Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Home Page → Great Lakes XJ → General XJ/MJ Technical → HHO, HHOO, Hydrogen-On-Demand, H2O Hybrid Systems and Generators.
 

Topic: HHO, HHOO, Hydrogen-On-Demand, H2O Hybrid Systems and Generators.

Post Info
dstaub
Supporting Member
Status: Offline
Posts: 523
Date:
HHO, HHOO, Hydrogen-On-Demand, H2O Hybrid Systems and Generators.
Permalink  
As stated by the Topic heading, this is about converting water into a combustible gas, known as many names (brown's gas, HHO, HHOO, hydroxy, hydroxygen), through the process of electrolysis. 

The purpose of this post is to hopefully spark interest in club members to start trying this on their rigs.  With the rising fuel prices, everyone is seemingly looking for ways to save on gas consumption and demand.  This idea absolutely works and I truly feel that this is the MOST beneficial and economical way to do so, and is also the most beneficial to planet Earth.  So, I have decided to post as much info on here that i can about this topic.  And the info that i post comes from hours upon countless hours i have read, researched, and tested this subject matter.  But I want this to be clear, I am in no way an expert on it and honestly, nobody is currently an expert on it.... yet.  I will just tell you what i have done, what works, what doesn't, what sites are good/bad, etc. 

So, Let's Go!

Alright, first things first.  So you don't waste your time, do not buy the "water4gas"  design.  i did not buy the actual manual from them, but i was able to do enough research on it to figure out their entire system, built one from materials that were far superior to the ones that they suggest using and the results were poor.  The cell ran hot, drew too many Amps, and the gas production was weak.  also the design of this cell caused the gas bubbles to become trapped in the water causing "saturation", which is basically wasted production because it is stuck in the water and not being released. 

Also, any design out there that uses stacks of SS fender washers in the cell, is pretty much a flop as well.  those cells do produce a decent amount of gas, but at a price of running at 40 Amps or higher.  Too much strain on your vehicles electrical system.

So basically, the only cell designs that WORK are the ones that use SS plates.  With that said though, there are MANY variations of this method.  Such as the number of plates used, configuration of the plates, running them in "series" or "parallel", and spacing between plates.

Here are some links to get you started and informed:

www.mindstrain.com    This guys design is what i am currently basing mine off of.  He has a very unique theory and i think it might actually be legit.  His pdf file about the S10 install is definitely worth the read.  His videos also have a lot of info, but the guy is really annoying to listen to in the vids.  He's kind of a goofball to when it comes to politics, so just ignore that aspect of his site if you need to.

Gas 4 Free    another really good source with a well designed cell. 
i have all their info and files and will post them soon.

that's all the time i have today.  more info soon smile


__________________
SCORE!: 1996 Cherokee Sport, bone stock, excellent condition, one owner, with currently 47,000 ORIGINAL miles!!
CURRENTLY:  2001 Cherokee Limited 4-dr, 33" Uniroyal Liberator A/Ts, 6-8" well built custom lift (sorry, i haven't measured yet).

SOLD: Project Rig: 87 Cherokee Pioneer 4dr.  bone stock now.  coming soon: 3" budget lift, go completely doorless and chop the rear cargo area out.

SOLD:  '98 Cherokee Sport 2dr, 3" SkyJacker w/ 2" budget boost, 31" Truxxus meats, Protofab off-road bumpers & rock rails, KC Highlights
ChevelleSSLS6
LIFETIME MEMBER
Status: Offline
Posts: 1579
Date:
Permalink  
here's a link to propane.
http://www.impcotechnologies.com/

so it runs like a forklift! lol.

Also, I think Adam was thinking of a 2.8v6 propane conversion.

more links

http://www.poweredbypropane.net/

http://www.gotpropane.com/

__________________

My Fleet
1996 XJ "Snowball"- 3.5" lift, bunch of little mods.  I hate pegleg rear axles!
1974 AMC Javelin "Jade Grenade"- 360v8, 4sp, green inside and out. Underfunded Project.
2009 Kawsaki Vulan 900 "Rocket III"- Summer DD
dstaub
Supporting Member
Status: Offline
Posts: 523
Date:
Permalink  
propane is also a very promising alternative fuel, but if we could, i would really like to keep this post about HHO related items... no offense.  maybe toss those links from here into a new topic about propane and natural gas.  i know those two fuels are also a growing idea so don't let me burst your bubble.... keep it going! :)

__________________
SCORE!: 1996 Cherokee Sport, bone stock, excellent condition, one owner, with currently 47,000 ORIGINAL miles!!
CURRENTLY:  2001 Cherokee Limited 4-dr, 33" Uniroyal Liberator A/Ts, 6-8" well built custom lift (sorry, i haven't measured yet).

SOLD: Project Rig: 87 Cherokee Pioneer 4dr.  bone stock now.  coming soon: 3" budget lift, go completely doorless and chop the rear cargo area out.

SOLD:  '98 Cherokee Sport 2dr, 3" SkyJacker w/ 2" budget boost, 31" Truxxus meats, Protofab off-road bumpers & rock rails, KC Highlights
dogwonk
LIFETIME MEMBER
Status: Offline
Posts: 1456
Date:
Permalink  
Okay, I have been racking my brain to try to better understand this technology ever since you left our house, Dan! rofl.gif

I really appreciated your humble explanation of what you built and honestly admitting that you are not an expert in this.

Your design seems really good. And, after some further explaining from Adam, sorry folks-Science isn't my forte, I really think this is a pretty good idea. I do understand some of the possible arguments against or in caution of, but it is something that is definitely worth looking further in to.

I forget, have you done the conversion to your XJ yet? If so, what kind of gains in mpg have you seen?

Keep updating us on further ideas and advancements in this technology.

Also, if you wouldn't mind, maybe post up some of the arguments against and your answers for them...

__________________
'93 XJ Sport - BUILD THREAD CLICK HERE
'90 XJ Laredo - TOTALED!

banner.jpg
Jeepguy91
Guest
Status: Offline
Posts: 407
Date:
Permalink  
I have got a buddy at work that just did this to his yj. He said that he got about a 10 mpg gain out of it. Don't know about that but think i am going to try it on the truck this weekend.

__________________

1996 Grand Cherokee Limited 3.5" rough country, 265 courser at's, roof rack, winch bumper, dana 44, 8,000 lb. winch
mvusse
Guest
Status: Offline
Posts: 86
Date:
Permalink  
<nerd>
One problem. If anybody has taken physics in high school, and paid attention to the laws of thermodynamics, they would realize this doesn't work.

It takes more energy to convert water into hydrogen and oxygen gas (hydroxy, Brown's gas, or whatever you want to call it) than you get back when you burn the hydroxy which will get you water as a combustion product.

This energy has to come from somewhere. Usually the battery, which is charged by the alternator, which is driven by the same engine combusting the hydroxy, as well as gasoline.

The only way it can increase your mileage is by creating more hydroxy using energy from the battery than the system is can put back in through the alternator. IE, it will drain your battery in return for better mileage. Depending on how efficient the conversion is, and how efficient your engine is, it would drain the battery fairly quickly for an unnoticable gain in mileage. it would also burn up the alternator.

More likely the system will look cool, but not drain your battery, which means it is not using much energy, thus not producing enough hydroxy to make up for the difference in drag on the alternator. The waste heat from the engine is still the same, as adding oxygen and hydrogen to the combustion process will not magically create a more mechanically efficient engine, but now you also have added waste heat from the water to gas conversion system. More waste heat means more energy lost to the environement, which has to come from somewhere. You guessed it: burning gasoline.

So running this system will cost you in more fuel burnt per mile driven. Probably not enough to be noticeable, but still there.

If it didn't, you would have the beginnings of a perpetual motion machine and it would be trivial to expand the system to become such.
</nerd>

But a properly built system looks hella cool!

__________________
dstaub
Supporting Member
Status: Offline
Posts: 523
Date:
Permalink  
well Rebecca, there's your answer to the request of an argument against this concept.  this is pretty much the biggest argument out there about it.  but here's the deal.  and with all do respect to you, mvusse, i feel that this "con" of the system is totally bogus.  i've heard and read this same thing plenty of times so don't take this personally.

here's why i feel it's bogus.  first of all the argument is basically stemmed from OVER THINKING the entire idea.  if a properly designed and efficiently designed HHO cell is such a huge drain on the batt, alt, etc, then why don't the lights, radio, and everything else electrical in the vehicle cause the battery and alternator to go bad quickly???
confused
Remember, an efficient cell only draws 20-30amps TOPS.  whoopeeedooo!
Also, you are not trying to run your engine on this gas, you are simply supplementing your gasoline to create a very efficient burn.... let's not be confused with what we are doing.
And if this was such a huge draw on everything, then why AREN'T people that have been doing this for a few YEARS now complaining about having to buy new batteries and alts??

*here's a lengthy but well said statement from a forum.

"I believe that the Water4Gas type sites are promoting their "E-Books" in a way that anyone should see as suspect. Their proposed systems are poorly designed and dangerous. Their email blasts and MLM promotional style just doesnt pass the smell test. But because some people are selling poorly designed dangerous products does not mean that all hydrogen injection systems are all a scam. In fact, hydrogen injection does work for scientific reasons that most of the nay-sayers ignore. Hydrogen is the smallest, lightest, and most reactive element that is why it is at the top left side of the periodic chart of the elements. Hydrogen ignites easier and burns many times faster than any other element. Adding hydrogen to an internal combustion engine is like adding charcoal lighter fluid to your Bar-B-Q, it gets things started faster. This was the conclusion of the JPL and NASA studies from the 70's. Both studies concluded that adding small amounts of hydrogen reduces ignition lag and increases flame speed, which supports much leaner air/fuel mixtures. It does not have anything to do with adding or transferring additional energy to the combustion, the Second Law of Thermodynamics is therefore not being violated. Without hydrogen injection gasoline is ignited by the spark plug several degrees before the beginning of the combustion/power stroke and is still burning when the piston reaches the bottom of this power stroke. The remaining unburnt fuel is then forced through the exhaust system to the EGR system to be recycled or to the catalytic converter to be incinerated (wasted). With hydrogen injection the combustion is much faster because the hydrogen burns quickly igniting the primary fuel from all sides at once. When proper engine timing and fuel mixture adjustments are made, the peak of the resulting pressure wave created by the combustion is higher (more energetic) and closer to the beginning of the power stroke because of this faster complete burn. Since most of the energy is released when the piston is near the top of the power stroke, more energy is able to be absorbed by the piston and converted to torque. Less energy is lost as heat through the exhaust. There is no unburnt fuel to be recycled by the EGR system or incinerated by the catalytic converter. A faster more efficient burn and less lost energy out the exhaust pipe means more power is converted to torque for power to the wheels, from equal amounts of energy input. This increase in over all system efficiency is the mechanism that creates increased fuel economy. What the NASA study does show conclusively is that hydrogen injection does reduce ignition lag and increases flame speeds. Therefore, designing systems for optimum fuel efficiency requires the energy released from the combustion to be focused at the very beginning of the power stroke, where the piston has the maximum time and travel to absorb the energy of the resulting pressure wave. In their summary the NASA engineers concluded that this would be possible with fuel reforming systems controlled by a closed loop computerized control system. Unfortunately, they did not have these control systems readily available to them in 1977. But we have this type of technology in common use today. While, electrolysis based hydrogen injection may not be the answer to reach optimal fuel efficiencies, they are the easiest to produce and test. Significant fuel economy gains are being produced by individuals and companies around the world with well designed safe units. But, Steam reforming systems are where near optimal fuel efficiency gains are currently being realized. Steam reformer systems utilize the waste heat from the exhaust system to produce hydrogen in higher concentrations than electrolysis and reform the gasoline (or any primary fuel) to easier to ignite plasma, just prior to intake. By using the hydrogen to reduce ignition lag to lowest possible time and processing the fuel to be fully consumed in the shortest period possible, near optimal fuel efficiencies are being reached. At the same time greenhouse gas and hydrocarbon emissions are greatly reduced. While most of the steam reformer systems available are using gasoline, it has been shown that some alternative fuels work even better. Fuels that contain large amounts of water work the best, with the added advantage that they do not require any additional storage/delivery system for water. The water to produce hydrogen and steam for the reforming process is available directly from the fuel. The real frustrating problems are that our news media focus on the least sophisticated technologies and ignore the most promising developments that will make the largest impacts in the shortest time. Our government agencies block advancements by refusing to test and certify new developments. Clean Air and Anti-Trust laws are written to protect the status quo rather than protect public interest and in the end only stifle innovation. Our colleges and universities teach that hydrogen is just an energy transfer or storage system so any other possible uses or properties are not entertained and/or met with ridicule. And the auto industry focuses on technology that will need 10 to 12 years to be developed and require major costly infrastructure changes. How did we get into this mess? Do we have the political will to fix it?"

i think that clears some things up....

in closing, for now, i would like to state this:
As Einstein once said, there are three stages to innovation, first you are considered to be crazy, then when people see you have something that works, skepticism sets in and the last stage is when everyone wants go get on the bandwagon.
idea

... he's no idiot...

__________________
SCORE!: 1996 Cherokee Sport, bone stock, excellent condition, one owner, with currently 47,000 ORIGINAL miles!!
CURRENTLY:  2001 Cherokee Limited 4-dr, 33" Uniroyal Liberator A/Ts, 6-8" well built custom lift (sorry, i haven't measured yet).

SOLD: Project Rig: 87 Cherokee Pioneer 4dr.  bone stock now.  coming soon: 3" budget lift, go completely doorless and chop the rear cargo area out.

SOLD:  '98 Cherokee Sport 2dr, 3" SkyJacker w/ 2" budget boost, 31" Truxxus meats, Protofab off-road bumpers & rock rails, KC Highlights
aci4369
LIFETIME MEMBER
Status: Offline
Posts: 3094
Date:
Permalink  
So dstaub, have you actually put your system on a vehicle or are you still in the planning phase?

Like Rebecca stated, what are your gains in MPG?

__________________

'99 XJ, 5.5" lift, 33" MT's
'11 Dodge Charger

I miss the days that they made toys that could kill a kid.

*Support our Troops*


My Pics and Specs

My Build Thread
dstaub
Supporting Member
Status: Offline
Posts: 523
Date:
Permalink  
i've actually had 2 different designs on my rig so far. they were the ones i described that didn't perform worth a darn.  i was actually out last night trying to wrap up my current design (the 3 plate design that i showed rebecca & adam) and get it all wired in.  almost done, just gotta get some more tubing, 1 fitting, more distilled water and i'm done! 
i have been running a small version of the 3 plate design on my fiance's car for about a month now and her AVG MPG per tank has consistently gone up 8-10 mpg.  it's on a 2000 Eclipse GT.  she's had it for 5 years and had NEVER reached 300 miles on a tank, until we put on the hho cell. now she is consistently reaching around that mark each tank.

the 2 designs that i had on my rig, like i said, weren't worth it.  first one i gained 1-2 mpg (if that).  second one i gained 2-4. that design (water4gas) was setup with 2 cells wired together. i later tried running them both but not wired together and come to find out that you have to run them together because it puts each cell at 6 volts.  at 12 volts, the cells get wayyyy to hot and you start steaming your water. that design also has you using baking soda as your electrolyte, but it gets your water dirty real quick.  oh and when i ran them at 12v, the heat warped the plexiglass cross piece that the electrodes were wrapped around, causing the electrodes to touch and short out the power wires.
SOOOOOO, after that mess and frustration doh, i decided to slow down, dig into this whole thing a lot more, and do a lot more bench testing.  you should see my garage... it's a freaking mess from all this! weirdface but through all of my additional testing and research, i was also able to find a very cheap way to build my current 3 plate cell.  i found a perfect container for $6 at Walmart, stainless plate for $10 each at Ace Hardware (you need 1 plate for the small cell, 2 for the bigger, more details later), plus then your odds and ends (stainless hardware, nylon hardware, terminals, etc) at Ace Hardware as well.  heck i even got my Sodium Hydroxide and distilled water at Ace as well!

alright, that's enough for now, got things to do.  i'm going to try and get some pics and maybe even a video of my cell today... we'll see. wink

__________________
SCORE!: 1996 Cherokee Sport, bone stock, excellent condition, one owner, with currently 47,000 ORIGINAL miles!!
CURRENTLY:  2001 Cherokee Limited 4-dr, 33" Uniroyal Liberator A/Ts, 6-8" well built custom lift (sorry, i haven't measured yet).

SOLD: Project Rig: 87 Cherokee Pioneer 4dr.  bone stock now.  coming soon: 3" budget lift, go completely doorless and chop the rear cargo area out.

SOLD:  '98 Cherokee Sport 2dr, 3" SkyJacker w/ 2" budget boost, 31" Truxxus meats, Protofab off-road bumpers & rock rails, KC Highlights
ChevelleSSLS6
LIFETIME MEMBER
Status: Offline
Posts: 1579
Date:
Permalink  
pretty neat. Is Adam the one who was looking to build a 2.8v6 for propane (or at least a conversion kit). With the higher octane (I think propane= 110) , he'd be able to run 11:1 CR in that thing.

__________________

My Fleet
1996 XJ "Snowball"- 3.5" lift, bunch of little mods.  I hate pegleg rear axles!
1974 AMC Javelin "Jade Grenade"- 360v8, 4sp, green inside and out. Underfunded Project.
2009 Kawsaki Vulan 900 "Rocket III"- Summer DD
aci4369
LIFETIME MEMBER
Status: Offline
Posts: 3094
Date:
Permalink  
So do you think that this setup will have any negative effects on your engine (besides battery and alt. that was already stated).

When this is all said and done are you going to post up a "How To" on this so that others don't have to go through the same problems that you have?


What type of gas milage does you GF's car get normally?  Should people expect to get 8-10mpg out of the setup or should they expect to get a certain percentage of gas millage.  I get 15-18 mpg normaly.  So do you think that I could get 25mpg, or closer to 20 with the setup?  Just thoughts for people that are reading this so they don't get dissapointed if they don't get an increase of 10 mpg.

__________________

'99 XJ, 5.5" lift, 33" MT's
'11 Dodge Charger

I miss the days that they made toys that could kill a kid.

*Support our Troops*


My Pics and Specs

My Build Thread
dstaub
Supporting Member
Status: Offline
Posts: 523
Date:
Permalink  
i really don't see any issues to the negative side if someone installs a cell on their vehicle.  i've heard a few "ill effects" theorized before, but i (again, not an expert, just my opinion) disagree with them. 

one is "hydrogen embrittlement".  people say that hydrogen causes metals to become brittle.  ok, that may be the case.... maybe... but only in "storage" situations.  remember, i am creating this gas on demand. there is no storage in the vehicle.  and the gas is definitely NOT in the engine long enough for it to even have a chance to weaken anything.  it flows into your intake, then flows into the intake manifold, then the cylinders, and BANG- it's ignited with the gasoline.... it doesn't just stop and sit anywhere at anytime inside the engine.

two is that because this gas ignites so "violently" that it causes the engine to run hotter.  i don't agree with this AT ALL.  when this gas is ignited, yes it is VERY reactive, but it's also extremely fast burning.  we're talking over 4000ft/sec.  ok, so what i'm getting at is that when it burns, it doesn't have time to make anything hot.  gasoline is actually worse because when it's ignited it burns horribly slow. 
oh and because of that factor in it's chemisty, your ignition system shoots the spark into the cylinder considerably before top-dead-center and the gas burns from that point all the way to after TDC.  an almost perfectly efficient engine with an almost perfect source of fuel would only have to spark right at TDC, and then BOOM!!, that perfect timing of everything forces that piston downward and transfers it into motion

**the perfect example to demonstrate this is this:  we've all done this before.  take a lighter and light it.  run your finger through the flame quickly, and what do ya know? you barely feel anything.  now run it through slower.  you feel a little more heat, but still not burning you.  now try to just hold your finger in the flame and you can't possibly do it.  flame.gif

it's a simple law of thermal transfer.  the longer heat is applied to an object, the hotter it gets through transfer.  
BTW, in my case (and most everyone elses too), i usually notice mine running a little cooler actually.


Yes, i will post a How-To of sorts.  i finally got mine wrapped up on my rig yesterday, but since all of the rain tonight i wasn't able to go out and get some pics/vids.  i will show you exactly what i did, what i used, where i got parts, and the cost of building the cell yourself.

on my fiance's car, she was averaging around 16-17mpg per tank and now she is consistently getting 23-25 average mpg per tank.  again though, she has a very small cell right now.  she will have basically the same setup as i have now, fairly soon, and will hopefully increase even more.  let me stress this though, EVERY vehicle/engine will react somewhat different so there is no guarantee as to what % increase you may get.  BUT even a little is something worthwhile.  and heck, even if you don't somehow get better mileage, your engine WILL get a noticeable gain in power because your effective combustion is so much more.

ok, all for now.  should have pics and vids on here tomorrow. biggrin

til next time.....

__________________
SCORE!: 1996 Cherokee Sport, bone stock, excellent condition, one owner, with currently 47,000 ORIGINAL miles!!
CURRENTLY:  2001 Cherokee Limited 4-dr, 33" Uniroyal Liberator A/Ts, 6-8" well built custom lift (sorry, i haven't measured yet).

SOLD: Project Rig: 87 Cherokee Pioneer 4dr.  bone stock now.  coming soon: 3" budget lift, go completely doorless and chop the rear cargo area out.

SOLD:  '98 Cherokee Sport 2dr, 3" SkyJacker w/ 2" budget boost, 31" Truxxus meats, Protofab off-road bumpers & rock rails, KC Highlights
dstaub
Supporting Member
Status: Offline
Posts: 523
Date:
Permalink  
ok, well, here they are.  nothing fancy about them. just used my RCA Small Wonder video camera.  no scripting, no editing, etc.  but it works. smile






oh, fyi, my next cell design test will be a multi-plate dry cell.  it supposed to be the best design out there, but it costs quite a bit more and is harder to make.  i may end up just buying one that has all the parts, but you have to put it together.  the EBN (energybuilders.net) design is the one i will go with. BUUUT, that will be quite a while from now.  i'll let ya know when that starts.wink

__________________
SCORE!: 1996 Cherokee Sport, bone stock, excellent condition, one owner, with currently 47,000 ORIGINAL miles!!
CURRENTLY:  2001 Cherokee Limited 4-dr, 33" Uniroyal Liberator A/Ts, 6-8" well built custom lift (sorry, i haven't measured yet).

SOLD: Project Rig: 87 Cherokee Pioneer 4dr.  bone stock now.  coming soon: 3" budget lift, go completely doorless and chop the rear cargo area out.

SOLD:  '98 Cherokee Sport 2dr, 3" SkyJacker w/ 2" budget boost, 31" Truxxus meats, Protofab off-road bumpers & rock rails, KC Highlights
aci4369
LIFETIME MEMBER
Status: Offline
Posts: 3094
Date:
Permalink  
I was reading about this on another site and someone posted this link.  It is from another jeep site and is an old topic but is full of really good info.  Just thought that I would post it up.

http://www.lonestarjeepclub.org/board/showthread.php?t=22303

__________________

'99 XJ, 5.5" lift, 33" MT's
'11 Dodge Charger

I miss the days that they made toys that could kill a kid.

*Support our Troops*


My Pics and Specs

My Build Thread
 
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
 
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard