How an HHO generator works and helps you save gas
An HHO or Brown gas generator is an interesting and often misunderstood technology.
The Brown gas generator uses electrolysis to split water (H2O) into it´s base molecules, 2 hydrogen and 1 oxygen molecule.
This is why it is often referred to as an HHO gas generator.The HHO in itself is not an alternative to gasoline but a additive
to boost the efficiency of the engine. Gasoline engines are unfortunately not burning gasoline to its full potential. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency
The average gasoline engine in a car is about 18% to 20% efficient. That leaves a lot of room for improvement and Brown gas is one good way of improving the efficiency. The reason for this is simple, the hydrogen is highly flammable much more so than gasoline so when your engine ignites the hydrogen the explosion ignites the gasoline with much better results (cleaner, less waste and fewer emissions) than it would otherwise have done.
Some basics the burn speed of hydrogen is 0.098 to 0.197 ft/min (3 to 6 cm/min) compared
gasoline´s 0.00656 to 0.0295 ft/min (0.2 to 0.9 cm/min).
The hydrogen explosion is so fast that it fills the combustion cylinder at least 3 times faster then the gasoline explosion and subsequent ignites the gasoline from all directions (it is like putting flue on a fire), instead of just a spark in one end of the combustion cylinder, and we would like to do that because the gasoline only has a short time in the combustion cylinder and if its not fully burnt in that short amount of time then it just goes out the exhaust and is lost.It is also preferable to ignite all of the gasoline when it is under maximum compression in combustion cylinder to get the maximum amount of energy out of it (this is a small time window),whonce the piston starts going down the energy transfer from the explosion to the engine becomes less efficient.
The hydrogen´s higher burn temperature and explosive force is such that it cleans the soot that collects in the engine (it is like having the engine consistent maintains) and with a cleaner engine you get better mileage and fewer oil changes .
An HHO or Brown gas generator is an interesting and often misunderstood technology.
The Brown gas generator uses electrolysis to split water (H2O) into it´s base molecules, 2 hydrogen and 1 oxygen molecule.
This is why it is often referred to as an HHO gas generator.The HHO in itself is not an alternative to gasoline but a additive
to boost the efficiency of the engine. Gasoline engines are unfortunately not burning gasoline to its full potential. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency
The average gasoline engine in a car is about 18% to 20% efficient. That leaves a lot of room for improvement and Brown gas is one good way of improving the efficiency. The reason for this is simple, the hydrogen is highly flammable much more so than gasoline so when your engine ignites the hydrogen the explosion ignites the gasoline with much better results (cleaner, less waste and fewer emissions) than it would otherwise have done.
Some basics the burn speed of hydrogen is 0.098 to 0.197 ft/min (3 to 6 cm/min) compared
gasoline´s 0.00656 to 0.0295 ft/min (0.2 to 0.9 cm/min).
The hydrogen explosion is so fast that it fills the combustion cylinder at least 3 times faster then the gasoline explosion and subsequent ignites the gasoline from all directions (it is like putting flue on a fire), instead of just a spark in one end of the combustion cylinder, and we would like to do that because the gasoline only has a short time in the combustion cylinder and if its not fully burnt in that short amount of time then it just goes out the exhaust and is lost.It is also preferable to ignite all of the gasoline when it is under maximum compression in combustion cylinder to get the maximum amount of energy out of it (this is a small time window),whonce the piston starts going down the energy transfer from the explosion to the engine becomes less efficient.
The hydrogen´s higher burn temperature and explosive force is such that it cleans the soot that collects in the engine (it is like having the engine consistent maintains) and with a cleaner engine you get better mileage and fewer oil changes .
Remove these ads by
Signing UpStep 1: Tools and main components
Tools:
Screwdriver
Glue gun
Drill and bits
Metal saw
Soldering iron
wire crimp
wire cutters
Components:
HHO Generator
Pulse width modulator (PWM)
Electronic Fuel Injection Enhancer (EFIE)
Electric wires
Hose
Air connector
On/Off switch
Straps
Cable connectors
One way air valve
Piece of sheet metal
Peace of rubber
Glue
Screwdriver
Glue gun
Drill and bits
Metal saw
Soldering iron
wire crimp
wire cutters
Components:
HHO Generator
Pulse width modulator (PWM)
Electronic Fuel Injection Enhancer (EFIE)
Electric wires
Hose
Air connector
On/Off switch
Straps
Cable connectors
One way air valve
Piece of sheet metal
Peace of rubber
Glue
Visit Our Store »
Go Pro Today »
>Peace of rubber
I don't get it. You have the two words RIGHT in front of you. Both cannot be right, therefore one is wrong. You got it right first time, but what level of depraved intellect and poor education could result in such woefully idiotic a mistake? RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU. Both words, entirely different. Yet you clicked next and publish without questioning it.
>(it is like having the engine consistent maintains)
Lolwut? LOLWUT? It's like having the engine consistent maintains? Now you're just adding random bloody words together. What's next? "Has anyone ever been so far even as decided to want to do look more like?"
How can we take your Instructable seriously when you don't even take the language in which you're writing seriously enough to notice blaring errors in what you're saying and utter such complete nonsense as the above? Honestly. Read what you write before hitting send, and question whether you worded things correctly.
I'm not saying apply a chilling effect in fear of grammar Nazi's, but some semblance of care as to the quality of your wording and your ability to communicate your ideas is integral to operating in modern society, or even being employable.
According to http://youtu.be/2LtoW1wYdeg (someone who clearly knows what they're talking about and not inflating numbers) states for about 160 watts you get 1 litre of hho/minute. 10.6V at 15 amps in a strong electrolyte and good catalyst.
1 litre per minute. At 35 amps as per this instructable, you should get about double the output. maybe triple. I'll be totally overkill fair and say 3 litres per minute of hho.
A naturally aspirated 2L engine near idle (say 1000RPM for easy math, best case scenario for this thought) breathes 2 litres per 2 revolutions (4 stroke), Thus, it consumes 2000/2 = 1000 L/m of air (and fuel, which as a mist is only a few mL, negligible)
At high revs (say, 5000rpm) it's consuming 5000L/minute of mostly air.
Onwards.
Air, is
Chemical % by volume
Nitrogen (N2) 78.08
Oxygen (O2) 20.95
Argon (Ar) 0.93
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 0.033
Other trace elements 0.007
Source is www.scifun.org
780 litres of nitrogen
210 litres of oxygen
10 litres of argon
3 litres of CO2
If you take 1000 litres of air, and add 3 litres of HHO, the percentages go to
780L Nitrogen 79.3%
211L Oxygen 21.5%
10L Argon 1.0%
1.8L Hydrogen. 0.18%
982.8 total
The lower explosive limit for hydrogen is 4% Until you get 4% (to a max of 75% in air) hydrogen will not even explode. An explosion is what makes an internal combustion engine run. It will not increase the burn rate of the air fuel mixture in any measurable way.
At high RPM it's ridiculously lower difference as a percentage.
Yes, the new 'fuel' and 'fuel additive' nature will happen -- straight gasoline will be .2fps, and hydrogen will be .4...but the difference is in the hundredth of a percent.
The difference is so astronomically low that it simply won't change the chemistry of how the fuel burns.
Compound the inefficiency of the engine to extract that as mechanical energy (20-30% at best, coupled with the alternator 70% at best, coupled with the HHO generator (I don't know but I suspect since it gets hot 50% at best), you have a 9% efficient system aimed at increasing efficiency. Correct me if I'm wrong, (these are loose quick numbers) but it says a lot.
I'm pissed off about this pseudoscience going on and on in the internet. and it hides behind the conspiranoic belief.
thank YOU for thinking and do a little research!
if the atmosphere is made up of about 80% nitrogen and about 20% oxygen then this is what would normally be drawn into the cylinder on induction. if the HHO generator was providing 10% of the volume of gas for induction then the percentage of nitrogen would drop to 72% the oxygen would increase to 21.33% and the remaining 6.66% is hydrogen. The ECU is adjusted to put less fuel in the charge due to the hydrogen being fuel.
has anyone tried adding pure hydrogen to a charge? id be very interested to hear what the result was
And as far as energy goes. Its in what were releasing. Hydrogen is very powerful. And its THE most abundant fuel source. So it make perfect sense to use it. as our methods to extract it become more efficient its use will become more prevalent.
The reason I would presume its not being used as a primary fuel source yet, it no one would make money off of it. honestly ask your self, would would profit from it, and you have your answer as to why its not being researched!
Gasoline passes that test easily. Hydrogen does not.
"a material used to produce heat or power by burning"
If something yielded more energy than it took to create, that would break the laws of physics (namely the first law of thermodynamics).
The thing with fossil fuels is, the ground work was done millions of years ago, but the energy was still put in there. It just takes us less energy to EXTRACT it from the ground. We get about 3 times more energy than we put in for petrol.
With hydrogen as a fuel, you have to create it, not just extract it, so you have to put in the initial energy.
BTW, I'm pretty sure that's the second law of thermodynamics.
I was taking it as "energy can be neither created nor destroyed" therefore, where did the extra energy come from in the reaction, if you didn't create any.
But it also works with "the entropy of a system always increases" i.e. you can't end up with more energy in a system than you started with.
Either way, perpetual motion is impossible (though that's on the list of things to do)
Your definition of 'fuel' breaks both those laws. So hydrogen is a fuel because it fits under webster's definition of 'something used to produce heat or power by burning'
And it's not going to cause bad things to our planet if produced using green electricity because all its energy comes from energy that is here now. Using fossil fuels get energy that was taken out of our system millions of years ago and releases it, warming our system and increasing entropy
Your "green energy" malarkey is simply an ad hoc logical fallacy.
'How it got to be that way' is extremely relevant. It is the whole basis of the green fuel vs. fossil fuel argument. How it got to be that way:
It took ~60-100 years of sunlight to grow a tree or animal (feeding off trees), then it took millions of years and a whole lot of geological pressure to turn that into oil. That is a huge amount of energy stored in the oil, and a huge amount of energy which has been locked away, out of our system, for a very long time. During which time the Earth developed to live without it. When you release all that energy back into the system in 50-100 years, the system can't take it and you screw things up. Hydrogen fuel is created on the spot, using energy (hopefully from the sun or wind or water) which is in the system now. It is used again days or years (but not millennia) later, releasing the energy back into the system.
Please elaborate. Don't just say "green energy is a logical fallacy", please give some examples and counter arguments.
ie,
simplistically calculating through ratios, at 20% hydrogen and using 95RON gasoline you end up with a 9RON mix.
The existence or not of problems depends largely on additional factors, for example the sensitivity of the electronics etc.
Anyway this is just some food for thought for anyone thinking about trying this.
The underlying theory in this has it's kinks, and AFAIK fuel is already burnt thoroughly, owning largely to modern design and technical understanding of the whole thing.
Maybe the additional efficiency you notice is due to the replacement of some gasoline with hydrogen, therefore reducing the amount of gasoline used.
just my 2cents.
There will always be "nay sayers". The great majority of those who say nay really have no idea of the subject they are attempting to disparage. Don't dismiss out of hand that which you don't fully understand. Accept that most things are possible, just think! Cloned sheep, heart transplants, television, jet engines. These were all pipedreams when I was a boy. The only thing I am really sure of now is that just about everything that can be discovered or invented will eventually be so.
I have worked with HHO for long enough now to know that it is only a matter of time before the technology that will allow us the finite control needed to make HHO production a viable and safe option is available.
Someone has already pointed out that it is only the fact that once discovered there won't be a lot of money in it for the big boys. Unless the governments of the world give big business absolute control of all water. You think that's a stupid comment? Consider that we could have had this technology many years ago if big business hadn't wielded it's political stick. In Europe certainly, the majority of water is now owned by major companies. It might fall on my roof but the moment it touches the ground it's theirs.
Who put this soapbox here? All I really wanted to say was that the concept of HHO use is sound. As soon as HHO is burned it turns back to water so there is no wasteage. The energy needed to convert water to HHO gas is minimal. The amount of HHO needed and added to your fuel can be as low as 5% to make a real difference. Equally don't expect your engine to run solely on HHO gas. There is an inherent danger with HHO that too many people aren't aware of. We rely on HHO to increase the speed of the burn rather than by adding to the power of the explosion in it's own right. We are trying to turn a 20% efficiency into a 30 or 40% efficiency in the short term. It's the overall efficiency that is important. Not the inefficiency of electrolysis.
What are your actual results?
I've been working on a similar rig. So far I've been able to run a Briggs and Stratton motor on it briefly.
X is larger then Y. But I am not thing to run the engine on HHO. I am using HHO to burn the gasoline more efficiency and with less wasted flue. And if it cleans my engine and there by cheeps it in constant maintenance as well that just an added bonus.
P.S. added some explanations to the instructable.
Hydrogen burning=Chemical energy harvested
Hydrogen separating=bonding energy destroyed
I know u are applying conservation of energy.
But the energy liberated after burning H was not the energy provided by electrolysis.It is chemical energy,it was already there.
The problem is though, that alternators are not 100% efficient, and nor is the electrolysis process, due to electrical resistance. Therefore, it takes more energy to split the water you get back from the combustion.
HOWEVER
To my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, but using HHO as a fuel additive isn't as simple as getting only as much energy as the HHO provides, but I think it actually improves the efficiency of the petrol combustion, so you would end up getting more out of your engine despite working the alternator extra hard.
Can someone confirm this?
during HYRDROGEN explosion,I don't know the actual REACTION EQUATION.So I maybe wrong there.But understanding the amount of energy evolved in a hydrogen gas explosion I don't really think it is supplied by the battery.
"Electrolysis supplies energy to breaks molecular bonds. Hydrogen gas explosions release a lot of energy, which was not originally put in by the battery".
If that's what you meant, then this is my reply:
The equation for electrolysis of water is as follows
2H2O + energy => 2H2 + O2
The equation for combustion of hydrogen is thus
2H2 + O2 => 2H2O + energy
It's the exact reverse. Hydrolysis is just a backwards explosion.
If you don't believe me there, here's something to ponder...
The first law of thermodynamics states that "energy can be neither created nor destroyed"
This means that the total energy of the system, in all its forms, must be equal both before and after a reaction. So...
If the system has x amount of energy, provided by the battery to electrolyse the water, where does the extra energy come from which is released by the hydrogen explosion?
The energy has to be in there originally, to be released, so according to your explanation, if you electrolyse water, then combust the hydrogen, electrolyse that same water and repeat 100 times, then the hydrogen would eventually run out of energy because electrolysis doesn't put back in as much as combustion releases...
So,yes if thats right then the combustion helps in the fuel burning properly.
:P Thanks :P
For all the nay-sayers please explain why a super and or turbo charger benefit your car.
Use it for an HHO welder!
I think there are an error in these numbers. If min = minute, these speeds are extremely low. Moreover, very interesting.
But since you seem to be hire is a more details explanation added to it the instructable.
Hope you enjoy