Gas consumption idea??

[BoyntonStu]

Gas consumption idea??

A fuel pump pulses, correct?

Set your speed at 60 MPH.

Count the pulses for 5 minutes.

Turn on cell.

Count again for 5 minutes.

Is this feasible?

BoyntonStu

[mario brito]

A fuel pump pulses, correct?


BoyntonStu

please explain that "pulsing", i don't understand :(

thanks

[BoyntonStu]

please explain that "pulsing", i don't understand :(

thanks

Good question.

As I understand it, a fuel pump receives power from the battery in pulses controlled by the car computer.

Each pulse causes the fuel pump to push a tiny bit of fuel.

Think of a pulse as a squeeze on a spray bottle.

Each push sprays a little bit of fluid.

If I counted your trigger pulls, I could tell how much was pumped.

I may not be correct about the operation of a fuel pump.

It is only how I think they work.

However, if I am correct, it might be a way to measure relative MPG.

For example: Drive 5 minutes and count 2,600 pulses. (just guessing).

Turn on Hydroxy and count again for 5 minutes.

If the count would be 2,000 pulses, the % increase in MPG would be 600/2600 * 100 or a 23% increase.

Thanks for asking.

I hope that I helped.

BoyntonStu

[HYDROTEKPRO]

The heart pulses, or more correctly it pumps the blood through the body.

[mario brito]

Good question.

As I understand it, a fuel pump receives power from the battery in pulses controlled by the car computer.

Each pulse causes the fuel pump to push a tiny bit of fuel.

Think of a pulse as a squeeze on a spray bottle.

Each push sprays a little bit of fluid.

If I counted your trigger pulls, I could tell how much was pumped.

I may not be correct about the operation of a fuel pump.

It is only how I think they work.

However, if I am correct, it might be a way to measure relative MPG.

For example: Drive 5 minutes and count 2,600 pulses. (just guessing).

Turn on Hydroxy and count again for 5 minutes.

If the count would be 2,000 pulses, the % increase in MPG would be 600/2600 * 100 or a 23% increase.

Thanks for asking.

I hope that I helped.

BoyntonStu

ok, now i understand. i'm not sure if that could work. as far as i understand, the fuel pump is nothing more then an electric motor that puts fuel under pressure in to a chamber, that connects to the fuel injectors. when the fuel injector gets the signal from the car's cpu, it opens for an "x" amount of time, and the fuel enters the combustion chamber. so, maybe the fuel pump doesn't "pulse", but simply accelerates to keep the same pressure when more fuel is needed. that means that you cannot only measure the "pulsing" frequency, but also the duration of that "pulse".
also, lets say that the fuel pump is providing the exact same fuel that the engine needs. you would not get any pulse, because the fuel pump would be at a constant rpm.

i'm no mechanic, so, i could be very wrong about this.

anyway, i believe there's better ways to do that kind of measuring. and the best still is to put same amount of fuel, and get more MPG.

if i would need to measure fuel pump "pulsing" to be able to see if i'm saving fuel, then i would give up, because that would mean that i'm getting very low fuel savings.

thanks

[BoyntonStu]

The heart pulses, or more correctly it pumps the blood through the body.

I agree.

However, your heart muscle will not pump until your brain computer sends it an electrical pulse.

BoyntonStu

[Phantom240]

A fuel pump does not 'pulse'. It is a pump just like the water pump in your car, but driven by electricity rather than a belt. It pumps fuel from your tank to a fuel rail (or carburetor bowl), where your injectors are plumbed up to (unless you're carbureted) and the signal from the ECU tells the injectors when they fire. The fuel pump maintains a constant speed, and pressure, and the Fuel Pressure Regulator (which is controlled by vacuum)... well its self explanatory.

[HYDROTEKPRO]

A nice, exact, accurate answer. PERFECTO!!

[Phantom240]

The only way I could think of to measure fuel consumption in real time would be kinda like Mythbusters did with a flow meter on the fuel lines. I can't recall if it was the return or the pressure line... but I would assume it was the return, as the pump will be flowing a pretty steady amount of fuel, whereas the return line will vary by consumption.

This is pure speculation though

[mario brito]

this pulsing fuel pump idea reminded me of a story i heard about nasa :

nasa spent a few millions dollars inventing a pen that could work in the absence of gravity... Russians kept using a pencil :D

no, i do not know if it's true, but you get the point :)

[JojoJaro]

On Diesels, the fuel pump (AKA Lift Pump) delivers the maximum fuel rate the engine could possibly need all the time. The IP (sometimes AKA High Pressure Pump) regulates the fuel flow to the injectors and returns the excess. The injectors themselves also return the extra fuel it does not need. (I suspect this is true for fuel-injected gas engines also. For carb engines, I don't know.)

To accurately measure fuel consumption in all conditions, you need to measure the feed flow and subtract the return flow. If your flow meters are accurate, you should get a steady-state fuel rate consumption. Instantaneous fuel rate consumption might still be a little tricky since it takes a little lag for the return flow to keep up with fuel consumption.

On the other hand, vehicles with OBDII already has many of this information. You can retrieve this info and calculate you instataneous MPG. This is how a ScanGauge works.

[Phantom240]

On Diesels, the fuel pump (AKA Lift Pump) delivers the maximum fuel rate the engine could possibly need all the time. The IP (sometimes AKA High Pressure Pump) regulates the fuel flow to the injectors and returns the excess. The injectors themselves also return the extra fuel it does not need. (I suspect this is true for fuel-injected gas engines also. For carb engines, I don't know.)

To accurately measure fuel consumption in all conditions, you need to measure the feed flow and subtract the return flow. If your flow meters are accurate, you should get a steady-state fuel rate consumption. Instantaneous fuel rate consumption might still be a little tricky since it takes a little lag for the return flow to keep up with fuel consumption.

On the other hand, vehicles with OBDII already has many of this information. You can retrieve this info and calculate you instataneous MPG. This is how a ScanGauge works.

Well in a carburetor, you have a bowl where fuel is kept as it is siphoned into the motor, and though the fuel pump constantly feeds it, it doesn't overflow because it has a float like a toilet. When the float is up, the fuel bypasses the bowl. As the engine consumes the fuel in the bowl, the float goes down, and lets fuel back into the bowl.

[scribs212]

I just bought one of these, its a scanguage II, they're amazing for watching your fuel consumption and monitering all other engine paramiters. You can use it to read fuel mileage, as a trip odometer, cleanmpg.com is a great websight for all kinds of gas saving techniques that is user implimented(meaning controlling your foot). Hypermiling is amazing.

http://www.scangauge.com/

[jimbo40]

You just like to hear yourself talk or what?:rolleyes:
Thanks again BoyntonStu

[BoyntonStu]

On Diesels, the fuel pump (AKA Lift Pump) delivers the maximum fuel rate the engine could possibly need all the time. The IP (sometimes AKA High Pressure Pump) regulates the fuel flow to the injectors and returns the excess. The injectors themselves also return the extra fuel it does not need. (I suspect this is true for fuel-injected gas engines also. For carb engines, I don't know.)

To accurately measure fuel consumption in all conditions, you need to measure the feed flow and subtract the return flow. If your flow meters are accurate, you should get a steady-state fuel rate consumption. Instantaneous fuel rate consumption might still be a little tricky since it takes a little lag for the return flow to keep up with fuel consumption.

On the other hand, vehicles with OBDII already has many of this information. You can retrieve this info and calculate you instataneous MPG. This is how a ScanGauge works.

Excellent information, thanks.

I was thinking out loud hoping for your response and explanation.

I never knew about the return gas.

Do you believe that the instant MPG gauge built into a car is accurate enough for the 10 mile test?

Is the ScanGauge any more accurate that the built in MPG gauge?

BoyntonStu

[timetowinarace]

In my opinion, if you want accurate fuel consumption rates, you have to use weight rather than volume. You have to bypass the stock fuel tank and use one you can remove and weigh. Not practical for most testers.

Electronics like the scangauge will give decent guesses on a short run. But anything other than the method above on a short run will be inaccurate. Even for the electronics, short run results are useless. Use a monthly average.

[BoyntonStu]

In my opinion, if you want accurate fuel consumption rates, you have to use weight rather than volume. You have to bypass the stock fuel tank and use one you can remove and weigh. Not practical for most testers.

Electronics like the scangauge will give decent guesses on a short run. But anything other than the method above on a short run will be inaccurate. Even for the electronics, short run results are useless. Use a monthly average.

Darn!

Wouldn't it be nice to be able to drive down the road diddling the controls for max MPG?

In my car there is an instant MPG gauge.

When I am driving with cruise control set at 65 and getting 29 MPG, when I begin to go uphill, the MPG instantaneously drops to about 22 MPG or so.

If I turn the cruise control off and coast uphill, the MPG will go even higher than 29 as the car slows down.

Wouldn't this information be useful for testing the Hydroxy effect?

BoyntonStu

[scirockett]

In my opinion, if you want accurate fuel consumption rates, you have to use weight rather than volume. You have to bypass the stock fuel tank and use one you can remove and weigh. Not practical for most testers.

Electronics like the scangauge will give decent guesses on a short run. But anything other than the method above on a short run will be inaccurate. Even for the electronics, short run results are useless. Use a monthly average.

Bingo. I'll second all of the above.

A carb'd motor is the only gas setup where an inline flow meter will be anything close to "accurate".. plus, watching friends burn thru 150 gal of fuel in their boat and find their fuel flow meter 10-15 gallons of is not assuring at all.. Since fuel injected motors will return fuel to the tank, the only other thing I thought about was rigging a seperate measurable tank, fuel pump, and accumulator in the cabin to monitor fuel consumption. otherwise weight is the only option.

code readers link scangauge are not close to accurate and cannot be used for this kind of testing. on the otherhand, stand alone setups can more accurately measure fuel.. the problem for BOTH is that is what the computer THINKS is being delivered. MANY little things can effect this: condition of the injectors, exact pressure maintained by the FPR, vac/boost or lack there of on rising rate regulators, etc.. So ECU assumtions may be helpful, but surely can't be used for consumption calculations..

[Smith03Jetta]

Darn!
BoyntonStu

See my thread for additional comments!

[wrxdrvr]

In my opinion, if you want accurate fuel consumption rates, you have to use weight rather than volume. You have to bypass the stock fuel tank and use one you can remove and weigh. Not practical for most testers.

Electronics like the scangauge will give decent guesses on a short run. But anything other than the method above on a short run will be inaccurate. Even for the electronics, short run results are useless. Use a monthly average.

I have had my ScanGauge for 3 1/2 years now and can say without a doubt that it is accurate and precise. Once you set it up with the info that conforms with your vehicle and + - % of how much actual gas you put into tank. Yes monthly numbers are more accurate as for average MPG but for the highest MPG testing for highway driving, or average MPG on that tank, the ScanGauge is as accurate as it gets. :) Once I have set up the ScanGauge By filling the tank up to the top, where I can see the gas and can't put in any more, I ran it to empty and filled it up again... It was 56.1L out of 56.0L that the ScanGauge said it should take. :cool:

[BoyntonStu]

I have had my ScanGauge for 3 1/2 years now and can say without a doubt that it is accurate and precise. Once you set it up with the info that conforms with your vehicle and + - % of how much actual gas you put into tank. Yes monthly numbers are more accurate as for average MPG but for the highest MPG testing for highway driving, or average MPG on that tank, the ScanGauge is as accurate as it gets. :) Once I have set up the ScanGauge By filling the tank up to the top, where I can see the gas and can't put in any more, I ran it to empty and filled it up again... It was 56.1L out of 56.0L that the ScanGauge said it should take. :cool:

That is great information, thanks.

Have you ever done instantaneous test down the highway with Hydroxy ON/OFF?

BoyntonStu

[wrxdrvr]

That is great information, thanks.

Have you ever done instantaneous test down the highway with Hydroxy ON/OFF?

BoyntonStu

No, I just found out about this HHO thing and decided to join. I was/am using Acetone as a gas mileage improver which works too, but I am intrigued with the HHO so I am here to learn...

EDIT; And yes, it's great to see instant MPGs to see what you are doing is working or not...