Hydrogen or HHO mileage increaser mods

Forums › Off topic › Hydrogen or HHO mileage increaser mods

HFCtech

5 posts

Wannabe Geek

#23054 16-Jun-2008 16:01

I are currnetly researching add ons and mods for standard injected and carbed engines involving a HHO producing cell. Has anyone here tried these methods with any mileage increase? There are plenty of kits available and plenty of plans to build your own but all seem to have mixed results.

gulfa

321 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#138471 16-Jun-2008 17:30

also interested Have details and plans

sleemanj

1490 posts

Uber Geek

#138589 17-Jun-2008 00:19

"Lisa! In this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"

http://aardvark.co.nz/hho.shtml

---
James Sleeman
I sell lots of stuff for electronic enthusiasts...

LennonNZ

2459 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#138601 17-Jun-2008 06:12

Water + Baking Soda + 12V Electrolysis connected to your car battery with Stainless Steel Anodes and Cathodes = Lots of Hydrogen which burns..

Please give me your millions instead of all the other scammers who are trying to sell you free energy. I can promise you 100% it won't work

<--- If you want to loose your money otherwise then click on one of these Google Ads on the left hand side of the screen.

BobW

90 posts

Master Geek

#138625 17-Jun-2008 08:53

Why not discard the petrol and just use water?

The latest claim for using water as a fuel comes from a Japanese company called Genepax. Their claim has been widely discussed over the last few days. See, for example, http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english/NEWS_EN/20080613/153276/

Of course, the Genepax engine is just the latest in a long line of such claims. It is a pity that none of them actually work.
Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genepax

electrik

17 posts

Geek

#140116 24-Jun-2008 10:12

Best tips to save fuel- drive slower, run your tyres at higher pressure, and change your air filter with a new OEM factory one. You can remove your catalytic convertor if it's an old car.

Especially in an old Jap import like mine, the cat was clogged up anyway, and the engine runs with more power and less "drag" once it was removed. I change the air filter regularly with a factory toyota one (not dodgy 3rd party one) and have removed the muffler on the intake. Tyres are run at 36 at the front and 32 at the rear.

Combine this with gentle driving and fuel economy has noticeably improved. However it's still painful at the pump... Luckily I can take the bus to work!

Mark

1653 posts

Uber Geek

#140138 24-Jun-2008 11:55

electrik:... run your tyres at higher pressure, .... You can remove your catalytic convertor if it's an old car.

Ummm .. I agree with some of your statements, but the two above .. Nope!

Putting up the pressure in the tires is a no-no, you'll end up with less surface area of the tyre touching the ground which yes does result in less drag, but also has the nasty side effect of less grip, which in turn can mean more views of the bottom of ditches, inversed scenery, screaming, fire and death :-)

Also removing the catalytic converter will give you some power back, but also has the side effect of not converting some of the nasty emmissions to something less nasty, which results in choking, cancer and death ... :-)\

So don;t do both of those ... do however keep the car well serviced (from a decent service center .. having people who know what they are doing makes a difference)

Regards

Mark

idlearts

85 posts

Master Geek

#140142 24-Jun-2008 12:08

I'd venture a guess and say that HHO gas would just decrease the effiecency of ignition, requiring more petrol to produce the same output, case may be different if it where just pure H.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

idlearts

85 posts

Master Geek

#140145 24-Jun-2008 12:16

Mark:
electrik:... run your tyres at higher pressure, .... You can remove your catalytic convertor if it's an old car.

Also removing the catalytic converter will give you some power back, but also has the side effect of not converting some of the nasty emmissions to something less nasty, which results in choking, cancer and death ... :-)\

Regards

Mark

don't think removing the catalytic converter on cars older than 5 year would increase the health risk, they only work for a couple of years before they're supposed to be replaced and as we don't have any emmission standards, most of the cars on the road are bunging up their exhaust with defunct catalytic converters, pumping out all that lovely benzine, frankly I'd prefer lead, I'd much rather be mad as a hatter than cripled with cancer.

electrik

17 posts

Geek

#140168 24-Jun-2008 13:44

Putting up the pressure in the tires is a no-no, you'll end up with less surface area of the tyre touching the ground which yes does result in less drag, but also has the nasty side effect of less grip,

Correct pressure will stop the tyre deforming where it meets the road, underinflated tyres definitely hurt fuel consumption. I guess what I'm trying to say is slightly overinflated rather than slightly underinflated is a good rule of thumb, most people run them too flat IMHO.

Also removing the catalytic converter will give you some power back, but also has the side effect of not converting some of the nasty emmissions to something less nasty, which results in choking, cancer and death ... :-)\

Bah, my 1972 mini had no catalytcic convertor, as did most cars on the roads in the 80s. Modern fuel injected engines burn pretty clean anyhow...

Adamal

544 posts

Ultimate Geek

#140552 25-Jun-2008 19:04

In short, it takes more energy to produce hydrogen from water than it produces when being combusted.
If you were to use a system which stored hydrogen in a tank however, then you would see results, however, you would either need to:

A) Only use a small mix, as the ECU of an EFI car can only lean out the air to fuel ratio to a certain extend. There are no sensors in place for an external fuel source.

Or

B) Get an aftermarket ECU, and then you're talking about $1000 minimum, plus tuning etc to get it running right.

AmooMan

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#140558 25-Jun-2008 19:21

I have been following this topic for the last 8 months..

Very interesting stuff !!

Check out the following people on YouTue..

madscientist67 <---- Very Good

Fusion8r <---- Cold Fusion anyone?

ammanninox <---- Great designs

johnaarons <------ With Over 300 Videos !! I think this guy is on to something

OriginalUncleNemo <---- Very Good

ZeroFossilFuel <---- Very Good

sirHOAX <---- Very Good

mdbreedi

Fraktul

836 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#140571 25-Jun-2008 20:13

When it comes down do it the claims are either:

- The additional hydrogen fuel (and additional oxygen if the system calls for not filtering this out prior) burnt provides greater post combustion pressures and hence mechanical output from the engine. As people point out the energy required to generate the hydrogen in the first place far exceeds the additional power output. Hence some of the advocates for HHO suggest -

- HHO increases the combustion efficiency. As far as I can see the only way this would be accomplished is by decreasing the petrol droplet size (increased vaporisation) to ensure more complete combustion. However, modern fuel injection already does this very well; the amount of unburnt fuel from a modern fuel injected car engine in a state of good repair is very small.

Older carburetted engines often saw significant increases to power output by carburettor modifications or after market carburettors which would improve the fuel vaporisation amongst other things resulting in an increase in the % of fuel actually burnt. When you see a lot of these tests being run they are often on older non fuel injected vehicles without ECUs; rational being that adding additional fuel into the intake manifold will confuse the ECUs (rightly so). I guess it might be possible that given the relatively small draw of most of these devices that the additional hydrogen into the intake manifold and possible increase in the conventional fuel vaporisation is offsetting this.

Point is that even if this was the case, who cares? You have increased the fuel efficiency of your older car. This is not going to help all those fuel injected cars out there, only the rapidly shrinking number of older non fuel injected vehicles in daily use.

If you must keep your classic car and dont mind trying it out then by all means do so. Everyone else? Keep praying for those developments in battery technology to come about. Lower cost, high energy density batteries will make hybrid and pure electric vehicles more viable.

Fully battery powered vehicles compared to conventional vehicles mean that you are still burning fuel (although less with regenerative breaking) – however it is now being burnt in a electrical generation power plant which are typically quite a bit more efficient than even the best ICE…You are also not carting round your source of fuel everywhere in tankers to distribute it.

Electric engines also have good efficiency and power output across a range of RPMs, meaning nice torque from the get go – you might even be able to keep up with old gas guzzler Tony :)

Finally compared to bio fuels you are not having to compete with food crops, first gen bio fuels are a raw deal for consumer food prices.

AmooMan

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#140585 25-Jun-2008 20:55

Nice post Fraktul...

I agree with 80% of your post there..

Yes Electric engines are great !! I want one now !! :)

Yes bio fuels will likely bring the deaths of thousands of people, from the lack of basic food crop farming area.

The ECU's on fuel injected vehicles can be bypassed with making your own signal trasmiter.

Have a look at some of my links in my last post..

The only reason people are working on HHO cells is because its taking to look for Electric cars to become mass market.

Adamal

544 posts

Ultimate Geek

#140602 25-Jun-2008 22:14

I think if we play it smart, then biofuels won't require land that can be used for growing crops.
Take Air New Zealand for example. Their answer is to use a crop to product biofuel which can be grown in even the harshest conditions, places where you would never be able to grow food related crops.
Thats the sort of thinking we need to be using.

Also, using a signal transmitter or something like that is not wise, and will likely cause damage to your engine.
Fuel is not fed to the engine depending on the amount of revs its pulling, but is also dependant on the load. A fuel map is a very strange thing to the untrained eye and complicates things due to adding a third axis.

A factory ECU has a very limited ability to change its fuel map, due to its sensors. It is either MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure) or AFM (Air Flow Meter) sensored. MAP works by detecting the pressure or vacuum in the intake, which the AFM works out how much air is flowing into the intake.
Either system works in conjunction with an oxygen sensor, which is in the exhaust. This detects how much oxygen there is in the remaining exhaust gases.
It then works out from here what adjustments are required in order to get the right air to fuel mixture ratio.
It's not programmed to have another fuel system in place and doesn't make allowences for it. As far as its aware, it strictly runs on gasoline.
If you were to add hydrogen to the mix, there would be an increase in oxygen content in the exhaust gases, therefore the ECU would lean the mixture of air to fuel out. But it can only go so far.
And depending on how much load there was on an engine, the air to fuel ratio would change again. And the gasoline to hydrogen ratio would need to be very close. This is where it causes problems in EFI based engines.