Finally got some pics of Hydrogen on demand system
It took me awhile since I've been working on improving production, but here is where I'm at now. Go to http://www.flickr.com/photos/sirrahn...287184/detail/ and see what I've been doing. I have the new Dry cell design installed on my '89 F-350 Diesel truck, but I don't have any test results as of yet. I'll be working on getting some measurements to share and I know it's making more HHO production than any previous attempts.
That's too bad that they went out of business. I have been learning and building HHO on demand systems for over a year from researching all the people on the internet that have been doing hydroxy systems. From the start I have seen for myself the improvements in mileage and/or performance on gas vehicles, even with the low producton of HHO that I was getting at the beginning.
My new Dry cell design makes at least three times as much HHO than the last...approx. 3 liters per minute. In the F-350 I have been able to increase amperage draw from 20 to almost 30 amps and still keep my temp below 120 degrees with 100 degree desert daytime temps. Higher temps can create steam and I don't want water injection, just HHO.
I wanted to test it on the truck with a turbo instead of the Toyota motor home because I think the higher HHO output needs more air than the Toyota gas engine is capable of offering. It will take awhile to get miles on the truck and share an accurate average MPG with the HHO compared to the history of 15mpg in this truck. I want to put about 3000 miles on the unit between needing any servicing like adding electrolyte fluid, etc.
I am trying to educate people by sharing this technology, since I already know that it works, so we can keep more of our money and quit giving it to the oil companies. Cleaner air and engines plus increased performance is just icing on the cake. I posted som pics at http://www.flickr.com/photos/sirrahn...287184/detail/
to show what I have going. I do hope to get into production and help those less mechanically inclined at some point, but my main motivation is to kill the oil company and supply as much info as I can to help the little guys. I would like to teach as many people to fish as I can, and I want to share info with DIYers, so spread the word.
Some quick math: A 5.0 liter engine spinning at 2000 rpm at a very conservative 10% volumetric efficiency (think idle or maybe a very light cruise) will ingest 500 liters per minute. 3 liters per minute is 0.6% of that amount. With an air:fuel ratio of 14.7:1 on gasoline at sea level, the air mass amounts to roughly .6125 kg of air per minute, 0.039 kg of gasoline per minute compared to about .0005 kg of hydrogen or 0.08% of the air mass for an air:fuel ratio of in the neighborhood of 1200:1. At better volumetric efficiencies and higher engine speeds, the ratio of air to fuel will swing even higher as the mass of air greatly increases in relation to the mass of fuel, in this case "HHO".
Stoichiometric air:fuel ratio for molecular hydrogen is approximately 32:1 by mass or 2.4:1 by volume, meaning you would need 148 liters per minute of hydrogen (more if there's oxygen mixed in) from the "hydroxy generator" to run the engine entirely. I realize it's being induced in addition to gasoline, but the quantity is minuscule in comparison to the engine's demands.
Any improvement you are seeing is from something else.
When smog hit In the 70's they took a Ford 429 cu. with 425 horsepower and put a 460 cu. with 225 horsepower , how is this a better idea ? They put a cataletic converter to burn all the raw fuel that goes out the tail pipe . That is were Hydrogen comes in . It burns the rest of the fuel in the cylinder not throw it out the tailpipe . I have a jet boat with a duel point ignition to try to burn all the fuel in the cylinder . Now it's not made for mileage it just goes fast and yes I'm working on Hydrogen for it also . It only gets 2 1/2 mpg if I could double that it would be something .
I don't pretend to be a scientist and understand all the math and what the heck "stoichiometric" means, all I know is that I started out curious and found by first hand experience that it does improve performance for sure and mileage (as stated in my previous posts regarding other vehicles). I do not have results for the diesel truck yet, but it does have more power with less pedal. Tailpipe doesn't smell as much when you stand next to it. Nothing else has changed except the addition of the hydroxy system. I admit I have not put more than 100 miles on it since I installed the system, but I will soon be putting it through it's paces and will post the results.
Ron
1989 F-350 Diesel 7.3IDI ATS Turbo Crew Cab 4 X 4
If just getting improved mileage and performance is not enough and you need to understand more of the scientific background regarding how much HHO (hydroxy) is needed to get positive results this is a good place to look http://waterfuelforall.com/forum/index.php?topic=33.0
I don't have a need to understand the exact science of how and why it works to be able to understand that it does work.
Ron
1989 F-350 7.3 IDI Diesel ATS Turbo Crew Cab 4X4
"People clinging to ancient rules as if they were gospel is what holds back progress" - Bob Boyce 2006
Wow!! Rarely, if ever, I've seen so much non-sense on a message board!
Quote:
Until you have experienced high efficiency electrolysis (150% to 200% or higher power efficiency), I guess you just don't want to believe it. Keep clinging to Faraday all you want and stay in the dark ages. Build what you want, how you want. It's your money.”
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.
Low Amp, Low temp Dry cell system
