Have you had any success with your variations that you were talking about?
How about any of you others?
I wonder how it might work on a smaller engine. Would the hydrogen production be enough where the gasoline fuel line could be shut off completely once it was pulling in oxyhydro?
Hopefully this thread doesn't die out. It has been a very interesting read.
well after reading 19 pages I have had my interest peaked.
So the only real danger is flame travel back and reaching the reactor? wouldn't a 1 way ball check valve prevent that?
what kind of adverse effects could this have on the engine as 1 person pointed out?
I like the tube under the truck idea, filling it with water might suck, but hey..... the PVC may be strong, but you could put several rubber plugs in it. like 15-20 1/2" plugs for blow out.
and what is going to happen you go from WOP to brakes right now with a system like the authors and no electric hooked up to control amps and stuff?
I got the close hanger Idea to work... Awesome! just wanted to let you know.
Also to the Above post...
I took that post as once you compress the pedal with your foot (gas it) the switch turns on activating the hydro gen. And once you decompress the pedal (brake or drift) the switch is then turned off. Like a pressure switch. Maybe a norm closed switch that only makes the connection when the button is held down.? Am I right?
right but how does the switch on the pedal stop anything? is there an ignition wire close by?
The way I figured is that OxyHydro would start bubbling when the gas pedal was depressed because the switch there would complete the circuit. Foot comes off and hydrogen production stops.
Thinking over the amount of amps being used, I would think these switches should be wired into the control/coil side of a relay pulling in the contacts for the higher amperage. Otherwise the tiny switch would eventually burn out.
Because of you guys, I spent most of my night thinking and dreaming of this confounded HHO generator...
Thanks alot...
Anyhow, I still tend to think it would damage the engine and certainly could present a terrible risk of explosion in an accident.
I finally found an article that seems to explain that it gave his car more power but also caused a reduction in fuel mileage. His theory is that it made the car run richer due to temp sensors telling the computer to try to cool the engine.
Not sure if I buy his theory since I thought I read here that the mixture should actually burn cooler than a straight air/gas mixture.
If any of your guys can help explain this, I would appreciate it.
I converted the data to a spread sheet to get my numbers.
Max savings in gallons per hour,
At 100% throttle starts at,
1300 RPM 1.1 GPH
1500 RPM .9 GPH
1700 RPM .9 GPH
1900 RPM .8 GPH
2100 RPM .6 GPH
At 75% throttle max GPH savings is at,
1900 RPM 2.1 GPH
2100 RPM 1.6 GPH
1700 RPM .07 GPH
At 50% throttle max savings is at,
1100 RPM .7 GPH
At 25% throttle, there was no savings at any RPM and fuel consumption increased about .5 GPH
Somewhere I have another link that also supports this info at low RPM, but has slightly different results at higher RPM's.
The difference may be the engine used the one in the report above was running up around 214 Ft. Lbs. but max HP was 76.1 at 2300 RPM.
My guess is that was an inline 4 cylinder, John Deere was the manufacturer.
Thanks for finding that Dave. It makes for some interesting reading. It looks like you took you're fuel usage savings from the John Deere motor (too bad the didn't use the 6.0 as originally planned). I'm not sure these numbers will be accurate for our trucks since we will have a different GPH fuel usage. I'm also puzzled by the fact that the tested engine was more efficient in the base line test at 100% throttle than it was at 75%.
Their overall conclusion of a 15% increase in fuel economy does sound good. I did not see the information on how much browns gas they were producing to come up with these results. It would have been nice to know the amperage as well as the surface area of the electrodes/anodes in contact with the water.
A couple things I'd like to address,
1. A earlier comment about hydrogen/water being dangerous/bad to be in our engines... OK, theres like 100X more moisture just in the air alone than this little generator, something like 20x more air moisture goes through youre motor than gas/diesel!!!
There is 1 potential problem, if you have bad blow-by, there is a chance you could "steam clean" the oil right off youre piston rings, bore, etc. But, you'd be talking bad bad blow by, and crazy amounts of steam to do that. Unless youre planning on running 100% hydrogen, I wouldnt worry.
The whole concept as I understood it, was not to burn the H2 for its chemical energy, but rather the burning process of diesel is somehow benefited by having more H2 in the process.
My new generator still isnt in yet, but when it gets a little warmer out there.....
Also working on a "gassification" system to burn diesel/ any oil in a gasser!
(small 1/4 inch line wrapped around a red hot pipe, oil goes in one end, "gas" out the other end, which travels through a cooling coil, and into the air intake of the lawnmower. Almost sorta kinda works actually! Needs major work, but the motor will actually run smoke free if the gas/ air ratio is just right! This would mean, when i get a decent amount of gas coming out, and plug the air hole with my finger just right...) (Needs to be started on gas so far.) (have not checked spark plug yet, i expect at least a little buildup of crap)
__________________
2002 7.3 PSD 4x4 Nothing out of the ordinary.
Great to here from you Parkland........so now that you have been running your setup for a while.....what have been your mpg gains? Also, have you tried it on bio diesel yet? I have not made a unit yet, but I have come up with a design. One of these days I will make it! I've also been thinking about making bio diesel also since diesel prices are $4.00 now and was wondering if the two are compatible.........Thank you again for all your info on this topic!
__________________
'03 Excursion Limited 4x4 7.3l - Family Hauler Performance Mods: Superchips flashpaq set to Performance, slotted/dimpled rotors, Zoodad mod, Steveracer mod; D.I.Y. intake. Interior Mods: Alpine CDA-9883 Head Unit w/ SWI-JACK & iPod, Infinity & Polk 5x7, Sirius satellite, Alpine PKG-RSE2 10.2 Drop Down DVD w/ PS2 Slim.
I havent checked mpg's for a long time now, so much warming up that theres no point. (it is friggin cold here in manitoba)
Use stainless steel plates/ rods, and it should draw 10-15 amps. More baking soda=more amp draw.
I honestly have no idea about biodiesel+h2....I'd be careful though, could a chemical reaction take place to make the biodiesel change properties, would it matter if it's just going out the exhaust, I dont know. It is possible that the H2 may reduce combustion chamber temps enough to allow coking. Veg oil will run perfectly in a 7.3, provided it is really REALLY REAAAALY clean, and it is 180deg or better going into the heads. However, there is not much leeway for mistakes, and cooler combustion may not be very good. Truth is, I dont know.
__________________
2002 7.3 PSD 4x4 Nothing out of the ordinary.
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
