So explain how H injection doesn't work again?

[joeventura]

Geez I had no expectation that you would.
Geez

[R.I.D.E.]

Alternators do not produce excess electricity, they produce necessary electricity.

Thats why they put a load sensor on your car, so it wont kill the engine when you place a greater load on the charging system.

My VX kicks up the idle speed on fan position 2, with no other loads other than the power necessary to run the engine.

Statements about 20% engine efficiency are wrong. The efficiency of a typical 4 cylinder engine is about 35% when the load is suffecient to maximize the point of operaton on a BSFC map, about 80% load at 1700 RPM.
Increasing the load above 20% by 10% increments does not give you more horsepower at half the cost in fuel. Thats not even 10% additional load above the power necessary to propel the vehicle at a moderate speed.

Efficiency statements that presume average load over normal operational conditions also include 13% idling which is 0 efficiency since the vehicle is stationary.

This hho (browns gas) thing has been going on for at least 20 years. Why would no one bother to dyno a vehicle and really get some factual data?

The cost of renting a dyno?

Give me a break.

Enhanced combustion characteristics. OK, I can find some believability in that.

the problem is when you try to tell me that adding 1/336th of the fuel energy to my engine, you will achieve 50% increase in the combustion efficiency of 1 unit of fuel over 1+1/336th units of fuel.

Dont like the message, so attack the messenger, merely an ancient form of propaganda.

The Dyno will not lie, not a single unbiased dyno test in 30 years?

I can add a bottle of any fuel to my car and improve the mileage, when you only consider the gasoline in the tank as the fuel you are measuring to claim a mileage improvement.

regards
gary

[GasSavers_BEEF]

I think that my position has been misconstrued. I have heard people say that the math doesn't matter as long as they see results. I have been waiting for someone to test an hho device in a semi scientific manner for a while (and someone that is non-biased).

this is a gas log entry for "rolling box car" he has a jeep wrangler. he hasn't given up on the idea but just read it. the first few sentences speak volumes to me because this is a person that actually spent money to see this thing work.

Mostly highway miles with hydrogen cell "off"....I repeat, Hydrogrn cell "off". I get better gas mileage with hydrogen off!!! I gassed up at the same station as usual, same gas pump!!!! This is a good figure. Starting to prove...water to gas is not all it's cracked up to be!!! I have an idea...I'm going to test. When the car is in cruise mode...no hydrogen. About 10 seconds before arriving at the base of a hill, turn the hydrogen unit on. It takes about 5-10 seconds for a good hydrogen flow. I have a kill switch that I can turn on and off. Leave the cell on until a second or two before I reach the peak. Turn it off. This is for a car without a EFIE. I have a funny feeling that injecting the hydrogen while the car is in cruise mode is causing too much oxygen for the sensor and it's using more gas then neccessary in that mode. My thought....adding the extra fuel in hard work mode, for a short period of time, may "not" give the computer time enough to respond with extra gasoline fuel on the hill, yet give the engine a little extra juice via hydrogen. The oxygen sensor may see normal emissions until roughly the time it arrives at the top of the hill...Florida only has small hills so they usually only last 15 to 30 seconds....when the emissions go up...the car will be in the end process of going back into non hydrogen / cruise mode. Does anyone have a scan gauge and fuel cell to test how the car responds with quick bursts of hydrogen in "hill mode"? My jeep is a 1992 so I don't believe I can add a scan gauge. Correct me if I'm wrong.

for anyone interested in reading more, check out his entire gas log. it is very interesting. as far as I know, this is the only guy on here that has a gas log with hho information in it. please correct me if I am wrong. I had serious doubts about this working without having any data (especially since no one could supply any) and now I have data confirming what I originally thought

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

Not sure what you're saying, R.I.D.E. yes peak efficiency is at high load, but efficiency increases with load to that point. I'm only saying that it's because efficiency is awful at low load, that if you add to that load and improve efficiency, you use less extra fuel than you might think because it's more efficient. It's somewhat paradoxical that at best mpg speed, a motor is likely to be operating near it's least efficient, due to the low load demand of steady cruising. That's not news, series hybrid developers aim to run a motor at high load and store the energy. Yes you're using extra energy to make HHO, if your sole purpose in running the motor at all was to make HHO the overall efficiency would suck, however, you're running it to move you and are asking very little of it most of the time, it's not near 35% efficient at this point. Adding load will always use more gas, but adding 10% load could bring it 3 or 4% closer to peak efficency, meaning a relative increase of 15% more efficiency over the low end 20% or so at cruise, such that you are using .85x.3 more fuel rather than 1x.2, thus using 2 units for 20% load while only using 2.5 units for 30% load. So your load has a relative increase of 50% while your fuel consumption only has a relative increase of 25%. So you only have to achieve 50% conversion efficiency with that extra load to get your energy back. If your alternator efficency is 60% and your electrolysis efficiency is 80% you come damn close. You won't do it with a 2 bolts in a jar cell though. So you've made nearly the same BTU value of HHO as it "cost" in gas... but then when you put it back into the motor... MUCH more of the BTU in the H2 gets to the crankshaft than the BTU in the gasoline does. This would be due to differing thermodynamic efficiencies of different fuels in an IC motor. You get that and you get a knock on efficiency effect with higher flame speed promotion.

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

Originally Posted by BEEF

this is a gas log entry for "rolling box car" he has a jeep wrangler. ... ... ...

Unfortunately he's using it essentially backwards to how he needs to. He only had it hooked up to a vacuum port, and vacuum while accelerating or hill climbing is gonna be minimal.

[severach]

Originally Posted by joeventura

Is the alernator powering the devices in the car or is it charging the battery that powers everything?

To the car this doesn't matter. All that matters is that the necessary power is supplied. To you it only matters slightly since there is a bit of loss to put power into a battery and pull it back out. It would cost more to put all the energy into the battery then pull it back out than to use it directly from the alternator.

What happens to the 10 amps I don't use?

If the alternator field were from a permanent magnet then the power would need to be discarded. Your alternator, like a generator in a power plant, has an electrically variable field controlled by a regulator. The power never got produced nor was that extra power drawn from the belt.

Next question, same scenario, I have everything on and drawing 30 amps and turn on a HHO generator that draws 20 amps. Do the lights dim or does the battery start to drain (probably both)

For a 40 amp alternator that is actually limited to 40 amps, it will produce 40 of the amps and the battery will supply the other 10. Run for a while and your lights will dim and eventually everything will go out. Alternator ratings have gone up as gewgaws have gone up because that situation must not happen so long as the alternator is operating properly.

but here is the $64 question, does the alternator do anything different? Turn faster? Work harder? I think not.

It works harder at the direction of the regulator. The regulator increases the field current to produce more power at the same speed. If you speed the engine up then the faster alternator will produce more power so the regulator will reduce the field to compensate.

My understanding is the alternator is turning and creating power, which is either stored or used, and when the battery is fully charged and the devices are not drawing more than the alternator can make then the extra power goes where?

If there is no field current then the spinning alternator produces no power, just some air noise and bearing heat. You have witnessed this when the alternator brushes are at the end of their life and no longer make contact. The battery dies rather quickly even though there is a spinning alternator connected.

My point is that the alternator is creating power in excess of the cars needs probably better than 50% (if not more) of the time, so if you use it for a radio, an HHO generator, a winch, etc as long as the car is running and your battery is in good shape then what is the problem?

If a 125 amp alternator were producing 125*12=1500 watts wasting and you were only using 30 amps then the wasted 95*12=1180 watts should be easy to find. Something near the alternator would be glowing red. Don't look, it isn't there. The alternator only produces what is needed.

Originally Posted by RoadWarrior

That's only true of older cars. Since the 80s the ECU has been modulating the field current of alternators according to load.

An ECU is not required to regulate an alternator. Regulators have been used with alternators for a very long time, long before 1980 and ECUs. All the ECU does is to monitor the load and may temporarily reduce or pause production from time to time. Even when the ECU regulates the alternator it is still a regulator that is doing it and the regulation could just as easily be done with an external regulator.

Originally Posted by joeventura

So a single wire to the Alternator (shown here) does what you describe yes?

The number of wires doesn't matter. A GM 1-wire alternator has a regulator inside. Alternators are too easy to regulate to not have a regulator.

Embedded.com > Columns: Designing a microcontroller-driven alternator voltage regulator

[joeventura]

Severach,
Fabulous response.

Thanks!!

[ZugyNA]

Too many people get the CART BEFORE THE HORSE?

The HORSE is increased mpg.

The CART is some explanation of how or why it is happening.


Practicing BASIC SCIENCE is essentially putting something together and testing it fairly and impartially....not always easy to do...but doable.

So If I build some cells and test them and see an mpg gain (and I have)...I've done what I need to do from my point of view. My next responsibility to my own endeavors is to possibly further improve my results and demonstrate consistent results..to my own satisfaction.

IN NO WAY do I have any responsibility to explain technically or in terms of combustion theory or even particle physics....how and why it happened.

Those who plant themselves in the road and DEMAND an explanation...are just CONFUSED? They are standing on the CART in the middle of the road and are wanting an explanation before they will allow things to go forward.

My advice? When you see these people...just lead your horse around them and go on testing. Validly.

I do believe that there is a kind of IRONIC reality involved when testing HHO and some other mpg boosting methods....in that you can use the fuel additive/HHO to see more power (and the same or less mpg)....OR you can use it to gain more mpg. Some want to see this as the placebo effect or due to changes in driving techniques. I think it is just good sense. Drive consistently.

[R.I.D.E.]

My mileage can vary by 18 MPG depending on many variables.

Thats why I said put the car on a dyno where your variables do not exist.

I applaud your success ZUGY, but I see no gas log or other factual data to support your conclusion.

If I tell you you can flap your arms and fly, because I have done it, are you going to jump off the Emprie State Building because I said you cou do so and live.

I hope not.

Any person who can make a HHO generator that works on every vehicle regardless of how efficient it was before the conversion, with unbiased data that proves their position, would convince me to try one on my car.

In a previous post I stated that I had met with two individuals here in eastern Virginia, who were selling HHO generators locally.

They (not I) told me the system would not work well in my Honda. I works better in diesel trucks and larger vehicles. I watched their system working in the van I rode around in with one of the two partners for a whole day while we talked about their system.

Virginia has passed a law that requires the system to be certified to be in compliance with federal emissions laws.

The federal fine is $2500, not sure what the state fine amounts to.

Since you have made it perfectly clear to me that HHO works, with no data or any other confirmation, would you like to deposit a few thousand dollars in my checking account to cover the fines I might incur, when I decide to willfully ignore the laws that could make me guilty of a crime.

regards
gary

[GasSavers_RoadWarrior]

I'm trying to explain how I think it all hangs together because I think these things would become more practical if the theory behind them was better understood. Then one can direct development along lines that leverage their strengths, and shore up their weaknesses.

I'm still thinking about how I'm gonna set a system up, because I recognise firstly that good design and efficiency are key to getting clear repeatable results, and because I don't want to drive with a bomb in the front of the car, so I'm hashing and rehashing the details of how best to install and use a system with minimal hazards to either me, or the vehicle.

I think ZugyNA's point is it is the duty of science to explain unexpected results, rather than deny them. If no theories predict those results and they are repeatable, then the theory is bad, not the results. Results come first theory follows with an explanation. I do think though that yes, results could be prepared more thoroughly. I don't think that any company is going to invest much cash in testing though, this is basically unpatentable at this point. 95% of those hawking kits don't seem to know what they're doing, so they probably don't know the first thing about producing convincing results. Some of those that do have a better idea of what they're doing are coming up with somewhat dubious tests to "prove" it works, but that is apparently to compete in the numbers game with those who just make wild claims.

Then the other side of the problem is that people rely more on their gut feeling about science than the science itself... I get real fed up with arguing things like the fact that a bullet fired horizontally will drop at the same rate as one just dropped out of the fingers at muzzle height... the gut feeling is that it "flies" somehow.... nope sorry... gravity works just the same until you get to significant fractions of escape velocity. Anyway, half the people who argue about things never understood their high school science well enough in the first place for it to override their gut. We do however lack a decent analogy for this process...

Maybe think of a baker... if he starts with only flour and water to make bread... he's going to have to leave his dough sitting around for a week or two to catch enough natural yeasts from the atmosphere for the dough to rise. If he does this every time he's not going to make bread very fast. The efficiency of the baker is poor. If he takes a small piece of risen dough (OMG HE CAN'T DO THAT, THAT MEANS THERE'S LESS BREAD!) and saves it, and incorporates it in the next batch of dough, he introduces a culture of yeast directly into the dough and it rises in a day. Thus the baker can make bread much more quickly and easily and becomes more efficient.

Maybe think of a coal mine... winching the coal up the shaft is a slow and tedious process... it can't be got to the surface as fast as it is mined. So the mine owner decides to install a coal powered steam engine to work the winch (OMG HE CAN'T DO THAT, THAT MEANS THERE'S LESS COAL!) increasing the output of the mine substantially.

Fact is, diesel engines use a portion of their output to do work on their input, spark ignition engines use a portion of their output to do work on their input, automatic pistols use a portion of their output to do work on their input.... get over it already.