Offroad-Express

After being inspired once again by meece4x4's HHO generator i'm gonna build one for my car...
LETS NOT GET INTO A DEBATE ABOUT IF OR WHY IT WILL WORK rather how do you guys think is the best way to test it, attempting to remove as many variables as possible?

My car is a 1992 Suzuki Cultus, 1L - Carby (No ECU etc), 5 Speed Manual, A/C, P/S. Uses 91 petrol normally. Also has small sub/stereo . My normal fuel economy ranges from 14km/L to 19.5km/L depending on how i decide to drive and what the road is like etc.

How do you guys think is the best way to test it, attempting to remove as many variables as possible?
As there is no ecu or fuel injection I cannot use one of the commerical MPG type gauges, the only way would be to try and measure the flow rate through the fuel line..

My current thinking is to remove the fuel line from the tank from the carb, and place another line from a measured container to the carb (ie 250ml). Then warm the car up, and measure time it takes at a fixed number of revs (ie 1000rpm at idle and maybe 3000rpm) to use the fuel with and without the HHO

Then would need to try and test it under load - i guess the ideal would be a dyno but not having access to one i wonder about trying to find a track or fixed route that i can maintain a steady speed with like a hand throttle and measuring the amount of fuel it uses.

I guess them would be the real life testing - however there are many varibles here to attempt to control to have valid results...

and it is rumored to produce an increase in power/torque/? So i guess this would just be a subjective test?

Edit: Fixed calculations

No help on the HHO but I think you have done your fuel calc's wrong . My thirsty v8 rangie did 20l/km
So I'm thinking you mean 14km/l ?

Chris

oops yeh thanks

It ranges from 7.1-5.2L/100km or 14-19.5 km/L

Still got a some issues with your calculations.

For km/l, you divide the km driven, by the litres used.
For litres per 100km, you multiply the litres by 100, then divide by the km driven.

Once you've got your calculations sorted, you need to drive the same route many times, fill up each time you've finished till you get a decent scatter of results.

Do the same with the snake gas generator on, try to keep everything as close to the same as you can (temperature, rain/dry, speed, tyre pressure etc).
You need to write down all your results, you'll get a scatter result for each. This is normal.
Once you've got the results, some quick stats will show you the mean and deviation. We can work out the margin of error on each.

I just rounded it up to 5.2l/100km instead of 5.1l/100km

On a recent trip from Rotorua to North of Auckland driving semi-carefully on open road we did 351km with 18L ($38)
351/18 = 19.5km/L
18 x 100 = 1800 / 351 = 5.13L/100km

On the other end of the scale with heavy driving I've done about 420km to the needle hitting empty (30L)
420/30 = 14km/L
30 x 100 = 3000 / 420 = 7.1L/100km

Note: I haven't built the 'HHO electrolyzer' yet. That's tommorows project having trouble finding a preserving jar of all things I did not pay for the plans, but found some free ones on the net (I can forward them if anyone's interested) and figure it will only cost a few dollars to make so haven't got much to lose. I am very skeptical of it actually working but hey its worth a try to prove the critics correct...

icekayak wrote:I just rounded it up to 5.2l/100km instead of 5.1l/100km

On a recent trip from Rotorua to North of Auckland driving semi-carefully on open road we did 351km with 18L ($38)
351/18 = 19.5km/L
18 x 100 = 1800 / 351 = 5.13L/100km

On the other end of the scale with heavy driving I've done about 420km to the needle hitting empty (30L)
420/30 = 14km/L
30 x 100 = 3000 / 420 = 7.1L/100km

Note: I haven't built the 'HHO electrolyzer' yet. That's tommorows project having trouble finding a preserving jar of all things I did not pay for the plans, but found some free ones on the net (I can forward them if anyone's interested) and figure it will only cost a few dollars to make so haven't got much to lose. I am very skeptical of it actually working but hey its worth a try to prove the critics correct...

Sorry I thought we were talking 4wd's, that's why the figures didn't make sense.
Yes for a 1L suzuki cultus those figures make perfect sense.

Best bet is to find a loop and drive exactly the same loop 4 or 5 times, fill the tank back to the same point each time noting the ammount required to refill the tank, average the 5 results.

Next do the exact same trip the same 5 times refilling the tank again, note the results and average them out again.
One thing all the websites do say is to reduce the fuel you put in, this would distort the results to some degree but you should also compare drivability of the two "fuel's"

I would go with a 2.25 Litre coke bottle as the fuel tank or rig up some similar smaller tank to feed the engine, Oh and good luck the results will be interesting.

Are you using just water? or water and baking powder?

I guess it may pay to run a single blind trial (think thats the term) ie getting a couple of people to drive the loop without telling them if its on or off...

Was planning on using water and baking soda if nothing else will be a good way of producing hydrogen balloons
Got most of the stuff today (Finally found a preserving jar at opshop for 20c )

Well have made a start on building it. I am having trouble getting a seal around the lid and where the bolts go through, and the wire i used was too thick to make nice coils but it is producing bubbles (which i presure are Hydrogen and Oxygen).

I put 1/4 of tsp of baking soda in and took it for a little test drive...
I filled up both times at same pump till it first clicked off, then drove a course primarly down the motorway trying to keep constant speed of 90km/h staying in slow lane (this was to try and make sure i didn't get stuck behind traffic) and filled up at the same pump again. Measured it using in-car gps. Tyre pressured should have remained constant, car had been driven for about 30 mins before test so should have been warm, and weather was fineish with slight drizzle during both tests (auckland weather - fine with drizzle??)

Without Hydrogen
Total km: 39.3km
Average Moving Speed: 81.2km/h
Average Speed (inc time stopped): 77.5km/h
Top speed: 94.5km/h
Total time: 30:20
Time Stopped: 1:20
Petrol Used: 1.90l (of 91 - $4.03)
Economy: 20.68km / L or 4.83L / 100km

With Hydrogen
Total km: 39.3km
Average Moving Speed: 81.2km/h
Average Speed (inc time stopped): 77.4km/h
Top speed: 94.7km/h
Total time: 30:20
Time Stopped: 1:20
Petrol Used: 1.84l (of 91 - $3.90)
Economy: 21.36km / L or 4.68L / 100km

So 21.36km / L with hydrogen and 20.68km / L without hydrogen, just over a 3% improvement
I am the first to admit it wasn't a controlled test, and there would easily be 3% difference in normal driving but hey it didn't go down at lease.

I am gonna get another lid for the jar and rewind the coil and test again on same route
Anyone know anyone friendly with a dyno?

That's a good start.

There're dyno guys on outerlimits offering their dyno time free to prove/disprove the worth of these things. But Aussie is a little far away.

I would like to see your plans if you could pm me your email address, I would run the car on a dyno for the testing, ring oraemail round I am sure one of the dyno guys in auckland would be keen on some cheap dyno time for the sake of sience. you could see if you cam get a fuel meter from somewhere too to be sure of accuracy. Would be keen to help out if I can.

So how's this test progressing?

Any more news on this chris?

Not really its still under the bonnet but need to find a better sealing lid to fit the jar i think.
My fuel useage changes daily depending on how late I sleep in...

After speaking with others who have fitted units I think the only way to really test these things would be on the dyno.

Agreed, although in oct/nov I'm going to be doing a wee bit of driving. (Around 3000km and possible upto 7500 km...) So am going to have pleanty of times to test this and other fuel saving tips...

Hi There, I have built a hydrogen generator and am running it in my toyota Carib, we also made an adjustment to the mapsensor which allows us to tune the fuel mixture by adjusting the map sensor (this is essential on a fuel injected car)
I had it put on the dyno and the results are impressive, we had a increase of horse power throughout the rev range, most noticably at 2500 rpm where we had an increase of 7 horse power, and top horse power went from 64.0ho to 67.7 hp, this may not sound a lot, but all this wwas acheved while leaning the engine to run at its best, and for any doubters that say it doesnt work, I am more than happy to show them it going and show them the print outs. but you cant just add hho and expect it to work, you have to make changes to counter the work you have done, hope this is of some interest, will be doing a fuel saving test this weekend so will kepp you posted

Hi Jear bear, When you ran it on the dyno did you retune the engine on just petrol first? just out of intrest most cars are detuned to run on poor fuel ex factory and a dyno tune can boost hp etc by as much as 15% on its own, so did you run it with and without the HHO at the same engine settings? Cheers Stephen

jear bear wrote:Hi There, I have built a hydrogen generator and am running it in my toyota Carib, we also made an adjustment to the mapsensor which allows us to tune the fuel mixture by adjusting the map sensor (this is essential on a fuel injected car)
I had it put on the dyno and the results are impressive, we had a increase of horse power throughout the rev range, most noticably at 2500 rpm where we had an increase of 7 horse power, and top horse power went from 64.0ho to 67.7 hp, this may not sound a lot, but all this wwas acheved while leaning the engine to run at its best, and for any doubters that say it doesnt work, I am more than happy to show them it going and show them the print outs. but you cant just add hho and expect it to work, you have to make changes to counter the work you have done, hope this is of some interest, will be doing a fuel saving test this weekend so will kepp you posted

The improvements in power and economy are from the leaning of the fuel mixture, almost any petrol vehicle will benefit from this as manufacturers tune their cars on the rich side of stoichiometric to protect the motor from knocking under load. If you're going to be mucking around with A/F ratio you really need a meter to ensure you don't take it too far and end up with holes in your pistons. Though I suppose a modern car with knock sensors should retard the timing before this point is reached.

You can't attribute the improvements to the 'HHO' generator as it's effect is not being measured in isolation - you have made other mods to the engine (tricking the ECU to run lean).

smurf182 wrote:The improvements in power and economy are from the leaning of the fuel mixture, almost any petrol vehicle will benefit from this as manufacturers tune their cars on the rich side of stoichiometric to protect the motor from knocking under load. If you're going to be mucking around with A/F ratio you really need a meter to ensure you don't take it too far and end up with holes in your pistons. Though I suppose a modern car with knock sensors should retard the timing before this point is reached.

These are my thoughts also.

While the knock sensor will retard the timing if the fuel starts to detonate, you'll still have EGT's way higher than normal. If the hydrogen has a stabilising effect on detonation (it has been claimed) that's well and good until it stops coming for any reason (out of water, circuit breaks etc).
Then you've got an engine running lean, the ECU can't richen it up any more and your pistons melt.

I'm all for fuel saving, but you've gotta save a lot to pay for a new engine.