liter per min per liter of displacement for our engines is not over doing it. Go ahead and get yourself a 150-160 amp alternator, because you'll need roughly 70 amps to make all the HHO your engine can use at speed. If you build a unit that is too small to meet your demand and don't see the increases you think you should see, then you're going to be disappointed and probably end up badmouthing HHO.. And that would be a shame.

You will probably want to build a unipolar system simply for the production & efficiency gains available from that style because of your engine's large displacement.

You can also pick up a couple 12v ozone makers (ozone is O3) and mount them where their output can be drawn into the intake air. They draw very little current. The extra oxygen made available by the ozone coupled with the higher compression instituted by water injection (steam) gives a better burn and any oxygen inspired egt increase is negated by cooling effect of the water. It's a win-win scenario.

Sorry if I covered some ground that you're already familiar with, but one never knows...

Oshawapilot

03-17-2011, 04:45 PM

Thanks for the pointers. You guessed close on the truck, it's a 97 C3500 with the 6.5TD. It's also a one-ton dually crew cab long box. At 21' long and pushing 8000 Pounds empty, I still get a respectable 16-17MPG.

No 02 Sensor. Exhaust is turbo-back 4" straight pipe. NO restrictions. Air filters on diesels are a hot button topic, the "K&N is better" mantra does not always apply. Water/Meth is on my radar but HHO is further up my list. No intercooler, 6.5 never had one...those who have experimented with them on the 6.5 anyways have experienced lower EGT's/IAT's as expected, but mediocre MPG effects. Boost system is top knotch, but I have my wastegate de-tuned to reduce boost levels. Contrary to popular belief, more boost does not equal more MPG - quite to the contrary, actually.

Fluids are as thin as I'm willing to go but I'm not willing to invest in synthetics for the marginal MPG increase they will provide...based on the experiences of many others with the same truck. I also use this truck for towing a heavy fifth wheel all summer long so going with taller gearing is simply not an option, nor is larger wheels or anything else that would compromise it's hauling ability.

Unlike others who own huge pickups which end up as pavement princesses, mine is actually used for it's intended purpose. :)

My mileage is stonewalled by the fact that, well, it's a huge truck. To be getting the mileage I'm getting is staggering in the eyes of many, but it's because of extremely careful/conservative driving using basic hypermiling techniques. Lots of others with the same models on the forum are getting 12-13 MPG with smaller versions (Non dually, non CCLB) so I'm pretty happy with 16-17 MPG. Yes, I'd love 25, but I also have to keep things in perspective.

All that said, I'm pretty confident that I can get over 20MPG with HHO, perhaps more. A few old threads there when some people were experimenting with the 6.5 and HHO in 2008 (when the last fuel price spikes occurred) reported anecdotal evidence of one guy getting nearly 25 with his 6.5TD truck of similar year.

Based on the advice here I've decided to take a pass on the smacks (wet) kit and hold out to do the dry model instead. I have yet to find a set of plans that is thorough as I'd like, however.

lhazleton

03-17-2011, 05:09 PM

Mark,
Looks like you're learning already.:)
We're all in here to help out. I had totally forgotten that Gus was a diesel head!
Believe it or not, he does know what he's talking about and always gives sound advice.
Man, did I just say that????????:D

>>Gus, yer buddy's waiting for ya in the other thread............:rolleyes:

BioFarmer93

03-17-2011, 05:15 PM

OK then.. First off, were you planning on putting the unit in the bed/box? I hope so because it's going to be fairly big compared to many of them. I can design a unit for you no problem & no charge, but I have to know what kind of amperage you are willing to commit to it so I can size the plates properly.
Here is my system, it makes roughly 8lpm @ 100 amps.

BioFarmer93

03-17-2011, 05:19 PM

>>Gus, yer buddy's waiting for ya in the other thread............:rolleyes:

Huh?!? My buddy? I thought he was your buddy!

Oshawapilot

03-17-2011, 05:35 PM

Alright, now we're talking. :)

I found these plans online this evening - http://b2bf.com/hho-plans/

It's given me a better understanding of the building of the actual dry cell versus the wet cell design and has brought it down to a level where it doesn't seem as daunting anymore. My primary concerns now are getting the actual plates (not an issue, but cost could range from "Free" to "Arm and leg"), and finding the gasket material...although I liked the ideal in the plans above of using the heavy flexible PVC. (Does it stand up to the electrolyte?)

That's one heck of a sytem in your truck. The more I realize the size of what I'm going to be getting into, the more I realize that bed mounting is the only real viable option if I want to get +++ LPM.

I've read at a few places that anymore than .50/Lpm to the engine size (so 3.25L/Min for a 6.5L engine) is not necessarily better - I'm assuming this is not exactly the case? With your system making 10L/Min on what appears to be a pickup, I'm going to assume you're dumping all that into the engine, not just generating it for the fun of it. :D

As for amps...well, my alternator is a 110A, so drawing 100A constantly isn't realistic as with just the amp draw of the engine electronics and a handful of other small things and I'm depleting batteries, much less maxing the alternator.

Yes, I could go with an dual alternator setup, but I'm thinking if I could keep amp draw in the 60A range I'll be fine to stick with my single alternator which I'd prefer...at least at this point. Given those numbers is it realistic to get 6L/Min? Given simple math based on your 4 Cell system @ 100 Amps (10 amps per 10L/Min) it would seem it is.

Your thoughts on this?

Oshawapilot

03-17-2011, 05:44 PM

A bit OT, but a fellow staff member at the diesel forum PM'd me tonight offered me his only slightly-used HHO generator for what he describes as "a steal".

Here's the link to the model he says he has:

http://www.alternativegassolutions.com/dual-cell-generator.html

I can't seem to see for sure if it's a dry or wet kit, but it LOOKS like they are dry kits. The model he specifically quotes is a "double" cell which pruports to make 5-6LPM at 25 amps. Something seems off there based on what little I've learned here already.

He bought it in 2008 and had trouble with it blowing the 30A fuse, so he eventually got ****ed off and yanked it off. Apparently it's been sitting in his garage ever since. I suspect he didn't properly mix the electrolyte resulting in the amp issues, but I'm just guessing at this point - I'm waiting for him to PM me back with details.

Thoughts on this specific system?

BioFarmer93

03-17-2011, 07:22 PM

Mark,
Tell your buddy thanks, but no thanks... If that tiny thing makes 5-6 L a minute, then I wish to revise the output statement on mine from 8lpm to 45lpm...

The free plans you found there have been around for a while and are responsible for getting a lot of people into HHO. With those plans you could perhaps build a unit suitable for a diesel Rabbit or Jetta.

Something to bear in mind is the fact that small units that make "big numbers" are measuring a lot of water vapor and/or steam, not clean dry HHO. It's really very straight forward, plate area x amps up to a point- too many amps and you can overheat anything. No magic involved, but media blasting your plates really helps.

I ran two alternators at first, the stock 100A and a 150A just for the system, it was not as efficient as I initially thought it would be. I found that just using the 150A would be plenty, that's why I advised you to go that route rather than adding another one.

OK, it's late, gotta sleep, talk more tomorrow... Gus

ultra_efficient

03-17-2011, 09:13 PM

when upgrading your alternator make sure to upgrade to a PMA. a PMA is a permanent magnet Alternator. it has a magnetic core already so it don't need power to make power like the conventional alternators which makes it more efficient. i have a 150amp PMA even thou i don't use more than 30amps for HHO.

lhazleton

03-18-2011, 03:48 AM

Sounds like a very good idea!

koya1893

03-18-2011, 04:32 AM

They're all over the place.
For diesels, Ben (Koya) is your best bet. He specializes in builds for diesel trucks.

Thanks for the confidence, but as you said Gus is a bigger diesel gerahead than I. I've scanned through the thread and picked up on Gus offering to build a cell for you. I would take that offer because you probably will not get that kind of offer and get a well built cell. I know this because he own a Benz.

Addtionally, the plans in the link you posted will run hot and consum a lot of amps, this is due to the top hole aligned, I know many have suggested to do that on the top hole thinking they are not submerged all the time. when I built a cell according to those plans, at 100 mg of NaOH per gl. the amps shot up to 30amp on this config -NNNNN+.

The cell for the system for suburban has two independent cell 3" X 11" plates 1/8 spacing configured like this -NNNNN+ and wired seperately.

YES, good idea Richard. I put one of those on my 1972 LT1 before I installed a HHO system.

Kidding aside your 6.5 is probably similar to a Suburban diesel I built a cell for 2.5lpm, last he report he is getting 21 mpg local driving. One thing you might want to look into first is how many mile your stock has on it. If it has a lot of mile the first long drive you take with a HHO system onboard it will die. so, as adviced get a new high output alt then build a system or buy one.

I also, have several F-250 and 350 with my system onboard, I am not inducing the .5 lpm to 1 liter of eng displacement. the F-350 with 7.3 turbo system in inducing a little over 2.5 lpm with 2-3 mpg increase while towing a 38 foot Fifth wheel.

It weems you've done some reading not like most of the newbies. so stay in touch here and we will assist where we can. Oh yeah, GOOD decision on staying away from the WET CELL. If you built this yourself USPlastic has a 1.5 gl. plus reservior that works great.

Gus,

My Benz was doing great (32 mpg city) until the oil cooler line decided to leak from being old. I am looking to get a new engine or do something MAD. I have a 350 and 700R4 in the garage.

Oshawapilot

03-18-2011, 05:25 AM

Ok, I'm about to go get some prices on the stainless.

For a 6LPM output I'm gathering I'm looking at 2 generators, so how many plates (ultimately, how much stainless) should I be looking to buy?

As for the alternator, I'm not too worried about it - the units spec'd for the 6.5 diesels are incredibly hardy, and at the moment I have a Bosch (with lifetime warranty ;) ) which is only about 1.5 years old. I'm comfortable drawing 60a continuous from it, and IF if let's go I'll get a free replacement anyways and will reconsider power options again at that point - either a second alternator, or a bigger upgrade.

lhazleton

03-18-2011, 06:05 AM

Hope you can get everything you need locally. I know from other guys in Canada that shipping charges are incredible!:mad:

Oshawapilot

03-18-2011, 06:59 AM

Ok, here's what I gathered. Local metal supplier that's actually a customer of mine, so handy. :)

10 plates 316SS, 3x11" (seems narrow, but thats what Koya mentioned?), .062 (1/16th) would be $5 per plate. They added $10 to fab 4 out of those 10 with a 1x1 tab for the electrical connections. Total investment $60.

I did get quotes on thicker 316 - 1/8th plate would increase the cost to $10/plate though.

What's the best option for the thickness assuming 316SS?

For the end plates I looked at UHMW polyethylene, 1" thick 4x12" ( leaving a 1" overlap for bolting) would run $15 each, so another $60 total there assuming a 2 unit build.

Reducing to 3/4" reduced the price to $10/end. Down to 1/2", further reduction to $6.00 each.

Again, for the end plates, is the UHMW suitable, and what's best for thickness? I've heard a lot of complaints from those who cheaper out and couldn't get good clamping forces as a result of too thin end plates, so I'd like advice here.

Thoughts so far?

I have not yet sourced gasket material but know of the perfect supplier - another one of my customers as well. What material is "ideal" for the gaskets, and what is on the "it'll do" side?

Thanks again all.

BioFarmer93

03-18-2011, 07:36 AM

Mark,
Well, now comes the time for some choices... First though, you can save some money by going to .04" on the 316L. Don't talk about connection tabs yet with your supplier because you're going to want two per plate. Are these going to be waterjet cut? I realize you want to move on this thing but there are several loose ends that must be attended to first, such as-
Are you going to build unipolar or bipolar?
Are you going to control the amperage or just use an on-off switch to a solenoid?
Are you still committed to a high output system, or is the sticker shock down-sizing it for you?
Have you made allowances for balance-of-system costs? (elbows, tubing, wire, gaskets,solenoid, switches, fuses, nuts, bolts, zip ties, hose clamps, electrical connectors, etc..?

Note to LEE-
If he goes unipolar I'm going to design a mini-beastie for him since that style makes the most efficient use of space & materials... At 60A max, I'm thinkin' about 480-500 sq. in.. What do you get?

myoldyourgold

03-18-2011, 07:47 AM

Mark, you have some of the best giving you advise. I will add my 2 cents as well remember it's only 2 cents.

Plate thickness depends on your reactor design. If you go with an all unipolar design like Bio's then .050 (18 gauge) for all the plates is what I would recommend. If you are going to have a combination of unipolar plates and bipolar plates then I would suggest the bipolar plates be .0375 (20 gauge). The .062 is 16 gauge and is way to thick in my opinion. I see no benefit in using the thicker material.

Plate shape is something you might want to do some more research on. Both Boi and Koya use a similar design. I have had better luck with keeping the distance the bubbles have to travel small and think that 4 X 8 where the bubbles are traveling up only 4 inches is one of the best designs. This is somewhat splitting hairs but is backed up with simple science and some testing. The difference is small but there is a difference.

Make sure you go with media blasted plates. In tests I just completed this week you can hit these plates with a lot more voltage and amps with no significant increase in heat. I suspect this will apply to any well designed plate. I will be doing a lot more testing to see what happens long term.

You have done a good job of research. Keep it up.

lhazleton

03-18-2011, 01:57 PM

Good to see ya, Carter. Where've you been?

Oshawapilot

03-18-2011, 03:10 PM

First though, you can save some money by going to .04" on the 316L. Don't talk about connection tabs yet with your supplier because you're going to want two per plate. Are these going to be waterjet cut?

OK, I'm getting overwhelmed again. :o

If .04 is adequate, I'll go with that. The supplier I looked at this morning only had .025 and .062 in stock, so the .04 would probably be special order. If they need to source an entire sheet just to make my one project it *could* drive the price up for me, not sure.

I'm assuming that there is an "optimum" thickness? Is the .062 ultimately too thick?

I realize you want to move on this thing but there are several loose ends that must be attended to first, such as-
Are you going to build unipolar or bipolar?

Not sure. I was basing my thoughts so far on what Koya mentioned:

-NNNNN+

As I interpret it, that's a negative plate on the one end, 5 neutral plates in the middle, and one positive plate on the other end. Correct? This is what I was basing my request for only 4 plates with the tabbed connection points from the supplier.

The actual dimensions of the plates, layout, and hookup is still a big enigma to me. Koya mentions 3"x11" plates, and others 4X10, 5X9, etc.

Are you going to control the amperage or just use an on-off switch to a solenoid?

On/off with a solenoid was my plan. Reasoning is that I already HAVE all of that under the hood pre-wired to a switch on my dash - it's intended use is a winter glowplug override that lets me cycle my glowplugs for an extended period before cranking in extreme cold.

During the summer I will NOT need this system (the stock glowplug cycle is long enough) so I can simply disconnect the lead going to the glow plug relay and use the relay for the HHO system. The relay is capable of providing over 100A continually (2ga directly to drivers side battery, and then direct to the relay) so it's ideal for the HHO feed.

As I understand it, once the electrolyte has been mixed properly the amp draw should stabilize and maintain itself, correct? Yes, I will have an ampmeter inline with the feed, but as I understand it I shouldn't need an amp controller with a well build dry cell and properly mixed electrolyte. Correct?

Are you still committed to a high output system, or is the sticker shock down-sizing it for you?

Well, I'd like to size the system so that it fits within the ability of my electrical system at the moment. Based on what I've gathered I should be able to do a 6LPM build with 2 separate cells and be in the 60 Amp range. Correct?

If I'm pleased with the results, I can always construct a third cell and simply add it to the system at a later date.

If my results are good I have a friend (Who is apt to join here and chime in soon) who is also very interested in this and we may end up building a kit for him as well, so at that point we could build a third (or fourth, who knows) for me at that point.

With a 6LPM system will I be satisfied?

I'm not suffering from "sticker shock" per say, but there IS a point where if I have to get into replacing alternators and spending a metric buttload of cash over and above beyond the construction costs of the HHO generators themselves, the wife approval factor (WAF) will significantly decrease. :p

Have you made allowances for balance-of-system costs? (elbows, tubing, wire, gaskets,solenoid, switches, fuses, nuts, bolts, zip ties, hose clamps, electrical connectors, etc..?

Non issues. All cheap and readily available locally, already in my garage, or already on the truck. :)

My last question is still in under-hood versus in-bed location.

If I go with only 2 cells I think I can find spots under the hood to fit the generators and a bubbler without much issue. Under hood would be my preference (at this point) as it means I can avoid running heavy gauge wiring to the bed. To get 60'ish amps that far back (remember I have a crew cab, so we're talking probably 15-20 feet of wire to go from the alternator, under the cab, and up into the bed) I'd have to use probably 4ga. That's gonna run about $40-$50 for the positive run alone, double that if I go with both a positive and negative run to ensure a good ground - not sure I'm confident enough with relying on a frame ground for that sort of amp draw.

So....lets tackle all the above. :)

Bhart

03-18-2011, 03:29 PM

Oshawapilot

03-18-2011, 03:36 PM

Since you are in the cold north you might want to revise using PVC, and instead use EPDM for your gasket material. PVC doesn't hold up to the extreme cold. My experience is to ground to the battery, I lost a bunch of amps by grounding to the frame.

Thank you, noted. The gasket material was one of the big questions I still had - PVC seemed easier to find, but EPDM can be had relatively easily as well, albeit perhaps at a bit higher cost.

So my concerns about the ground wire were well founded. So, running to the bed, and future proofing for the ability to handle 100A (assuming I eventually added a third unit) I'd be looking at upwards of $100 for the cable alone.

Under hood mounting is looking more and more attractive again if it's workable.

myoldyourgold

03-18-2011, 05:15 PM

Good to see ya, Carter. Where've you been?

Lee I have been in the lab making sure I did not suffer a senior moment the other day. I didn't for a change LOL.

Well, I'd like to size the system so that it fits within the ability of my electrical system at the moment. Based on what I've gathered I should be able to do a 6LPM build with 2 separate cells and be in the 60 Amp range.

Mark at 60 amps to make 6 lpm is going to require some real doing. I think your expectations are a little high. My guess is you are going to produce 4 to 4.5 lpm at the best. That would give you an MMW around 5.45. 6 lpm would be 7.2 MMW If you can do that you have a very efficient design better than most. You might need larger reactors (more stacks) or a third to achieve your goals of 6 lmp and closer to 80 or 90 amps. I suspect you will not need more than the 4 to 4.5 lpm anyway.
You are headed in the right direction. Keep up the good work.

Oshawapilot

03-18-2011, 05:31 PM

Ok, I've been basing my figures based on Biofarmers 8LPM system @ 100 Amps, but yeah, I just did the math (assuming the figures scale correctly) and I see exactly what you're quoting now - 4.8LPM@60A, again, assuming a perfect scaling from the 8LPM@100A Biofarmer is achieving.

As for what I'll be happy with, this seems to be showing differing opinions as well. The "recommended' figures I read in lots of places (before finding the forum here) was the .50 equation (so 3.25LPM for a 6.5L engine), but now I'm hearing differing opinions, with some saying "Go crazy", and others (like yourself) suggesting I'll be happy in the 4.0-4.5LPM range.

Ultimately, we come back to the available amp limits I'l able to work with, though, and I think 60 is about as high as I'm willing to go, leaving a reserve for charging the batteries and running accessories, etc.

BioFarmer93

03-18-2011, 07:36 PM

Mark,
How much room do you have between the grill and the radiator- sorry, I'm not too familiar with GM stuff, I have very little on my '89 NA 7.3 idi CC dually... I had to mount in the bed. For a frame of reference, to get that production, I used a unipolar four group system of 21 5"x14" plates each. That's right, 84 plates in all. I know it's kind of like a punch in the gut, but it can be done- it's just not cheap... You're not going to get big production from one or two small units. Another thing to keep in mind is that Ben (Koya) is getting those results from Powerstrokes, I'm running the predecessor to that motor so he and I comparing mileage gains is apples to oranges.

Yes, the cable to the bed will be expensive, I know mine certainly was.

An observation about reactor types... If you go unipolar you can go with a straight on-off setup with a full 28% KOH electrolyte and no worries about overheating, but the build is slightly more complex.

If you go bipolar, you will have to either use a PWM so you can run full strength electrolyte (for best efficiency) or skip the PWM, go straight on-off and tailor your electrolyte strength, number of neutral plates and total number of plates to avoid thermal runaway. This is a method some people are using but their output isn't anything to write home about and the efficiency is low.

If .04 is adequate, I'll go with that. The supplier I looked at this morning only had .025 and .062 in stock, so the .04 would probably be special order. If they need to source an entire sheet just to make my one project it *could* drive the price up for me, not sure.

I'm assuming that there is an "optimum" thickness? Is the .062 ultimately too thick?

.025" is a little light, & .062" is a little heavy. That being said, I assure you that both have been used in systems before. Maybe call around? Someone else might have something in the .035"-.05" range sitting in the shop. If not then go with the .062" from your guy.

Ok, I've been basing my figures based on Biofarmers 8LPM system @ 100 Amps, but yeah, I just did the math (assuming the figures scale correctly) and I see exactly what you're quoting now - 4.8LPM@60A, again, assuming a perfect scaling from the 8LPM@100A Biofarmer is achieving.

As for what I'll be happy with, this seems to be showing differing opinions as well. The "recommended' figures I read in lots of places (before finding the forum here) was the .50 equation (so 3.25LPM for a 6.5L engine), but now I'm hearing differing opinions, with some saying "Go crazy", and others (like yourself) suggesting I'll be happy in the 4.0-4.5LPM range.

Ultimately, we come back to the available amp limits I'l able to work with, though, and I think 60 is about as high as I'm willing to go, leaving a reserve for charging the batteries and running accessories, etc.

The .50 equation was arrived at for gasoline powered computer managed engines, and is essentially a compromise figure that will show some gains for 2.0-5.5L gassers with minimal ECU & effi twiddling. The only person getting really good gains on big diesels without going at least 1 to 1 is OldGold and he's doing all kind of other secret stuff to them that's not covered by the freedom of information act... DARPA & the NSA will probably come down on my butt for just saying that much.:eek:;)

Oshawapilot

03-19-2011, 03:49 AM

Ok, so in your opinion I should be looking at at least 6-7LPM production for worthwhile results?

I'm not against "doing it right" the first time, even if it means splitting the purchases up over a few paycheques in order to avoid triggering the wife's ":mad::mad::mad:" alert.

Space behind the grille...hmmm. Ironically I had my grille off a few weeks ago (replacing headlight bulbs) and a few months before that (relocating the injection pumps solenoid driver, commonly referred to as the PMD in the airflow ahead of the rad), and despite that, I can't visualize if there would be enough space behind there for 2 or 3 generators. I will look again today. That said, I have my doubts that space ahead of the grille will be adequate, and even if it was, the 6.5 has been known to suffer overheating while towing with even minimal rad blockage, so I don't think it's wise to start hanging all sorts of gear in front of the rad.

This leaves some under-hood room to work with. I know I can locate 3 units without much problem - they will have to be distributed around, but I'm not worried about the electrical and plumbing - both are second hat to me, especially the electrical.

Ultimately, if we have to go with the in-bed option, then I'll do it that way and suck up the cost of the wire. Wire is something else I may be able to find at one of my customers as well, so I'll stay on the hunt. (I'm a commercial driver who works for a big LTL carrier, so I have a lot of customers I deliver and pickup from that have a lot of what I need for this project - it's simply a matter if they will sell it to me as most are not at the retail level, but wholesale or industrial...)

The PWM is another potential cost - most smaller PWM's I see online are limited to the 30A range as a maximum, meaning for a project in the 60-70 amp range I'm looking at needing at least 2, perhaps 3 if I go with separate modules. At about $30/each (unless you guys have found sources for them less expensive?) that's going to add at least another $100 to the project.

I did see some online that can handle 100A, but it's more expensive than buying 3 individual 30A units. :rolleyes:

As for cell design, I'm still not entirely clear on the whole design options and benefits of one versus the other, number of plates, etc etc, so I'm leaving that to you guys.

BioFarmer93

03-19-2011, 04:46 AM

Ok, so in your opinion I should be looking at at least 6-7LPM production for worthwhile results?
In my opinion, yes.

I'm not against "doing it right" the first time, even if it means splitting the purchases up over a few paycheques in order to avoid triggering the wife's ":mad::mad::mad:" alert.
I sure know about that!

Space behind the grille...hmmm. Ironically I had my grille off a few weeks ago (replacing headlight bulbs) and a few months before that (relocating the injection pumps solenoid driver, commonly referred to as the PMD in the airflow ahead of the rad), and despite that, I can't visualize if there would be enough space behind there for 2 or 3 generators. I will look again today. That said, I have my doubts that space ahead of the grille will be adequate, and even if it was, the 6.5 has been known to suffer overheating while towing with even minimal rad blockage, so I don't think it's wise to start hanging all sorts of gear in front of the rad.

This leaves some under-hood room to work with. I know I can locate 3 units without much problem - they will have to be distributed around, but I'm not worried about the electrical and plumbing - both are second hat to me, especially the electrical.
The electrical is easy, the plumbing on the other hand needs to be a bit more carefully attended to, as the height of various components in relationship to one another is pretty important.

Ultimately, if we have to go with the in-bed option, then I'll do it that way and suck up the cost of the wire. Wire is something else I may be able to find at one of my customers as well, so I'll stay on the hunt. (I'm a commercial driver who works for a big LTL carrier, so I have a lot of customers I deliver and pickup from that have a lot of what I need for this project - it's simply a matter if they will sell it to me as most are not at the retail level, but wholesale or industrial...)

The PWM is another potential cost - most smaller PWM's I see online are limited to the 30A range as a maximum, meaning for a project in the 60-70 amp range I'm looking at needing at least 2, perhaps 3 if I go with separate modules. At about $30/each (unless you guys have found sources for them less expensive?) that's going to add at least another $100 to the project.
If you go with three separate units you can use three micro switches in a row mounted on a plate/bracket with a nylon slider connected to your throttle cable to trigger each one as throttle position advances. Each switch of course would go to a solenoid. Not a PWM, but a simple, reliable, fixable way to accomplish on-the-fly RPM related production variation.

I did see some online that can handle 100A, but it's more expensive than buying 3 individual 30A units. :rolleyes:

As for cell design, I'm still not entirely clear on the whole design options and benefits of one versus the other, number of plates, etc etc, so I'm leaving that to you guys.
Two very different schools of thought on that, but unfortunately professional ethics and StarFleet's non-interference regulations prevent me from saying things like "bipolar has had it's day, unipolar rocks!" or "Want better more efficient production? Go unipolar!" So you're just going to have to do a lot of reading and video watching... I'd suggest Zero Fossil Fuel's Youtube stuff on "The Bat Cell" and HHOPWR's thread on the "Magnetic Beastie" at the HHO Underground, www.nicksrealm.com

racer55

03-19-2011, 05:00 AM

Hello
I am new in town and do not intend to thread steal,I have been known to be a partner in crime on occasion with Oshawapilot on some projects so I thought I would enter the fray.

There have been posts about the high amp draw required by these systems and just to address that fact I thought I would add in that there is an aftermarket supplier who makes alternators for our 6.5TD`s that will output 130,150,170 or higher amps in a single OEM style unit.
I know pilot has a great warranty on a nearly new alternator but like everything else in the world problems are often solved by money,except for good health-priceless.

I would be very interested in the design offered earlier in the thread by BioFarmer93,from what I have read there is a steep learning curve involved with this and I am from the school where it is best to try and learn from others who know what hard lessons to avoid.

lhazleton

03-19-2011, 05:23 AM

Racer,
Welcome to the Forum. It's nice to see a newb in here that realizes that there's lots of work and learning to be done to successfully use this technology.
Luckily, Pilot has come a long way in a short time.

Oshawapilot

03-19-2011, 08:03 AM

If you go with three separate units you can use three micro switches in a row mounted on a plate/bracket with a nylon slider connected to your throttle cable to trigger each one as throttle position advances. Each switch of course would go to a solenoid. Not a PWM, but a simple, reliable, fixable way to accomplish on-the-fly RPM related production variation.

That's a problem since the electronic 6.5TD's are a fully electronic "Fly By Wire" engine - there is no throttle cable to the IP, it's entirely electronic from the pedal to the fuel solenoid driver.

Yes, I could get into mounting the required microswitches on some sort of bracket fabricated to the pedal, but I'm not sure how effective that would be since I use the cruise control as much as physically possible (even in town) to maximize MPG. Seing as how there is no physical connection between pedal and pump when on cruise the pedal is "dead" - it doesn't move.

I would have to go with a manually controlled system with a multi position switch on the dash, or something. Not ideal.

My other concern is that my usual RPM range is from 600 (idle) to 1700/1800 - rarely do I exceed this unless I'm towing, which in the grand scheme of things is a fraction of my annual mileage.

So, I assume based on this discussion that there is a such thing as "too much" HHO. If I left the system on 100% at all times (generating, say, 7LPM) is it going to overwhelm the engine at low RPM's or have negative effects?

BioFarmer93

03-19-2011, 10:29 AM

That's a problem since the electronic 6.5TD's are a fully electronic "Fly By Wire" engine - there is no throttle cable to the IP, it's entirely electronic from the pedal to the fuel solenoid driver.
That's just wrong... Too much electronics to go bad.;)

Yes, I could get into mounting the required microswitches on some sort of bracket fabricated to the pedal, but I'm not sure how effective that would be since I use the cruise control as much as physically possible (even in town) to maximize MPG. Seing as how there is no physical connection between pedal and pump when on cruise the pedal is "dead" - it doesn't move.
What about boost switch activated?

I would have to go with a manually controlled system with a multi position switch on the dash, or something. Not ideal.
No, not ideal... Ideal would be having it by your right hand on your center console.

My other concern is that my usual RPM range is from 600 (idle) to 1700/1800 - rarely do I exceed this unless I'm towing, which in the grand scheme of things is a fraction of my annual mileage.
Ah, you must have an automatic trans then, I regularly rev to 3k getting onto the expressway. Does your alternator make full output at idle? Mine doesn't.

So, I assume based on this discussion that there is a such thing as "too much" HHO. If I left the system on 100% at all times (generating, say, 7LPM) is it going to overwhelm the engine at low RPM's or have negative effects?
600 RPM x 6.5L = 3,900L.... 7LPM(HHO)/3,900L = .0017948%.... Doubtful.

Oshawapilot

03-19-2011, 10:52 AM

That's just wrong... Too much electronics to go bad.;)

The actual fly by wire thing on the 6.5's has actually proven to be remarkably reliable over the years. Occasionally people have issues with the pedal (since in effect it's just a giant potentiometer) but it's pretty rare.

What about boost switch activated?

Could work, I suppose but calibrating it would be difficult as I try to keep my boost as low as possible - one of my other back of my mind projects is actually a manual boost control which would allow me to completely open the wastegate while at low-load highway cruise .

Currently I'm running a manual wastegate which is setup to provide only 5PSI under most loads (perhaps 10PSI at WOT) and typically builds only 2-4 PSI under my driving style.

Again, low boost = higher MPG. I had my wastegate setup cranked so I could build and maintain 10-15PSI at one point and it cut nearly 4MPG off my fuel consumption - massive difference. More power and snappier performance, yes - MPG, not so much.

I would have to go with a manually controlled system with a multi position switch on the dash, or something. Not ideal.
No, not ideal... Ideal would be having it by your right hand on your center console.

Ah, you must have an automatic trans then, I regularly rev to 3k getting onto the expressway. Does your alternator make full output at idle? Mine doesn't.

On the 6.5 you start touching redline @3500 RPM. Peak fuel economy is 1850 RPM, and I sit at about 2100 RPM while at highway cruise...thanks to my 4.11 gearing. In town I rarely exceed 1800 RPM.

While pulling our fifth wheel, pulling a grade downshifted out of OD I might maintain ~2600 RPM for a short period, but that's about as high as my engine ever sees.

So, I assume based on this discussion that there is a such thing as "too much" HHO. If I left the system on 100% at all times (generating, say, 7LPM) is it going to overwhelm the engine at low RPM's or have negative effects?
600 RPM x 6.5L = 3,900L.... 7LPM(HHO)/3,900L = .0017948%.... Doubtful.

Ok, so aside from the continuos high amp draw, is there any downside to simply leaving the entire system energized under all RPM/load/speed combinations? Again, if I use the already installed relay for my glowplug override system I'll leave it connected to the toggle switch inside the cab (dash mounted) and if I anticipate a period of idling, slow speed, or stop/go traffic I can simply flip the relay and kill the HHO system manually. A little manual intervention isn't a big deal to me - I drive a tractor trailer for a living so constantly flipping buttons and switches (blah blah blah) is second nature to me. ;)

As for the alternator, based on my observations of it's output it has no problem making most of it's rated capacity at low RPM's - the alternators on the 6.5's are equipped with a fairly small pulley which keeps their RPM's up even at low RPM's.

At some point I could find a simple boost activated switch that would energize the system at (say) 1PSI which would signify the truck is at least moving under some load..but not sure they make boost switches with calibrations that low.

myoldyourgold

03-19-2011, 03:47 PM

Oshawapilot

03-19-2011, 06:29 PM

Mark just to make sure there is no confusion. When I sad you would be making 4 to 4.5 lpm I was under the assumption that you were going to build a unit with bipolar plates. That would be the best under those circumstance, if even that. If you follow Bio's unipolar setup then you will get the same or close to the same as Bio. You seemed to be undecided. As Boi says unipolar rocks.

Well, at this point I've no reason to not follow the advice you guys are giving, so lets go unipolar!

I will preface that by saying that the difference between unipolar and bipolar is still unclear to me though. It's all in the plate design/wiring I'm assuming?

myoldyourgold

03-19-2011, 07:07 PM

Well, at this point I've no reason to not follow the advice you guys are giving, so lets go unipolar!

I will preface that by saying that the difference between unipolar and bipolar is still unclear to me though. It's all in the plate design/wiring I'm assuming?

A bipolar plate is a plate that has one side + and the other side -. All N (neutral) plates are bipolar. Unipolar plates have the same charge on both sides. +nnnnnn- has 2 unipolar plates (the end plates) and 6 bipolar plates(all the N's). Unipolar plates have to be connected in grouped series/parallel sets so as to divide voltage/amps into the amount that you want between each pair of plates/set. I'll let Bio explain all of this as this is his specialty. I am just an old guy who tests a lot of crapola and reports only some of the results which are not believed by some because I make no videos or show very few pictures for some very good reasons. LOL. I am always happy to help when I can.

Oshawapilot

03-20-2011, 06:06 AM

Ok. So I assume there's a lot more thought that has to go into the plate design and wiring for the unipolar setup?

I'd like to start gathering parts in the early half of this week.

Oshawapilot

03-20-2011, 06:33 AM

Someone OTBC the spammer please!

BioFarmer93

03-20-2011, 06:42 PM

Someone OTBC the spammer please!

Mark,
I have no idea what that means.. (OTBC)
Anyway, now that you have made the decision to go unipolar, you must decide on bed mount or under hood mount. To divide voltage properly there needs to be seven groups of cells (7/13.8V=1.971V per group). You say you can spare 60amps, so @ .25Amp per sq.in. that gives us 240 sq.in. Since we are going unipolar we double those sq.inches because both sides of each plate are the same polarity... 480 sq.in. Now the fun part, deciding on the number of plates, well 7x70=490... Unipolar reactors do well at low current densities and we're only talking 10 extra sq.in. so lets say 70 sq.in. per group. That's 10 sq.in. (active area) per plate. 2.5"x4" gives us 10 sq.in. Add an extra inch each way for gasket makes it 3.5"x5". Now, diagonal tabs or ears for drilling through for your electrical connections. Here is a preliminary design for plates, gaskets and intermediate separators.

Oshawapilot

03-21-2011, 03:28 PM

Great, thanks for the plans. I'm still a little confused on the number of plates I'm going to need. Hold my hand here.. ;)

BioFarmer93

03-21-2011, 04:40 PM

Hand being held... What is your question?

Oshawapilot

03-21-2011, 04:54 PM

Hand being held... What is your question?

Great, thanks for the plans. I'm still a little confused on the number of plates I'm going to need.

Did I read your post previous to my last response as stating each cell will be a total of only 7 plates?

The Unipolar versus Bipolar still has me a bit baffled as well - I'm assuming it's simply a wiring difference (since I see in the schematics the plates have electrical connection tabs at BOTH ends) but it's still not clear.

Do you have pictures of a fabricated/complete bipolar generator with wiring in place? I'd be interested to see that and it may make things click for me.

BioFarmer93

03-21-2011, 05:33 PM

Here you go, I did these a while back for just this reason.
http://www.hhoforums.com/showthread.php?t=6737

Oshawapilot

03-23-2011, 03:45 AM

Ok, sorry I've been AWOL for a few days, been down and out with the flu. Still dragging.

So, this image made things click more for me:

http://yafh.com/image/0c6d043d-hhoplans1.jpg

So, each cell would require 14 plates (times 4 reactors) for a total of 56 plates required, correct?

Now, looking at the plans you made for me:

http://yafh.com/image/31dcf099-hhoplans2.jpg

I see the plate design shows electrical connection tabs on both ends. Given how each cell only has one electrical connection (albeit alternating between top and bottom) is it OK to simply forego the second tab for ease of manufacturing and increased space, or is the there a reason it's there that I'm just missing?

Also, I see that the plates show long rectangular slots which I assume are th electrolyte and gas vents, correct?

http://yafh.com/image/571c1d7d-celldesign-question.jpg

Everything I've read about cell design indicates that the hoes should be minimized and staggered - is it the particular design of the unipolar setup that allows for large holes (4 of them, at that) in this design?

Sorry if it's a stupid question but I don't want to get these designed and then find out I screwed up.

Also, it's doubtful I'll be getting them laser cut. Water jet perhaps (if the place I have in mind will do them for a reasonable $$$), but in the end I'm probably going to end up getting them done at a metal shop that has regular metal working equipment - regular hydraulic shears and bandsaws. In this case, getting those rectangular cuts isn't going to be possible, so I'd probably just drill the holes myself - will this change the design at all?

koya1893

03-23-2011, 04:09 AM

Here you go, I did these a while back for just this reason.
http://www.hhoforums.com/showthread.php?t=6737

GUS,
The server I use for will not allow me to log in to the Underground, this is the first time seeing your madness. THAT's one hell of a unit, I am trying my hand at the unipolar system for the home heating. It's on hold right now due work. sorry I am doing it again "hi-jacking" a thread. for those looking to go this route Bio is your mentor.

BioFarmer93

03-23-2011, 08:42 AM

Hey Mark,
I was wondering what happened to you.. The first picture is a schematic, and only exists to clarify the way a unipolar electrolyzer works. The fact that the plate count, the number of groups and the number of connections per plate doesn't jibe with the reactor that I designed specifically for you is to be expected.
In unipolar systems we can use slots instead of staggered holes because there is no current leakage. If the bipolar guys could get away with using slots, they would.
Your system will use 7 plates per group and 7 groups for 49 plates. I have done some edits to the drawing since I posted it the other day. I'll post the updated picture for you to see this evening as it's on my home computer. Let me know when you want the actual CAD file for your water jet guy so you can save some money by not having them redraw it. I can give you .dwg, .dgn & .dxf formats. Most CNC programs have an app for converting one of those formats into code for the cutter.
Your system will not be made in separated groups like mine & will be much more compact and have less resistance. You will have 6 cells per group of 7 plates. Your layout will alternate the number of pos & neg plates in each group, like this:
[]+-+-+-+[]-+-+-+-[]+-+-+-+[]-+-+-+-[]+-+-+-+[]-+-+-+-[]+-+-+-+[]
You have two connection tabs on each plate to decrease resistance thereby increasing efficiency.
A word about going cheap on your plates- don't. I'm designing you a state of the art unit, so get your plates cut by water jet and then get them sand blasted. Wash them in a clean sink with a grease cutting dish detergent, rinse them then set them into a clean dish of distilled water. From that point on don't touch them unless you're wearing disposable rubber gloves. Rinse them again in more distilled water, then rinse them with denatured alcohol. Dry them with clean paper towels then wrap them in something clean until you're ready to use them.

Oshawapilot

03-24-2011, 01:51 PM

Ok, thanks - I'll take the CAD files for sure if you would be so gracious - I do have one shop in mind that has the high end waterjet equipment needed to do a job like this, so if I make it as quick and painless for them as possible (bringing my own SS and even the CAD file) they might whip it off for me for minimal cost.

So, at 49 plates, how many individual reactors are we talking? 49 doesn't divide evenly into anything less then 7...so are we talking about 7 independent builds here, or am I again missing something?

lhazleton

03-24-2011, 04:00 PM

Mark,
I don't want to jump in here between you & Gus, but I will anyway.:p
It will be 7 reactors, each with 6 cells. Sure you don't want to go with a SCHMUCK-BOOSTER after all???????????:D:D

Oshawapilot

03-24-2011, 04:22 PM

Mark,
I don't want to jump in here between you & Gus, but I will anyway.:p
It will be 7 reactors, each with 6 cells. Sure you don't want to go with a SCHMUCK-BOOSTER after all???????????:D:D

Hahah.. well, it's definitely getting involved now, but I guess we're at the go-big-or-go-home stage now. :p

So, my next question would be...why go with 7 small reactors instead of, say, 3 or 4 medium sized once instead with the same amount of square inches?

Bio, in your pics of your setup, what size are those reactors for reference purposes? They look sizeable, but it's hard to gauge.

BioFarmer93

03-24-2011, 04:52 PM

1 build, 7sections or "groups"- I assume it's going into the bed, right? Here is the updated picture- I'll try to throw together an iso view for you to give you a better idea of what it looks like. PM me your email addy so I can send you the CAD file.

Oshawapilot

03-24-2011, 05:07 PM

1 build, 7sections or "groups"

Ok, so as I interpret that, it's going to be one "big" assembly all tied together, where:

E=End Plate
R=Reactor
S=Separator Plate

E|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|E

For a total of 7 reactors, 6 separator plates, and 2 end plates.

It's all starting to come together in my head now.

My email address is my username here, @Gmail.com.

I assume it's going into the bed, right?

It's looking more and more like that's going to be the case, yes. I would *LIKE* to place it somewhere easier to hook up (both power in, and gas out), service, and maintain, but I just don't see a viable location in my head at this point. Perhaps once it's assembled I can revisit it.

I have a tonneau cover on my bed, though - does this provide a problem from a ventilation or routine maintenance standpoint?

Oshawapilot

03-24-2011, 05:17 PM

Your system will not be made in separated groups like mine

https://forum.eurofurence.org/Smileys/default/facepalm.gif

I was just reading back through your earlier responses and realized I missed this. I guess trying to read technical posts while under the influence of the flu was a bad idea. :)

So, disregard my question above - this clarifies the construction for me now, no questions - one single...long, unit.

I like!

BioFarmer93

03-24-2011, 06:05 PM

Ok, so as I interpret that, it's going to be one "big" assembly all tied together, where:

E=End Plate
R=Reactor
S=Separator Plate

E|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|S|R|E

For a total of 7 reactors, 6 separator plates, and 2 end plates.

It's all starting to come together in my head now.

My email address is my username here, @Gmail.com.

It's looking more and more like that's going to be the case, yes. I would *LIKE* to place it somewhere easier to hook up (both power in, and gas out), service, and maintain, but I just don't see a viable location in my head at this point. Perhaps once it's assembled I can revisit it.

I have a tonneau cover on my bed, though - does this provide a problem from a ventilation or routine maintenance standpoint?

Sounds like you got it to me... tonneau shouldn't be a prob unless it seals up better than your system is.:eek:

email sent..

Oshawapilot

03-25-2011, 04:49 AM

Ok, on my way momentarily to get some prices from the waterjet place.

Oshawapilot

03-25-2011, 04:17 PM

Ok, good news. The guy at the waterjet place was quite interested in my little project and actually said he could do *all* of the fabrication, right down to the seals. It could be one-stop-shopping.

He was amazed that I showed up with professionally drawn plans, and even MORE surprised when I offered him CAD files. :)

So, that's the good news.

The bad news is that when I asked for a "baseball park figure" on cost the first number he tossed out was about $7.00 per plate. Ouch. I must have noticeably winced a little as he assured me after chatting some more that he would see what he could do to give me a good deal. He did actually seem quite interested in the project, and I did allude to the fact that a second order may be in the wings as (I think) Racer is also interested in one of these.

However, at $7.00 per plate I'm looking at nearly a $350 investment for the plates alone. I'm hoping on further consideration they come in at about $5.00 each, $250 is a little more palatable. Pie in the sky, he comes in even lower than that, but when his first quite was $7 I don't think I can hope for much better that $5.

Not sure about his cost for the gaskets and dividers yet, although he said "that stuff is all cheap and I have it in stock" so I don't anticipate it to be that significant...hopefully.

lhazleton

03-25-2011, 04:34 PM

Mark,
I have no idea what Gus or Larry paid for their plates, but in my opinion,
you just stepped in sh1t & came out smelling like a rose!:D

Oshawapilot

03-25-2011, 04:39 PM

Mark,
I have no idea what Gus or Larry paid for their plates, but in my opinion,
you just stepped in sh1t & came out smelling like a rose!:D

So that's a GOOD price? :D

BioFarmer93

03-25-2011, 05:43 PM

Hey Mark,
Did he include media blasting in that price too??

Oshawapilot

03-26-2011, 02:48 AM

Hey Mark,
Did he include media blasting in that price too??

No, he doesn't have and blasting equipment there AFAIK. I know of a place that would probably do it for me for free but their equipment would probably be far too large for this and would end up damaging the plates - we're talking "the air compressor is the side of a 30' Semi trailer" type of commercial equipment, used to blast large scale oil field machines they produce there. I think the nozzle they have is larger than the plates in my kit. :p

I have a buddy with a small home sandblasting kit. With the right media, and a lot of patience, will this suffice?

Bhart

03-26-2011, 04:13 AM

That is the style blaster that I use, it works great. Just takes time to blast. If it is not in a contained unit wear a face shield as the sand will ricochet back at your face.

BioFarmer93

03-26-2011, 05:12 AM

No, he doesn't have and blasting equipment there AFAIK. I know of a place that would probably do it for me for free but their equipment would probably be far too large for this and would end up damaging the plates - we're talking "the air compressor is the side of a 30' Semi trailer" type of commercial equipment, used to blast large scale oil field machines they produce there. I think the nozzle they have is larger than the plates in my kit. :p

I have a buddy with a small home sandblasting kit. With the right media, and a lot of patience, will this suffice?

Yes that will be just fine, it's how a lot of us do it, as it's handy to have a small blaster at home for all kinds of stuff. My mom is a crafter and she's always turning up with items for me to blast. It was actually purchased so I could clean rust spots off my truck to bare metal for re-priming.

racer55

03-26-2011, 05:15 PM

Oshawapilot

03-27-2011, 04:57 PM

Its a shame that the site is not notifying me of new posts like it is supposed to,I have to make an effort to keep up.

The cost vs return on this project seems in line for me and I will be on board with Mark on this 1.

Thanx for being so incredibly helpfull.

You have to visit the UserCP and manually enable the option, and then (as it was probably disabled) manually subscribe to this particular thread using the "Thread Tools" dropdown at top of this page.

The forum here is configured to have the option for automatic subscription disabled by default, unfortunately. It's a shame, it means a LOT of people are probably never returning simply because they forget and are not reminded by default of responses to their content.

racer55

03-27-2011, 05:15 PM

I actually did go through that process last week right after speaking with you and this is the first notification of a new post I have had since post 36 when I changed the settings and subscribed to the thread.

Oshawapilot

03-28-2011, 02:35 PM

Touching base, guys - still waiting for the quote back from the waterjet shop.

I sent him a reminder email this evening as I really expected to have something back by this point.

Oshawapilot

03-29-2011, 03:04 PM

Bazarommcmullen

03-29-2011, 05:14 PM

I have been following this post and I too am interested in installing an HHO Dry cell on my 6.5L. I have been researching HHO systems for a good amount of time. I have designed my own plates and have went out and priced the water jet cutting. My price per piece was 18.50 a plate but I had much more material/surfice area. I have not purchased any material yet. Definately glad I read this thread prior to buying anything. I was about to make a few mistakes at my own expense.

BioFarmer93

03-30-2011, 02:48 AM

Ok, I bring good news and bad news.

The good news is this:

$5.50 per 316SS plate, waterjet cut directly from your CAD file. I'm pretty impressed with that - $296.50 plus tax for all 49 plates.

Bad news (well, not THAT bad) is the prices on the end plates and gaskets are not good. $4.00 per gasket, and $20.88 per end plate.

I tried to source the gaskets from another place after work but they were already closed...but I'm confident I can get them for much less then $4.00 each. If not, I'll just get the raw material and fab them myself.

I guess in retrospect the end plate price is not terrible as the other place quoted me $15 for just the raw HDPE cut to the raw rectangle shapes and nothing more. The $20.88 price included everything except tapping the holes.

Would reducing the divider plates to 1/2" HDPE be possible/wise? This would probably cut the price down by at least half for the 6 dividers - a fairly notable saving.

Thoughts?

Mark,
I'm afraid 1/2" is a no-go, but if you are extremely careful drilling and tapping the gas & equalizer holes, then 3/4" HDPE is just barely do-able with the 3/8"NPT fittings, but will leave you only 1/16" wall thickness at the fitting sites. Your option at this point (with 3/4" HDPE) is to drop down to 1/4"NPT fittings, but I worry that doing so will restrict gas flow. I can't remember reading anywhere on this issue in particular, but I would hate to steer you wrong.
If the cutters are going to drill the holes for you (still talking 3/4" HDPE and 3/8"NPT fittings here) the chances are that they can do a dead-on job of centering the holes on the plate edges, but the clearance issue still makes me nervous. My advice would be to save money by making the gaskets myself and getting the 1" HDPE cut & machined by them.
You nailed it on the head earlier in this thread with a phrase that I believe is from racing "Go big or go home". I would not like to be in a position to have to tell that to someone, but this stuff can get a little exspensive, especially jumping into a full sized high end system like you are. There is a silver lining though- you won't have to go to the exspense of a PWM for it.

koya1893

03-30-2011, 03:40 AM

BioFarmer93

03-30-2011, 05:33 AM

Hey Ben,
It wouldn't be a problem if it was the plate face, but Mark has to go in on the plate edges for the threaded fitting, then drill to meet that hole from the plate face with a half-depth hole for the unipolar design, because the 6 divider plates electrically isolate each group, so they have to have 2 sets of holes in them. One set feeds the cells on the right, one set feeds the cells on the left... The two end plates though can be straight in ala' regular style or done similar to the divider plates, but with all holes on the face coming out just one side.

Oshawapilot

03-30-2011, 02:56 PM

It wouldn't be a problem if it was the plate face, but Mark has to go in on the plate edges for the threaded fitting, then drill to meet that hole from the plate face with a half-depth hole for the unipolar design

Ok, I'm glad you mentioned this. On the designs I see the gas and electrolyte equalization holes in the divider plates but I hadn't looked closely enough to see what you explain above - the gas and electrolyte holes are actually on opposing sides of the divider plates and enter/exit via the EDGE of the plate.

It makes total sense now that I visualize it and I *do* see how you've visualized it on the plans, but it hadn't "clicked" until just now.

I'm guessing the waterjet place will not be able to fab these holes now since the waterjet can't cut to a predefined depth - it's all the way through, or nothing. I'll probably have to find someone with a drill press and do this myself.

I now understand why the divider plate thickness is a concern. I'll stick with the 1" for sure now.

I tried to source the gaskets from another location today. The raw material is cheap if I want to cut them myself, but getting them fabricated will still end up being about $75. Better, but still not great. The price comes down considerably if I order enough of the gaskets to make 2 of these kits, which (last I talked to Racer55) he was still interested in, but I'm waiting to confirm things further with him.

I think I'll email the waterjet place back and tell them that I'm happy with the price for the stainless but was hoping to see a better price on the rest of the materials, mainly the end plates. I suspect if I mention it may be a double order afterall (again, depending on Racer55's decision if he's in or out with this project) the prices may become more attractive as we are talking some quantity at that point.

racer55

04-01-2011, 01:04 PM

Still on board and following closely,still getting very few new post alerts though.
Looks like I will have to finish the instalation of my milling machine and get some needed tooling.

myoldyourgold

04-01-2011, 01:31 PM

To cut the size down you can go to 3/4 inch ends and dividers. Use 1/4 npt x 3/8 barbed fittings. You could also go smaller on the dividers and use smaller fittings with duel exit ports and hoses but it is more plumbing. 3/8 will work well with this setup. I do it all the time. You can run up to 6 lpm with no problems. Over that and you will need to add another exit port/ hose or go to 1". The only problem is the pressure because of the 3/8 hose when running 10 lpm will pump the electrolyte out of the reservoir and into your bubbler and on unless you have a large reservoir with lots of head room. (Not a good idea) You will not be needing 10 lpm so no problem using 3/8 hose.

Oshawapilot

04-01-2011, 03:54 PM

To cut the size down you can go to 3/4 inch ends and dividers. Use 1/4 npt x 3/8 barbed fittings. You could also go smaller on the dividers and use smaller fittings with duel exit ports and hoses but it is more plumbing.

Yeah, once I had the awakening to exactly how the "ducts" are formed in the sides of the dividers it immediately became evident to me why they are designed with 1" material.

Considering me and Racer will have to make these ducts ourselves (since they can't be made with the waterjet) all the more reason to have the extra thickness to work with.

Oshawapilot

04-04-2011, 05:06 PM

Still alive here, guys - just had one heck of a weekend working (repairing, rather) my truck. Trying to finalize pricing and order quantity - I just got a PM from a third person looking to go in on this order as well, so I'm hoping that quantity ordering may reduce the pricing further.

racer55

04-05-2011, 09:07 AM

Oshawapilot

04-05-2011, 09:23 AM

Any thoughts of how this would work on a first gen Duramax?
Any pitfalls to be aware of with those engines?

The order count may go up to 4 Mark,my neighbour is feeling the strain at the pumps and may have an interest if things are compatible.

Only issues I could see with the newer engines is the increased electronics - the 6.5 has no O2 sensor and such so no fooling is required, but a newer duramax would require an 02 sensor fooler (as I understand it) at the very least.

myoldyourgold

04-05-2011, 09:44 AM

In my experience I have found without reducing the amount of diesel being injected and replacing it with HHO you will not see significant gains. This too has a limit and to pass this limit you will need to try other things to get even better gains like negative ions/ozone etc. Remember diesels are a pretty efficient engines when comparing them with gas. If I am wrong I would sure like to hear about it. I am always looking for ways to increase efficiency. I have tried a lot of them and some do work. Of course if you are just looking for 20% that is possible on most if not all diesels with out to much trouble.

BioFarmer93

04-05-2011, 10:00 AM

EEeeewwwww! Electronics! LOL.. Let's see, I seem to recall that you must locate the O2 sensor wires, tap into them and monitor the output from cold start to full temp under load. Then you have to buy one of those little electronic gizmo's with the knob on it so you can modify the signal/voltage from that sensor to the computer so the computer doesn't notice the sweet taste of a little extra O2. Beyond that I'm lost, 'cause old diesels don't have any of that stuff- sorry:o

racer55

04-05-2011, 10:11 AM

If nothing else this proves there is always more to learn!
A quick search at DP and it doesn't seem as though the 1st gen dmax was equipped with an O2 sensor,more research seems to be in order.

myoldyourgold

04-05-2011, 10:21 AM

Gus, adjusting the O2 sensor in a Duramax will get you max 20% if that, at least in the one I played with for a while I couldn't get over 15%. You really have to change the timing and amount of fuel injected to get something over that. I did not have access to the vehicle long enough to complete my testing so it was really not a fare test. A friend left it with me for a couple days while he was away but needed it back as soon as he got back. I had to drive him to the airport and pick him up for the privilege of mucking with it. LOL Nice engine though. He lost his job and sold the truck so I am out of luck until I find another one to play with. LOL

Oshawapilot

04-12-2011, 08:31 AM

Ok, touching base. I have not forgotten about this nor is it off the table, but important info has come to light.

The engine that I specifically wanted to use this with is the GM 6.5 turbo diesel. This is an indirect injection diesel with some notorious weak spots that are best not abused. For every day use they are great, but when abused, problems rear their heads.

The big issue is that I keep coming across is detonation issues. Primarily people experimenting with propane injection on the 6.5 specifically always stated that detonation was the biggest challenge and often the propane feed had to be turned down significantly to solve the issue under some circumstances - primarily heavy and hard work - towing, for example.

My concern now is this - I'm guessing HHO on the 6.5 Is going to suffer the same issues with detonation, and I do NOT want to crack a piston or bend a rod in my engine.

With the propane kits one can simply dial-down the injection if/when detonation becomes an issue, but I can't necessarily see how that same thing would be easily accomplished with an HHO reactor, possibly on the roadside somewhere.

Thoughts on this issue?

racer55

04-12-2011, 08:33 AM

Staying tuned for the reaction of this scenario.
Pre-ignition is very bad for the Chev 6.5 turbo diesels that we wre considering the HHO for.

BioFarmer93

04-12-2011, 09:30 AM

Hey Mark,
The amount of propane being injected to enhance performance (6-8%) is huge in comparison to the amount of HHO you can possibly make & inject (<1%) to enhance efficiency. About the only things I can see causing detonation in your engine would be carbon build up or running some kind of fuel that had a lower compression ignition temperature than diesel. Propane has a higher heat ignition temp than diesel but if someone runs too much propane it can have the same effects as detonation. I'm pretty sure the GM 6.5 doesn't have a pre-cup like the old International 7.3 idi's do, and you're still pre split-shot injection also, so you're good to go.

racer55

04-12-2011, 02:25 PM

The GM 6.5TD does have a pre-combustion chamber,so we will probably have to be carefull with making HHO during the starting glow plug cycle.

Oshawapilot

04-12-2011, 04:29 PM

Hey Mark,
The amount of propane being injected to enhance performance (6-8%) is huge in comparison to the amount of HHO you can possibly make & inject (<1%) to enhance efficiency.

Ok, thanks.

I'm still leaning towards HHO (and honestly, am still intrigued by it) at this point, not to mention the reality that a propane system has a recurring bill to keep the propane tank full, whereas the HHO system does not have such.

All that said, a big road block for me at the moment with the HHO is the upfront cost. If I could get the cost down to the $400 range I could make it happen, but I have a figure of about $600 to $700 in my head right now by the time I'm done with everything including incidentals, and that's what has put the brakes on for me right now.

Unfortunately almost all of our tax return was spoken for with other commitments, and some of that money was what I had hoped to put towards this project.

I know we took the "go big or go home" approach with the plans so far and I anticipated that wouldn't be a problem at the time, but now, unfortunately, it is.

So, I'm at a crossroad, and I need to sleep on things for a bit.

BioFarmer93

04-12-2011, 04:36 PM

The GM 6.5TD does have a pre-combustion chamber,so we will probably have to be carefull with making HHO during the starting glow plug cycle.

OK, I wasn't sure if it did or not and I didn't take the time to look it up- now I know. As for HHO at start-up, not a good idea, just ask Lee. Wait till the old girl's rattling good before flipping the switch. To be fair, Lee's little snafu was from leftover, not initial gas. It's a good argument for turning the system off a couple minutes before shutting down, rather than at shutdown.

myoldyourgold

04-13-2011, 08:14 AM

In my Mercedes diesel (now on vacation LOL) I used a voltage switch so it does not come on until the engine is running and the switch sees at least 14 volts. The new alternator I put on a couple of years ago puts out 14.2 at idle with everything on. That messed up my turning off at idle setup. I had to instal a RPM switch to control the off at idle so really didn't need the voltage switch any more. With low volumes of HHO there was no problem with the heaters igniting the HHO. It was to diluted I am assuming but when I increased the volume of HHO I did not take the chance and started using the voltage switch and later the RPM switch.

racer55

04-13-2011, 08:55 AM

For what it's worth I called BIll Heath @ Heath Diesel (the foremost authority on these engines)this mourning and had a long conversation about the GM 6.5TD.

I called to enquire about a propane kit they offered at one time and although it worked well it was discontinued because people would circumvent the safety features that were built in and damage thier engines-then blame the kit,that and when set up properly the fuel savings were offset by propane costs.Power boost was good though.

His experience and advice was to stay far away from propane and HHO-any fuel source introduced pre-combustion chamber is harmfull.
These engines were not designed to survive the pre-ignition that can be involved under certain conditions.

The advice given was to go only with water injection-you get cooler egt's and the combustion temperature of 3000+ degrees actually creats HHO in the cylinder not unlike the way nitrous oxide works.

His kit was designed to use tap water at a flow rate equal to the fuel consumption.60 gallon fuel tank-60gallon water tank.

That is much higher than other kits propose using but the R+D done proved it the best soloution and beyond cooler EGT's adds 1-3 mpg on average depending on the load.

Bill even put the kybosch on the after cooler I intended to install.Air flow restriction that is preset on the heat exchanger is detrimental for these engines.

So I guess the point is that these 6.5TD's can generate HHO internally and that is the safest way to do it.Economical too!

myoldyourgold

04-13-2011, 09:27 AM

racer55

04-13-2011, 09:42 AM

I agree completely with you,and with Bill.

The balancing act is the part that makes me shy away from the HHO project at this time on my engine.
I am not in a position to make the investment and then go too far-as is the common problem when there is a power gain as well.

Some is good,more must be better right?Like the propane kit Bill offered.

Bills sentiment that the 6.5TD is nowhere near robust enough to get it wrong,even for a short time makes me inclined to live with the smaller return on mileage with WMI(still need to talk more about the alcohol/methanol aspect).

I really appreciate the effort and education you folks have provided in this thread and will very likely pursue the project when I do grenade my engine and do a 12 valve cummins swap down the road.
The cummins can handle the HHO much better.

Thank you again untill I revisit this project at a later date.

b1jetmech

04-17-2011, 09:01 AM

Hi everyone,

Been a while since I posted but I don't want to sound like I'm hijacking this thread.

I just got done with 6.5 conversion to my 94' Suburban(which was a 350 engine) The mileage gains were noticeable right away. 11mpg with the 350 to 21 with the 6.5.

Now I want to go further by installing a hydrogen generator puts out 3LPM.

I just caught up with the reading of using HHO on an IDI diesel on this thread and I want to add that I had good luck with an old 7.3 IDI Ford with HHO. However I sold the truck off right away, It ran much quieter and very smoooooth....

Now that I have a chevy 6.5 I'm hoping for some gains as well.

I believe if there is any negative cause-and-effect on using HHO in an IDI diesel it might be due to the fact Diesel is a slower burning fuel when HHO is fast burn. Gasoline is faster burning and has good results with HHO (OBD1 computer of course) but if there is an issue that arises with using HHO on an IDI diesel then adjustments do have to be made.

For instance retarding timing on a diesel so it may fire later preventing pre-ignition (if it happens) problem is the risk of hard starts.

Another that you all touched on is turning the fuel down. I need to turn the fuel up on mine because it is seriously lacking...lack of any smoke proves it;)

So when I get mine done I let everyone know right away what kind of results(if any). But really I'm optimistic about this.

Chase

racer55

04-17-2011, 09:12 AM

No smoke from a 6.5 is a good thing,they do not respond well to smoke-it's unburned fuel and will melt a 6.5 down in very short order.

Unless changed to a mechanical IP your 94 will have an electronic Ip so turning it up is not an option-a reprogrammed chip in the ECM is required to change the fuel map,timing ect.

Your point about retarding the timing on a diesel has me confused,if HHO is fast burning and diesel is slow burning how would injecting later help with pre-ignition?
A later timing event would add the slow burning fuel even later in the power stroke and make the diesel burn later as well as increase engine heat?

Would the HHO not ignite at the same time regardless of injection timing if it was being fired by compression heat alone.

Water injection as a supplement might help reduce pre-ignition by cooling the air charge and delaying the rise in cylinder temps during compression?

Oshawapilot

04-17-2011, 09:21 AM

Another that you all touched on is turning the fuel down. I need to turn the fuel up on mine because it is seriously lacking...lack of any smoke proves it;)

A properly running diesel engine should not smoke.

Smoke is unburned fuel. If you're trying to increase your fuel mileage, and then dumping all sorts of black smoke out the back end, you might as well be pouring diesel on the ground next to the tailpipe. It's very counterproductive to what you're trying to accomplish here. NO smoke = best fuel mileage.

That aside, black smoke on a 6.5 is a recipe for disaster. They do NOT handle it well.

You may want to read my FAQ on the matter at my other home, DieselPlace. You can the thread specifically here:

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=389251

Anyhow, I wanted to come back and touch base in this thread as well. As Racer mentioned, based on what has come to light, we have decided to put the brakes on this project.

The 6.5 is even more susceptible to rapid and extreme damage to detonation than I had even initially realized, and upon a lot of digging I was able to find a few stories of people who grenaded their 6.5's by using HHO. Those who did have "success" with it were noticing marginal MPG increases at best due directly to the fact that they had to turn the HHO system down so drastically to reduce detonation/pinging that it was loosing it's ability to be effective.

Unfortuately, I'm not willing to risk my engine, now knowing that it and HHO (and propane) can be a bad combination, for a MPG increase. It would be very easy to get upside down from a financial standpoint really quick if something blows up.

I'd like to say THANKS THANKS THANKS for everything we've shared here so far. I promise you when the day arrives that I move up to a Duramax I will be back to continue this project. Apparently HHO and the Duramax are indeed a match made in heaven.

Oshawapilot

04-17-2011, 09:23 AM

No smoke from a 6.5 is a good thing,they do not respond well to smoke-it's unburned fuel and will melt a 6.5 down in very short order.

Looks like we were replying at the same time, Steve. :)

b1jetmech

04-17-2011, 09:37 AM

Oh Yes I'm well aware smoke is BAD especially from the 6.5, my problem is it runs out of rpms at 2500 so when getting on the highway and it's at 55 in 3rd FLOORED then upshift to 4th to gain speed is where the short comings are it's either lacking fuel or the IP is going.

Like to add...the 6.5 I'm using is a 94' model out of a G20 van. It is mech pump and non turbo.

The generator I'm using is 10" x 10" with 6 neutrals. Only puts 2.7 LPM at 30 amps but 11 amps a liter is good for me. If 6.5 needs just 1 lpm that will be great but I have to experiment with this because were building a unit for a semi truck and my burn is the guinea pig.

racer55

04-17-2011, 09:39 AM

Ok turning up the IP is an option for you.

b1jetmech

04-17-2011, 09:42 AM

Your point about retarding the timing on a diesel has me confused,if HHO is fast burning and diesel is slow burning how would injecting later help with pre-ignition?
A later timing event would add the slow burning fuel even later in the power stroke and make the diesel burn later as well as increase engine heat?

Would the HHO not ignite at the same time regardless of injection timing if it was being fired by compression heat alone.

It just a theory of mine that need to try out. The reason I mentioned this is when timing is retarded the fuel injects later which combusts later. Retarded timing will allow the HHO to combust later when the piston has traveled further up and the HHO induced combustion won't hammer the piston.

Hopefully the generator will be on in a few days so I can try some of this out. Got everything I need just, need more room with the 10x10 generator. because this is like stuff'n a turkey.

b1jetmech

04-17-2011, 09:48 AM

A properly running diesel engine should not The 6.5 is even more susceptible to rapid and extreme damage to detonation than I had even initially realized, and upon a lot of digging I was able to find a few stories of people who grenaded their 6.5's by using HHO. Those who did have "success" with it were noticing marginal MPG increases at best due directly to the fact that they had to turn the HHO system down so drastically to reduce detonation/pinging that it was loosing it's ability to be effective.

Here is the conversion of the 6.5

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=414585

Like I said to racer, I will be experimenting with this so if everything goes well I will let you know ASAP. If the 6.5 grenades on me then I got a 6.2 for back up.

racer55

04-17-2011, 09:52 AM

b1jetmech

04-17-2011, 10:00 AM

I think your theory has a flaw,pre-ignition happens when the octane of the fuel cannot withstand the heat in the cylinder and spontaneously combusts.
The HHO is the culprit here since under compression the cylinder temps skyrocket and the HHO will ignite prematurely.
A diesel is compression ignition engine,the injection timing determines when the fuel ignites simply by only supplying fuel at the correct time,the ignition temp has already been reached in the cylinder.

Retarding the ignition timing will not help with pre-ignition since the HHO is allowed to ignite independant of diesel being present,retarded timing will actually make things worse by making the engine temp hotter.

That is correct. Where I'm coming from is when HHO is introduced, the flame speed is increased thus less exposure of combustion which translate into more mechanical energy. If retarding the timing on an IDI diesel results in higher temps then HHO could lower the temps by increasing flame speed.

Ultimately like you said, the diesels ignition is set by the compression and there is very little wiggle room for time of combustion but if the combustion is cooled by adding HHO then the lowered temperature offers a later ignition...it's worth a try...gotta try it because I'll go crazy theorizing the rest of the my life of what could'a...would'a...should'a scenario.

Ignition timing is easier on a gas engine because the spark sets it off. Diesels have less room for timing of ignition.

Well I will be starting this in a few days so we'll see what happens.

racer55

04-17-2011, 10:10 AM

Good to know,please let us in on your results.

From what I understood the ratio of HHO generation to engine displacement was 1 liter per liter of displacement so a 6.5 would need 6.5 liters HHO.
Your system might be a great starting point to check on pre-ignition though.

myoldyourgold

04-17-2011, 11:08 AM

Gentlemen, there is one thing to consider and that is your HHO is diluted with air so much by the time it gets to the precombustion chamber, a match/heaters will not light it unless you are injecting huge amounts of HHO. This is where the amount of air to HHO is as important as HHO to diesel is. When I inject more HHO I crank up the turbo to keep it diluted, cut back the fuel and retard the injection timing just a tad. To much retard and the suckers will not start or run properly without HHO. You need to at least be able to start and limp back to be able to repair the HHO system. Slowing down the burn rate of the HHO is the key. Once you get it all dialed in you will find the sweet spot just like any other method of tuning. Remember there is no HHO at start if the system is wired right only after the engine has started so there should be no worries as far as heaters go anyway. You need to treat HHO like starting fluid. Not good with glow plugs unless it is diluted or very little.

For the novice some basic diesel information:

http://vegburner.co.uk/dieselengine.html

BioFarmer93

04-17-2011, 04:22 PM

Carter, thank you... I scrolled down with intent to respond and saw that you had already set the issue straight. Racer- even at 1 liter per liter per minute the amount necessary for self ignition (~4%) is not available. HHO doesn't cause pre-ignition, it actually needs the ignition of the diesel fuel. However- once ignited the flame front travels many many times faster than the flame front of a diesel fuel mist flame front and ignites more areas of the mist simultaneously, which imparts a higher specific impulse and more complete burn. What you feel is more power, less dieselstink and the low back pain that comes from sitting slightly to one side because your wallet is a little thicker:D As Carter said, the 6.5's issue with the picky timing caused by adding HHO can be mitigated with water injection, which is going to clean carbon and boost mileage also.... Just something to think about.

racer55

04-17-2011, 04:42 PM

Well if nothing else you guys sure provide an education!
I am still sitting on the fence,partly because of finances and partly because of fear of not having the finances to make repairs if things go south.

billyba

04-23-2011, 01:17 PM

I'm not sure if I should start a new post or not.
I read this thread and my head is spinning. I myself have a '96 F-250, 7.3 powerstroke with 260,000 miles on it. It is a work truck, and I tow sometimes a 6x12 loaded with tools or a 30' travel trailer with it. Just driving around I get 15-16 mpg towing the trailers 9-10 mpg.I saw a site "mileage.com"They say that no PWM is needed with there system.Is this a load of cr@p or what? Can one or more of you gentlemen enlighten me on this subject? I'm so lost and my head is so far up my butt I can't see the light of day!!!

BioFarmer93

04-23-2011, 04:44 PM

Hey Bill,
Welcome to the forum. I was going to take a look at the unit you noted and I tried to go to the site as you listed it but I got one of those generic multi-listing things that doesn't seem to have anything to do with what you are looking for.. If designed properly for the task, it is entirely possible to have an HHO reactor that doesn't need a PWM.

-Oh, and yes- Please start a thread for yourself... We can't be mixing the 7.3's and 6.2's- it just wouldn't be proper now would it??LOL!

billyba

04-24-2011, 01:52 PM

Sorry I took so long to get back but last night ( I live in Sherman Tx ) we had tornado warnings and we had to jam over to wally world. Luckily we only had some busted tree branches to show for it. Then today is Easter Sunday so.....
Anyway my bad on the website info, it's "mileageshop.com" not mileage.com. Some peoples kids, huh. Anyway I will start a new thread and I hope you will be able to enlighten me on this!

billyba

04-24-2011, 01:59 PM

Heeelp I can't find the new thread button? I told you I was new

Bazarommcmullen

04-24-2011, 05:42 PM

I have not abandoned this thread or the idea of building bio farmers cell. I have been traveling alot and am still awaiting my plates to be laser cut. Since then I have machined and drilled and tapped all 8 bulkheads using .75 UHMW. My resovoir will be made out of a 2 Gal water container with a nice 4" screw on jar lid. I also am about 90% finished wiht my bubbler using 3" Poly Carbonate tube. All of my gaskets are cut out of Rubber Roofing material. Progress has been slow and steady. I also have been working on a custom PWM Module. I am looking at building a PWM capable of delivering 100+ amps from scratch. I have built a timing circutit using a 555 timer with a pot as a voltage divider. The circuit should ocsilate arund 144KHz. I am now in the process of building a parrallell mosfet bridge for the power delivery. I should have a nice picture by picture totorial after I am finished.

BioFarmer93

04-25-2011, 04:17 AM

Hey Baz,
The 100A PWM kinda made my ears perk up a little... If you wouldn't mind after you smoke test it, putting the schematic w/ components chosen & values up here so others can build it also? I don't recall anyone here homebrewing one with that capacity before. I'm looking forward to some photos & performance results on that bad boy...

Bazarommcmullen

04-25-2011, 04:06 PM

Well I keep working on it. And you are right. All good things run on smoke. And when you let all the smoke out they no longer run. I am working on gathering components and begin testing but I have been on the road going on 4 weeks now so it is difficult to get anything acomplished in airports and hotel rooms. Anyway I make a little head way each weekend. There are always stepping stones. And then there are always dreams.

BioFarmer93

04-26-2011, 02:31 AM

There are always stepping stones. And then there are always dreams.

Indeed, and without either we would most certainly be lost. As my buddy Glenn says, "Jes keep peckin away at it."

dixiepc

02-20-2012, 11:09 PM

I want to bring this thread back to life as it is almost exactly what I want to do.

I have a fully mechanical naturally aspirated 6.2L diesel in a 1992 Suburban.

Gus, would you offer me the same thing that you offered Oshawapilot at the beginning of this thread in designing me a system for my Suburban.

I need to make a mininum of 6 lpm with a unipolar cell. I am not going to be limited to 60 amps as Mark was, I will upgrade the alternator to whatever is needed.

I know that a unipolar cell is going to be more involved to build but I'm up to the task.

I have not firmly grasped how to figure the amps for a unipolar design. I also am not sure if I need a positive and a negitive bubbler.

Gus, as far as the bubblers go, one of your post seemed to negate the need for the two bubblers. Can you explain?

I have stated in another thread that I intend to build a quality cell, I just don't have the finances to experiment.

I would like to put this under the hood or behind the bumper. As I am working on a custom bumper design I might could incorporate something there.

Thanks for all the help.