Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Negative vacuum water vapor injection
Author Message
cjpeaceful Offline
Member
***

Posts: 214
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #1
Negative vacuum water vapor injection
Well, I thought I'd give this a try.

First, I want to say there are no modifications done to my car other than a K&N air filter. It's a 2000 Ford Mustang 3.8L with 98,000 miles on the odometer. I have recently installed new Autolite spark plugs and changed my oil. Other than these (2) changes, the car runs very well.

I have removed all HHO equipment. My HHO setup consisted of a custom build series style generator plumbed into a vacuum port connection (COMPLETELY VACUUM TIGHT). With the HHO (and NO "vapor") I was seeing about a 17% increase in fuel economy. This took me from a baseline of 22.5 mpg to 26.3 mpg. No electronics where used with this setup. No EFIE, no MAF sensor modifications, no O2 sensor modifications, etc. I was in the process of designing a way to increase my economy even more by "tricking" the Air Charge Sensor into thinking there was warmer air (actually 170+ degrees) than normal. I have concluded this technique should work. But, I wanted to give vapor injection a try because of the limited constrains (a.k.a. better half says no to "complex" HHO system) on my mini-van.

So, here is where I am currently with water vapor injection.

I followed this guys tips on injecting water vapor into my engine and needless to say I have not seen any improvement with this technique.

http://web.hometel.com/~tron/1983_dodge_rampage.htm

However, it has only been (1) tank full. I am going to increase the surface area of the sponge(s) by increasing the size of my container. Currently, I have (1) spaghetti sauce glass jar (26 oz.) lined with (2) small sponges and filled with about 1/5 of water.

I think I am going to take one of my older "brick-in-a-bath" HHO generator containers and convert it to a "new" vapor injection device. It will hold more water and possibly house twice the number of sponge(s).

Well, see...Smile

Oh, on a side note. I might see better mileage IF I drove more city miles. Just something to think about if you try this technique as well.
10-31-2008 06:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
gtkco Offline
Member
***

Posts: 322
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #2
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
cjpeaceful Wrote:Well, I thought I'd give this a try.

Thanks for the tests, and info. We really don't have a good understanding/data/test on why HHO is working on the vacuum side. At least now maybe we can rule out water vapor as the sole cause.
10-31-2008 06:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cjpeaceful Offline
Member
***

Posts: 214
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #3
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
Well, I'm not sure we should rule it out, yet. I say this because some who are using HHO injection via vacuum connection are probably ingesting more water into there engines then I am with vapor injection. I say vapor because this is exactly what I am witnessing. It's a very fine mist. Just like in this guys videos. Very fine.

Also, I'm starting to think the more HHO we inject into our cars the more we have to "trick" the ECU. This means either electronic devices or mechanical or both.

I'm starting to think there is a very small threshold between enough HHO and too much HHO based on the engines design. Or, rather, inert in efficiency.
10-31-2008 07:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cjpeaceful Offline
Member
***

Posts: 214
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #4
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
Update:

Today marks another week in my WVI setup.

This morning I had the car in for a vehicle and emissions inspection and so I removed the water vapor canister and all the hoses just in case. I really didn't want to argue with anyone this morning about my rights and what is legal and what is not (it's Monday). So, off the equipment came.

The first thing I noticed was the lack of torque. When I had this setup running on the car last week there was a noticeable increase in the amount of torque during acceleration. I may not have seen any increase in mileage but there is definately an increase in torque possibly horsepower as well.

Needless to say, the canister is going back on the car this evening.

Also, I'm still trying to work out the details for a larger canister. I thought I had some larger cylinders I could use but failed to find any. At this point, I think I'm going to have to purchase a larger canister.

We'll see.
11-03-2008 02:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
maxc Offline
Member
***

Posts: 10
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #5
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
Air temp sensor will only change ignition timing. Retarding it when tricked "hotter".
11-05-2008 03:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thomasbala Offline
Senior Member
****

Posts: 629
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 4
Post: #6
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
cjpeaceful Wrote:Well, I thought I'd give this a try.

First, I want to say there are no modifications done to my car other than a K&N air filter. It's a 2000 Ford Mustang 3.8L with 98,000 miles on the odometer. I have recently installed new Autolite spark plugs and changed my oil. Other than these (2) changes, the car runs very well.

I have removed all HHO equipment. My HHO setup consisted of a custom build series style generator plumbed into a vacuum port connection (COMPLETELY VACUUM TIGHT). With the HHO (and NO "vapor") I was seeing about a 17% increase in fuel economy. This took me from a baseline of 22.5 mpg to 26.3 mpg. No electronics where used with this setup. No EFIE, no MAF sensor modifications, no O2 sensor modifications, etc. I was in the process of designing a way to increase my economy even more by "tricking" the Air Charge Sensor into thinking there was warmer air (actually 170+ degrees) than normal. I have concluded this technique should work. But, I wanted to give vapor injection a try because of the limited constrains (a.k.a. better half says no to "complex" HHO system) on my mini-van.

So, here is where I am currently with water vapor injection.

I followed this guys tips on injecting water vapor into my engine and needless to say I have not seen any improvement with this technique.

http://web.hometel.com/~tron/1983_dodge_rampage.htm

However, it has only been (1) tank full. I am going to increase the surface area of the sponge(s) by increasing the size of my container. Currently, I have (1) spaghetti sauce glass jar (26 oz.) lined with (2) small sponges and filled with about 1/5 of water.

I think I am going to take one of my older "brick-in-a-bath" HHO generator containers and convert it to a "new" vapor injection device. It will hold more water and possibly house twice the number of sponge(s).

Well, see...Smile

Oh, on a side note. I might see better mileage IF I drove more city miles. Just something to think about if you try this technique as well.

I don't want to throw a wet blanket on your experiments but we used to try water injection in the '60's muscle cars. Basically what you are doing is creating a hybrid gasoline/steam engine. The water injection just causes steam which assists the power stroke. There is an almost instantaneous increase in low end torque [you can feel it] but you start to break timing chains at high rpm's. We did water injection with 425 cid Buicks, 440 cid Chryslers and 426 hemi's. The Buicks worked best, probably because of their longer stroke; the hemi's usually spun a rod bearing and the 440's would just turn to junk [it's hard to tell if a rod or a crank broke when all the evidence you have is a trail of broken cast iron and aluminum]. I think we might have had more success if we had a way of decreasing the water injection as rpm's increased. Good Luck; watch those pressures.
11-05-2008 10:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cjpeaceful Offline
Member
***

Posts: 214
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #7
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
Thanks thomasbala! And yes, maxc, I agree. This is why I think it will work with HHO injection.

Update:

I am now on my third tank of gas. This morning I filled the car at the same station, same pump (I had to wait) and stopped at the first "click" - just like before. No increase in mileage, again.

In a weeks time I went through approximately 2 oz. Not much I know but the extra torque is nice. Wink

I'm still using the same spaghetti sauce jar but have a larger PVC container on my work bench which will double the volume to approx. 52 oz. Again, I'm using sponges to promote better evaporation of the water. Without the sponges, there is no "mist" seen in the jar. They act to break the surface tension on the water promoting better vaporization of the water.

So, well see....Smile
(This post was last modified: 11-07-2008 07:23 AM by cjpeaceful.)
11-07-2008 07:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
cjpeaceful Offline
Member
***

Posts: 214
Joined: Jul 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #8
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
Sorry, I said another week. It's actually been 4 days. Just want to clarify.
11-07-2008 07:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
thomasbala Offline
Senior Member
****

Posts: 629
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 4
Post: #9
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
cjpeaceful Wrote:Sorry, I said another week. It's actually been 4 days. Just want to clarify.
CJ:

The more I think about your water injection the more I like it and see a possible future. Volvo has been experimenting with a 5 cylinder engine where the 5th cylinder is powered by steam generated by ICE heat. You're essentially doing the same thing but in the ICE cylinders. As far as combining water injection with HHO I see perhaps an insurmountable problem: water injection will increase the density of the air in the intake manifold. The greater the density the more fuel needed and thus more HHO. To generate sufficient HHO with this increased density is the issue. Obviously generators that produce more is the solution, but more HHO usually means more amps which equals a greater drag on the alternator using more HP with a mpg loss. Watch those steam pressures; the 3.8L V6 blows a head gasket in a New York minute [if you're lucky; I won't comment on if you're unlucky].

Do you have any way to determine when you're getting close to excessive compression? From my prior experience you don't get a "ping" that you might expect; you just get either a bang, or, sudden silence and always a few seconds of clanging. Then the work really begins; just to try a different set up next time.
11-07-2008 04:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rzone Offline
Member
***

Posts: 10
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #10
RE: Negative vacuum water vapor injection
I tried to use water injection using a pump, electronic valve and spray nozzle. Still working on water flow control. One thing puzzle me reading this thread: how is possible to extract water from a sealed bottle? I mean after the vacuum in the bottle balance the vacuum in the manifold, there is no more water flow. I'm I wrong?
11-09-2008 04:49 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)