Heresy - Interceptors and HHO

[vn5000]

Your statement makes no sense .
If fuel burns cleaner , then there will be less oxygen in the exhaust as it has been used to burn any unburnt fuel .
The o2 sensor will then produce a higher voltage and the ecm will compensate and reduce amount of fuel injected .
Therefore why would you disconnect o2 sensor.

[AntBoy1979]

It makes perfect sense actually, a garbage bag full of air contains less oxygen than a teaspoon of water does! When you feed an HHO mix into the engine it is getting far more oxygen than it was getting out of the air alone. This alone will increase your power and burn more of the petrol prior to the exhaust stroke. The Hydrogen quantity in your fuel helps determine it's RON rating, more hydrogen equals lower RON, lower RON means quicker ignition and burn rate. This is why you need to retard the ignition slightly as the engine may ping. The end result is less unburnt fuel and more oxygen in the exhaust. I wouldn't recommend HHO in a high compression or turbo engine as the higher compression alone may cause pre detonation and pinging. This is also why high power cars stipulate high ron fuels as they can be compressed more without pre detonation, but high ron fuels need a more advanced spark as they take longer to ignite and longer to burn.

[BennVenn]

Necropost!

So... I've got my hands on a pair of 95L/Hr HHO generators (chinese acrylic flame polishers) I've just done flow testing on the pair and I can fill a 1L bottle in a touch over 20seconds or about 2.8L/min of HHO. Total power consumption for this output is ~600watts. This is powered from mains, not the alternator so there are no extra loads on the engine for this test.

The 'experts' in the HHO field tell me between 2 and 4 Litres/minute is enough for up to a 5L petrol motor. It has been suggested that I use no more than 0.25L/min in the old 1.8L pulsar. Any more will cause the piston to work harder when compressing the air/fuel mix. I'm not sure if the engineers of these kits know how an engine works, or even basic math.

So i've done a little bit of my own math. My 1.8L puslar at 5000rpm consumes 4500 L/min of air assuming 100% VE. at 2.8L/Min of HHO, that is 0.06% concentration. At the recommended 0.25L/min at ~3000rpm when cruising this is about 0.009% HHO in the airstream.

The experts also tell me, adding this small amount of HHO will increase torque and HP by up to 50%. Fuel economy will not improve unless I disable O2 correction.

I've got the old pulsar strapped to the dyno now, with HHO machines on the standby. Just putting a bit of charge in the phone to record the dyno results.

Plan is, 3 dyno runs to get the engine and trans nice and warm, 3 dyno runs with one HHO machine on (1.4L/min), 3 dyno runs with both HHO machines on, 3 runs with the HHO off. If the last test shows significantly more than the first, I'll do the test again. I know my 18LE motor puts out more power when the oil temps are higher.

O2 correction will be disabled as per the experts suggestion.

If there are ANY gains, I'll then do some steady state tuning at 2000rpm and find the best timing and AFR values with HHO vs without.

You'd think with the engine idling, IAC disconnected, you'd see an RPM increase when feeing 2.8L/min of HHO into the intake. I mean, any increase would be reassuring. But no. AFR didn't change at all either at idle with or without HHO.

And the cost? the 'best' kit on the market from Perth is $4800 not including postage. It produces 2-4LPM from only 15amps at 12volts. This is suitable for up to a 5L petrol motor. No, he will no loan a system for dyno testing. He said he's done his own independent economy and power testing himself. No dyno graphs are available. Only anecdotes.

What do you think? Will .009% of HHO produce more HP than 8psi of boost? I'll post the video's on my instagram. Watch along here: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cu3NolXpTL8/

[Gareth]

I fucken love this stuff

I hope we don't here the bang down here in Vic!!

[antus]

I will also be very interested to see the results here. The problem as I understand it, is that it uses more energy to split the water in to hyrogen than the hydrogen can produce. So I expect you will see gains here, though if your input power is 600w, then you should only see ~ .5kw gain.

Last time I looked in to this I read about Stanley Meyers. I found this guy testing the machines and building the patents that Stanley Meyers released (youtube link below), and indeed the first few revisions did improve the efficiency of the generators quite a lot. Probably these generators you have are using these teqniques for that volume of hydrogen. But then the last revision, the one that pushed it in to territory where energy was gained was never released. I looked in to the patents and the stories and like most of this staff it was half truths - enough that people could say it was real and claim murder to keep the details hidden, but the evidence when you did dig deep was that the medical condition and death was real and unfortunate and he moved from legit scientist to scammer when he hit the limits and his funding dried up. So the scam was to produce more money to continue his research and the original goals of a water car generating and running hydrogen were never reached.

The videos are here but don't fall in to the trap of paying to see the last video or to help further the research to finish the work of re-creating the work that was supposedly lost but probably never existed. https://www.youtube.com/@valyonpz

[BennVenn]

I sooo wanted this to work....

Once the engine oil was warm, we actually lost torque with the HHO machines on.

I did 3 runs NA, 3 with both HHO machines on, 3 with one HHO machine on, then finished with 3 runs with both machines off. The highest torque and HP of each was kept, as seen above.

This probably explains why there are no dyno graphs on any of these HHO websites, no guarantees, no evaluation units loaned. Ahh well, better put that turbo back on.

[BennVenn]

Antus, the theory is the miniscule amount of Hydrogen causes a complete burn of the air/fuel charge. The hydrogen alone doesn't contribute to the increase in torque, it is instead the complete burning of the otherwise wasted fuel that is creating the extra torque.

Trying to run HHO (generated by the alternator) as a fuel itself could never work, because science. The idea that a more complete burn will make more power seems solid to me, though that would also show a rich condition at the wideband because more O2 is burned leaving less in the exhaust and a richer AFR because of it...

I'm sure HHO enthusiasts will say my testing was flawed. Then again, people will go and pay $250 for a 'throttle controller' for all that extra torque they give you

[antus]

Yeah I have heard that theory too. But then the question is why is there unburnt fuel, and wouldn't an OEM change the engine design so there isn't? And then, havn't they done that already? But at any rate, the results are in and good to see. Always good to have a real and unbiased test. It would be nice if it was real, but then I think it would be mainstream already if it worked as advertised.

[In-Tech]

We did some zero emission fuel testing years back, pretty incredible stuff. It would actually use any hydrocarbons left in the combustion chamber or anywhere in the exhaust too. Self cleaning, fixes the cats(unless damaged) cleans the chambers, pistons, spark plugs, o2's etc etc. My high mileage Ford Expedition at the time would ping/detonate on any 91/93 octane fuel, after the fuel...you could NOT make it ping on 87.

[vlad01]

Well, it's not newtons laws as his are laws of motion and gravitation. You are talking about the laws of thermal dynamics, which state that which way heat flows, entropy and that energy is conserved (ie. neither created or destroyed).

Because of entropy and the chemistry of water, HHO will never create more energy in such a system. The electrical load, thus mechanical load on the engine will always be greater than the chemical energy released during combustion.

Furthermore, with petrol engines, something like 99.xx% of all fuel is burnt in EFI engines since basically forever, so improving on combustion completeness is in the realm of 3/64th of fuck all.


Nearly all of the efficiency gains in the last few decades have been through mechanical and thermal efficiency tweaks and tricks than anything.

Also, the Carnot cycle and ideal gas law states than you can never get any more than a certain thermal to mechanical efficiency due to these laws. Physics basically. Quick google throws around figures of a max efficiency for an ideal heat engine of about 64%, some state 40 odd % but we know some engines (diesel) get close to the former with about 50% now days.