Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
DIY Fuel Ionizer.
Author Message
Edostar Offline
Member
***

Posts: 625
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 18
Post: #1
DIY Fuel Ionizer.
The DIY Fuel Ionizer:
http://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-Fuel...p1/Recipe/

Every liquid fuel engine should be fitted with one of these as factory standard and it reflects very poorly on the Auto Industry that they fail to install them at all.
It's hardly rocket-science after all.

Only fuel vapour burns and yet liquid fuel is atomised (by carb or injector) into the burn chamber where the surfaces of the droplets begin to vaporise.

Ionised fuel splits into much finer droplets under the same conditions and so there's more surface to vaporise.

The result is that more fuel vapour is available for burning and more power is generated from the same fuel.

Throw one together this afternoon and test it for yourself.

Dan.

Download HCS Installation files.
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2013 03:46 AM by Edostar.)
05-10-2013 03:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mike Offline
Senior Member
****

Posts: 2,020
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation: 7
Post: #2
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
Great link, thanks.

Anyone try one of these yet?

[Image: signature.gif]
Visit Our Documents Page
05-10-2013 05:53 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Edostar Offline
Member
***

Posts: 625
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 18
Post: #3
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
Hi Mike.

I have one on each of my various vehicles and they all work great.
The effects are always immediately noticeable when fitted to a motorcycle but on cars; the effects build over time (no idea why).

Sometime I'll have to do a test to see what fuel savings I get from just the Ionizer.

Dan.

Download HCS Installation files.
05-10-2013 02:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
masster Offline
Member
***

Posts: 185
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Post: #4
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
After carefully examining all US patents related to "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TREATING FUEL", I came to the conclusion that what we call 'ionizer' is in fact a fuel catalyst at lower temperature. Please have a look at the following short material I compiled for your review.

NOTE: I took the liberty of making some annotations or to underline some passages (in red) that I believe are most important. As usual, there is always room for further tests. Take all figures with a grain of salt.

THE OPERATION MODE
Empirical evidence has demonstrated that fuel catalysts improve the combustion process in diesel, gasoline, alcohol (both methanol and ethanol), and heating oil. Testing conducted confirmed that treatment of fuel with those elements changed the composition of fuel, in the direction of higher octane, higher energy fuel constituents, for gasoline and diesel. The method of analysis chosen was gas chromatography followed by mass spectrometric detection (GC/MS). GC/MS is capable of determining the chemical composition of complex mixtures of organic compounds such as fuels.
The treated gasoline has many more compounds in the higher boiling portion of the chromatogram, indicating that the catalyst elements form these compounds, most likely by cracking longer chain paraffins. Accordingly, the treated gas has much more octane, nonane and decane than the untreated gas, which would mean higher octane. These compounds are mostly aromatic in nature, meaning they are based on benzene. The aromatic hydrocarbons have the most energy per unit carbon, and thus have the highest octane rating, so the catalyst treatment appears to increase octane and energy content of the gasoline by forming aromatic compounds.
Aromatics are generally not very abundant in diesel, so the aromatic derivatives that showed up in the gasoline are absent. Fuel treatment devices have been certified by various agencies which verified substantial decreases in hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, carbon dioxide and fuel soot emissions. Further, tests confirm that the elements act as true catalysts and do not dissolve into the fuel being treated.
It is now believed that the basic underlying mechanism of the operation of the fuel catalyst lies in the liberation of hydrogen gas from the fuel through a catalytic action. The fuel catalyst utilizes antimony, tin, lead and mercury. Antimony and tin, in particular, act as hydride producers in protonic solvents. When acidic groups are present, the elements of the fuel catalyst act in a similar manner to an electrolysis cell. The elements act as a set of short-circuited galvanic cells, in which the one or more elements is a common anode (with a high overvoltage for hydrogen evolution) and one or more elements act as a cathode (with relatively low hydrogen overvoltages). Metal ions leave the common anode while hydrogen gas is evolved from the cathode.


CONSTRUCTION AND FURTHER TESTS
The container can be manufactured from copper. A plurality of catalyst elements are located within the container and are arranged in sets between element spacers (preferably plastic disks with perforations) that permit the passage of fuel from the fuel flow inlet to the fuel flow outlet, during which time the fuel comes into contact with the elements.
The catalyst elements preferably include, apart from impurities, 60 to 80% (weight) tin, 15 to 30% (weight) antimony, 2 to 7% (weight) lead, and 3 to 12% (weight) mercury, and may be formed by casting, extruding, cutting or shaping to have any desired configuration.

In weak acid solutions, both antimony and tin produce the hydrides Stibine (SbH3) and Stannane (SnH4) when a more active electrolytic element (less noble) and a less active electrolytic element (more noble), for example lead and mercury, are present. These hydrides are very unstable and decompose rapidly to produce hydrogen and the parent metal, especially in the presence of dissimilar metals. In hydrocarbon fuels, there are always acidic impurities and water, which is soluble to some extent in all fuels. These supply labile hydrogen ions to the fuel catalyst to allow the liberation of hydrogen in small and safe quantities.

It is therefore believed that the hydrogen resulting from the catalytic
action is responsible for improving the combustion process, allowing the improvements that have been observed in power, reduction of pollutants and particulates, and an increase in mileage.

While it has been known that the introduction of relatively small amounts of hydrogen in hydrocarbon fuels can dramatically increase horsepower and reduce emissions of atmospheric pollutants, it has been difficult to find a safe and simple way of introducing hydrogen into the combustion process. Prior methods of utilizing electrolytic cells, where hydrogen is produced at the cathode, or tanks of compressed hydrogen gas, or palladium-hydrogen systems, where the correct application of heat drives off hydrogen gas, are complicated, bulky and cumbersome. In contrast, the use of the fuel catalyst to produce hydrogen as fuel flows over the catalyst is simple and safe. Utilizing the fuel catalyst, hydrogen is released in proportion to fuel flow. (here comes HCS into play)

In view of the above, it is now possible to analytically design fuel catalysts using hydride producing elements, for example, by utilizing hydride producing elements from Group IV and Group V of the periodic table in combination with elements that are more active and less active on the electrolytic scale. Accordingly, metals such as mercury and lead may be replaced with metals such as zinc, magnesium, aluminum, palladium, silver, copper and cerium. Using the above information, fuel catalyst elements having 40% (weight) zinc, 40% (weight) antimony, 18% (weight) tin and 2% (weight) silver were prepared using a smelting process. For example, the antimony, tin and silver are combined and melted in a crucible at a temperature of 1100-1200 degrees F and stirred until completely alloyed. The zinc is then added to the mixture and it is either poured into molds and cast or dropped to form shot.
The fuel catalyst was then compared with a control using no fuel catalyst. Six independent runs were made for the control, while measurements of CO, CO2, HC and O2 were taken. The averaged results of the six runs are illustrated in Table 1.

Code:
                                    CO     CO2     HC     O2
Mobil 87 Octane (no Catalyst)      2.42    7.94    132   3.5
Mobil 87 Octane (with Catalyst)    0.90    9.07    66    3.1

Based on the results obtained, it is believed that catalyst elements containing variations of 10-80% (weight) zinc, 20-60% (weight) antimony, 1-5% (weight) silver and 10-30% (weight) tin will yield beneficial results. Other combinations are also possible. A further preferred embodiment includes 39% (weight) zinc, 11% (weight) aluminum, 25 % (weight) tin and 25% (weight) antimony.
The interaction between the catalyst elements and the mild steel is not fully appreciated at this time. It is believed that the mild steel is also acting in combination with the catalyst elements as a material that is more active on the electrolytic scale. In order to avoid problems with corrosion of steel mesh, attempts were made to replace the steel screens with non-corrosive #316 stainless steel screens. It was found, however, that #316 stainless steel appeared to adversely impact the efficiency of the fuel catalyst. It was discovered, however, that an alloy of nickel and copper, for example Monel 400 could be successfully utilized in place of the mild steel. Other alloys may also be utilized including Monel 404, Monel 405 and Monel K500, as well as other types of alloys having equivalent properties. For example, brass, copper and alloys of copper and nickel are also suitable. In such cases, it is believed that the copper is acting in combination with the fuel catalyst elements as an element of greater activity on the electrolytic scale.


There is no ionization involved without an external amount of energy, usually a DC electrostatic field with voltages of 400-1000 V applied right on fuel injector nozzle (otherwise ions are shortly neutralized).

Today is today, only today. Tomorrow it will only be yesterday.
05-12-2013 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Edostar Offline
Member
***

Posts: 625
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 18
Post: #5
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
The Fuel Ionizer (Catalyst) apparently 'changes the composition of fuel, in the direction of higher octane' which explains part of the reason that it results in increased performance.
This is in addition to the advantages of the finer aerosol spray resulting from ionized/catalyzed fuel.

Many cars are required to use higher octane gasoline (which is usually more expensive) due to the engine's higher compression ratio.
Higher octane gasoline will withstand higher compression without self igniting (preignition) so the addition of an Ionizer/Catalyst will allow the user to fill his/her tank with cheaper gasoline and still achieve the same performance on account of the increased octane rating resulting from being treated with the Ionizer/Catalyst.

Much is made on this forum of saving fuel and the obvious benefit is a reduction in fuel costs to the owner/driver.
Buying cheaper gasoline will also have the same effect of course; even apart from the fuel-savings resulting from a more efficient and complete burn of the fuel in the burn chamber.

Dan.

Download HCS Installation files.
(This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 07:45 PM by Edostar.)
05-23-2013 07:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vortexor Offline
Member
***

Posts: 15
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 1
Post: #6
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
I put one selfmade Fuel Ionizer on my 3.5hp electric generator.
The attempts where made many times, always with the same 95 octane fuel.
Under the same load conditions it consumes 7,5% less fuel per hour.

Big differences in the behaviour of the engine:
- runs much smoother with a clearer sound
- less exhaust gases, no smell of fuel (i will made an emission test in the next weeks)
The engine has an open crankcase ventilation and it was always smoking grey out of it.
- After running the engine with the Fuel Ionizer for about 2hours the smoke disappeared completely!!
- The outlet valve is cleaner than before the use of the Ionizer

best regards, vortexor
09-03-2013 08:47 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vapor Offline
Member
***

Posts: 5
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 0
Post: #7
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
hi guys - i'm new here and have been researching water injection and HHO when i came across this post and i some questions on this technology...

the info provided by masster and Edostar is very interesting - i have also read one patent which employs this tech:
https://www.google.com/patents/US6306185

i'd like to try this since it looks so bloody simple and cheap, but i'm wondering about 1) which metals may be best, 2) corrosion resistance (fuel contamination) and 3) the purpose of the magnet - is the magmatic field not important and maybe it is just the type of metal that is?

quote from the patent...

Quote:Preferred formulations of the catalyst element include: a) 20-60% wt antimony, 10-30% wt tin, 10-80% wt zinc and 1-5% wt silver; b) 40% wt antimony, 18% wt tin, 40% wt zinc and 2% wt silver; c) 20-60% wt antimony, 10-30% wt tin, 20-80% wt magnesium, 1-8% wt cerium and 0.1-1.0% wt palladium; d) 40% wt antimony, 25 % wt tin, 30% wt magnesium, 4.8% wt cerium and 0.2% wt palladium; and e) 25% wt antimony, 25% wt tin, 39% wt zinc and 11% wt aluminum.
09-14-2013 06:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vortexor Offline
Member
***

Posts: 15
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 1
Post: #8
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
@vapor: just try the metals from the link of the DIY Fuel ionizer in the first post.
That worked very good for the most people inluding me!
09-15-2013 11:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vortexor Offline
Member
***

Posts: 15
Joined: Sep 2013
Reputation: 1
Post: #9
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
Does anyone have news about the savings with the DIY Fuel Ionizer?
My 3.5HP electric generator constantly needs ~8% less fuel per hour and runs greatly smooth compared to previously consumption befor the install of the Ionizer.
At the moment i´ll try it on my Audi TDI, i will post the results in a few weeks.
It would be nice to hear from others experiences about the possible savings Smile
04-08-2014 03:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Edostar Offline
Member
***

Posts: 625
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 18
Post: #10
RE: DIY Fuel Ionizer.
It's been a while since I checked this thread and I'm pleased to see people getting positive results from the Fuel Ionizer/Catalyst.
It is so simple and cheap to make that every vehicle should have one.

I hit a snag when trying to fit one to my Kawasaki 650 motorcycle though.
It's fuel injected and the fuel line is too short to fit an inline fuel filter and too high pressure to risk cutting into it.
The fuel pump is inside the tank and I guess must have an internal fuel filter.
There's also no obvious pick-up point on the pump so it must scavenge fuel from the lowest part of the fuel tank.

My solution to this problem was to roughly weave together Stainless wire, Copper wire and Aluminium wire in a number of separate meshes and drop them into the tank.
My hypothesis was that they'll all eventually gravitate down to the lowest point in the tank and congregate around the pick-up point of the pump and 'ionise/catalyse' the fuel as it passes around and through them into the pump.
This seems to have been a good idea as the bike (already fitted with HCS) runs even smoother than before I dropped them into the tank.

Here's one that I made using the long spiral strands from a stainless steel scrubbing pad as the Stainless element:
[Image: FuelCatalyst_zpse08b5ca4.jpg]
I cut a strip of light aluminium plate about an inch and a half long and wound some of the stainless steel strands around it.
Then I folded the two ends back on themselves to secure the stainless and stop it falling off either end.
Finally I wound some copper telephone wire around the outside and twisted the two ends together.

A few years ago; someone gave me a 'drop-in' fuel catalyst and it seemed to make a difference.
I eventually removed it from the tank and set it up in the fuel line and it worked better.
From this; I'm assuming that the original idea of little pellets of mixed metal in a fuel filter is more efficient that the 'drop-in' method but in this case I see no other way.

No Fuel-saving figures for this device but if the engine runs quieter and smoother; then one can be pretty sure that this is due to increased fuel efficiency which has to translate into fuel savings.

Dan.

Download HCS Installation files.
(This post was last modified: 05-28-2014 02:48 AM by Edostar.)
05-25-2014 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)