Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
HHO and its inherent issues
Author Message
EmissionO Offline
So close to the edge its untrue
***

Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #1
HHO and its inherent issues
Ok chaps I have trawled the forums and t'internet for answers to the questions I have but thought the best place would be here so here we go....

1. Which electrode produces/leaches Chromium into the electrolyte when using stainless steel (of any grade)?

2. If CrVI a real problem or is it merely scaremongering?

3. What is current leak? We have a cell design which uses rods in a wet cell configuration.

4. People talk of using 1/4lpm per litre of engine capacity....how is this derived? Is this merely a best all round figure or is it for a specific engine at a specific rpm?

Hope you can assist.
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2012 07:26 AM by EmissionO.)
02-13-2012 07:15 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: HHO and its inherent issues
I'm afraid I can't give you good answers on 1-3. But number 4 is explained more here: http://www.fuelsaver-mpg.com/how-much-hho-should-i-use .

In general, any formula like that is by trial and error. And it's not very precise due to the wide latitude in measurement error of LPM in the industry. But the article should help you understand what's going on and give you some idea of a quantitative estimate.

[Image: signature.gif]
Visit Our Documents Page
02-13-2012 08:26 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EmissionO Offline
So close to the edge its untrue
***

Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #3
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
Mike thanks for you reply.

I have read that particular article before and there is nothing in there which leads me to the answer of why is 1/4lpm the decided amount. Surely this amount of HHO is specific to a stiochiometric value. This would take into account the mass airflow or rpm is you chose.

I am asking as to why 1/4lpm is being quoted as the right amount of HHO to introduce. If it is down to experimentation then is it possible to throw some light on the experiments conducted and the results found.

Obviously the results will only be relevant for the generator tested as it will have its own operating efficiency and therefore its own limit as to where the cut off is when plotting current draw v fuel economy.

We are conducting testing on our generator on Thursday and have based our required rates of HHO production on the 1/4lpm....I just wanted to see if this figure was accurately decided or merely a finger in the air type of figure.
02-14-2012 06:36 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: #4
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
No. Its a finger in the air number, but its based on experience too.

But look, I did a major revision of that article. You might want to read it again. I bring up that we have found that the actual value is closer to 1/8 LPM, not 1/4. We've seen quite a few guys get better mileage by drawing less amps.

But in the final analysis, I'm not aware of any really scientific results that are available on the internet. I am aware of some unpublished results of testing with a 15L semi tractor on a dynamometer that demonstrated that the sweet spot for that semi was between 1.25 and 1.5 LPM. More HHO caused the gains to reduce.

[Image: signature.gif]
Visit Our Documents Page
02-14-2012 09:30 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EmissionO Offline
So close to the edge its untrue
***

Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #5
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
Thanks again Mike. I have sent you a personal email recently to your mail address but have heard nothing back from you.

I think this is the general problem with HHO and its various systems. The information out in the world has not really been scientifically evaluated or arrived at and is very much a best guess (by experience or not) scenario. To that end our primary goal at Emission O is to get to a point where this technology is scientifically provable and we are able to offer a robust system to customers without the need to hide behind smoke and mirrors anymore.....Para v Ortho Hydrogen anyone.

As said we are going to conduct testing tomorrow to ascertain a few things.

Firstly is does HHO being produced onboard have any desirable effect on an ICE, namely a 2.2 turbo diesel engine.

Secondly is to try and find out at what point does the production of HHO become detrimental to fuel economy. Alternator load exceeds any further benefits.

This is all we are testing tomorrow (we only have 1 hour in the test centre) and based upon the results we will then be conducting further testing next week to try and ascertain a stiochiometric value for HHO. This is the holy grail as far as we are concerned as we are currently developing and testing several systems that will enable us to change HHO injection rates according to demand.

Obviously I wont be able to publish the exact results but I do hope to give people here a broad brush overview of our findings. Keep you posted.
02-15-2012 06:33 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: #6
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
One tip:

Most people think more HHO is better and overdo it by a mile. Semis need about 25 amps on a good efficient system. If you add more HHO, even if you don't increase the amp load (like if you were to generate it from another source), the mileage will still worsen. But do your testing. Just be prepared to test for less HHO to find the sweet spot.

[Image: signature.gif]
Visit Our Documents Page
02-15-2012 11:22 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EmissionO Offline
So close to the edge its untrue
***

Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #7
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
Thanks for that Mike....the cut off point as far as we can tell will be the point at which complete combustion occurs....any futher HHO then will be wasted and may influence the O2 sensor as the spare O2 will not be utilised in the combustion process and therefore will be detected by it and cause an overfuel situation.

The testing to ascertain correct stiochiometric values will happen next week pending results from today.

Will keep you posted.
02-16-2012 02:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EmissionO Offline
So close to the edge its untrue
***

Posts: 18
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation: 0
Post: #8
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
Ok so we ran the tests today and the results were not what we were expecting.

The test consisted of 4 power run tests where the max torque and bhp were recorded.

The results were essentially no difference and we ran the unit at 0lpm, 0.3lpm and 0.6lpm on a 2.2 turbo diesel.

At present we are confused as to why we are not showing any increase in power/torque as that is the whole basis on which the mpg increases are based around....more power/torque = less throttle at a set speed = better mpg.

Are we missing something out here?
02-16-2012 08:01 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: #9
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
Obviously. But I can't tell you what. Some of the most common causes of poor results are (believe it or not), leaks in the HHO containment. We one time found a loose reservoir lid completely sabotaged a project. Try spraying soapy water on all your hoses and fittings. No results indicate something way off.

[Image: signature.gif]
Visit Our Documents Page
02-16-2012 08:07 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
chrisdibor Offline
Ceedee
***

Posts: 21
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 0
Post: #10
RE: HHO and its inherent issues
This thread has finally confirmed what I suspected for long about HHO (at least the brute force version) - the reason it has not become mainstream has nothing to do with suppression, more to do with extreme variability. which car manufacturer will take the risk of adding a device that requires the user to tune so much to find a "sweet spot"? I have tried both HHO and Hydrocarbon Cracking System (HCS) and the HCS is much simpler and produces far more predictable results.
for all we know, the auto makers are secretly researching and testing and one day when the have it right and predictable, boom! HHO will be all over the place....
I need to add that the one place I see HHO proving itself is with static speed engines like power generators, especially the older models without electronics. Fuel savings actually up show with such engines

Need to save fuel now....
(This post was last modified: 02-20-2012 01:34 AM by chrisdibor.)
02-20-2012 01:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)