Thread: test results back from hydrogen

Tweet

Cool! Lets see some details. I bet you build an awsome potato gun too

I am so glad that it worked mooneye. I am also interested in the plans. Congrats

Originally Posted by Geronimo

Cool! Lets see some details. I bet you build an awsome potato gun too

As a matter of a fact, I built and tested and modified potato guns and prepellants for 2 summers, Finally got 1700 foot shots. Right guard arosol deoderant is the best bang for the buck. I will figure out a way to give a diagram to anyone who would like to dabble some. I would have to ask for permission from the moderater before posting anything plan wise on this board first. Ive just recieved a 114 page book for an elaborate system that costs about 450 bucks to build. But is is supposed to double the mileage on gas and about 150% or better increase on diesel. I will keep everyone updated with future results. Data is slow to compile as the vehicles are only driven when nessacary, and not just to run up miles to gather data.

Originally Posted by mooneye777

Right guard arosol deoderant is the best bang for the buck.

Most sprays I used gummed up the igniter. The ones that didn't rendered my weapon useless

Interesting, I am replying to maintain contact with this thread. Keep the hose to the carb sealed, free hydrogen leaking out would/can be hazardous! Today is the last day to get the plans book for $50. I am interested and tracked back the HHO name and found it is related to a history of what is to me a sad mixture of 90% hucksterism and 10% scientific genius. I know a little about the HHO group and I do not dismiss the idea that in there somewhere there is some important technology but unfortunately they sell their ideas with a heavy load of made up names and other baloney that covers up the good part of their ideas. Sooo, thanks for the picture. If you could also show the carb inlet I would appreciate it very much because I am mainly concerned with the safety aspect of generating a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen and having it leak out after the engine is turned off. Perhaps with some sort of check valve and an ignition key turnoff this system can be made safe. Yes, I believe it does take slightly more electrical energy to do the electrolysis than is recovered in the combustion but I think it could work by using excess charge from the alternator to electrolyze small amounts of water ready to add to the hydrocarbon charge. I do agree that only 18 cc of water (about a shot glass full) can be electrolyzed to about 33 liters of combustible gas (O2 + H2) so the claim that water is a "condensed fuel" is technically correct, assuming full electrolysis. It appears that the folks making the money on this are the HHO folks selling the books for $50 and credit is due to mooneye777 for actually building and getting it to work. How many books will be sold for which no one builds the device? If there is sufficient safety built into the design I might try to build one too, but I would like mooneyes77 to comment on the safety of the relatively small amount of gas fuel that is left in the electrolysis generator when the ignition is shut off, is there a check valve?

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder

Maybe it's just me, but I've seen too many first-person testimonials expounding the benefits of everything from Ganes air needles to Fish carburetors, and they all doubled their mileage. Where are they now? Surely, if Chrysler, say, could get twice the mileage out of their entire fleet for the addition of a bit of wire and a jam jar, they'd do it and put the hurt on all those ricers flooding the world?
A buddy hooked up one of these setups on a Mazda pickup. He claimed a notable increase in mileage, but he drove it easier after the installation. One cool morning, he gave it the gas and she backfired. The flame front went up the line and blew the fruit jar all to smithereens.If you are going to try this, put a check valve in the line!

mooneye777, any chance you can post a picture of how the gas gets into the carb or in the case of the Saturn the air inlet box? Looking at the picture I see most of the construction from PVC pipe and clear tubing. The vertical tubing on the side is just a "sight glass" to see how much water is in there and the + connection from the battery is the source of the current flow. I suppose the blue wire is the ground wire but cannot see how it is attached in the back of the cell. The clear tubing seems to go directly into the air box of the FI system and the tubing is fairly long which might (????) give a check valve a chance to close in the case of a backfire but gas explosions are incredibly fast so a longer tube with a check valve might be a better idea, but that check valve better be FAST!!!!! I also see water droplets in the tube to the air box which might be just from vibration of the cell so it might also be a good idea to have a trap in the inlet line to catch such water AND to act as a bubbler check valve and partial flame arrester in the case of a backfire. As mentioned above, it is unlikely that anyone can get further patents on such a system but I can assure you the folks at HHO have access to at least one "attack lawyer" so I am trying to be careful to mention that this is a good idea that might possibly be made practical with some added safety features. Since the big boys will all have their own lawyers we are just talking about home made devices in the hot rod tradition of innovations for our own use. What the heck is the black nipple on top? Maybe that is a sping loaded check valve for adding water to the cell? I cannot figure out where to get one of those but if I were to build one of these devices I would add a FAST, SENSITIVE check valve at the inlet to the air box and a bubbler water trap at about the middle of the tube so that there is time for a check valve to react to a backfire pressure change. Of course for legal purposes I do not take any responsibility for the safety of these suggestions and folks like mooneye777 can experiment and maybe tell us what happens. I note that there is one patent already for a water bubbler, and it looks like the mimimum sort of check valve for safety but really a check valve is needed that is extremely fast and sensitve to reverse pressure so it can close before the flame front reaches the cell. If the check valve is moved closer to the cell in the line that might allow more time for the valve to close but then the gas in the line up to the valve will still explode. Another good idea is that with such a small cell as shown, the amount of HHO is small for "only a small explosion" but who needs the hood blown off their vehicle? Thanks R. Pope for the story about the back-fire problem!

Don Shillady
Retired Scientist/teen rodder