Water as Fuel / HHO Technology [Merged Threads]

[ghosthunter]

30 Liters of HHO gas will not be consumed without air.

Really? ... But you already have the perfect mixture for combustion. Two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen makes for the water molecule. Add a spark and your 30L of HHO gas will consume itself.

[ghosthunter]

The truth will be realized only when it's already too late.

This can be taken both ways.

[philmagi]

[SIZE=4]"RIDDLE OF A SMALL CAN OF ADDITIVE"[/SIZE]

The quantity of an additive may vary as recommended bY the supplier depending on the engine size and other factors. By and large, all these additives are realtively small by % volume when compared with the engine free air intake. Consider the ff:

1. Brand "x" - Mfg., large oil companies; raw material, generally hydrocarbon coumpounds; quantity, 150 ml can; purpose; boost/enhance ICE; claim, many says it works, others I don't know yet.

2. Brand "y" - Mfg., individaul/groups; raw material, generally hydrocarbons; purpose, boost/enhanced ICE; quantity, "GAS SAVING TIP" indicate about 3-4 fluid oz (90-120 ml) per 10 gal fuel (37.8 li); purpose, boost/enhance ICE; claim, many says it works, other I don't yet.

3. Brand "z" - Mfg. under test by one individual; raw material, water converted to what others call HHO; quantity, HHO gas produced is equivalent to about 200 ml liquid water for every full ags tank (depending on engine size); claim; many says it works, many says it does not work, one individual is out to find.

Comment by one member:

He says that his concoction works, most if not all other additives out there are junks. Particularly that HHO thing, it is just like the fart of a fly, much less when put into the Pasig river.

Question:

If on the basis of % volume alone, regardless of performance, is it not that all of the additives above are also relatively small when compared with the ICE free air intake? Perhaps, degree and kind of performances as claimed may differ. It is not the intention here to "catch a fish thru its mouth", as they say, rather to establish common ground for sensible discussion.

[SIZE=3]Browse the internet why HHO system works, not only why HHO is not suppose to work according to math calculations by those who can not even fix a sandwich, less fix a car, or trained skeptics. You see, one does not have the monopoly of being rude to be firmed, one can also be firmed and gentle. It is unfortunate that this discussion is turning this way. Maybe, I am at fault as well, "MEA CULPA".[/SIZE]

[SIZE=4]"HAVING AN OPEN MIND IS CRITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN THE QUEST OF BETTER MILEAGE WITH LESSER USAGE OF FOSSIL FUEL."[/SIZE]

[philmagi]

Regarding Mr. Dingle, what he was suppose to do with his fuel saving device can not be denied as something in the field of engineering be an accomplishment. It is a pity it ended up differently. However, I would wish to reiterate the ff:

"Fossil fuel, money, other commodities are their to serve the individual, as well as for the well being of society. However, all these are double edged sword, and any of these can be used for good or bad reasons. However, it does not mean that if it was used for one reason, it can not be used for other reasons. This is true in Mr. Dingle's case, it does not reflect that the the HHO system, or any technology for that matter are frauds or does not exist. I know the readers know better than what I am trying to say, just reiterating and thinking allowed. Poor Dingle.

[philmagi]

Hi! I noticed one member is already in the advance stage of this so called HHO project, and here I am going through the labor pains. Well, I regret nothing, and I am not sorry for not just just acquiring a ready unit, and instead doing it myself.

The knowledge I have gained going through is ten fold what I could have paid for a ready unit. I learned that it is not for the ordinary driver, and that it is not just HHO, and it must be a system. I have reached a level of actually testing it in two of my cars of different make. I have reached that point of producing micro torch and not bad so far for a hobby. I am not ready to declare a level of satisfaction, not yet.

Mr. Ehnrico, it appears it is working for you, and have a shop. I decided to do this project myself to find out why many are saying it does not work, and many says it works. I wish to visit your shop one day, if you will allow me.

[ehnriko]

Philmagi,

I was testing my torch today... it registered 481 deg. C. measuring it with an IR thermometer.

I am running it at nearly 30VDC * 6A.... roughly about 180W... or less :-)

The flame is faint blue with yellowish hue at the ends - looks like a laser beam... there is no radiant heat felt... ... the visible flame is about an inch... I can burn a hole on a 30mm plyboard from 2 to 3 inches away.

I'll text you later for my schedule. See you.

[ehnriko]

HHO is not yet an established science... anyone is free to explore it.

The problem with everyone... is they have to read a book about it.

Only a few dared trek the unknown with blind testing.

I was a skeptic also before... I was playing with HHO in 1983 - attached it in a VW bug. I never noticed anything until we removed it and the bug started running like the rest... and smell like the rest. But I was thinking - maybe maganda lang ang kundisyon ng makina before... baka nagkataon lang.

I remained a skeptic ever since until 2 years ago when I tried and tested it again on a Honda Dio Scooter.

There is only one way to find out.

Normally... it's not written in the books. :-)

[ehnriko]

Philmagi, thought you might be interested in seeing this.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk7mGSrmBwE"]YouTube - ZERO Emission Success! Motorbike with Hydroplus[/ame]

[philmagi]

Hi! I am glad to see the use of the technology in a motorbike, and hoping that it be to its fullest extent, even at its present level. Current level of the technology is limited to its behavior as an additive, looks like super additive, short of the appropriate term. Further developments in this level will be more of refinements in the departments of; hydrogen cells, flashback arrestors as safety device, gas scrubber, injection port like use of venturi, and addressing that corporate man-made ECU.

Most of the problems were traced to the ECU refusing to recognize fuel saving devices, stubbornly sticking to its OEM programming. Though, partially solved at the grass root level to some satisfactory degree, I wish there is a law requiring car manufactures to include in car system to recognize fuel saving devices w/o sacrificing safety, efficiency, economics, and warramty provisions.

I am shifting now to a higher level and will join the few who dared took this path, a dangerous path the say, the field of plasma, resonance, and whatever in the high and cheaper production of that gas produced from electrolysis of water, with calatyst if needed. I am realizing now that there is more to what was taught in high school physics. I found two and could be more sources in the internet of a high-caliber open exchanges on this subject.

Nice meeting you guys, and good Luck to all!

philmagi

[ehnriko]

[B][I]
I am shifting now to a higher level and will join the few who dared took this path, a dangerous path the say, the field of plasma, resonance, and whatever in the high and cheaper production of that gas produced from electrolysis of water, with calatyst if needed. I am realizing now that there is more to what was taught in high school physics. I found two and could be more sources in the internet of a high-caliber open exchanges on this subject.

Nice meeting you guys, and good Luck to all!

philmagi

You might want to visit CR4 threads... the American engineers are more intense in debunking HHOers' in general.

With regards to plasma and vortexes... try vortexcat.com... some unusual thinkers and experimenters are also in there. HHOINFO.com have more newbies and those who bought kits on line... but more legits... also hho games.com for the guys from Florida.

[ehnriko]

From New Zealand...

Steve, approached it differently.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POJQKg9CRJc"]YouTube - A Motorcycle that runs on PURE Water.[/ame]

Take note of the Mr. Expert at the end of the video... take note of what this character is saying. Observe how one's word is being repeated over and over inside the box.

[ehnriko]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rk2XD2ePzAA"]YouTube - Future Cars Hydrogen Cars Discovery Channel[/ame]

[ghosthunter]

YouTube - Future Cars Hydrogen Cars Discovery Channel

This video is NOT about water powering cars but hydrogen powering vehicles. There is a difference.

I remind you to take care on the difference on the subject.

[fmzart09]

Hello! I'm in Texas and within the past year become intimately familiar with HHO. Yes, you are correct, it's actually H2 & O2. Since they are mixed together the term HHO has become the chosen term throughout the Internet to refer to this very explosive gas combination.

First, I became involved when a member of our local car club began installing one of these "HHO" units on his car. I scoffed at him and explained to him why this absolutely would not work. In detail I showed him the relationship between the energy value of the "HHO" he would produce compared to the energy it would take to make it. Clearly, not even close to a break even point. This individual, a retired Physics professor, looked at me and told me, "You are wrong!" I then told him that the very physics books he was teaching from told me that I am right. He then said something to me I will never forget, "Like I keep telling everyone, the books are wrong!"

Since I made some of these in high school, only to make hydrogen balloons for the fireball effect (yes, I'm lucky to be alive), I fabricated a simple yet somewhat productive unit to prove my point. I had a 67 VW Beetle that was peaking at 42 miles per gallon. Everyone that knows me knows how hard I have worked to break past the 42 mile per gallon barrier, but the little car has no more mileage to give even at slower speeds. After installing this quickly fabricated HHO generator in the car I made some mileage runs. All were consistent at 45 miles per gallon! Instead of proving my point, I was blind sided with one reality. Never argue with a retired physics professor!

I've been studying this and it's not just the HHO (or H2 & O2), but many other factors too complex to go into detail here. Yes, there is a significant at times increase in mileage. No, it's not all from the gas but a combination of factors. So Faraday's Law remains intact and valid concerning the BTU value of the HHO created from water compared to the power robbed from the engine to pull the amperage. Simply put, mileage increases due to several factors and some simple testing under controlled conditions would prove this out.

One thing to consider is definitely the moisture. The higher lever of moisture would net some improvements in mileage. That being said, a friend and myself did many tests on moisture alone compared to HHO, and there is a higher percentage of improvement in mileage using HHO compared to only using a moisture bubbler. This I believe is due to the affect the HHO gas has in the combustion chamber when mixed with gasoline or diesel. If my theory is correct, the improvement in mileage would not be seen in a vehicle fueled by Natural Gas or Propane. Diesels see a higher net improvement in mileage than do gasoline fueled vehicles. Every test done at a pollution station in Houston Texas show more than a 100% reduction in hydrocarbons which support my theory. The primary fuel burns hotter and somewhat faster when a small amount of HHO is introduced into the mix. A vehicle with one bad cylinder was equipped with an HHO generator. The engine never made 2 hours at highway speeds without oil fouling number one cylinder. With the HHO the plug never fouled. What's more, if the fouled spark plug is reinserted into the engine uncleaned, the plug was clean after only one day of driving. This is related to the reason we see a mileage increase. Not only did the spark plug not foul, the motor oil leaking into the cylinder was now combusted and turned to fuel further increasing mileage. This is why when one of these units are installed on a very worn engine the results tend to be even better.

Another factor to consider is amperage. It is very unproductive to increase amperage even if it increases HHO production. On the 67 Beetle when I increased amperage beyond a certain point mileage began to drop. There is a "flywheel effect" in any engine where it will run at ease with a small load nearly free. Once you crank up the amperage and the engine loads up, mileage figures drop. I found that if the engine is idling and you suddenly turn on the unit there should be no drop in engine RPM or heavy loading of the engine. If you keep the amperage in this range where the engine at idle pulls it freely, mileage will be best. Every engine has a different "flywheel effect" zone depending on size or gasoline/diesel.

This is a lot of work and expense that I gone through to save money on fuel many say. But for me it was never about fuel savings, but curiosity on the mechanics of these systems. Most HHO systems I've seen on the Internet will never work properly. But a proper unit should generate better mileage and reduced exhaust emissions if run conservatively. As a former "nay sayer" on this I have to say "Give it a try before you condemn it." Remember, BTU values of hydrogen may apply in the Faraday formula to determine efficiency. But in an internal combustion engine we are creating an increase in volume that pushes a piston that may not be entirely dependent on BTUs of energy released. You can run an engine on compressed air alone and the engine manufacturers do this to seat the piston rings.

Hope this clears up the topic of why so many see mileage improvements where none appear possible. Depends on the engine, of course, and the way the HHO is applied. Be advised this is potentially dangerous as the gas is explosive. If a unit is making one liter of HHO per minute and the engine backfires, the explosion will be more than significant. I've never had an accident myself taking every precaution. However, several friends have blown the tops off of tool boxes by accident testing these on engines without flashback preventers. You could be burned badly or even killed doing this wrong. If that happens law makers tend to pass laws limiting the average person's access to these units. Don't ruin it for the rest of us by being careless.

Glad to be here by the way. I've been to the Philippines once even staying in Manila for 6 months. Might be traveling there again in the next few months.

Hey I would like to comment and more or less agree on your argument. I have used a water electrolizer, fabricating it and using for the last 2.5 to 3 years. My car is a 1996 Toyota Rav 4 and if I were to make my best comment; I will not be satisfied NOT installing and using one in any car I will be owning in the future. These are some of the facts I have noticed using my own fabricated HHO device.
- I have'nt changed NOR cleaned my spark plugs for 3 years and it has not fouled despite 85-90% running it in Manila traffic.
- I have'nt noticed sufficient increase in mileage,if there was, I will consider it quite small. But my car has consistently run with feeling of glide and smoothness. Running it long in hiways, however, there was 40% more mileage increase compared to when it is run in traffic.
- I noticed that my car has run at 25-40% cooler, based on temperature dial reading.
- There was no black carbon deposits in my exhaust pipe, if there was, it is very minimal
- Based on my regular registration emission tests, my car has consistently passed at only 25% reading based on the upper threshold limit.

I am using a parallel s/s plate connected to the battery via 2 terminals and water as the only contact between them. Use of KOH as polarizer ]

[fmzart09]

Hello! I'm in Texas and within the past year become intimately familiar with HHO. Yes, you are correct, it's actually H2 & O2. Since they are mixed together the term HHO has become the chosen term throughout the Internet to refer to this very explosive gas combination.

First, I became involved when a member of our local car club began installing one of these "HHO" units on his car. I scoffed at him and explained to him why this absolutely would not work. In detail I showed him the relationship between the energy value of the "HHO" he would produce compared to the energy it would take to make it. Clearly, not even close to a break even point. This individual, a retired Physics professor, looked at me and told me, "You are wrong!" I then told him that the very physics books he was teaching from told me that I am right. He then said something to me I will never forget, "Like I keep telling everyone, the books are wrong!"

Since I made some of these in high school, only to make hydrogen balloons for the fireball effect (yes, I'm lucky to be alive), I fabricated a simple yet somewhat productive unit to prove my point. I had a 67 VW Beetle that was peaking at 42 miles per gallon. Everyone that knows me knows how hard I have worked to break past the 42 mile per gallon barrier, but the little car has no more mileage to give even at slower speeds. After installing this quickly fabricated HHO generator in the car I made some mileage runs. All were consistent at 45 miles per gallon! Instead of proving my point, I was blind sided with one reality. Never argue with a retired physics professor!

I've been studying this and it's not just the HHO (or H2 & O2), but many other factors too complex to go into detail here. Yes, there is a significant at times increase in mileage. No, it's not all from the gas but a combination of factors. So Faraday's Law remains intact and valid concerning the BTU value of the HHO created from water compared to the power robbed from the engine to pull the amperage. Simply put, mileage increases due to several factors and some simple testing under controlled conditions would prove this out.

One thing to consider is definitely the moisture. The higher lever of moisture would net some improvements in mileage. That being said, a friend and myself did many tests on moisture alone compared to HHO, and there is a higher percentage of improvement in mileage using HHO compared to only using a moisture bubbler. This I believe is due to the affect the HHO gas has in the combustion chamber when mixed with gasoline or diesel. If my theory is correct, the improvement in mileage would not be seen in a vehicle fueled by Natural Gas or Propane. Diesels see a higher net improvement in mileage than do gasoline fueled vehicles. Every test done at a pollution station in Houston Texas show more than a 100% reduction in hydrocarbons which support my theory. The primary fuel burns hotter and somewhat faster when a small amount of HHO is introduced into the mix. A vehicle with one bad cylinder was equipped with an HHO generator. The engine never made 2 hours at highway speeds without oil fouling number one cylinder. With the HHO the plug never fouled. What's more, if the fouled spark plug is reinserted into the engine uncleaned, the plug was clean after only one day of driving. This is related to the reason we see a mileage increase. Not only did the spark plug not foul, the motor oil leaking into the cylinder was now combusted and turned to fuel further increasing mileage. This is why when one of these units are installed on a very worn engine the results tend to be even better.

Another factor to consider is amperage. It is very unproductive to increase amperage even if it increases HHO production. On the 67 Beetle when I increased amperage beyond a certain point mileage began to drop. There is a "flywheel effect" in any engine where it will run at ease with a small load nearly free. Once you crank up the amperage and the engine loads up, mileage figures drop. I found that if the engine is idling and you suddenly turn on the unit there should be no drop in engine RPM or heavy loading of the engine. If you keep the amperage in this range where the engine at idle pulls it freely, mileage will be best. Every engine has a different "flywheel effect" zone depending on size or gasoline/diesel.

This is a lot of work and expense that I gone through to save money on fuel many say. But for me it was never about fuel savings, but curiosity on the mechanics of these systems. Most HHO systems I've seen on the Internet will never work properly. But a proper unit should generate better mileage and reduced exhaust emissions if run conservatively. As a former "nay sayer" on this I have to say "Give it a try before you condemn it." Remember, BTU values of hydrogen may apply in the Faraday formula to determine efficiency. But in an internal combustion engine we are creating an increase in volume that pushes a piston that may not be entirely dependent on BTUs of energy released. You can run an engine on compressed air alone and the engine manufacturers do this to seat the piston rings.

Hope this clears up the topic of why so many see mileage improvements where none appear possible. Depends on the engine, of course, and the way the HHO is applied. Be advised this is potentially dangerous as the gas is explosive. If a unit is making one liter of HHO per minute and the engine backfires, the explosion will be more than significant. I've never had an accident myself taking every precaution. However, several friends have blown the tops off of tool boxes by accident testing these on engines without flashback preventers. You could be burned badly or even killed doing this wrong. If that happens law makers tend to pass laws limiting the average person's access to these units. Don't ruin it for the rest of us by being careless.

Glad to be here by the way. I've been to the Philippines once even staying in Manila for 6 months. Might be traveling there again in the next few months.

: [SIZE=2]
I tend to agree with your comments. There are many factors involved using HHO in internal combustion engines which is complicated enough such that a simple mathematical logic cannot explain what's actually happening. It could be the same reason why an increase in mileage is experienced just by cleaning dirty or fouled plugs. No one can argue about this. I have used a diy HHO kit using parallel s/s plates (8 in all), with an input voltage of 12+volts and ampere draw not exceeding 1.25 amps through. The medium I used was distilled water and KOH dissolved in it. The controlling factor of KOH concentration was the ampere reading at initial cold start. Part of the plates are positive and the back of it negative as the only connection between the terminals is the water where the plates are dipped. I have used the HHO generator kit for the last 2.5-3 years. The control car was a Toyota Rav4 '96 model. Here are my observations:
- From the time I first installed the HHO kit, I have not changed NOR cleaned the plugs, but the car has constantly run with great smoothness and glide. It never fouled.
- The engine ran at 25% lower than its operating temperature based on the temperature dial. To find out the 'normal', I have disconnected the HHO kit and observed the dial reading. This I did from time to time.
- I have observed my exhaust as very clean and only trace of black carbon soot, if there was any, can be seen in it. One can run his finger in the last few inches of the exhaust pipe and not end up with black residues in it.
- I used to run my car 85-90% in Manila traffic (and you know how much we have of it) and did'nt noticed any mileage increase. But sometimes running it in hiways beyond the metro, there was an increase of 40% distance compared to traffic conditions. I really am not sure of this significance.
- When I drew the plugs,just recently, the only observation I had was a coating of rust. I cleaned the plugs using a tiny wire rotating brush using a hand held mini drill and a piece of sandpaper. I installed back the plugs and did not replace them. The car ran as if nothing was changed.
There are many theorists around imbibing old known science facts but no new inventions can be had in this world if one will not tinker and observe new facts through experimentations. I believe the saying, "don't argue with an old physicist". They will always try to find new things.
From hereon, I will not drive my own car without an HHO kit.
[/SIZE]]

[ehnriko]

This video is NOT about water powering cars but hydrogen powering vehicles. There is a difference.

I remind you to take care on the difference on the subject.

Hydrogen makes 92% of the universe... even gasoline has it.

The fact that we are talking about running your car on water meant that we are using water as the base or energy carrier to derive hydrogen in pure or mixed form.

Whether it's on board generated of on site as what Norway is doing for their hydrogen highway - it is still hydrogen derived basically from water.

HFC cars basically are electric cars which needed the hydrogen "From Water" to run a reverse electrolysis process to generate the electricity needed for the EV motors.. otherwise - it can just run on batteries.

The same hydrogen which is basically mixed with its' oxygen counterparts derived from most HHO kits are also using water as it's basis. - the only difference is - it is used as a combustion catalyst - to shorten the burn rate so that more of this gas is utilized inside the cylinders of the ICE.

Ergo, every car utilizing hydrogen - in part or in full for as long it gets this gas from Water... basically runs on water. Thats not meant to confuse anyone - but to clarify it.

[ghosthunter]

Hydrogen makes 92% of the universe... even gasoline has it.

The fact that we are talking about running your car on water meant that we are using water as the base or energy carrier to derive hydrogen in pure or mixed form.

Whether it's on board generated of on site as what Norway is doing for their hydrogen highway - it is still hydrogen derived basically from water.

HFC cars basically are electric cars which needed the hydrogen "From Water" to run a reverse electrolysis process to generate the electricity needed for the EV motors.. otherwise - it can just run on batteries.

The same hydrogen which is basically mixed with its' oxygen counterparts derived from most HHO kits are also using water as it's basis. - the only difference is - it is used as a combustion catalyst - to shorten the burn rate so that more of this gas is utilized inside the cylinders of the ICE.

Ergo, every car utilizing hydrogen - in part or in full for as long it gets this gas from Water... basically runs on water. Thats not meant to confuse anyone - but to clarify it.

Don't get theoretical on me.

Clarify.

Car runs on water means it has WATER on board which is uses whatever process to make it useful as "fuel" to power the car.

Car runs on hydrogen mean it has HYDROGEN on board which it uses to fuel the vehicle either by combustion or catalytic reaction.

There is a difference on the two.

[ehnriko]

Don't get theoretical on me.

Clarify.

Car runs on water means it has WATER on board which is uses whatever process to make it useful as "fuel" to power the car.

Car runs on hydrogen mean it has HYDROGEN on board which it uses to fuel the vehicle either by combustion or catalytic reaction.

There is a difference on the two.

It's not theoretical...

but I wont argue with you on this, I will let this one pass.

[ghosthunter]

It's not theoretical...

but I wont argue with you on this, I will let this one pass.

LOL! It's like arguing between Dingle's water powered car and those hydrogen fuel cell car. You have no arguement to make, period.

[ehnriko]

LOL! It's like arguing between Dingle's water powered car and those hydrogen fuel cell car. You have no arguement to make, period.

I am not the one deleting my comments...

You want debate?... bring it on.