After doing some [not as much as I'd like to] reading on the subject, I'm seriously considering the Hydro4000 [ http://www.hydro4000.com ]. Anyone want to talk me out of it?!? I'd like some opinions before I jump. I've got an '05 F250 SD XLT CC 5.4 5R110W with 56k+.
TIA, guys.
Later...
Brewster...
__________________ ferro ignique gesta res
'05 F250 SD XLT CC, 5.4, 5R110W, 3.73s, Leveled, Plow Prep, Hankook DynaPro M/T RT03
315/70-17, KC Daylighters(385k), Hella 500s, ARE cap, see Profile/Gallery for more- Elise;
'86 H-D Frankenstein;'99 Ducati-;'97 KTM 300 MXC;'41 Servi-Car War Wagon;'78 Omega;'74 Nova
After doing some [not as much as I'd like to] reading on the subject, I'm seriously considering the Hydro4000 [ http://www.hydro4000.com ]. Anyone want to talk me out of it?!? I'd like some opinions before I jump. I've got an '05 F250 SD XLT CC 5.4 5R110W with 56k+.
TIA, guys.
Later...
Brewster...
Personally........I do not care who on this site says/proves it works there is no way I would pay $1200 for a system! If you do not think you have the patients or ability to make your own, then I would at least wait until you have a few of us that are tinkering with this to actually get it to work before I would purchase any pre-made system! I should have my ss plates by this weekend and I'm hoping to be able to put it together a test it. Obviously I will post any positive or negative info I come up with as I already have. This is in no way a slam on Parkland, but so far he is the only one who has gotten this to work (I think). I would want a few more testimonials before I drop some serious cash for one, unless you have money to potentially waste! I don't and I have less than $100 invested so far....Trust me....I do want this to work, but I'm not sold yet!
Oh....I google "HYDRO-4000 scam" just for fun....some interested reading....
__________________
'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 read as many of these "faith-based-hydrogen" links as I could without becoming too nauseous, and the following 5 items are exact quotes from the HYDRO-4000 web site, which are given below.
1) Our HYDRO-4000 utilizes the electrolysis process, with certain patent-pending modifications built in, to improve its efficiency, durability and ease of operation.
2) The HYDRO-4000 contains an all stainless steel apparatus which creates far more hydrogen and oxygen than products that appear to be similar. The output is 2-3 liters per minute of hydrogen.
3) The non-polluting hydrogen adds combustion energy, replacing some of the ordinary fuel needed to power the vehicle.
4) The theoretical maximum efficiency of electrolysis can be as high as 80-94%. These values only refer to the efficiency of converting electrical energy into chemical energy (combustible gasses).
5) The energy lost in generating the electricity is not included. If, however, electrolysis is accomplished using an underutilized electrical source that already exists (the excess, unused capacity of an automobile alternator, for instance), high efficiency can be routinely achieved.
I've got no issues at all with items 1 & 2, they employ electrolysis to separate the hydrogen and oxygen in water.
In item 3, the "how does it work" seems to be based on "replacing some of the ordinary fuel needed to power the vehicle" with the "combustion energy" from "non-polluting hydrogen", and at least in principle, I've got no issues there.
In item 4, for the sake of brevity, I'll go along with 80% in my following calculation, but remember, it said "theoretical maximum efficiency", not routinely achieved practical efficiency.
In item 5, the statements "underutilized electrical source" and "the excess unused capacity of an automobile alternator" seem to be claiming that an alternator is consuming a constant parasitic HP drain on an engine, even when the battery isn't being charged or other electrical devices like headlights are being operated, and that this lost energy can be put to use making hydrogen to power the vehicle, and many posts exist in hydrogen forums claiming this effect.
In fact, a PSD alternator has about a 70% efficiency for converting mechanical flywheel HP into electrical output power, and at full load, it draws about 3 HP from the engine, but at half load, it only draws about 1.5 HP.
I'll give item 5 the benefit of the doubt, and assume they're not claiming "free energy", but rather saying that for at least some driving conditions, the alternator has an input HP reserve capacity of 50% or about 1.5 HP.
So lets take this 1.5 HP from the flywheel, which is {(746)(1.5)}=1,119 W, and convert it with the reserve capacity of the alternator at 70% efficiency to provide 783 W to use for electrolysis, which at 80% efficiency gives 627 W=2,139 Btu/hr of hydrogen combustion heat energy, which at 100% conversion into HP would give 0.84 HP, but considering the 38% efficiency of a diesel for converting this combustion heat energy into flywheel HP, this gives only 0.3 HP as the HP produced by the hydrogen.
Now, lets go back to item 2 which states "The output is 2-3 liters per minute of hydrogen." and use this number to calculate how much HP this amount of hydrogen makes when combusted in a PSD. If you don't care to read the detailed calculations below, they also give only 0.3 HP as the HP produced by 3 liters per minute of hydrogen!
Ok, for those still interested in science, here's how to calculate the additional HP due to ingesting a given amount of hydrogen.
Hydrogen has a Btu energy content of 60,000 Btu/lb, whereas diesel only has about 18,500 Btu/lb, but hydrogen is very light, and it has a density that's only about one-fourteenth that of air.
At 70 F the density of air is 0.075 lb/ft3, so it takes 13.3 ft3 of air to make 1 lb of air. Therefore it takes about 186 ft3 of hydrogen to make 1 lb of hydrogen.
If you could ingest 186 CFM of hydrogen, that would be 1 lb/min which would provide 60,000 Btu/min or 3,600,000 Btu/hr of additional combustion heat energy.
At 100% conversion efficiency, each 2,545 Btu/hr produces 1 HP, and this gives 1,415 HP (for 186 CFM of hydrogen) at 100% conversion efficiency, or about 538 HP (for 186 CFM of hydrogen) at the typical thermodynamic conversion efficiency of 38% for a diesel.
So ingesting hydrogen at a rate of only 3 L/min=0.1 ft3/min=0.1 CFM of hydrogen, gives only {(0.1)/(186)}{3,600,000}=1,935 Btu/hr of additional combustion heat energy, and at a 38% conversion efficiency, this provides an additional HP of only {(0.1)/(186)} {538}=0.3 HP.
ernesteugene:
That's some good calculating you did there. I believe the HHO simply causes the existing fuel to burn faster, which means it will burn in the combustion chamber, not in the exhaust pipe. It effectively advances the timing by creating a better burn. We are not trying to replace the fossil fuel, just take full advantage of what we put into our engines. As far as all of the BS put out by the people trying to sell their units, they'll say anything to suck in the unsuspecting.
out of all the posts, i wonder if anyone has overcome the fact the the 7.3 , 6.0 and now the 6.4 use a " FIXED " fuel/air ratio ( no hego`s). as stated here, ( http://www.shop.hydrofuelsolutions.c...=4&productId=4) midway down on the page, and from our local ford dealer, these bad boys engines do not agree with hho units.
ernesteugene:
...As far as all of the BS put out by the people trying to sell their units, they'll say anything to suck in the unsuspecting.
Thanks, all, that's why I post here. You've all got valid, useful feedback.
TWTCAD, If you have plans or such, I could probably build it. I don't know enough about the theory behind it to design it though. If you care to share, I wouldn't mind an email with how one would go about building the set-up.
TIA
Later...
Brewster...
__________________ ferro ignique gesta res
'05 F250 SD XLT CC, 5.4, 5R110W, 3.73s, Leveled, Plow Prep, Hankook DynaPro M/T RT03
315/70-17, KC Daylighters(385k), Hella 500s, ARE cap, see Profile/Gallery for more- Elise;
'86 H-D Frankenstein;'99 Ducati-;'97 KTM 300 MXC;'41 Servi-Car War Wagon;'78 Omega;'74 Nova
out of all the posts, i wonder if anyone has overcome the fact the the 7.3 , 6.0 and now the 6.4 use a " FIXED " fuel/air ratio ( no hego`s). as stated here, ( http://www.shop.hydrofuelsolutions.c...=4&productId=4) midway down on the page, and from our local ford dealer, these bad boys engines do not agree with hho units.
Again, this system (at least in OUR view) is not to make "free energy" or make 40% more mileage, Its to burn the existing fuel as much as possible, without spending $$$$
ernesteugene: I dont even know what to say to you, how about; "why dont you work for ford"? Seriously, thanks for your input, I always save your posts and print them out and spend a few days glancing over the formula's....
HHO injecion as well as water injection has been proven to steam clean the cylinder walls and piston crown, leaving a nice clean engine without coke or carbon buildup. 10 amps and a bucket is a pretty cheap way to gain 1-5 MPG's on a 7.3 3/4 or 1 ton truck.
__________________
2002 7.3 PSD 4x4 Nothing out of the ordinary.
I have been reading this thread and enjoying it very much. I have a little info for you. I called the guys at hydro 4000 and found this out 1. the size of these units is quit large 16.5" tall X 6.5 in diameter. 2. the 4000 puts out 2L of HHO per min, I have the Xtreme street tune from ID and it gives me about 400 RWHP, the guy at Hydro 4000 says the 4000 is for 350HP and below, if I wanted to see any real benefit I should get 2 which is cheeper than getting the Hydro 5000 which puts out 6L PM @ $5999.00. I looker all around on my truck and I could not find any suitable place to put the thing (it hase to be mounted upright.)
I have also been following this thread Water as fuel? - Page 7 - Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum
the guy "mdiesel" put a unit on from HydroFuelSolutions
and so far has gained 2MPG.
I am hopeful this tech will work and I am still researching. I would like to see if those of us with the PS can get some gains better than 1 to 2 MPG.
thanks
Thanks, all, that's why I post here. You've all got valid, useful feedback.
TWTCAD, If you have plans or such, I could probably build it. I don't know enough about the theory behind it to design it though. If you care to share, I wouldn't mind an email with how one would go about building the set-up.
TIA
Later...
Brewster...
I am more than happy for provide all the info in my unit to anyone on here that wants it! In the other thread someone has already asked for my CAD file on the SS layout and I emailed it to him......I've posted pics of everything on both pages or you can access it in my photo album here. My buddy called me last night and said he has my SS, I'll get it from him tonight since I was out to late last night. If this all tests out and works, I will create parts list for anybody here that wants to duplicate it for free......but first let's see if it works, my first version didn't so this is round two! Brewster....just be patient someone here will get it working..........
ernesteugene.......wow, um yeah what he said..............
__________________
'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.
ernesteugene: That's some good calculating you did there. I believe the HHO simply causes the existing fuel to burn faster, which means it will burn in the combustion chamber, not in the exhaust pipe. It effectively advances the timing by creating a better burn. We are not trying to replace the fossil fuel, just take full advantage of what we put into our engines. As far as all of the BS put out by the people trying to sell their units, they'll say anything to suck in the unsuspecting.
Well since I just calculated that only 20% of the flywheel HP that's used to make hydrogen is returned to the flywheel due to the combustion of the hydrogen, the claim made in item 3, that hydrogen is "replacing some of the ordinary fuel needed to power the vehicle", is clearly false!
In my posts #398, #402, and #403, I addressed the possibility that hydrogen does its magic by mechanisms similar to those for DFAs, but even if this is true (which I doubt), the effects aren't additive with conventional DFAs, and as I'll explain, you'd be much better off just using a good quality conventional DFA instead of hydrogen.
Lets compare the potential DFA attributes of hydrogen with the Stanadyne DFA that I've been using for the past 10 years in both my early 99 PSD, and now in my CAT C7.
I add Stanadyne directly to the diesel fuel in a concentration that's about 0.3% by weight. Therefore, the concentration of Stanadyne flowing into the engine is constant, and doesn't depend on the GPH fuel flow which can vary from less than 0.5 GPH at idle to more than 25 GPH at WOT with a maximum load.
Lets assume the maximum production rate of 3 L/min=0.1 ft3/min=0.1 CFM of hydrogen that's claimed in item 2. This amounts to 0.0005 lb/min or 0.03 lb/hr of hydrogen. Since diesel weighs about 7 lb/gal, this means the concentration of hydrogen as a % weight of the diesel fuel varies from about 0.9% at idle to 0.017% at WOT, full load.
So hydrogen gives a concentration at idle that's factor x3 higher than Stanadyne, but at full load the hydrogen concentration is a factor x0.057 lower than Stanadyne. If your PSD is even working moderately hard, say 2,000 RPM & 10 psi boost, you're still flowing about 8 GPH, and hydrogen gives a concentration of 0.05% by weight versus 0.3% by weight for Stanadyne which is a factor x0.17 lower.
In summary, the hydrogen concentration is so low at engine loads of interest that it's hard to see how it can have much of an effect. On the other hand, conventional DFAs maintain a constant concentration independent of engine load, they keep the injectors clean to enhance fuel atomization, they provide a Cetane boost, they provide lubricity, clean water from the fuel, anti gel, and on and on, etc...
I recommend that you stick with conventional DFAs, even though they cost a few $, which is rapidly becoming a smaller and smaller % of the diesel cost, they don't rob power from your alternator and 1.5 HP from your flywheel. Working your alternator at near full capacity 100% of the time will wear it out, and those aren't cheap, and they're a pain to replace. Also, if you tow with your headlights on, you don't have much reserve capacity to begin with!
...I have also been following this thread Water as fuel? - Page 7 - Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum the guy "mdiesel" put a unit on from HydroFuelSolutions and so far has gained 2MPG.
I've got several comments...
A 2 MPG increase is comparable to the increases reported for conventional DFAs, but I wonder if the measurement technique was really accurate enough confirm this.
They're many variables and errors (some of which are random) involved in determining MPG, and various techniques for measuring it. As with any scientific measurement, the best that one can do is to give a result in a statistical manner.
For example, that the data shows there's say a 90% probably that an actual MPG increase occurred. This means there's only a 10% chance that measurement errors combined to give a false result. Then you can go on to further quantify the potential gains such as a 50% probably that at least a 1 MPG increase occurred, a 25% probably that at least a 2 MPG increase occurred, etc.. I'll do a post on the pit falls of measuring MPG accurately.
Now, how about this "water for fuel" concept? Well, I already showed that if you use engine power to do electrolysis of water to get the hydrogen, you only get 20% of that power returned to the engine when the hydrogen is combusted.
However, what if you had "free energy" and could somehow extract the hydrogen form the water for free. How much water would you have to haul around to run your PSD on the hydrogen you got (for free) from the water?
To generate 538 flywheel HP requires combusting 186 CFM of hydrogen, which is 1 lb/min of hydrogen, and if electrolysis is employed, that requires about 10 lb/min of water, which is 600 lb/hr of water, or 75 gal/hr of water. You could get this same HP for about 25 GPH of diesel, so even if the energy for the electrolysis was free (and it isn't) you'd still have to haul around a factor x3 more water than diesel.
The math indicates that when diesel gets to about $15/gal, hydrogen power becomes economical, but in the near term, the hydrogen will be made from natural gas (not water), and the hydrogen will be provided at filling stations in a similar (but more complicated) way than is currently the case for diesel.
It is sometimes HARD to communicate with EDUCATED IDIOTS! Some people with an education are more dangerous that the ones without. It looks like the professor reads an article with blinders on. IT has been stated many times that the purpose of the HHO is to enhance the burning of the diesel, not to replace it. The whole idea is to help the average guy with his fuel bill , by building a unit that most people have the ability to fab.
It is sometimes HARD to communicate with EDUCATED IDIOTS! Some people with an education are more dangerous that the ones without. It looks like the professor reads an article with blinders on. IT has been stated many times that the purpose of the HHO is to enhance the burning of the diesel, not to replace it. The whole idea is to help the average guy with his fuel bill , by building a unit that most people have the ability to fab.
Just curious, to whom are you referring to as an EDUCATED IDIOT?I'll have you understand I'm not educated!
__________________ TRITON V10 - THE BEST KEPT SECRET - (But word is getting out). '08 F350 Scab SRW V10 w/ 4:10
07 Gulfstream Prarie Schooner
'05 Escape
' Passed the exam today! I am now a licensed instigator!
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. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.
ferro ignique gesta res
hydro 4000
