PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2019-12-10, 10:20:01
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Author Topic: The Engine,and then the gas  (Read 22086 times)
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 615
The gases produced by splitting water= Hydrogen,Hydrogen,Oxygen-->H2 O1.


Brad

What is "O1"?
Is it "O" (monoatomic), or it is "1/2 O2", meaning half the quantity of diatomic oxygen compared to the quantity of H2.

We need to know what we're talking about. If it's diatomic molecules in any case, we could agree.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Renaissance Man
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2160


Buy me a cigar
I have always failed to see what is good about the HHOP.
In your video,you raise 50ml of water about 2 meters.
The energy required to do that is a very small 1 joule.'
So how much energy did the HHOP take to raise 50ml of water the 2 meters ?.
https://youtu.be/RwjTDXR31KA

Yes,i remember that one well.
It sounds to me like the timing is to far advanced for HHO--sounds like it's knocking hard.
Retard the timing a bit,and she would run a lot better  O0

Regarding the pulsed spark thing.
Most people dont know that the old points ignition system use to produce a very short series of sparks across the spark plug,and not just one strong spark. The primary of the coil and the condenser use to operate in a resonant tank circuit situation just as the points broke contact(become open),and this caused a rapid series of pulses in the secondary coil,resulting in a rapid series of sparks to jump the plug gap.This is why when you remove the condenser you will be struggling to keep the motor running,as the spark will then be only one very quick weak spark and not the rapid series of sparks you get when the condenser is playing it's part.
Being who you are,and what you do,i think you would already know this anyway.

Also,the propagating flame speed of HHO is very fast (hence the reason to retard your timing),and so there is no need to have a long series of sparks each firing,as the normal ignition system is well fit for doing the job well.

I think some people just jump in and quote what others say in regards to using HHO to increase efficiencies rather than taking a step back,and thinking about how it actually dose this-->which it dose.

I have watched many video's of self acclaimed guru's trying to debunk the use of HHO to increase the efficiency of the ICE,and they always lead them self down the garden path,and clearly have no idea as to how an ICE actually work's,or how the HHO increases the efficiency-->like this Aussie dropkick that calls him self an ex-spurt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OhICSDRySQ

Have you ever seen such an idiot,and yes,unfortunately he is our idiot.
He calls him self an ex-spurt,and an engineer. But like some here,he simply cannot grasp the needed fundamentals in increasing fuel efficiencies in the ICE. He keeps quoting the first law of thermodynamics,and yet cannot implement those very laws that disproves his idiotic claims.


Brad

Good morning Brad.

The HHOP idea makes a very simple water pump, just one moving part ( non return valve ) and a low input energy level.

You wrote 1 Joule? I don't think so, the cell was using 6W and took approximately 45 seconds between each cycle. This would be 270 Joules to lift 50 ML of water per cycle.

What sets HHOP apart from other water pumps is that same 6 W or 6 Jules can be used to lift the water much greater distances! It would depend upon the physical construction of the cell as to how high you could go.

Onto my little engine....

Built around the late 1890/1900 period it is a simple " expansion " ( non compression ) cycle principle. It would have used " Town gas " as the fuel. From TDC the piston draws in fuel and air and at half the stroke opens a port in the side of the cylinder, the ignition port. A pilot flame would have then ignited the charge and the remaining " power? " stroke would continue to BDC. From BDC the whole of the return stroke is exhaust. Returning to TDC for the next cycle. We replaced the pilot flame with a modified sparkplug and used a contact maker to drive the PWM to provide electrical HT ignition. In essence a two stroke/cycle non compression engine.

Obviously, very different to the engine that you're currently using! The ignition timing being set by the port.

You may recall a former member of OUR, Matt Watts? He built a very expensive high output HHO unit that he fitted to his very large Diesel engine'd pickup truck. In conversation he said that rather than his fuel consumption going down, quite the reverse! The power consumption of the multi plate cell was directly added to the overall consumption of the truck. He mentioned the term " many Benjamin's " spent, a term lost to this Welshman!

I will be following your progress with great interest Brad, rest assured!   O0

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   

Group: Room3327 Private Group
Sr. Member
*

Posts: 499
Believing in something false doesn't make it true.


You may recall a former member of OUR, Matt Watts? He built a very expensive high output HHO unit that he fitted to his very large Diesel engine'd pickup truck. In conversation he said that rather than his fuel consumption going down, quite the reverse! The power consumption of the multi plate cell was directly added to the overall consumption of the truck. He mentioned the term " many Benjamin's " spent, a term lost to this Welshman!

I will be following your progress with great interest Brad, rest assured!   O0

Cheers Grum.

Good morning Grum.

That quote reminds me of the old adage that if a little is good a lot is not always better.  Or in other words too much of anything can be bad.  I say that because my son and I both had increased mileage with our small HHO units added to our large diesel pickup trucks.  Our increase was around 10 to 15 percent with more power and less smoke and noise.  We did do some tuning of our units to determine just how much HHO would  give us the best mileage and we found there was a sweet spot of HHO to air that gave the best performance.  We have no way to measure that ratio but we surmised that the proper ration gave us an amount of HHO that when converted to water and of course then steam added to the power of the power stroke without being so much it cooled the cylinder temperature or added too much load to the alternator to produce the HHO.  Just guessing I would think maybe a ratio of  less than 5% HHO to air was what we ended up with.  It is all a matter of proper balance and tuning.

I also am looking forward to Brad's new project.

Take care,
Carroll

PS:  I think the term, many Benjamins spent, refers to the 100 dollar bill which has Benjamin Franklin's picture on it.


---------------------------
Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
What is "O1"?
Is it "O" (monoatomic), or it is "1/2 O2", meaning half the quantity of diatomic oxygen compared to the quantity of H2.

We need to know what we're talking about. If it's diatomic molecules in any case, we could agree.

Ok,this is harder than i think it should be.
We are(as we have always been)talking about splitting water into 2 parts hydrogen,and 1 part oxygen(H2 O1) via electrolysis. This gas mix is then sent into the ICE,along with the gasoline/air mix the ICE consumes.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Renaissance Man
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2160


Buy me a cigar
Hi Carroll.

Thanks for the note, pun intended, about the " Benjamin '  O0

I have to ask how old were your trucks? I think Matt's was quite new with all the " bells and whistles " that would probably over fuel from seeing what appeared to be a reduction in the exhaust gases.

Many years ago I used to run a 2 Litre " Bedford " truck, fitted with an Isuzu Diesel engine. It was a great tool but heavy on fuel. I read about people that had fitted Propane injection systems that both improved MPG and emissions.
Needless to say I tried a " homespun " system myself, just a simple demand LP gas regulator that I could turn on and off from inside the cab. It made a big difference, particularly on hill climbs, drastically reduced Black smoke and improved " pull " the downside was I couldn't carry a passenger because the bottle sat in the footwell! This was back in the days of non intelligent engine management.

As I see it we're trying to make a Diesel engine do what was never intended, smoke!!

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Good morning Brad.

The HHOP idea makes a very simple water pump, just one moving part ( non return valve ) and a low input energy level.

You wrote 1 Joule? I don't think so, the cell was using 6W and took approximately 45 seconds between each cycle. This would be 270 Joules to lift 50 ML of water per cycle.

What sets HHOP apart from other water pumps is that same 6 W or 6 Jules can be used to lift the water much greater distances! It would depend upon the physical construction of the cell as to how high you could go.

Onto my little engine....

Built around the late 1890/1900 period it is a simple " expansion " ( non compression ) cycle principle. It would have used " Town gas " as the fuel. From TDC the piston draws in fuel and air and at half the stroke opens a port in the side of the cylinder, the ignition port. A pilot flame would have then ignited the charge and the remaining " power? " stroke would continue to BDC. From BDC the whole of the return stroke is exhaust. Returning to TDC for the next cycle. We replaced the pilot flame with a modified sparkplug and used a contact maker to drive the PWM to provide electrical HT ignition. In essence a two stroke/cycle non compression engine.

Obviously, very different to the engine that you're currently using! The ignition timing being set by the port.

You may recall a former member of OUR, Matt Watts? He built a very expensive high output HHO unit that he fitted to his very large Diesel engine'd pickup truck. In conversation he said that rather than his fuel consumption going down, quite the reverse! The power consumption of the multi plate cell was directly added to the overall consumption of the truck. He mentioned the term " many Benjamin's " spent, a term lost to this Welshman!

I will be following your progress with great interest Brad, rest assured!   O0

Cheers Grum.

Quote
You wrote 1 Joule? I don't think so,

I was stating the required energy to achieve the feat.
50ml of water at 2 meters has a potential energy of 1 joule,which means that it only takes the same amount to raise the same mass 2 meters.

That is a most interesting engine,and i did not know it operated that way.
So no compression,which would mean no loss in power trying to compress the gasses.
But it also means a bigger loss in the power stroke,as compressed gasses are more volatile.
It would seem that with this type of engine,there would have to be some sort of valve closing off the inlet when the gasses ignite--perhaps just some form of vacuum operated valve?
You may have already stated how it work's,but seems i missed that bit somewhere.

I would so love to have a small desktop engine like that to experiment with.
I wonder if you could drive some form of pump/supercharger just big enough to pump a small volume of gas into the cylinder from TDC to 80* ATDC,and then fire the mix ?.
I bet that little motor would run like a gem with just a gasoline vapour system.
I recon i could build me one of those type engines out of bits and pieces from the scrap pile. O0
In fact,you could convert a 4 stroke engine to run this way.
Just change the 2:1 came ratio out for a 1:1 ratio,double the duration on the exhaust lobe,and place a spark plug into the bore half way down. So now it will exhaust for a full upward stroke,intake would open at TDC,and close at 90*,then the spark plug would fire. We could grind and decrease the inlet lobe on the cam,so as it closed at say just 70* from TDC,and that would give us a longer power stroke  O0
So we now have a 2 stroke that dose not need oil mixed in with the fuel for lubrication,as it would retain the 4 stroke lubrication method.
Imagine that,a very clean 2 stroke engine  :D
Wow,i think i just talked myself into it  ;D


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Renaissance Man
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2160


Buy me a cigar
Hey Brad.

The answer to your statement about the valve is done both mechanically and by pressure. The fuel is admitted via a mechanical action, timed by a cam on the sideshaft. The air is admitted via an auxiliary vertical valve that " hangs " open to allow air in but is " blown " shut when it fires. It's really simple!! By the way, my engine in the video was considered a toy at that time. It was made by a company called the British Electrical, Engineering Company of Leek, Staffordshire or BEECo for short.

As you know my passion is with the IC engine, particularly its early history. Before NA Otto patented the four stroke/cycle most engines were of an atmospheric construction. Otto, amongst others had discovered that by compressing the charge prior to ignition a much higher power output could be achieved. Otto was the first to make an engine that didn't " self destruct " when it fired!

Diesel's engine came about from his employment at Linde, where he tried using refrigerants as a working fluid but later moved onto a more safe approach with compressed air and oil fuel. The self ignition side surprised him at the time, his first prototype engine had been fitted with HT ignition. This was found to be unnecessary as " auto ignition " occurred because of the temperature of the air was raised during the compression stroke.

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Hey Brad.

The answer to your statement about the valve is done both mechanically and by pressure. The fuel is admitted via a mechanical action, timed by a cam on the sideshaft. The air is admitted via an auxiliary vertical valve that " hangs " open to allow air in but is " blown " shut when it fires. It's really simple!!
Cheers Grum.

Ok,so it's like !fuel injected!,and vacuum operated air intake.

Have you tried a gasoline vapour setup on it ?,where the !fuel injection! part would be not used,and the gasoline vapour would just go into the air inlet with the air.
I recon that would work well,and the engine would be very efficient.

Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Room3327 Private Group
Sr. Member
*

Posts: 499
Believing in something false doesn't make it true.
Hi again Grum,

Yes you are correct.  Both of our trucks were 1998 trucks with straight mechanical injection pumps and no computers.  As Brad has correctly stated trying to over come the modern electronic controls usually only causes your mileage to do down.  The only way I know of to overcome that is to reprogram your engine control computer so that you can adjust things on the fly from a laptop or tablet while trying the engine under varying conditions.  And I think for most of us that is more complicated than we want to get into.

I am pretty amazed though at what some companies have been able to do with modern controls on a diesel engine.  I have a 2007 motor home that is built on the Dodge Sprinter chassis.  The engine is a turbo charged v6 diesel engine built by Mercedes.  This is a smaller motor home that is only 24 feet long and weighs about 12,000 pounds.  Yet at 65 miles per hour on the interstate it still get around 15 miles per gallon of fuel.  And the exhaust pipe looks like an almost new piece of pipe with only a tiny bit of surface rust in it and absolutely no soot at all!  This engine is before the newer DEF systems that use the urea based additive to achieve the clean burn.

Carroll


---------------------------
Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 947
Having done a reasonable amount of programming and tuning on GM's LS series engines, it shouldn't be that difficult to accommodate hydrogen or any fuel as far as that goes with a computer controlled engine.  What is needed is to know the stoichiometric air-fuel ratio for the desired fuel or the stoich AFR.  This is the mixture that most effectively burns the mixture but is not the best for high performance.  For gasoline the stoich AFR is 14.7 and for hydrogen it is 34.  With some adjustments to the engine's ECU regarding the AFR, hydrogen could be used effectively.

For tuning using professional sensors and equipment, these numbers are usually set to Lambda or referenced to "1".  Then, the air/fuel tables are simply adjusted in percentages in the direction required while monitoring during driving or on a dyno.  It is possible to accommodate various fuel mixtures on the fly as is done in flex fuel engines using the proper sensors so I think this should be possible using hydrogen/gasoline.

Regards,
Pm 
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 615
Ok,this is harder than i think it should be.
We are(as we have always been)talking about splitting water into 2 parts hydrogen,and 1 part oxygen(H2 O1) via electrolysis. This gas mix is then sent into the ICE,along with the gasoline/air mix the ICE consumes.


Brad

Hi Brad,

If the physical or chemical names are used, "HHO" would mean a mixture of 2 hydrogen atoms for 1 oxygen atom. I deny that this would be producible by electrolysis and remains stable after production.
Electrolysis gives us 2 volumes of dihydrogen to 1 volume of dioxygen, so molecular gases, not pure atoms, I agree with you.

It is not surprising that the mixture of H2 + 1/2 O2 as written by chemists, added to the air and gasoline in the carburetor, has significant effects. We are moving towards a hybrid engine using partly hydrogen, and increasing the oxygen in the mixture.

I do not deny that such a mixture has a real effect, in particular it would reduce CO emissions. According to some users, there would be a slight fuel saving for diesel engines (not necessarily more than the energy spent on electrolysis, it is to be verified) and according to others, no effect, except on their wallet when they bought the KIT. The "HHO" KITs are not scientifically validated but the magic word "HHO" makes buyers dream. In any case, car manufacturers do not offer it natively, and given the competition they face for fuel consumption, it is certainly because the effect is minimal or there are other worse disadvantages, and requires more research but without real promises or for the moment very little.


---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1556
Here are three papers on the topic:


---------------------------
A man gets depressed, he gets sad, he thinks about quitting and folding, but he never does. He pushes through adversity. - Chad Howse
   

Group: Room3327 Private Group
Sr. Member
*

Posts: 499
Believing in something false doesn't make it true.
Thanks MudPed for the papers.

 It seems they back up what I have seen in my own use of HHO.

Take care,
Carroll


---------------------------
Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Hi Brad,

If the physical or chemical names are used, "HHO" would mean a mixture of 2 hydrogen atoms for 1 oxygen atom. I deny that this would be producible by electrolysis and remains stable after production.
Electrolysis gives us 2 volumes of dihydrogen to 1 volume of dioxygen, so molecular gases, not pure atoms, I agree with you.

It is not surprising that the mixture of H2 + 1/2 O2 as written by chemists, added to the air and gasoline in the carburetor, has significant effects. We are moving towards a hybrid engine using partly hydrogen, and increasing the oxygen in the mixture.

I do not deny that such a mixture has a real effect, in particular it would reduce CO emissions. According to some users, there would be a slight fuel saving for diesel engines (not necessarily more than the energy spent on electrolysis, it is to be verified) and according to others, no effect, except on their wallet when they bought the KIT. The "HHO" KITs are not scientifically validated but the magic word "HHO" makes buyers dream. In any case, car manufacturers do not offer it natively, and given the competition they face for fuel consumption, it is certainly because the effect is minimal or there are other worse disadvantages, and requires more research but without real promises or for the moment very little.

I for one(as are many others) am not one to get into using exact scientific names,but more so use the terms most widely used. When i say HHO injection,then 99% of the people here will know exactly what i am referring to.

First i would say that most of the small cheap ebay HHO cells are a waste of time and money,and not much(if any) gain would be had with such cells. Also,both the engine and management system have to be built and setup to take into account the HHO additive to take full advantage of the added HHO. Once done correctly,60 to 65% thermal efficiencies are not out of reach with an ICE.

The ultimate system would be something like this--

1-A very low compression ratio during the compression stroke up until 3 to 4*TDC,at which point the compression ratio would be raised high enough at TDC in order to achieve compression ignition.

2-Fuel (gasoline) would enter the engine as a gas along with the air--so a gasoline vapour system would be used instead of fuel injection.

3-HHO would also enter the engine along with the fuel vapour/air mix. 5 to 7% HHO to air/fuel vapour volume would be all that is required.

To implement a HHO system into a vehicle is no harder that installing a good stereo system.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Ok,i have decided to make up a test bench,so as we can tests all claimed efficiency increase methods.
Those being things like HHO,gasoline vapour systems,and the likes.

First i will get the test bench all set up,and then do a couple of runs with the motor in standard trim.
Once that information has been collected,we will then make modifications to the engine and fuel system.
We will do 1 thing at a time,and then do a run each time we make any changes,and see if we made any improvements to our fuel consumption per watt hours output.

So here is a quick video of the motor and generator i will be using as the DUT.
The motor is a cheap chinese 2HP side valve motor,and the generator is a 24 volt-1HP DC motor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycDEmg5zNlk

This video is unlisted,and i have also removed adds.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 615
I for one(as are many others) am not one to get into using exact scientific names,but more so use the terms most widely used.
...

I suspected that, Brad, and I think it is a mistake to avoid the effort of clarity of vocabulary, especially when like here, it is ambiguous.

If I asked myself about the alleged nature of the "HHO" you were talking about, it is because it has been claimed here and there in the "free energy movement", that monoatomic oxygen and hydrogen were produced, and that is what makes the difference. It is even for this reason that some would have called it "HHO" instead of H2 + O2.
So there are several conceptions of what it would be.

Then the word "HHO" is precisely made to fool the user, who believes in a new gas when it is a simple basic mixture of molecular oxygen and hydrogen. "HHO" is used as a commercial argument, and also by charlatans who claim to explain to us the alleged "secrets" of "free energy".

Finally, more generally, we must see why we need to formalize what we are talking about. For me it goes back to Galileo. At that time, it was realized that everyday language was no longer sufficient to describe the world. Galileo needed to conduct experiments, especially those with the inclined plane, and only mathematics had the rigour necessary to deal with them unambiguously. It is at this time that I see the separation of philosophy/theology and science, the two being mixed in older times.
If we want to deal with things of science and technology, without ambiguity, then we must use a very precise language, its own, which is neither that of commerce, nor that of preachers nor even that of the general public. Otherwise, we go around in circles, because everyone will redefine the notions over and over again rather than use them, and we get bogged down.



---------------------------
"Open your mind, but not like a trash bin"
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
I suspected that, Brad, and I think it is a mistake to avoid the effort of clarity of vocabulary, especially when like here, it is ambiguous.

If I asked myself about the alleged nature of the "HHO" you were talking about, it is because it has been claimed here and there in the "free energy movement", that monoatomic oxygen and hydrogen were produced, and that is what makes the difference. It is even for this reason that some would have called it "HHO" instead of H2 + O2.
So there are several conceptions of what it would be.

Then the word "HHO" is precisely made to fool the user, who believes in a new gas when it is a simple basic mixture of molecular oxygen and hydrogen. "HHO" is used as a commercial argument, and also by charlatans who claim to explain to us the alleged "secrets" of "free energy".

Finally, more generally, we must see why we need to formalize what we are talking about. For me it goes back to Galileo. At that time, it was realized that everyday language was no longer sufficient to describe the world. Galileo needed to conduct experiments, especially those with the inclined plane, and only mathematics had the rigour necessary to deal with them unambiguously. It is at this time that I see the separation of philosophy/theology and science, the two being mixed in older times.
If we want to deal with things of science and technology, without ambiguity, then we must use a very precise language, its own, which is neither that of commerce, nor that of preachers nor even that of the general public. Otherwise, we go around in circles, because everyone will redefine the notions over and over again rather than use them, and we get bogged down.

I believe that the term HHO arrived due to the fact that when you split water,you get 2 parts hydrogen and 1 part oxygen. So some one just decided to call it HHO for simplicity,and that term has stuck.

As far as overunity or free energy go's,well i have yet to see anyone produce such figures.
Yes,there are many that try and peddle the !HHO free energy! garbage,but they are the very same people that never produce any evidence or reliable data to back up there claim.

Im not going to state that it is not possible,but that i am as yet to see any OU -free energy from HHO.
But i do believe that it can increase the efficiency of an ICE,and when you start to understand as to what is needed to take the efficiency of an ICE higher,then you start to see how HHO gas can do that.

First of all,your introducing a higher oxygen content to the air/fuel mix,and this alone allows for a cleaner faster burn. Then your adding hydrogen,which allows for higher compression ratio's,which results in a higher mechanical power output from the engine. When you add the two together,you are also able to reduce fuel/air ratio's,which results in lower fuel consumption for the same power output.

Anyway,lets see how we go,and how much higher we can raise the fuel efficiency of this cheap side valve motor.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
The test bed setup so far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhKZ7Nnw5Po


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3269
 O0

Sweet set up ..
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Here is the first data recording run,with the motor in standard trim--not touched.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKFmyi0LgA0

I can tell just by listening to the motor that it is running slightly rich.
So i will see if i can adjust the float level a bit,and if that dose not help,i will have a go at making a variable main jet.
I will get the mixture as lean as is safe,and then we will give it another run.

After getting it running as efficiently as i can,i intend on removing the head,and shaving a mil of at a time,until we are on the verge of knocking/preigniting. I may be limited on how much i can shave off the head,due to it being a side valve motor. Clearance between the valves and head will determine just how far we can go with the compression ratio.

After we have done that,maybe we should try water injection,via the fogger system seen in some of my other video's,and see if that has any effect?.

The next step would be to try the HHO,and see how we go.

Before we can see any large advantages of using HHO,i will have to mount the coil on a slide,so as i can retard the timing when needed. This will be needed when raising the compression ratio even higher--if we can,so as to make full use of the gains to be had with adding HHO.

After doing all that,i think we could give a gasoline vapour setup a try,and see if anymore gains could be had.
For this i will have to build some form of vapourizer tank with a float valve to maintain a set fuel level in the tank,which is feed by our clear 100ml fuel tank.

So lot's to do.
Lets get some real answers.

Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1556
As usual, most excellent work TinMan.

Precisely what needs doing by way of comparison
to answer the HHO question.

Would it be possible to add another enhancement
possibility?  Water Injection is reputed to accomplish
increased efficiency.  Some sort of fogger or vaporizer
is most often used to produce what is needed for injection
into the air input of the motor.

Some have used both water and HHO injection.

For those of us who are temporarily lacking our
lab equipment and facility your work is especially
helpful and appreciated.  Many thanks!
-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

After reading your last post above:

Ha!  Dunno how I missed your last post.  I'd just
watched your three latest vids and somehow skipped
past it to make my reply.  Another one of those
mysterious Senior Moments no doubt. :o
« Last Edit: 2019-05-06, 04:01:17 by muDped »


---------------------------
A man gets depressed, he gets sad, he thinks about quitting and folding, but he never does. He pushes through adversity. - Chad Howse
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
As usual, most excellent work TinMan.

Precisely what needs doing by way of comparison
to answer the HHO question.

Would it be possible to add another enhancement
possibility?  Water Injection is reputed to accomplish
increased efficiency.  Some sort of fogger or vaporizer
is most often used to produce what is needed for injection
into the air input of the motor.

Some have used both water and HHO injection.

For those of us who are temporarily lacking our
lab equipment and facility your work is especially
helpful and appreciated.  Many thanks!

Hi muDped

Please re-read my last post  O0

Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Here is the video of the installation of a variable main jet.
As you will see in the video,the result was good  O0
We went from 1.82ml of gasoline per watt hour,to 1.18ml of gasoline per watt hour  O0

I will also be adding the the graph below every change we make along the way,and will post the updated graph along with each video in regards the the results from each modification we make. This way we can see how big an effect each modification has on our efficiency.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgm67okSzRA


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3651


Buy me some coffee
Wow,so little interest.

Perhaps im just wasting my time  C.C


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Room3327 Private Group
Sr. Member
*

Posts: 499
Believing in something false doesn't make it true.
Hi Brad,

Maybe the rest are like me.  Just watching and waiting for your final results.  I have no doubt you will be proving that HHO does make a difference.  How much difference will maybe open some eyes for those that insist HHO is a scam. 

Thanks for all your efforts.  Great work as always from you.

Take care,
Carroll


---------------------------
Just because it is on YouTube does not make it real.
   
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2019-12-10, 10:20:01