loading
Picture of HHO generator
Hi frnds!

Here I am at my attempt to give you more information about powering engine using water.
This instructable is a part of my previous one. Do visit that one to get a clear idea.

I am posting a video on how to build a HHO generator which will produce HHO gas to power your car's engine.
The video has part 2 for details. It leads you to a site and wants you to buy the guide.

I am posting my version and giving you a detailed information on how to do it.

Let's start!

Step 1: Things we need

Picture of Things we need
Tools.jpg
Things we need.

Parts:
1. Glass jar with plastic lid
2. Pet/squeeze bottle
3. 1000mm long braided wire
4. 500mm long water pipe
5. 1000mm long electric wire
6. CD case or thick plastic sheet
7. 2 screws with nut
8. Hollow screw with nut
9. Cheap pen without refill
10. Fuse

Tools:
1. Drill machine with bits
2. Screw driver set
3. Saw
4. Ruler
5. Plase
 
1-40 of 84Next »
NRen2k56 years ago
This is completely worthless. 1) There's no such thing as HHO. Water is HOH, and it's H2 and O2 that are being produced. 2) The energy you're using to breakdown the water into hydrogen and oxygen is more than the energy you get back, and ultimately that energy is coming from gasoline. 3) The amount of hydrogen produced is tiny. 4) I'm not sure about this one, but I think the baking soda is making CO2 gas rather than speeding hydrogen production. More pretty bubbles, sure, but it isn't actually doing any good.
It works fine, it does produce HHO and the baking soda or salt( don't use salt) increases the production.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.Water is H20,not HOH.Baking soda increases the conductivity of the water,allowing for bubbles to form faster.
Nope, you're wrong.

H2O and HOH are two different ways of expressing the same chemical formula. One version tells you just what elements compose the molecule, while the other tells you how they're actually arranged. For example, hexane can be expressed as C6H14 or as CH3CH2CH2CH2CH2CH3 - both are correct.

Sure, baking soda makes bubbles faster, but as you even said yourself, "it increases the conductivity of the water" - meaning you're drawing more current. Just because it makes the gas faster doesn't necessarily mean it makes it any more efficiently.

You're absolutely right, but the sodium hydrogen carbonate reduces the resistence of the water what means that less energy is going to be converted into heat and increasses the eficiencycy

no ur wrong to say HOH this shows either hydrogen hydroxide or some form of alcohol but either way they both dont exist
and increasing the conductivity of the water does make it more efficient
let me give u an eg
the copper wires that make up ur processor is 99.999% pure that makes them very fast
but no good for supercomputers
for these machines this wire which have the second best conducitvity
but they also have to be supercooled to become a super conductor they have no resistance and are more efficient
so if this was in ur computer ur light bill would be much less and ur computer would be faster  
I like how dpsilver rants on like he knows all about chemisitry, yet he fails to recognise that water is not "some form of alcohol" because an alcohol requires a hydroxyl group attached to a carbon chain. Come on, this is Carbon Chemistry 101 stuff.
yes by chance i was going through my email and saw this now about the chemistry did you happen to notice the date of the post and todays current date and how much could be learnt within that time period, so my failure that you mention was coming up on 4 years ago to this date and you quote the comment in a funny way "no ur wrong to say HOH this shows either hydrogen hydroxide or some form of alcohol but either way they both dont exist " that was the original comment so i do advise you to come with some argument that is better than what you stated
Woah, hang on buddy, who ever said it was a counter-argument on my part? I was merely commenting on something I found midly amusing. That is all
coggs dpsilver5 years ago
It would be fine to call it hydrogen hydroxide and imply that it is a basic substance. Water is amphoteric and can function as either a base or an acid. Not sure about your claim of it being an alcohol, but HOH is a common way of writing H2O because it helps simplify the fact that there are 2 H atoms per 1 O atom. H2O is just a condensed form.
dpsilver coggs5 years ago
to show that it is a basic substance is incorrect because the H+ ions are in balance with the OH- ions and pure water cannot ionize
alright let me put it this way the OH group in chemistry shows an hydroxy group that are present in alcohols and a hydoxide group if it is an ION OH- H2O is a covalent substance and saying HOH is wrong
2 the way substances are written now is very important like these two compounds
COH and CHO
COH are found in alcohols and the CHO group in ketones and aldehydes so i cant just go around saying which ever i feel like saying
one more thing i found out copper isnt in processors the only metal present is gold my bad 
 
The Lewis Structure of Water is:
O
H.^*^.H (With Best Text Representation)

Which is usually typed as H-O-H.

Using H2O instead of HOH does make more sense though.
yup i esp when using big name compounds or cycloaklanes let me see u type one of those like benzene lol
Just because the conductivity is higher doesn't mean it draws more current.
"Just because the conductivity is higher doesn't mean it draws more current."

Yes, it does. We're talking first-year electrical theory here.

Ohm's Law
This 'HHO' nonsense is not only a fuel waster as you note in your point 2, the arrangement shown is patently dangerous. Without a flame arrester in the hydrogen & oxygen delivery line, a backfire in the vehicle's intake will ignite the gases in the H & O line. The flame will travel back to the electrolyser, which will then explode.

'HHO' is a HHOax. If you believe this nonsense works, you don't understand the science. If you sell 'HHO' devices, you're a scam artist.
Oh yes there is SUCH a great risk of backfire, especially in modern vehicles.
ewitte NRen2k56 years ago
From a government agency

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/facts-research/research-technology/report/Guidelines-H2-Fuel-in-CMVs-Nov2007.pdf

Just one thing from the article

Because of the wide flammability range of hydrogen, an internal combustion engine (ICE) operating on hydrogen can operate with a much leaner air/fuel mixture than a typical gasoline engine, which improves efficiency. A hydrogen ICE developed by Ford Motor Company can operate with an air fuel ratio as high as 86:1, compared to 14.7:1 for typical gasoline engines (see Figure 7). This results in about a 25 percent improvement in efficiency (NEW-CARS, 2003).
NRen2k5 ewitte6 years ago
Yes, I know.

Let's be clear:
  • Hydrogen injection = beneficial.
  • Onboard electrolysis = not beneficial.
 not benefical in what way? I find that there is a advantage
But how do you "find" that there's an advantage? Have you done an objective test that eliminates as many other variables as possible?
actually the energy required to break the O-H bond uses less energy than that to form it. the total enthalpy of change for the formation of water is -285.8 KJ mol-1 that means it produces energy more than that it takes to break it apart
to break the H-O bond in water (one mole) requires the addition of 684KJ mol-1 of energy while the formation of water gives -926KJ mol of enthalpy change 
so ur second problem is wrong
the amound of H2 gas produced is twice as much as the oxygen
and depends on the surface area of the electrodes
if ur 4 problem is a problem then u shouldnt have posted this comment
because it shows me that u never did any research before u commented
HHO is the name that people give to this type of gas its kinda long to say H2O gas when HHO is perfectly there
 
"This is indeed a place for opions however learn from your mistakes"

Although I agree with you in many parts, you are not realizing the full purpose. Yes bi-carb and vinger or even water would work better but thats a one off chemical reaction that would need to be reset. With this, you could feed water into the tank the whole time and the the energy created isn't meant to cover the energy lost. Thats Perpetual which is impossible. What this is meant to achieve is using a RE-NEWABLE FUEL to increase efficiency of a NON-RENEWABLE FUEL. More bang for your buck now please give this Author some credit. He's done a great job.

 -Cheers, Chris
ajparag (author)  Lance Mt.5 years ago
thanks you!
i really appreciate your comment.
keep posting and keep inventing!
-cheers
jayb11 year ago
Sodium Bicarbonate (Sodium hydroxide take caution this is very caustic)

A teaspoon of Baking Soda in a glass of water is good for reducing an Acidy Stomach, good for a bloated Stomach as well. Been taking it for years & so did my father. Never did any harm only good.
Falcore5 years ago
Why 6-12V you can put as much as you want (i do this with 21V DC voltage) you can put as much as you have....
ajparag (author)  Falcore5 years ago
Dear Falcore, I am not a pro at this and i cannot comment much on your query... all i can inform u is that i tried using 9v battery to perform the electrolysis but i wasn't successful. i want to be honest with all you guys. there was some reaction taking place but it wasn't that big that i get a HHO gas flowing from one container to another. in short, i failed and i didn't go ahead with further analysis due to personal limitations... but do give it a try... i am confident about it... if not vehicles it can be used for various other purposes... do let me know when u succeed... best of luck!
What JJ said.
Falcore ajparag5 years ago
I was successful a while ago with a 21V 3A transformer (the amps are probably not important) to separate enough to blow a pen filled with H in thousands of little pieces...I can post a pic of a test i did with it at the beginning (i an ashtray).... the time it took to make that hydrogen was about 30sec-1min (i blew half of it away)...
071610014521.jpg
jj.inc Falcore4 years ago
Just so you know amps are important, very important, that looks really cool.
T0C jj.inc4 years ago
I know they are but when i did this with the transformer from my soldiering gun that was 6V 20A ( i made it go through a bridge, cap, coil and other things a basic power supply has) and the result was less HOH... A while later when i made my next power supply it was 25V around 10A and 35V again around 10A the results were EXPLOSIVE and the coil was different, but due to school and other things i haven't been able to continue... When i finish this grade (8-th, in Bulgaria this is where you get your first degree of education.and after that there's 2 more than the Master's, PHD's and other crap) i will continue my research. I will continue in my free time but till now i haven't had time i'v been doing a lot of other projects and have just forgotten about this... So as soon as i can i will post my version of my Hydrogen separator. probably will be an instructable... Sorry if i was writing like a dumbass :)...
ajparag (author)  Falcore5 years ago
Nice... good to see someone trying atleast! i would recommend u to post ur method of doing it... maybe u can post ur instructable. Best of luck!
T0C ajparag5 years ago
(I'm Falcore) I will post a instructable with this acc... But it won't be soon because my transformer burned out and i don't have the part to fix it and i won't be able to get it for at least 2-3 days (the closest store is about 10-15KM from me and i have some work now) i will post a comment as soon as i make the instructable...
ajparag (author)  T0C5 years ago
ok... All The Best!
jj.inc ajparag4 years ago
The problem is that a 9v battery has an extremely low current flow compared to 6v and 12v batteries. (low amps)
understand that this has been around since 1890, ask yourself why are we using oil as fuel. $$$$$$$ Now with solar cell true clean fuel. I challange all who read this. build something we must get off fossil fuels, the government will NOT help the fear is world economy collaspe.
Mar 30, 2012. 1:39 PMlloydrmc says:
The government dropped north of half a Billion-with-a-B dollars on Solyndra. Though that wasn't fuel research, per se, one presumes that one could charge an electric or plug in hybrid vehicle with their product, had they had a commercially viable product.

The 'net is all over the place as to how much the electrical energy equivalent is in a gallon of gas. Suffice to say that about $20 worth of gas in a gas tank that may have cost about the same sum to manufacture, will take an equivalent vehicle the same or greater distance than a $20,000 battery will.

Sure, an electric motor is a lot cheaper and easier to manufacture than a modern automotive engine, and the prevalence of vehicles that one may buy brand new for less than $15,000 (sometimes a lot less), also underlines the economics of transportation.
Now i'm working on an Hydrogen heater that you just plug in the wall, pour some watter inside, start heating (The power consumption of the prototype is MINIMAL i don't think it even has 20W. And it's heating good but the transformer's bridge is also heating a lot.) and the problem is the separation is giving off some H and O i still have to figure out how to fix that so i don't get poisoned in some way i will post the pictures of the HHO separator and heater as soon as possible.
DocMagnus5 years ago
G'Day Gents and Ladies,

I'll keep this shortish and stick to what I know as fact from my own experimentation and studies over the years. 

Can you produce a fuel from tap water? Yes, Hydrogen and Oxygen in different ratios.

How much current is needed to do it? Very little to achieve a minimal result (few bubbles on an electrode), quite a bit to generate meaningful quantities.

Is 14volts at 10amps enough to generate meaningful quantities? So you want to generate it from a running cars electrics? Stop. Yes you can do this. You can be very efficient in your electrodes and add a real catalyst (please, not baking soda) and actually draw 10 amps, but the bottom line here is you're taking a load from your electrics, which the alternator needs to replenish, which is driven by your engine, which will need more fuel to meet the increased load. Can you see the counter productivity creeping in? The more you generate, the more it costs you.

What if I add solar panels to my car to run the O2 H generator? Seriously, stop. I've done the math and built a scale test unit years ago. The average car would needs panels covering every surface several times over to generate enough. 

What if I have a second set of batteries in the boot just for this generator? The weight of the batteries has to be taken into account - until they run flat, then they will become dead weight until recharged - costing you power.

Okay, what if I generated this gas safely at home, and then feed it into the engine? This is where things get interesting. Yes, if you generate enough to use as a fuel source, of course you can run a car on it - with modifications of course. But once said, it is not as simple as running a hose to the air intake. It depends on if your car has a carbi, air flow type efi computer, or map sensor type efi computer. Carbi: Yes, it works the easiest. With flash arrestors of course.  EFI with air flows: Forget it. The computer isn't expecting a gas to be the fuel, so your computer will try to add enough fuel to match the air flow reading - which it can never do - circular logic applies. Add a custom ecu and yes you can do it a little easier. EFI with maps: This is a little easier, but you need to reduce the air flow coming in by the amount of 'gaseous fuel' you're adding. Again, a custom ecu will make life easier. But please note! You will kill your engine! Engines are designed to run at a certain mixture - the fuel is also a lubricant (not going into detail here), but for a start you'll burn valves real quick without engine modification to prevent it. 

What if I run my car on petrol, but supplement it with large amounts of my home generated fuel? Look, it will work. But it won;t be an efficient use of the fuel. Before you ask, think about it, then read on and see if you were right. 

Also of note is the energy generated by the fast exploding gases verses the slow burning air fuel mix and the power delivering properties of each. Remember, low octane fuel burns faster than high octane fuel (read that again if you didn't catch it the first time.) In all cases however, engine damage will occur as you are leaning out the mixture once you modify the air fuel mix - car engines are not designed to run on gas (and before you ask about lpg conversions, look at the properties of lpg before you do).

If you're NOT running the car lean by adjusting the mix and are simply just adding the gaseous fuel, then you're nowhere near using your fuel efficiently - simply because the car will add the same amount of petrol fuel as before, now however you are increasing the combustibility of the air-fuel mix only. This will give you more bang for your buck of course, but you have new problems... Assuming you can stop your highly volatile gas mix from igniting before it even reaches the combustion chamber, by increasing the combustibility of your air-fuel mix (which is partly where the modified carbi comes in), you become more prone to pre-ignition (engine pinging) which, a) damages the engine, and b) results in wasted energy. You can change the timing of the engine, to remove some of this, but the H O2 gas mix is extremely volatile, more so than a petrol air-fuel mix.

The ultimate bottom line/s are therefore:

Can you use water as a source of fuel by electrolysis? Yes, but only efficiently if your engine and car is modified and if you are creating the fuel outside of the enclosed space that is the car.

You can of course do it very inefficiently, just to prove it can be done - but seriously, what's the point? We are aiming for efficiency here, note a fuel source that will cost us money in different ways. 

Have you thought of generating oxygen only and adding that to your engine? It will generate its own problems, but not as severely as the above will. One major downside is your engine will run a lot hotter, which has it's own noteworthy issues! Another is it's clean and cheap generation. But hey, where's the challenge if it's all easy?

Cheers,

DM

DM holds two degrees and is considering a third. He is a friend to all except those who don't want to learn and the ignorant. He runs a company by day and is a closet inventor pretty much the rest of the time - his wife has adjusted, finally.



Hello You might want to have a read. This conflicts with some key elements you have stated. I oftem see cooments I agree with in part. Being that you are aware of many issues this might balance out some where you might be overstated or missing the spot. Solar Panels maybe in a few more years as the out put per sq in becomes more effective. Till then lets experiment.

Have Fun with it and learn


What about the leaner air/fuel mixture and the possibility of burning valves?
A. Exhaust Gas Temperature, Lean Mixtures, and Burning Valves

Will operating my vehicle at a leaner mixture with Hydrogen-Boost, cause damage to my valves?

With Hydrogen-Boost seeking to run on the leanest air/fuel mixture that has acceptable torque and power, in pursuit of the best possible gas mileage, we have had repeated questions from misinformed customers concerning whether they would burn their valves by running the extra lean mixture.

I am sure the misinformation comes from the aviation field. Being an aviator until last year's near fatal experimental aircraft accident, I know that piston engine aircraft take off and climb at maximum power, and cruise at a leaner mixture, watching the EGT gauge to insure a safe temperature. Of course we all assume that safe temperature means a temperature that doesn't burn the valves.

This information gets us to assume that an electronic fuel injected engine runs at the rich mixture that is cool enough to protect the valves from burning. Most also assume that if we lean out the mixture we will be in danger of burning the valves. A too hot exhaust gas temperature also would indicate a too hot combustion temperature that happens to produce NOx, the oxides of nitrogen that are considered as toxic pollution.

What most of us don't know is that during warm up and acceleration the EFI (electronic fuel injection) engine does indeed run with a rich mixture, but during cruise the engine control unit (ECU) runs in what is called closed loop operation, which targets a 14.7 to 1 air fuel ratio. This ratio is called stoichiometric, meaning that there is a perfect mixture of air and fuel to insure complete combustion. This also happens to be the perfect mixture to get the highest temperature of combustion, and therefore the highest exhaust gas temperature (EGT). Any leaner (more air) mixture will cause a cooler combustion, and any richer (more fuel) mixture will also cause a cooler combustion.

The following quote was obtained from http://www.sdsefi.com/techegt.htm and is chemically accurate:

Some gauge manufacturers say you should tune to achieve maximum or peak EGT for maximum performance. This is incorrect. Peak EGT generally occurs at an AFR of around 14.7- 15.0 to 1 on gasoline. This is far too lean for maximum power and is dangerous under continuous WOT conditions. Many people think that the leaner you go, the higher the EGT gets. This is also incorrect. Peak EGT occurs at stoichiometry- about 15 to 1 for our purposes. If you go richer than 15 to 1, EGT will drop and if you go leaner than 15 to 1 EGT will ALSO drop. It is VERY important to know which side of peak EGT you are on before making adjustments. It is safe to say that peak power will occur at an EGT somewhat colder than peak EGT.

As you can probably figure out by now, leaning the mixture from the target 14.7 to 1 will NOT cause a hotter exhaust nor will it cause you to burn your valves. This is not to say that leaning the ECU's program under all conditions will cause a cooler exhaust. There is one condition that could be hotter and that would be running at WOT (wide open throttle) at 14.7 to 1 instead of the programmed 13 to 1. A continuous running at this condition might indeed burn your valves.

But how often would a mileage conscientious driver equipped with Hydrogen-Boost want to run at WOT for extended periods of time at 14.7 to 1 mixture? First of all a conscientious driver would be following the driving tips in the manual which discourages WOT driving all together, say nothing about an extended WOT operation. Also if a Hydrogen-Boost system is adjusted properly, it will be running at a much higher (leaner) mixture than 14.7 to 1, even at full throttle.

Being a research scientist, I don't like to take anyone's word for anything so I have ordered two EGT gauges, both of which can read the temperatures of two sensors. I will verify all that has been written in this newsletter and will report the results in a later issue.

So to answer the original question: Will operating my vehicle at a leaner mixture with Hydrogen-Boost, cause damage to my valves? NO.

Verification:

On June 11th I finally installed one of my EGT gauges. The probe had a rather short lead so I ended up running with the EGT gauge on top of my hood, rubber banded to the windshield wiper. I had to drill and tap a hole for the threaded probe, which worked out fine. It was a little tight for space inside the engine compartment so I used a right angle portable drill and a socket and ratchet on the tap.

Once the probe was warmed up I cruised at a constant speed and throttle setting and dialed in a leaner fuel mixture while watching the gauge. What is claimed above regarding EGT and fuel ratio was indeed verified. At cruise the EGT was about 10 degrees cooler at 13:1 air/fuel ratio than it was at 14.7:1. At 17:1 it was also 10 degrees cooler. At 19:1 it was 20 degrees cooler, and at 21:1 it was 30 degrees cooler. The temperature really had more to do with the throttle setting than anything else. At high throttle settings the EGT was in the 900s, at high cruise in the 800s, at medium cruise in the 700s, at low cruise in the 600s, and at idle in the 500s. With this large range of temperatures the small change due to fuel ratio was insignificant.

One thing that is notable is the fact that any set power output typically produced the same or similar temperatures, regardless of the fuel ratio. Even though the higher fuel ratio caused a lower temperature at a set throttle position, to keep the same power it took a slightly more open throttle, which caused the temperature to rise back to the same reading as the lower ratio and throttle setting that produced the same power. Of course this was not quite true with those full throttle, rich ratio conditions when the EGT is hot but not as hot as it would be at 14.7:1 fuel ratio.

The throttle setting determined more than just the EGT, it determined the amount of temperature drop that was caused by the increasing fuel ratio. At idle there was only a 5-10 degree drop, but at higher throttle settings there was more than a 40 degrees of drop.

What does all this mean in relation to the question that started this discussion? Will operating my vehicle at a leaner mixture with Hydrogen-Boost, cause damage to my valves? To answer that question we would determine the condition that causes the highest EGT. This would be at full throttle and 14.7:1 fuel ratio. Neither a stock vehicle nor a Hydrogen-Boost system equipped vehicle would run at this condition. The stock vehicle would run at 12 or 13 to 1, and a Hydrogen-Boost equipped vehicle would run at the same 12 or 13 to 1, for those using the old electronic control circuit, or 18 or 20 to 1, for those with the new electronic control circuit. Of course any Hydrogen-Boost equipped vehicle would not likely be seen at full throttle for extended periods of time. So to conclude, the EGT that causes valves to burn would never be encountered with a Hydrogen-Boost equipped vehicle
1-40 of 84Next »