As I mentioned here at the last comment of this post about the testing of commericial SL50 oxy hydrogen generator, I am now testing a home-made device I built according to an ebook purchased at www.water4gas.ca
OK, it took me a weekend to get the home-made HHO generator installed, re-built and reinstalled. The main reason for this prolonged process was because I set the operating current to be around 10 amps, rather than 5 amps or less as recommended. 10 amp setting was for the commercial device and it made the cell too hot with this setting.
Anyway, I filled the diesel tank to the rim this time and onwards – to be more accurate to measure how much fuel I will need to add to the rim next time.
I will make a trip from Calgary to Edmonton on Wednesday and I will take the same test as I did with the commercial device last time. I will report here as soon as the test results come out. Here are two pictures I took during the install:
| DO NOT INJECT HHO THIS WAY - read my comments to see why |
| DO NOT INJECT HHO THIS WAY - read my comments to see why |
Note that in the cell the electrolyte color was red and it was probably due to too high current (about 10 amps at the time of picture) causing my non-316L stainless wire to corrode fast. Another possibility was Jack who made the electrode for me used a green-colored plexi glass sheet to make electrode insulator/holder and the high-pH electrolyte might have caused the desolved green-color to turn pink. Will use a totally clear plexi glass sheet to make the electrode insulator/holder next time.
As you can see, I have listened to Bill’s advice to insert a threaded elbow fitting from the inside of the rubber air intake hose and tighten it up from the outside using a flexible plumbing hose. It is interesting to mention that I measured the pressure there while the engine was idling by connecting a digital pressure gauge and it turned out that the pressure was -3.8 hPa, not positive pressure but vacuum before hooking up to the HHO generator. It is kind of surprise but it was indeed so – hope someone out there can explain why (note: now we know that it was because the turbo was not kicked on). Anyway, it is good for us as we want the HHO intake to have some vacuum pressure so that HHO can be sucked into the engine rather than diffuse into it.
One last thing, a one-way air check valve must be installed inside the bubbler jar so that no water can be pushed into the electrolyzer when the engine is shut off (electricity cut off). It appears that the cooling of the electrolyzer creates an pressure inbalance between the bubbler (no quick change in pressure) and the electrolyzer (reduced pressure). The pressure inside the bubbler jar is great enough to slowly push all the water in it into the electrolyzer!
Popularity: 37% [?]
Related posts:
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Related Articles
13 users responded in this post
OK, I have a real test result to report. To be more accurate, there are two results: one for city driving with the HHO generator ON and one for highway driving with the generator ON and then OFF – comparison result I just got fresh after driving from Calgary to Edmonton. Now here are the results…
First the city driving with HHO generator on all the time. I drove 197 KM within Calgary and it consumed 22.59 liters of diesel when I filled the tank to the rim before heading to Red Deer/Edmonton. So this gives a fuel consumption of 11.47 L/100KM (20.51 MPG).
Now the highway driving test. I drove at 125 KM/h from Calgary to Red Deer with the HHO generator ON. The distance traveled was 137 KM and it needed 14.84 liters to fill the tank to the rim in Red Deer. This results a diesel consumption of 10.83 L/100KM (21.72 MPG). So highway driving used less fuel as expected.
After filling up the tank to the rim again in Red Deer Shell station (I picked to use Shell only to make sure the fuel quality is the same if all Shell stations use the same diesel), I disconnected the cell – this can be simply done by taking out the 15A fuse I used in the fuse casing as shown connected to the red wire in the first picture above) and drove to Nisku just off highway #2. I stopped and filled the tank to the rim the third time with 17.88 liters of diesel. The odometer readings showed that I drove 142 KM for the second lag. This gives a fuel consumption of…
12.60 L/100KM (18.67 MPG)
Indeed, not using the HHO generator consumed 1.8 liters more fuel than using the generator for this test. So using this home-made HHO generator yields a fuel saving of 14% – very similar to the 16% saving we got with the commercial device we tested earlier.
Another observation was that the fuel consumption WITH the HHO generator for city driving (11.47 L/100KM) is even better than that of highway driving WITHOUT the HHO generator (12.60 L/100KM) – more than one liter less for one 100 KM traveled.
One last observation was that, this home-made device working with a low current (2 amps measured when the engine was idling) is almost as good as the commercial one working with a high current (10 amps or so). So a high current is not needed as it did not increase saving significantly. Moreover, a high current causes the cell to be too hot and this can be a safety concern especially when the cell is made of glass rather than stainless steel.
Note that I have NOT dealt with O2 sensors on the van yet. Will be the next project once we figure out if Dodge Sprinter uses O2 sensors and how it uses them.
In order to NOT overheat the cell by producing more HHO, some other types of cell may be needed. One possible candidate is Joe Cell as Bill mentioned in his comment in our test with the commercial device. Joe Cell seems to work on the principle of charging the cell as a capacitor rather than discharging the battery to drive the electrolysis process. So we will test the Joe Cell next if we can make it or purchase one with a reasonable price.
Bill, have you built a Joe Cell already?
HI,
I have been following the testing with the Dodge Sprinter with great interest. I own a ford transit turbo diesel 2,2 l and I do 80.000 km per year, so any fuel savings would be great.
Concerning changing your cell from one to multiple cells that could produce more HHO. I think having 2 water4gas cell’s is the most simple option.
The latest suggestion from Ozzie Freedom is to put them in series so they each have 6 volt going through them. That seems to produce more HHO than to put them in parallel and they heat up less.
I am not sure what the gains can be because I suspect that the HHO saves more diesel in it’s capacity to make the diesel burn more completely then in the combustion of itself.
Using the Joe cell is a lot more complicated. If you use it just to produce HHO I think it is not the most effective cell around as it will consume more amperes from your battery.
The real interest is to make it produce the orgone gas because then the cell can feed itself with virtually no amperage drawn from the battery.
However it does not suit diesel engines. That is because the gas implodes rather then explodes. This means that it produces in the combustion chamber a sucking action rather then pushing the piston away from the cylinder head.
To make this work for an engine you need to seriously advance spark timing so that the piston is pulled up rather then held in its highest point with normal timing.
The thing is that Diesel engine has no sparks and this makes it difficult to control the timing. Also the orgone gas seems to be unstable and somewhat unpredictable as many external factors influence its working. But I have to admit it is fascinating technology.
Hope this helps you in making some choices!
Thank you, Hein, for your input about Joe cell and the suggestion of using two cells connected in series in order to increase HHO production. As you and everyone else see, I am new in this field (this is why I need to test it myself) and any input and tips are highly appreciated.
What i would like to see is a slight change in your test: on the -next- run to Edmonton, leave the cell -off- on the leg to Red Deer, and then -on- for the remainder.
This way you’ll hopefully balance out any effects of differing terrain/highway/etc. on the two legs.
By having the cell ON on the first leg in both tests you’ve compared the commercial to home-made cell, but by not running the C->RD leg with it -off-, you haven’t really compared either with “no HHO” over the same course.
======
On the “cells in series” question: yes, that will be more efficient overall. It takes less than 2 volts to split water, so you could run up to 6 cells in series without exceeding the nominal 12v available. It won’t even take more energy, if you control it to limit the current to the same current you have now in your single cell, but you may have to increase the amount of KOH to keep the current up at the lower per-cell voltage.
have fun
-dick
Rather than having to go wall-eyed reading the two threads (SL50 and HomeBuilt), here are the numbers all in one spot (if i’ve got it wrong, please correct it or post your own grid and please “fill in the blanks”):
As you note in your FAQ, the “water injection” effect of the bubbler in even the “off” state may skew your results compared to the “before anything” condition.
–dick
FuelSaving asked:
“…while the engine was idling by connecting a digital pressure gauge and it turned out that the pressure was -3.8 hPa, not positive pressure but vacuum before hooking up to the HHO generator. It is kind of surprise but it was indeed so – hope someone out there can explain why.”
-3.8hPa is -.055 psi (or, if your “h” really was K, -0.55 psi) which certainly is not -much- vacuum. I -suspect- that the turbo wasn’t really helping (blowing) much at idle (why should it? increasing airflow would only increase fuel burn, which would be a waste if there’s no load demand), hence you were seeing the system almost perfectly balanced.
Dick, thank you for putting my test results in a table format – I used some HTML codes to display in a real HTML table. I just replaced the average fuel consumption with the highest value (13.10 L/100KM) that I got before I even started this project.
As for the “water injection” effect, it might be there for the SL50 test as I had not installed the shutoff valve for the HHO injection. But for the test using my home-built device, that shutoff valve was there and I actually closed it when I disconnected the generator for the Red Deer to Edmonton trip. So the test for the home-built one was reflecting the actual “before anything” condition. This also means that the comparison test for SL50 should have shown more saving had I had the shutoff valve installed and closed for the second leg of the test trip. Thank you, Dick, for pointing out this. This sort of solves the mystery why the two test results were so close while SL50 produces more HHO (as a very high current 10A was used) than the home-built device (2A was used).
As for the air pressure in the air induction hose, it is indeed positive when the turbo is on. The air pressure was so high when going uphill or on highway that twice it blew up the hole in the hose where HHO was injected when I tested the commercial SL50 unit – I used an automotive tire repair kit to amend the hole and reinforced the repair using several layers of duct tape. I just did a repair the third time and hope this time it won’t blow up the hole. I might have to purchase a new hose if it happens again
OK, I used some plumbing clamps to reinforce the repair and now work pretty good. Learn from my mistakes – NEVER NEVER drill a hole in the air induction hose after the turbo. Any leak will cause significant lost of engine power. Here is the picture showing I used three hose clamps to reinforce the rubber repair and duct taping:
It appears that it is good to inject HHO after the MAF (mass air flow) sensor but before the turbo. There should be enough vacuum there to suck HHO in rather than it being pushed in. See this picture for the proper way of feeding HHO into Sprinter’s air system:
See the photos and wonder why all the clamps and tape on the Sprinter turbo intake hose?? Still experimenting with our 2006 Sprinter Cargo Van to see if it make much difference. Comments please.
Dick, you did not read my comments carefully – I tried to feed HHO from where the tape and clamps are and found it was wrong to inject HHO there so I closed them both using rubber tire repair kit and then secured them with duct tape. Clamps were used because twice the high pressure inside (when the turbo was kicked on) found its way out from the side – since clamps were used this has never happened again.
Maybe there is a better place to inject HHO than what I use now (the second picture) – where the EGR (exhaust-gas recirculation) hose connects to the air intake hose. But that is not the most urgent thing.
The most urgent this is… something has to be done with oxygen and MAF sensors as my ScanGauge II displays clearly that feeding HHO to the engine did not help with fuel economy, even worse it increased fuel consumptions when a high cell current was used – see these latest test results here.
(ahh… that July 19th note was horribly mangled from what i’d *attempted* to write, but first:)
Regarding the “what’s this hose”? question, i’ve posted a full answer (with diagrams and part numbers) to the sprinter-forum thread you started.
Since you’re probably thinking of using it as an alternate feed point for the HHO, be aware that there is a -heater- at the bottom of it, right where it meets the turbo intake.
—
Now, as to the July 19th comment, the FULL text was supposed to be something like “What is going to happen if your dealer sees the photos…”
On my own part, i fully understand what you’re trying to do, and the various test hookups you’re trying.
——————–
In conjunction with researching the “what’s this hose” question, i fell across a full description of how the ECM (engine control module) “thinks”, and it’s quite different than many… the O2 sensor thinking there’s “too much” oxygen does -not- cause additional fuel to be injected. It causes the EGR amount to be increased (adding exhaust gas to the intake volume must, by displacing it, lower the amount of fresh air (i.e. oxygen) that’s swallowed by the engine. Thus Sprinters are somewhat immune to the O2 Sensor issue, as one of the sprinter-forum’s HHO experimenters has seen empirically. If he’s reporting correctly. That same system could also conceivably confuse the ScanGauge. Tank-fills remain the Gold Standard for fuel consumption. The scangauge certainly -helps- see what driving techniques help fuel consumption, but it doesn’t know everthing.
have fun
–dick
Dick, your comments are very valuable as they clear out the inconsistency between the results measured with ScanGauge II and the tank filling. See my newest results added as August 19, 2008 comment here in the SL50 test section for a good example. And those newest results confirm the earlier 15% saving results with a twist – it turns out that the “Calgary to Red Deer” and “Red Deer to Edmonton” routes are indeed different and should not be compared in the same category. Also, the results show that one should drive long distance (at least 100 KM) before seeing HHO having any positive effect in improving fuel consumption. In other words, you will not see any instant improvement on fuel consumption because HHO does not add much energy to the engine – it just makes the fuel burn better and it takes long distance to see this reforming effect. Will do more tests on long distance travels to confirm this.
Hi
where both tests done with the Same injection point as I cant find any km/L results for the Commercial unit with Hydroxy (HHO) injection before turbo.
it is hard for me to believe that the W4G unit is that much better as it is really a water heater because the Stainless steel has high electrical Resistance there for heating the fluid in the booster and creating steam thereby creating a damp air intake (great if you are in a dry area)
also what is the fluid used in the W4G booster (Baking soda ?) if it is that creates HARM FULL gases when when electrolyzed.
the Wouter cell by Water For All (WFA) have a much better booster then W4G using SS tubes sized to it in to each other drawing about 10A for 1 L/m
Rob
Rob, the testing results for the commercial unit is here: http://autofuelsaving.com/info/testing-commercial-sl50-oxy-hydrogen-generator-on-dodge-sprinter/
As for the W4G unit I built, each thread of the wires was pretty thick already and after twisting several wires together the resistance of the wire is even smaller. Also, I used relatively high concentration of KOH (potassium hydroxide) which means the resistance of the electrolyte is small too. With both of these things combined, it produced quite a lot of oxydrogen when the cell is cold. This means that the wires did not act like water heater – I tested the gas coming out using a BBQ ligher and it indeed gave the cracking sound proving it was not water vapor but H2/O2 gas mixture for sure.
The cell did get very hot due to accumulated heat with time. Also because I did not use the 316L stainless steel wire, it corroded relatively fast.
Like I said I did not use baking soda. Using baking soda as electrolyte will not produce harmful gas like you said – I am chemist and I got a PhD in electrochemistry. If someone says that, challenge him to show the electrochemical and/or chemical reactions. If you heat the baking soda (the real name is sodium bicarbonate NaHCO3), it does produce a gas, CO2, according to the following reaction:
2NaHCO3 => CO2 + H2O + Na2CO3
But CO2 is not harmful. Some will call it green house gas, but it does not harm you in any other sense.
The real reason of not using baking soda for electrolyte is that it makes stainless steel electrode corrode more than NaOH or KOH. Between NaOH and KOH, use KOH because potassium hydroxide is not as caustic as sodium hydroxide.
Don’t get me wrong, I do not think W4G’s electrode design is the best and it is not easy to make either. I was just testing all kinds when I started. We have some better designs now and we are going to test them.
I just checked Wouter’s website and his tubular electrolyzer looking very interesting. However, the 25A cell current seems to be too high. We should optimize the HHO production using as low cell current (e.g. 10A) and cell temperature (e.g. 40 degree celsius) as possible.
Leave A Reply
Please Note: Comment moderation maybe active so there is no need to resubmit your comments