HHO Generator - Save Gas

Tilly,
If the fuel you are using is the same and it is drawing enough power from the alternator to drop the voltage then I would say you have already proven that the fuel consumption (economy) is going down as well as hp to the rear wheels.

 

UPDATE:

Got in the parts and put one together. Will fill up with gas and start the experiment directly. Also, Ive been told you need about one unit per liter of engine size. Which would mean I need 5 total... As you can see I only have one. Im planning on adding more as money permits.

EDIT/UPDATE:

Went to fill the truck up with gas, and It did something it has never done before. As I pulled away from the gas pump it idled right into 2nd gear. I didn't even have to touch the pedal. Will that translate into better FE? Who knows...

Tomorrow I plan to see If I can find the parts I need locally (now that I know exactly what to get) and put 5 more together.

 

My HHO

I know I don't have a Mavrick or Comet, but I have been using a HHO device. I have a 2008 Ford Focus and added a device to it that is pumping out 2 Lpm at 5 amps. I had to add some devices to my O2 sensors to fool them to run normal. I added the device first and noticed my fule economy went down but my power went up and my CEL came on. I added the O2 sensor devices and the CEL never came back on and it seems to be idleing smoother, but when I first start my car it wants to idle at 2000 rpm's for about 5 minutes then it backs down to normal (a little below 1000). I think this has to do with the O2 sensors heating up. Once it becomes a closed circut (using the O2 sensors) it start to run normal (leaner I guess you could say). I have seen ganes ranging from 5 to 11 mpg more depending on where I drive. If it is around town then I get a 5mpg boost and if the interstate I will get 11mpg. I drive 144 miles round trip to and from work and the bulk is interstate travel. I have been using this device for around 4 months now and just had to clean it. I fill it every 900 miles with 5 cups of water and the device holds 2 quarts. So many people say it can't be done, but never tried it. I was tring to disprove it and it worked. I don't care if you believe me or not...thats your loss, but I heard about doing it and did it all myself from what I have gathered from the internet without having to pay for a stupid book. I even designed a SS Metal system that noone else has tried and it works better than what I have seen out there to date...even better than the smackbooster (which I have tried).

If you are going to use the smackbooster plate assembly then you should put plastic between the plate sections. This will stop electrical bleed that will hinder production. You will find that the smackbooster design will create .25 to .5 lpm which isn't a whole lot. I'll share my design if you want and you can try it out...will take $30 for the parts and about an hour to build but it is very easy to do.

Like I said before...I don't care if you believe me or not...spout laws of thermodynamics and conservation of energy. How may times have you calculated somethig in the lab and it was different in the real world? Who knows exactly what goes on inside the ICE...not even the creators know that so don't fool yourself.

Brad

 

So, how much to share your design?

 

Hho

Nothing. I can do it as a graphic for you or I can try to explain it.

Expanation:

I don't have the count amounts of the metal needed so that would be trial and error depending on how big you want to make it.

Basically take 6 2 inch pieces of 1/4 inch nylon rod. Line them in a row and place one SS Nut on each rod and one fender washer on the 1st, 3rd and 5th ones. Then place one fender washer in the 2nd, 4th and 6th one. So you should be starting a stack. Now put another on on the 1st, 3rd and 5th ones. You can keep stacking like this but don't go past about 3 levels because this will create too much bleed off. Then place 2 small 1/4in nylon wasers on each rod. Once they are in place stack alternating just like before but 3 high (do not go higher than 5 or there will be too much voltage drop to be effective). Finaly add 2 small 1/4in nylon washers to each rod and then the same number of stacks as the first one on the last let not greater than 3 levels. Then pisition the stacks in a circle like formation and finish the connection. Make 3 or more of them (I am using 3) and place them on a nylon rod. Use SS nuts and nylin washers to keep them from moving on the rod and touching eachother. Make enough room between each to place a piece of thin plastic between to slow down the current flow from one to another. Make one side of the circle positive and one side negative for each circle. The ones in the center are neutral which drop the voltage keeping the amps down and the 2 nylon washer spacing and stagared washers keeps the heat down. PM me an email address and I will make a graphic if anyone is intrested. I used a square microwafe safe plastic container I got from Wal-Mart with an airtight lid. Use Distilled water some baking soda, SS nuts and bolts and put a connector near the bottom of the container and one on the lid then connect your hoses. Attach it to a bubbler of any design and off you go.

The fender washers can be of any size just have to be SS and 1/4 inch ID. OD can be .25" to 2". The larger the size the more production but higher heat.

The design will reuse wasted energy by being in a circular pattern and staggared washers. Took alot of math and physics to figure this one out. The more you put in the higher the heat, but you can use more than one container and still not go over 25 amps and get more than 4 lpm.

Brad

 

I wonder why the more I look at these things the more they remind me of bongs.

 

On ECM controlled cars and trucks;they operate in a closed loop configuration based on oxygen sensor reaction in the exhaust.
You cannot just add an HHO system and overide the closed system control that will detect any change in the exhaust gas and attempt to correct the fuel injected. As a side note, too large a correction usually will bring on a check engine lamp because the correction table has been shifted to far out of normal range and is reported as a trouble code.
This correction may be more fuel if excess ox has been detected making the fuel consumption go up or possiblely staying the same if there was any advantage to the addon.
Much the same thing happens when ethonal has been added to the gas in high percentages.
Not only is there more ox in the exhaust, the BTU content is lower overall making fuel mileage worse in 99% of the cases.
Please consider the science of all this beginning with the motor as it exists and what you think you will achive with an addon.
Most of the time other supporting changes are needed to even begin to take any advantage of an addon decice.
Ignition timing, compression ratio, a/f/mix calabration are all affected once fuel feed is altered.
As far as fuel mileage goes, it is difficult to detect any change this small by even averaging many tankfulls unless the same driving route is taken and everything remains as much the same as possable.
I run an electronic gauge monitor in my truck and can tell you that keeping the 'instant consumption' as high as possible does improve the fuel mileage, and that average can all be lost at some other point in the trip.
The monitor gives you the instant and the "instant average' at any given time and not what you will end up with when the tank is dry.
There is to much wishfull thinking about fuel mileage and the effects of addon devices when the basic engine design and control systems set the basic fuel mileage you will get.
A vehichle that has light weight, small frontal area, small displacment motor with high compression and a fuel that will combust under high compression without detonation are the basic ingredents to higher fuel mileage.

 

All I can say is: "P.T. Barnum was right."

 

hey

Like I said before...it works on my car with the modifications to the car I have made (O2 sensor device, HHO bypases the MAF sensor) and by adding the HHO device. I really don't care what people say...I am not here to argue just add my $0.02 to the conversation and give some people that want to try it something to try that is better than buying the guides online. You can bash me and tell me I am full of it and spout laws of physics and combustion all day but it doesn't change the fact that is works on my car just fine. If anyone has an questions on how the HHO device I created is put together or anyother questions about installation just let me know.

Just a FYI to all the people that say it can't work...your credibility is lowered by the fact that you won't even try it. I believe in book work, but get your nose out of a book and give it a try you may be supprised...I was. The other person that was supprised was the mechanic from my ford dealership when I showed it to him. They are tring to get approval to add the devices to select test cars with owners consent.

 

Do you have a diagram and parts list for your setup?

 

No...but I can draw one up easy enough. Send me an email and I will respond when I get one drawn up tonight.

bradstarbuckwest@hotmail.com

 

Can't say I agree with that. Rejecting all this "book learnin' mumbo-jumbo" is pretty good for lowering one's credibility though.

If this worked - think about it. Car manufacturers are under intense pressure to lower their average fuel economy. GM sells Aveo because they want to sell Hummer. Nobody buys those sh!tboxes, they just exist to skew the average. If they could do this, they would. Millions, probably billions are spent by the auto industry on R&D trying to make engines more efficient. Engines getting smaller, getting turbo and supercharged - those things work. There's no way they haven't tested this, and the vast oil company conspiracy only reaches so far. There are no Illuminati meeting in secret caves under the White House with oil execs to supress this wonderful technology.

There's just no way the amount of hydrogen and oxygen put out by these little hookahs could be enough to meet these claims. Enough to make otherwise sane people hallucinate, yes, but not contribute measurably to fuel economy.

There's only one real way to test this, and I'm considering doing it myself. But it will be pointless, because if I prove this is bunk, somebody will say I was biased, or I built it wrong, and the circus will continue. Somebody needs to sneak this onto someone else's car after getting valid baseline data, and not tell that person anything. Then a third person should monitor it, and they shouldn't be told anything about it either.

 

I agree with you. I can help talk you thought everything if you need it, but if you say it works or doesn't work you won't be any different than me...one person tring to convince someone that something works.

As for car manufactures go it is quite difficult to put these on cars. One there is the whole hydrogen thing and the possibility of it exploding if not installed properly. Another thing is the fact that the devices require maintance every 6 months or so (cleaning) and topping it off with solution every 900 miles to keep it running in top shape. Car companies have a hard enough time to get people in for an oil change which could severly dammage your car if not changed. What makes you think that someone will remember to bring it in for a cleaning and or replacement if there millage goes down some...even if they are paying attention to it. I know it is odd for someone to have an answer to that that doesn't involve conspiracy with oil companies.

I am just a normal person...not wanting to sell anything which seems to be everyones first thought. I have one degree in Information technology, one in electrical engineering, and a masters in Information technology. I am 29 years old father of 2 boys and I drive 74 miles oneway to work. I am not saying anything to impress anyone, just stating facts. Do it if you want. Email me if you are intrested in a diagram and a partal parts list.

 

I am not rejecting book learning, just the fact that people only go by books and discredit something before getting there hands dirty. Thats all I am saying. I am not a Hitler follower that wants to burn all books or anything. I am actualy a nerd when it comes to books because that is the nature of my job. I have to keep learning new programming languages so I don't date myself out of a job.

 

A dealer wanting to do this on customers cars is a very risky thing to do.
If there are claims for motor problems down the road, the dealer will have to stand for it, the mfger will not.
Ford will not even stand by any method of spark plug thread repairs on the 4.6/5.4 motors that blow plugs off the motors, other than there own developed way and the customer pays for it yet.
As for Brad's apparent success with HHO, as I have said above, you made changes to your motor that are not authorized on a factory basis and may have been in the right direction to favor improved fuel mileage (called super lean running) but....but do you know if your motor is running to lean and may burn valves by fooling the Ox sensors?
Hide behind ignorance if you will and charge on. It may come back to haunt you in the end.
I don't think you will ever see an engineer knowingly do this.
They have enough problems after the public get the cars and trucks, even with exhautive testing years before production release.
As far as arguing; this is a disscussion on the subject not an attempt at causing a war.
Prove that what I discribed is incorrect about the operation of an ECM controlled motor and trying to introduce anything into the fuel channel to make an ongoing change in the 'whole fuel efficiency" of the motor.
The HHO is never in control (from the outside of the motor's system) on a looped feedback system.
You cannot keep ignoring these things.