Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
*Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Author Message
a3holerman Offline
Member
***

Posts: 31
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #11
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
If you pull a pair of each side it will run much worse. It then will be two 3 pair cells in parallel. What you want is to ADD 3 pairs to each side thus having two 7 pair cells in parallel. This is whay I am working on now. Will post my results.

Tom
Cape Cod
06-15-2008 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jksav7 Offline
Senior Member
****

Posts: 444
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #12
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Remember that the Smacks booster has + plates at each end with a - in the middle. I think what you're saying is to substitute one of those + end plates for a - plate, while at the same time dropping the - from the middle.


colchiro Wrote:Jk, 6 cells is considered optimal. So if you pull a neutral pair off each side it'd run cooler and should be more efficient since you'd be closer to a true series design.
06-15-2008 09:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
colchiro Offline
Moderator
*****

Posts: 3,265
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 11
Post: #13
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Smack's cell is (+) N N N (-) N N N (+)

This is two cells in parallel with 14/4 (3.5) volts across each cell, much higher than the optimal of 2 volts per cell and generating unnecessary heat.

Connecting two Smacks cells in series and dropping a pair of neutrals from each cell give you 7/3 (2.3) volts across each cell and twice as many plates generating gas.

Each cell now is configured as (+) N N (-) N N (+)

Since you have 2 containers with each having it's own electrolyte (true series cells), that would be much more efficient.

Rick

Links: Documents / Tuning for Mileage | Toyota Sensors | Autoshop Sensor Tutorials
06-15-2008 10:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Darrell Offline
Member
***

Posts: 10
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #14
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Hello All,

I am new to the forum and new to this ideal and after reading the results for using a Smack's Booster I have to wonder if it is even worth giving a try. Sounds like there is a problem with get the cells setup right? Has anyone thought about putting the cells away from the engine compartment, it would take a bit of fuel supply line running from the trunk or the truck bed but the unit would be a bit cooler....
What is the best cell setup? In your discription you posted +NNN-NNN+ for the SS plates, has anyone thought about using two different sizes of SS tube and wraping the two tubes with the wire and making the connections at the bottoms of the tubes??

Thank you for your time and help,
Darrell
06-15-2008 03:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
colchiro Offline
Moderator
*****

Posts: 3,265
Joined: Feb 2008
Reputation: 11
Post: #15
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Hi Darrell. The Smacks booster is a good low-cost cell. I'm just speculating that if you have a larger engine and need two cells, why not connect them in series. I'm not saying there's a problem with that design.

If you used tubes, then it wouldn't be a Smacks. Wink

Rick

Links: Documents / Tuning for Mileage | Toyota Sensors | Autoshop Sensor Tutorials
06-15-2008 07:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
retmil46 Offline
Member
***

Posts: 52
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #16
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
I'm modifying the cell plate arrangement as well.

+NNNNNN- 6 neutral plates. My charging system kicks out 14.4 to 14.6 normally.

Using 1/4-20 nylon bolts, with 2 thicknesses of .080" acrylic sheet in between for spacers, .160" spacing between the plates - between 1/8 and 3/16.

Using the same SSTL switch cover plates. I trimmed the top curved edge off the plates so that it would be more open for the gas to escape.

On the side and bottom curved edges, I coated them with liquid electricians tape (plastisol) as the spacing between the curves was uneven. I didn't cut the curved portions off on these sides as I wanted a "dead zone" with a fairly regular surface to enclose with acrylic sheet - similar to what ER's Hyzor manual describes in mounting the plates in teflon - to eliminate leakage paths thru the electrolyte.

I notched each of the plates at the bottom in alternating locations to allow electrolyte to flow into the spaces between the plates.

Bottom, sides, and ends of the cell assembly will be enclosed in acrylic sheet to eliminate unwanted electrical paths, and the liquid level maintained below the tops of the plates.

Mitchell Oates
Mooresville NC
'87 MB 300D Turbodiesel
'05 Jeep Liberty CRD (Common Rail Diesel)
06-15-2008 10:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jksav7 Offline
Senior Member
****

Posts: 444
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #17
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
retmil46,

I'm really interested to see how those modifications perform.
06-16-2008 03:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jksav7 Offline
Senior Member
****

Posts: 444
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #18
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Unfortunately, this is not a true series cell because the voltage will still leak. Also, by dropping down on the voltage applied there will be less gas production per cell. Eletrik designed the booster the way he did to get as much gas production as possible while at the same time minimizing the leakage. That's why he went with only 8 cells, when he could have put many more in there. He found that when he incorporated the step-gap there was less voltage leakage. He claims he spent a whole year trying to figure out what the best combination was.


colchiro Wrote:Smack's cell is (+) N N N (-) N N N (+)

This is two cells in parallel with 14/4 (3.5) volts across each cell, much higher than the optimal of 2 volts per cell and generating unnecessary heat.

Connecting two Smacks cells in series and dropping a pair of neutrals from each cell give you 7/3 (2.3) volts across each cell and twice as many plates generating gas.

Each cell now is configured as (+) N N (-) N N (+)

Since you have 2 containers with each having it's own electrolyte (true series cells), that would be much more efficient.
06-16-2008 03:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rode_warrior2003 Offline
Member
***

Posts: 11
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #19
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Well,
i found some leaks in my HHO lines, while playing around trying to hook up a torch to it. Don't worry, nothing bad happened Big Grin
With those all taken care of, the last fill @ $4.119 showed me running at 20.2 mpg.....YIPPEE !!!!!!
That's roughly 6 MPG INCREASE !!
I'm excited
You should be too.
It's a great day to burn HYDROGEN in the USA
06-16-2008 09:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Darrell Offline
Member
***

Posts: 10
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #20
RE: *Official* Smacks Booster Results Thread
Hello All,

Has anyone tried or thought about trying alternating the plates like +N-N+N-N+N-N+N-N+N-N+N-N and use the normal spacing between the plates? With alternating positives and negatives you may need to use more than two nylon bolts, washers and the plate setup or cell may need to be suspended slightly off the bottom, but with the SS straps supporting the cell that shouldn't be a problem, if I am reading the cell configurations correctly, by alternating the positives and negatives you would end up with 6 cells using 12 plates. What is the best grade of SS that can be used in the fuel cell design? My wife suggested using SS cookware, most of that stuff is a higher grade than I have seen used in the fuel cell designs.
Darrell
colchiro Wrote:Hi Darrell. The Smacks booster is a good low-cost cell. I'm just speculating that if you have a larger engine and need two cells, why not connect them in series. I'm not saying there's a problem with that design.

If you used tubes, then it wouldn't be a Smacks. Wink
06-16-2008 09:43 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)