Previous in Forum: Air Density Calculation   Next in Forum: INHIBITING RUSTING OF A CAR BODY
Close
Close
Close
Page 4 of 5: « First < Prev 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »
Rating: Comments: Nested
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246

The HHO Test Plan

03/28/2009 2:55 AM

Ben 78, who is with John Henry Hydrogen has offered an HHO unit to test. Their site is straightforward, and they do not claim that their unit will work only if you wave magnets around, pour weasel urine into the tank, or use an "efie," a device which alters (illegally, of course) the O2 sensor(s) readings.

My tentative plan is to install the unit on my 2004 Honda Accord, which has a manual transmission, helping to eliminate variability in torque converter lockup vs non lockup, etc. The Accord will be equipped with a Scan Gauge 2 fuel economy computer, the operation of which is proprietary -- but it is reasonable to assume that is uses readings from either (or both) the mass airflow sensor or pulse width on the injectors to calculate injected fuel amounts continuously. It uses the vehicle speed sensor to read vehicle speed, and then does the calculation to compute instantaneous fuel consumption (as well as trip, day, etc.).

People who have used the Scan Gauge 2 have reported very high accuracy, as would be expected, because it is using the same data that the ecu uses to precisely inject the correct amount of fuel.

With a Scan Gauge 2, and without the complicating factor of any devices which tamper with the emission system (and which could potentially "trick" the Scan Gauge 2 in the same way that the ECU can be "tricked,") even on-road tests of a device like an HHO unit (which can easily be turned on and off) can be accomplished with pretty good repeatability. However, there is no substitute for a dyno, which allows consistency of load and speed that is very hard to achieve safely (if at all) on the road, so we will use a dyno at least to calibrate and gain confidence in the Scan Gauge 2.

We'd measure HHO output flow rate periodically throughout testing to keep the flow rate constant. If it appears that there is significant gain or loss from the HHO unit, then we will vary flow rates to see if the relationship between flow rate and gain or loss changes. We will also test the claims by Onecraftydude that the typical flow rates (1-2 lpm) are actually too high (even though the injected mass is incredibly small) and cause detonation -- an effect not reported by other HHO promoters, nor by the numerous university researchers who have worked with hydrogen injection.

We will also monitor O2 sensor readings with the unit switched on and switched off.

We will do a series of A/B A/B A/B tests one immediately after the other to keep temperature, humidity, tire pressure, engine condition, etc. all constant. This will eliminate many sources of variability and sources for criticism of of invalid tests. We will allow enough time between on/off cycles to allow performance to stabilize. If we find a load at which the unit is particularly effective, we will alter flow to see if performance can be optimized, recording changes and results.

The tests will be designed so that any garage inventor can replicate them at very low cost. This will help small promoters of the units to avoid feeling that they must make outlandish performance claims before having any real data.

Our working hypothesis will be that performance differences attributable to the unit may be very hard to measure, because the energy value of the injected hydrogen is such a small portion of the total fuel consumption (on the order of 1/1000 of the total). Thus, we will be careful to see if effects can be observed at very low loads, such as at idle, as well as at more normal road loads.

If this preliminary testing indicates significant efficiency improvements, then we will attempt to set up testing with a governmental agency using standard procedures and equipment. Also, if this preliminary testing indicates a significant performance change, we will measure the criteria emissions (CO, HC, NOx) to see how they are effected.

If you have suggestions, or questions you would like to have answered via this preliminary testing, please comment. I'd like this test to be sufficient for an engineer, scientist, or technically engaged person (and ideally the average person) to be able to say either: "Yes, it looks very likely that these devices work as advertised", or "No, it seems unlikely that these devices work as advertised."

Perhaps if the HHO unit shows significant performance changes, then we can come up with a plan for testing additions, such as Efie, magnets, etc.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#287
In reply to #284
Find in discussion

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/08/2009 1:26 AM

thanks for your input good sir.... I am currently going forward with publishing tests of a 18 wheeler on a dyno for house power ,torque and emissions

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#301
In reply to #284
Find in discussion

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 2:27 PM

Thanks for making the information from your test available Ehnrico. I am sure the good people at CR4 will pick that data apart since they all believe HHO is a scam. From what I have learned from reading the posts, any data you offer is unacceptable unless done by the EPA or a major auto manufacturer because they never lie about results.

I like the idea of using the brake reservoir, but on some vehicles you have to use the existing fuel tank parts. When I did a test at a racetrack we used a wide bucket with a sturdy lid and fitted the fuel tank float assembly with pump and return lines to the lid. We then ran the vehicle until it died. We measured the fuel outside the vehicle with graduated containers used in painting and added 1 gallon to the tank and repeated testing the same way every time. We showed about 25% improvement with HHO.

The guy we showed this to owns Whetstone Chocolate factory (Hank Whetstone). He was the originator of the test and was the one filling the tank and measuring the fuel every time. When we left the track he had a funny look on his face and was remarkably silent. Days before he had stated that if we proved to him this works he would have a contract ready within days to start fabricating units. After a week of not hearing from him I called him to find out he was not interested.

That is the type of thing I run into daily. Sceptics are very boistrous and have no problem accusing you of witchcraft etc. Sometimes I feel like I am living in the middle ages. Good luck with your business there buddy and fight the good fight for the planet so our grandchildren have a place to grow old without rebreathers.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#303
In reply to #283
Find in discussion

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 3:19 PM

Have you got your fuel container made yet? I am anxious to see what it looks like.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#309
In reply to #303

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 9:13 PM

Actually, I am not planning to make a container other than as a last resort. The "real" containers for this purpose are made by Taylor and others, and cost far more than the average HHO experimenter would want to spend.

Instead, for a given car under test, measuring fuel injector pulse width with the HHO unit on and then off, on then off, etc while running at constant speed and load on a dyno will show any change in fuel flow, and thus fuel efficiency. Such a measurement is pretty easy to do and does not consume a lot of dyno time. The device I constructed to do this (which is a simple opto-isolator circuit to interface with a laptop oscilloscope [free] or a pulse width meter [fairly cheap]) only works more-or-less, because it is picking up electrical noise. Not a hard problem to fix, but I haven't had time to work on it. HHO is not high on my priorities.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
Power-User
United States - Member - Member Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - Member

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 119
Good Answers: 1
#275
In reply to #273
Find in discussion

Re: The HHO Test Plan

04/17/2009 1:20 AM

Neat site, I'm thinking I could make a one-of-a-kind Jacuzzi with one of those cone bottom tanks...

But the funniest thing I noticed, when I checked the link on the Left for "Fuel Tanks" I found this item, and description:

100 Gallon Fuel Tank

This tank is Made from Crosslink PE and can store fuel (Diesel or Gas) without any permiation.


NOT FOR INDOOR USE!

NOT FOR TRANSPORTING FUEL!

____________________

__________________
"Don't let those telling You, it can't be Done, stop you from Doing IT", Albert Einstien...
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#277

Re: The HHO Test Plan

04/17/2009 1:34 AM

I look forward for a test with CR4....

" if " we CAN measure physical fuel....

should we also be taking "bets" on the side lines at the dyno... ha ha ha

Register to Reply
Active Contributor

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21
#279

Re: The HHO Test Plan

04/22/2009 10:34 AM

Hi guys,

I got behind, how is the progress.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#280
In reply to #279

Re: The HHO Test Plan

04/24/2009 12:39 AM

i am behind as well.... I am still waiting to hear from BLINK as to the way we can measure physical liquid fuel... I posted my thoughts on the matter...

I see no reason why?? it would not be easy and accrate... time will tell

I just sit and wait for the chance to prove on the dyno

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#281
In reply to #280

Re: The HHO Test Plan

04/25/2009 4:05 PM

Hi, I'm back. I've been traveling, fixing my son's car, doing real work, etc.

The Scan Gauge is working well, and provides very accurate figures for both instantaneous and average values, but it does it's calculations from the same data used by the ECU, rather than directly measuring actual pulse width of the injectors (from as much as I have been able to tell so far, from feeding MAP gas to my Honda). If all the fuel reaching the engine is injected by the ecu, then this method can be extremely accurate, especially when the engine is operating in closed loop mode, which with my Honda is just about all the time (this state is one of many things the Scan Gauge will show).

The Scan Gauge can be programmed to show anything that the car can supply through OBD2. The Honda supplies O2 sensor data, so I can program the Scan Gauge to show this. But, at this point, I am not sure that there is any combination of data and calculations that will clearly and directly show the effect on liquid flow rate when a gas is added.

I need to experiment a little more, but it looks like reading actual pulse width will give a better (liquid) fuel flow indication when part of the fuel is gaseous. This is a little trickier to do, because it involves using an oscilloscope, but a laptop can act as a o-scope for these frequencies, using free software, and I should be able to make an interface circuit for a couple dollars.

The idea of running a tank dry does not work, even on a dyno, because stopping the vehicle between runs and getting out and back in can shift the vehicle enough that fuel sloshes around too much, given the flat, broad tank bottom and the compounding issue of stiffening ribs. There can quite easily be an error of a quart or so (of unusable fuel), even with slight differences in tilt. The other issue has to do with burning enough fuel to minimize the effect of the sloshing error -- if we started with a full tank, the sloshing error would be small -- but the dyno cost would be astronomical. If we are only burning a gallon, and looking for only a fifth of a gallon difference, then the sloshing error is too great. (All this was far easier in the days when you could feed a carburetor via gravity from a flask.)

But even a gallon is too much to burn at a dyno, because of cost issues -- it just takes too much time, if you do several runs with HHO on and off. (Also, some dynos are not designed for such long runs and will overheat.) The obvious solution is real dyno fuel flow equipment, which replaces the entire tank and fuel pump system, and measures the actual fuel consumed either by mass or by keeping track of both feed and return fuel flows. With this equipment, you can get a good reading at a particular load in a matter of a few seconds. Most dynos do not have this equipment however, so something that an average experimenter could put together is what I plan to come up with.

I've calculated the amount of propane injection required to replace 10% of the fuel at idle. I should be able to inject that amount, and see the ecu reduce liquid fuel flow accordingly. (I am not completely convinced that the scan gauge alone will not show this, but so far, it does not appear to do so -- and as far as I know, the Honda does not output injector pulse width through OBD2.) (I may experiment with a Ford, too, because I've read something ambiguous, that indicated that this info is in the Ford OBD2 data.) Once I have seen liquid fuel flow change consistently and repeatably in response to gaseous injection, then we can measure the effect of HHO on fuel flow.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#282
In reply to #281

Re: The HHO Test Plan

04/26/2009 1:55 AM

well.... last time I put a car on a dyno it did not move around because it was strapped to the shop floor....but I see your point about the run time on the dyno,,,,

I am curious about your experiments with adding hydrogen and oxygen to the air flow....

I wonder if the scan gauge will recognize it.... I would not put propane or MAP gas into your Honda because it will burn too dry and hot,,,, but it should be ok for a short test.... keep me posted... thanks for your enthusiasm good sir

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#289
In reply to #281

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/15/2009 1:45 PM

Quick update:

I calibrated the scan gauge with an adjustment the prior to the most recent, and have finally used enough gas to fill up again, using the same position at the same pump, with the flow latch set to the same notch on the dispenser handle, etc. The Scan Gauge predicted 13.0 gallons, and 13.05 gallons were required for the fillup.

The gauge has been fun to fool around with. In one trip in which the timing of lights was especially bad, and in which traffic was heavy, I got 7.3 mpg. Day long averages, however, tend to be fairly consistent, unless I do something unusual, like go a long distance with little traffic. The Odyssey has been getting about 20 mpg, not bad for a 13-year-old van. (The first generation, like mine, has a 2.2 liter four, and got slightly better mileage than the later ones which are v6 powered.) Instantaneous readings appear very accurate, but point up the need for a dyno -- it is almost impossible to find a flat road on which the instantaneous readings do not vary a lot. So you either need to do a lot of long term averages, which are unlikely to be accepted because so many variables are introduced, and which take a long time. Or, use a dyno, where you can control the variables and quickly get valid data. Even the dyno is better if it is the right type, in which you can hold a constant, rather than the cheaper, more popular, inertia dynos which are like more like running a quarter mile.

I made a pulse width isolation circuit (opto-isolated, so that a pulse from the injector, which has peaks up to 60 volts or so will not damage an oscilloscope or the pulse width meter I recently purchased). I haven't looked at the output with a scope yet, but the result with the pulse width meter (part of a DVM which measures frequency, pulse width, duty cycle, etc) was instability -- leading me to think that my circuit needs to be shielded, and is picking up spikes as pulses. I've had no time to fool with this, but before too long...

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Australia - Member - Torn and breading Engineering Fields - Nanoengineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnetic Island, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3721
Good Answers: 74
#290
In reply to #289

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/15/2009 5:10 PM

Blink

in which traffic was heavy, I got 7.3 mpg.

That must be a typo or what happened? I'm still just observing but that can't be right. All the best, Ky.

__________________
The Twain Has Met
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#318
In reply to #290

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 5:35 PM

Hi Ky,

No typo. When the van is idling, it's getting 0 mpg, so the average keeps dropping, the longer it idles. (Days like the one I mentioned say a lot for idle stop control.) Going uphill, it actually gets about 6-10 mpg, depending on steepness of the hill. It happens that the ride to school is mainly uphill, and on that day, the traffic was slow moving, and I hit all the lights. The reading was the average for the trip into school. I've forgotten the reading when back home, but it might have been something like 16 or 18 -- still lower than the long term average, but helped tremendously (from the 7.3) by the largely downhill run home (during which, part of the time, injection is shut off all together.)

The gauge is fun to play with, and I'm hoping it doesn't cause me to run someone over while staring at it.

Regards, Blink

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Australia - Member - Torn and breading Engineering Fields - Nanoengineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnetic Island, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3721
Good Answers: 74
#320
In reply to #318

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 9:36 PM

Thanks Ken (Blink)

That explains that. I anticipated an explanation and am happy now. Could have thought about that possibility myself but assuming it was a typo/dyno, I never thought twice. Another lesson learned about due diligence, I suppose.

Your answer in post #313 confirms the expectations of gritty investigation and is an even more detailed repeat of what has been said before by you and many others here in CR4.

I am not sure if my GA will make a difference but take it as a vote for your dedication and tenacity to get this out of the way and explained in a rational and unemotional manner. I am impressed (if that means anything) and would like to see this conclusion published at the top of all HHO websites so to not lead enthusiasts down a wrong path and try to reinvent the wheel time and time again.

A time back, here on CR4 , I was dislodged from my high horse and had to admit that I thought I knew all about it. This was not just incorrect and ignorant of me, at the time, but the beginning of a long learning curve. Coming off that horse has hurt much less than I thought it would and gave me much needed detailed information about the different fields of expertise required to understand the workings of electrochemistry and the influence on combustion ratios etc. Understanding and implying this knowledge made me go further with my basic idea from back then. I suddenly had more to go by and am still persisting.

What it has also shown me is that it is much cheaper to do things in ones head than to go and "tinker" with the real thing. Buying parts and such and thing, hiring Dynos to prove the workings of a combination of chemical and physical reactions. This had been proven by numbers before and some were still trying to prove the opposite?.....People like me, still?

I am not an engineer but I am slowly becoming one. If I can't do it in my head first, I won't do it at all.

It would be good to see Ben and Henry have the same experience as I had, which is, that just the experiencing of the science and understanding it, is already an achievement in its self. Its a learning process and should be treated as such. Being able to put it into a machine is a bonus and not many achieve that anyway in whatever field of science. Just the adventure and discovery part of inventing beats any other excitement or entertainment known to me.

Now to reinventing the wheel.

As you and others here know, I have always claimed, while sitting on the fence, that I have a different approach to using electrolysis in an IC engine. Even though I understand the ins and outs of what has been discussed here (he keeps saying), I see my "system" as feasible. It requires a more intricate hardware setup and I am not aiming at the automobile market at all but at decentralized power generation for households.

I don't need to produce thousands of units to prove the technology. I don't have to step up to some car maker and beg him or the Government for funds, which is the most depressing part of it all, and don't have to be concerned about weight and all other issues arising when putting such a "generator" into an existing car. I can put the first unit in my house and R&D would be not as cumbersome. Attaching new things to an existing governing system is a very restricting environment to work in/with and cutting that out can make things easier, I think.

As things stand the unit will be the size of an old fashioned TV set (for a Family of 6) and would have an estimated (+/- 10%) price tag of around $2500 when low numbers of units are produced. It would run virtually immissions free and would be suitable for houses not on the main grid at first. Others to follow, once proven in the field.

I have a paper in progress and will publish this to some of (you know who) in the coming months. Ken, I will contact you as well through private email at that later stage. Your opinion will be more than appreciated and you would not need to set up diagnostic tools and communicate over large stretches of time. It could all be done in the head, to a certain point. To have the hardware in place will take some time out of my and lately some body else s life. It is also delayed by the tightness of funds all around. That is great, because it gives me more time to think. The next wave is mine.

Having people like you around is of great help to me and us and all others interested in the matter. There are others too, that show interest and input, but you beat them hands down. I thank you for that, Ky.

Come on, press the subit button!

__________________
The Twain Has Met
Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#322
In reply to #320

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 10:05 PM

That comment wasn't for you Ky LOL

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Australia - Member - Torn and breading Engineering Fields - Nanoengineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnetic Island, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3721
Good Answers: 74
#323
In reply to #322

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 10:13 PM

I knew that

__________________
The Twain Has Met
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#291
In reply to #289

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/16/2009 12:21 AM

GOOD LUCK ....

I don't trust scan guages....

for it to be accurate on a hho test it would have to be calibrated again with hho...

remember the Dennis lee scam? his scan gauge said he was getting 57.7 mpg

you have set your scan gauge accuately.... but if you added hho or bigger tires you would have to re calibrate your scan gauge to match your new mpg ....

I need physical proof .... good luck

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#292
In reply to #291

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/16/2009 7:38 AM

Pot Meet Kettle

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#293
In reply to #292

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/16/2009 8:59 PM

forget it... you guys would not believe it any way so why do I try...

you would not see the forest because of the trees....

I grow weary of this it is going no where...

I don't need CR4 for a test on a dyno with a scan guage...

Dennis lee and every scammer out there will prove that it works with a scan gauge and sensor trickers....

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Australia - Member - Torn and breading Engineering Fields - Nanoengineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnetic Island, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3721
Good Answers: 74
#294
In reply to #293

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/16/2009 9:14 PM

Does that include me? My eyes are open but I admit I tend to see the trees not for the forest, sometimes. Stay cool and don't panic. Good luck, Ky.

__________________
The Twain Has Met
Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#295
In reply to #293

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/16/2009 11:38 PM

BS

Lots of talk of super secret data

Calling out dennis lee is a classic misdirection ploy

& calling scam on blink

of course you can recalibrate a scan gauge to say what ever you want, by tricking the inputs, that doesn't mean you can't gather legitmate data. You can trick a dyno too...

At least make an effort to throw up some data that could potentially be real

We're the one's who are tired of the endless HHO nonsense.

20% gain blah, blah

You've come to that doubious conclusion somehow, but can't be bothered to share the data.

you ask a question, you give us song & dance about how the answer is no good.

Why are you here?

You've got the goose that layed the golden egg, but are asking us for validation?

Register to Reply
Power-User
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Engineering Fields - Manufacturing Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Endless Mountains of NE Pa, USA
Posts: 298
Good Answers: 20
#296
In reply to #293

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/16/2009 11:41 PM

I don't need CR4 for a test on a dyno with a scan guage...

Well, it IS a test by a 3rd party who has no tie to your company and is going to test your system without bias. (I hope you believe that)

If he has the scan gauge zeroed in to predict fuel usage to with-in 5/100's of a gal., I'd say that's pretty accurate and a very good base.

If by injecting hho into the fuel mixture, the scan gauge results change without tampering with any other parameter or sensor, and the changes are relatively consistent, then you would Know that any difference was caused by the hho injection during the test(s).

A further investigation would then be needed to discover the actual causes for any changes that occurred and what they really mean.

Regardless of the results, I'm sure that Ken will apply sound scientific cause and effect principles to discern WHY the unit did or did not live up to expectations.

So, hang in there and be patient. I'm sure the results will be made available as soon as that is possible. Doing it RIGHT will take some time.

__________________
Courage is not the absence of fear, but the inner resolve to rise above it....or the inane lapse in judgement brought on by copious imbibitions....Egre Flagrus
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#297
In reply to #293

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/17/2009 6:36 PM

if you saw any of my data from the dyno or emissions ...

It would not be any good ... because I did it even though the emissions were done by a state inspector....

I would post them here but the graphics would be too small to read...

I am sorry we all grow tired of this

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#298
In reply to #297

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/17/2009 9:20 PM

I would post them here but the graphics would be too small to read...

Give it a shot, that we might be able to help. Graphics can be expanded & tweeked.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#299
In reply to #298

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/17/2009 11:17 PM

oh well... we should wait ...

if we ever get to the dyno...

I am still up saving for it.... not every one has more money than brains...

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#300
In reply to #298

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 2:26 PM

well here it is.... the blue line is normal..... the red line is with hydrogen...

please keep in mind ...

this was with the first unit we made....

it was pulling 30 amps and the hydrogen production was low ,,,, compared to the units we have now...

but it does show an increase of performance ... and a leaner air fuel mixture

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#304
In reply to #300

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 3:34 PM

Thanks for supplying the test data. You were right, the graph is microscopic on this page, but it proves you had tests done. I don't have graphs yet, but when I do I am sure these guys will be more than willing to entertain the idea that it works. So far I have not heard any negative inputs from Garth so I guess it shut him up. I think it's funny that a guy would come here for help proving his system does what he claims, get abused by all of the "Experts" and then be told to provide data in the form of testing before the experts can be bothered doing tests.

You are right thinking nothing will come from trying to convince people on CR4 or any other engineering site that HHO works. You will never have their support or enthusiasm for something which ruins their whole understanding of physics.

Register to Reply
4
Guru
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Australia - Member - Torn and breading Engineering Fields - Nanoengineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnetic Island, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3721
Good Answers: 74
#305
In reply to #304

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 6:21 PM

greenandclean

I have read through your post a couple of times and found it very negative to say the least. Just jumping into a discussion and blasting diatribe away, at free will, can be of no help. Let me go sentence by sentence and you might be able to see what I mean or what has upset me, or better, my understanding of cooperation.

Thanks for supplying the test data.

What Are you thanking him for. It is not recognizable at all. He might as well have supplied us with a graph showing the minuscule rise in body temperature while doing his tests.

You were right, the graph is microscopic on this page, but it proves you had tests done.

Either you have 20/20 + vision which enables you to recognize what was tested when and were, or you are just taking things for granted. I appreciate Ben's effort, don't get me wrong, but to state/conclude, that it proves anything, is just so unscientific that it defies belief.

I don't have graphs yet, but when I do I am sure these guys will be more than willing to entertain the idea that it works.

Until such a time were you have the graphs I will choose my own entertainment. Once I have entertained my self sufficiently I shall ponder over your certified graphs, if they ever show up on this thread.

So far I have not heard any negative inputs from Garth so I guess it shut him up.

If you would know Garth a bit better you will find that there is no way to shut him up. Ever! I can see him sitting back and putting on a relaxed grin. That he has not made any negative comments is more a sign of him being constructive and helpful but not an endorsement of any thing. The absent of a response can be interpreted in many ways, just like the graphs. Shutting some one up can have the same effect as "over doing the the sweet spot" in an IC engine. It could blow up in your face.

I think it's funny that a guy would come here for help proving his system does what he claims, get abused by all of the "Experts" and then be told to provide data in the form of testing before the experts can be bothered doing tests.

You got it all wrong. Ben and his Dad did not come here for help but for critical analysis and assistance of a third party, namely Ken, who has not blinked, yet. Calling critical input (which would be done down the line of R&D any way) "Abuse by experts" is a bit infantile if not plain rude. Not once did I abuse any one. I have never called myself an expert (although I am) and will avoid doing so in the future, although I just have. Dichotomy is the name for what I just did/stated and not bi-polar, just to get that out of the way.

What I will not avoid is systematic research and tangible results. I will also try not to poison a discussion with negative attitude. What was your post meant to do? Galvanize the HHO (I hate that terminology BTW) community? Well it has just done the opposite and gave clear points to the attentive and mostly well meaning observers of this thread.

You are right thinking nothing will come from trying to convince people on CR4 or any other engineering site that HHO works. You will never have their support or enthusiasm for something which ruins their whole understanding of physics.

My gosh, you are so negative and soooooo not constructive. It is not about support but all about completely valid reasoning here. Just to correct you here, my understanding of this whole thing is that it is not only physics but involves laws of chemistry as well, not to mention the laws of electric power in what ever way shape or form it is introduced to the so far not fully understood/verified combined effects of all.

If my time comes, and it will, I would not subject myself to open slather but have all data and facts in place, for all to see and not speculate and keep referring to unsubstantiated claims, which yours and Ben's still are at this point in time.

I wish Ben and you and all the others all the best. To ask the participants of this thread to not ridicule the ridiculable is just plain stupid and of no help to any one or any method that is in the process of being tested. Your attempt to help has back fired and I would ask you to try and be a bit more positive about all matters concerned in the future. It is not only about new technology but about how we deal with each other and our credibility in a very critical surrounding. Generalizing is and never has been helpful and that, you have done.

I wish we could be sitting at a table so you could find that I am easy to get on with and not as pompous as I sound here. Well, you started it and I just had to respond to keep the skeptics on board. They are the ones that have to be convinced and not us over enthusiastic "tinkerers".

Hope all goes well for the lot of us and it will, as long as we stick to some written and some un-written rules. With all due respect, Ky.

__________________
The Twain Has Met
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 4)
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#308
In reply to #305

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 8:54 PM

I apologize for my rant. I do not want to alienate those who truly want to help understand and test these systems.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Australia - Member - Torn and breading Engineering Fields - Nanoengineering - New Member APIX Pilot Plant Design Project - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Magnetic Island, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 3721
Good Answers: 74
#310
In reply to #308

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 9:17 PM

All done and over with Mate.

Lets get to work and show them how its done. It will take time and time is money as we all know. Dedication, even if a bit delusional, has done amazing things in the past, so why not just keep trying. This does not mean making the same mistakes over and over but crystallization is a very slow process. Even after they have formed (crystals/ideas/concepts/theories) they need cutting and polishing and only then can they be used as collateral. A valid skeptic will tell you at a glance if your stone is worth the effort of further handling it.

Stay in touch and we will find out, if ever. Good luck, Ky.

__________________
The Twain Has Met
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#306
In reply to #304

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 7:41 PM

I agree with Ky.

Your negative attitude doesn't help anyone. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one here who remains skeptical but open-minded. If Ken, or anyone else, can verify that it works, that will be wonderful! Should that occur, then as someone else said recently, the next task will be to determine what combination of various branches of physics and chemistry makes it work.

Most of us who have been trained in chemistry and physics don't currently see the source of energy or improved efficiency required to make the improvement in mileage, but ALL who consider themselves scientists MUST accept evidence from appropriately conducted experiments that can be repeatedly verified by unbiased third parties.

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#307
In reply to #304

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 7:42 PM

greenandclean said....

"So far I have not heard any negative inputs from Garthh so I guess it shut him up."

to the contrary he probably has not time to see it yet...

and I look forward to his imput... I have respect for his opinion ....

and I posted the dyno tests "for GARTHH"

but you are right about one thing... the graph is too small.... you need to save the photos to your computer and enlarge it ....

it does show that the results are above par....

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#311
In reply to #307

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/18/2009 9:48 PM

Thanks Ben,

3 liter Dodge gas

little more hp

Little less torque

a push

worth some more investigation

But what about your claim to fame, Diesel?

Here's something I was investigating when I was working for a Biodiesel company: http://www.o2diesel.com/

our thought was to be able to make a cleaner burning fuel & lower our costs, ethanol can be cheaper than vegetable oil & not removing the excess would also reduce processing costs.

If HHO will reduce oxides of nitrogen, you have a winner. The future is going to bring ever tightening emission standards. An electrolysis unit is no worse than BMW's blutec solution...

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#312
In reply to #311

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 12:01 AM

I can e mail you the photos so you can see it better

it showed a little more horse power and toque with a leaner mixture... .... but it showed that hydrogen can be made from the alternator with out a loss,,,,

but like I said this was the first unit we ever made,,,, it used 30 amps and had really low production...

I look forward to testing the John Henry unit that we have made....

as far as pollution ,,,, Do you mean the "NOX"... because if you want to see the emissions data I can send it to you.... the "NOX" is much lower than the base line test,,,, at a high RPM its almost cut in half

as far as diesel engines go.... it "was" very hard to get it to work on 18 wheelers...

it will reduce emission on a 18 wheeler.... how much I don't know yet,,, but we will be dyno testing a BIG RIG soon... with emission tests done at the same time....

its on the top of my list of things to do ASAP

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#316
In reply to #312

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 4:15 PM

Yep

NOX,

if HHO produces a slightly cooler burn, you will have a hot product for keeping older diesels on the road. Here in California all the old construction & farm equipment is slated to be replaced, because of emissions. Particulate can be reduced with traps or biodiesel. NOX is tricker.

If you can get CARB [California air resources board] to buy in there is a market for several 100'000 units... With emission regulations as Cali go so goes the rest of the country.

I was being polite with my earlier comments, but you did finally post some data. I would have to agree w/ Blinks assessment.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#324
In reply to #316

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/20/2009 1:30 AM

thank you GARTHH

Register to Reply
6
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#313
In reply to #300

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 1:21 PM

These dyno charts convincingly show that, at ordinary engine speeds, HHO has no effect at all. That is the only reasonable interpretation of these charts. These charts were supplied not by some skeptical engineering/scientific type but by an HHO promoter, so they cannot be dismissed by HHO promoters as being slanted in some way against them. (Odd that John would present these as evidence that HHO has some measurable effect, good or bad. ??!!!???) These results support the Popular Mechanics test, which could find no significant effect at all, in concert with scientific and engineering expectation, support common sense, and support the contention of the FTC's expert witness on the subject (a very highly-regarded physicist from Northwestern University.)

The apparent 1% difference in horsepower that occurs at the 4750 rpm HP peak (a state which an engine virtually never sees in ordinary driving) is 1. possibly due to the operator starting to lift off the throttle because acceleration* has leveled off (because at that point the engine torque is declining) but more likely, 2. meaningless, because the difference is too small for a Dynojet to measure reliably. Clearly, all the way up to (and even beyond) the torque peak i.e., at all speeds up to 4500 rpm, there is no significant, measurable difference between the two runs. Even the 1% difference in peak hp is outside the Dynojet's measuring range -- in other words too small a difference to measure reliably. (Although you can estimate down to perhaps 1/128 with an ordinary yardstick, you cannot reliably measure to anything smaller than the smallest graduations.) People unfamiliar with the Dynojets incorrectly assume that the wiggles seen are accurately representing variations in torque (and consequently hp). They are not. In fact, the wiggles are an indication of the inherent inaccuracies in the Dynojet dynos. When you consider the huge flywheels in the system: the engine flywheel, the drivetrain, the wheels and the 48 inch drum, along with the filtering effect of rubber hysteresis, you can conclude that actual movement of the drum is far smoother that the dynojet plots suggest. The sampling error is not adequately smoothed -- although the DJ can be set for longer averaging, to compensate for this -- and probably should be, because otherwise, there is an implication that the dyno is picking up subtle changes that it is actually incapable of picking up.

Although I suppose that John is not intending to be deceptive here, the nature of these curves is misleading. They have the appearance of ordinary torque and hp curves, but the vertical scales have been both expanded and shifted, so that the minimum hp shown is 70, not 0 as usually shown. Thus tiny differences (such as the 1 hp difference at the peak (which is meaningless on a Dynojet dyno) look like large differences. Certainly, presenting these curves as indicating anything other than "there is no measurable difference" would require many pages of explanation -- and it is hard to envision what form that explanation would take.

My own results, after getting the pulse width noise sorted out, cannot be taken as anything more than a gross indication, possibly to +/- 3%. If after running a test, I say "See... this shows that HHO actually reduces performance by 2%", any sensible, experienced engineer should say to me: "BS! You cannot measure that closely with your setup, and further, we expect the reduction in performance to be less than 1% percent. Provide a rationale that will sway us toward accepting your results." But of course, we don't need to measure that closely. Even John's relatively conservative claim is for 20% improvement, (although his data shows no improvement at all), but others claim 30%, 50%, 200% and even more.) In simple terms, we are going to be looking something akin to the difference between a nominal 2x4 and the actual measurement of a 2x4 (which is really more like 1.5 x 3.5).

Some may think I'm being a skeptic. But it's all there in black and white (and blue and red) (albeit rather fuzzy). There is no special, skeptical interpretation necessary -- the data clearly show that the two runs are identical to within the limits of the measuring equipment and routine. A reasonable person would conclude that the differences are even smaller at normal operating speeds (which are off the chart to the left) because there seems to be a trend to support that contention. But with a little education of that reasonable person re the Dynojet, he would say, "Oh, in that case, the data shows that there is no difference at all, because the slight difference I saw as a trend is outside the instrument's ability to resolve."

If one were to pretend that this dyno was very very accurate, then the only conclusion would be that HHO degrades performance because the gaps between the curves are greater where the HHO "causes" reduced performance than where it "causes" increased performance. But that interpretation (that HHO caused lower performance) would be wrong, given this data -- the differences are too small and inconsistent to be significant. A second set of runs would show a completely different curve (in terms of the small wiggles in the plot, which are meaningless and are different on every Dynojet run even when there are no changes in the engine at all) but would show the same thing in terms of the gross curve -- namely that they are identical to within the capability of the instrument to measure.)

Mixture measurements shown on Dynojet plots (as a measure of actual driving conditions) are meaningless, because Dynojet curves are run at full throttle, where closed loop operation is no longer in play. Even if you are only tuning for 1/4 mile times (which is the main use of Dynojet dynos) you need to be cautious in interpreting the results). This forum post discusses some of the issues surrounding the Dynojet dynos -- which work ok if their limitations are taken into account: but they are effectively useless for measuring, for instance, a 10% difference in fuel consumption under ordinary steady-state driving conditions.

It is indisputable that HHO injection represents an almost immeasurably small part of the total fuel inducted into the engine: the promoters' own figures show this clearly. One liter-per-minute of HHO represents an energy value much less than 1% of the liquid fuel intake, even at low power outputs.** We've had some promoters here claiming that even that infinitesimal amount is too much and claim that amounts over fractions of a liter per minute will cause detonation, a contention unsupportable by 1. the higher octane value of hydrogen, (scientifically valid) 2. the reported claims of other promoters who claim just the opposite, (not scientifically measurable at these concentrations), only the truly naive or confused try to argue that HHO is replacing fuel.

* Inertial dynos (like the popular and cheap Dynojet on which this run was done) only measure hp and torque under full throttle acceleration conditions. They cannot measure steady state horsepower, emissions, etc. because they have no brake (water, hydraulic, eddy current, etc). (Some Dynojets are equipped with a friction brake, but that brake is not capable of applying a full, constant load.) Inertial dynos work on the same principal as used to calculate hp from 0-60 or quarter mile times. Given only the weight of a car, and its 0-60 time (assuming little wheel spin) you can calculate engine hp according to F=MA. (The effect of aerodynamic drag can be ignored for this gross calculation because the average speed, 30 mph, is pretty low.) Obviously, this calculation does not give you a precise figure. The Dynojet operates on the same principle: at each instant of accelerating the inertial drum (typically 48" in dia) with the car's wheels, the tractive force can be calculated. As you can imagine, there are many confounding variables: for example, on a second run, the transmission temperature will be higher, meaning the oil viscosity is lower, meaning that less energy is absorbed in the transmission... engine intake air temperature will be different from different under-hood temperatures, etc. many of these problems can be avoided with a brake type dyno, on which you can do on/off, on/off on/off tests in less than a minute, because HHO can be switched on and off easily and quickly.

** For instance, this Mitsubishi (Dodge 3.0 liter) engine was outputting 97 hp or so through the rear wheels. John said that the alternator draw was 30 amps (360 watts) If his HHO unit is more efficient than most, then he is getting perhaps 250 watts of energy equivalent in HHO (The tiny amount of O2 adds nothing -- it is even smaller relative to O2 intake from air than the H2 input, relative to fuel: suppose one third of the gas inducted is O2, perhaps 1/3 liter per minute. At 4750 rpm, the Dodge is intaking 1.5 liters x 4750 lpm = 7125 lpm. We can all agree that this tiny amount of O2 will have no effect.) 97 hp is about 72000 watts. Obviously, on an energy replacement basis, 250 watts is far too small to be meaningful: 250/72000 = .003

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 6)
Guru
United States - Member - Charter Member Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - Charter Member

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The People's Republic of Massachusetts
Posts: 1946
Good Answers: 73
#314
In reply to #313

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 1:36 PM

Amen. Good job Blinky.

__________________
I go into every human encounter expecting to be framed for a crime I didn't commit. Dilbert, 2013
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#319
In reply to #313

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 8:49 PM

Why waste your breath? You could have just copy and pasted your previous statements, would have saved you some time.

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#321
In reply to #319

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 9:43 PM

& what new exciting innovation are you trying to get CR4 to validate?

or do you have a question?

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#325
In reply to #313

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/20/2009 2:13 AM

like I said... "this was with the first unit we made.... it had high amperage and low production"....

I also said..."it does show that the results are above par...."

I will agree with blink on some things ....

I wish this thread was never started....

allot of name calling could have been avoided...

not to mention the waste of time it has been....

I knew any documentation provided by myself would be seen as a bias opinion...

but I never thought... any one could not see a red line above a blue line...

every one here said that "it would produce under par results...."

I would say that at par results { no increase} proves them wrong...

this data was not done with the "unit" we have been using on the Big Rigs...

I appreciate the effort from blink .... I would require no further help from CR4....

It was nice to have meet you GARTHH....

and for some members here I hope your able to see the lines right in front of you when your driving to work... the only reason your able to get to work is because your following the car in front of you.... please keep the rubber side down...

I will leave you all with a quote from the car you are follwing.... "I AM OUTTA HERE"

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#326
In reply to #325

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/20/2009 10:02 AM

Hey

I still wanna hear about diesel results, both small & large....

Can't some of this stuff be done on an emission dyno?

of course here in cali there are lots of them, since every car & truck must be smogged every 2 years

What about other states?

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#328
In reply to #326

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 12:16 AM

we are getting the big rig dyno tested and emission tested as well....

its at the top of my list.... all results will be posted on the web site...

I have no sheet data on diesel emissions right now .... but

I was in a semi repair shop in Houston,,,,, and they had a 18 wheeler on a lap top...

checking the sensor readings...

it had a sensor that measured the exhaust weight... when we introduced the gasses into the breather it dropped the weight of the exhaust almost in half...I know this was not emission testing... I was just messing around ...

I will get a 18 wheeler on a real dyno during the month of june.... I will keep you posted and show you the results if you like

I do have emissions on a dodged 3.0 liter van.....

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#327
In reply to #313

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/20/2009 12:16 PM

GA, but I'm still not clear on whether you actually received and tested Ben's device, or just decided the equipment was not adequate to do the testing.

Please clarify this...

Thanks

Dick

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#329
In reply to #327

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 12:23 AM

well ... I showed the dyno results from the "first" unit we made....

no one liked it .... I am am not impressed with it myself but... it did prove at par results...

I think we all agree that there will be no need to have CR4 test the unit we have now for 18 wheelers....

I will be doing dyno and emission tests in june ....a.s.a.p.

I will be happy to share the results when I get them.... { a 3rd party test of coarse}

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#330
In reply to #329

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 1:04 AM

Thanks

"I will be doing dyno and emission tests in june ....a.s.a.p.

I will be happy to share the results when I get them.... { a 3rd party test of coarse}"

Please do!

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#332
In reply to #329

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 8:20 AM

The data you submitted showed an improvement. Blink somehow misread the graph and in his mind it showed a decrease in performance somehow. For all the talk about the HHO people being liars cheats and scammers or just plain stupid buying into their own lies, Blink sure does buy into his own lies. You stated that the test was not your best and it still showed improvement. That is what early testing is like, you start with a small increase and you build on your successes. I guess Blink expects you to get 30% or better results with your first try. I wonder if he ever did any experiments or if he just read about them? I am leaning toward the latter.

Register to Reply
5
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#333
In reply to #332

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 10:46 AM

You are apparently too highly biased, or too uneducated in science, math, and engineering, to read and understand what Blink is trying to tell you! He is trying his best to follow correct scientific procedures, where all changes, good or bad, that are below the accuracy and precision of the instrumentation, are ignored.

Rarely is a single experiment considered proof of anything. Detonation of the first atomic bomb would be an example of those rare exceptions. Only when several experiments, performed by more than one team of observers, using appropriate instrumentation for the measurements involved, provide consistent results, do the experiments become a basis of proof.

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 5)
Power-User
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Engineering Fields - Manufacturing Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Endless Mountains of NE Pa, USA
Posts: 298
Good Answers: 20
#334
In reply to #333

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 11:04 AM

Thank you dkwarner!

Succinctly and well stated.

A GA to you and Blink's earlier post.

__________________
Courage is not the absence of fear, but the inner resolve to rise above it....or the inane lapse in judgement brought on by copious imbibitions....Egre Flagrus
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#337
In reply to #333

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 11:48 AM

You are correct about the testing. Now tell me why no unbiased third parties are jumping up to the plate to test these?

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#339
In reply to #337

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 1:14 PM

"Now tell me why no unbiased third parties are jumping up to the plate to test these?"

That is precisely what Blink was attempting to do! He is (or at least started out as) an unbiased third party. He is also clearly educated in appropriate fields to be able to do the testing.

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#341
In reply to #339

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 3:06 PM

If Ken were unbiased he would not label the discussion HHO lies.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#348
In reply to #341

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 4:57 PM

The thread, at least on my computer, is titled "The HHO Test Plan".

That title, or label if you will, is what brought me to the discussion in the first place! I had hoped at last for an unbiased test. Having followed Blink's posts long before this thread started, I considered him one of the best possible people to perform the tests.

Careful testing takes significant preparation and significant time. I'm truly disappointed that people weren't patient enough to let Blink complete the process...

If there were any lies from Blink or any other competent engineer/scientist types here, I failed to see them. Could you point ONE out? Note that it is quite possible for different people to infer different results from the same data, depending on exactly what those different people understand, and of course on what some of those people WANT to understand... Different interpretations of the same data do not necessarily constitute a lie on any of the interpretations. When many experience people from highly varied backgrounds can reach a consensus, that concensus is significant!

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
2
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#349
In reply to #341

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 5:23 PM

On the contrary. 1. This discussion is not labeled HHO lies. 2. The discussion which is labeled HHO lies has only to do with the obvious lies, and not with any claims that may not be lies. If I wrote "All claims regarding HHO are lies," that would indicate be bias, although not experimental bias, which is a different thing.

For example, the claim that a large portion of the gasoline in an engine goes out the tailpipe (or into the catalytic converter) unburned is a lie, pure and simple. There is no way of varnishing that to make it appear otherwise. Elsewhere on this site I've provided links to resources that support my contention, but this is a fact well-known by every engine engineer, and by virtually every competent engine mechanic. If a promoter uses that lie to sell anything (magnets, weasel juice, HHO, fuel heaters, etc) they are committing fraud, unless they can convincingly claim to be ignorant of the facts.

Labeling lies "lies" is not bias. It is simply telling the truth. Every scientist goes into any investigation with a hypothesis. This is not bias, it is simply good science. If the scientist subsequently ignores evidence, or selectively uses evidence (such as claiming an hp difference at one rpm but ignoring hp readings at all other rpms... or presents insignificant data as significant... or presents measurement differences inside the error spread of the measuring device as being valid differences... then that is bias). I have not done that, and have gone to some time and expense to ensure that my test will be accurate and sensitive enough to show differences of 4% or so -- plenty close enough when many HHO promoters are claiming 20%, 50%, 100% gains.

If you have a concrete example of apparent experimental bias on my part, then we can discuss that. But in any case, you are putting the cart before the horse. There can be no experimental bias until there is an experiment.

It seems that I have bent over backwards to accommodate John and Ben's request for actual fluid measurement (despite is not being required -- because the amount of HHO gas supplied to the engine is too small to measure as a significant displacer of air, the absolute pressure of which is what the Scan Gauge uses to make its calcualtions, just as the ECU does). If they had wanted to supply, when I was willing to work with them, a calibrated tank with a Honda fuel pump, return and supply lines, mounting brackets acceptable to the dyno facility, etc., I'd be happy to use that -- but that is not something the typical HHO experimenter is likely to be able to (or want to) fabricate. Thus the Scan Guage, supplemented with an inexpensive pulse width measurement device. If we find that there are problems with that setup, perhaps we'll come up with something else... but it is too early to say.

But we'll do the liquid fuel measurement as well, which I expect will demonstrate that the Scan Gauge works fine, and the liquid measurement is unnecessary. I'll build or find an HHO unit. I have no interest in working with people such as Ben who are so obviously rude and advesarial, and unwilling to read up on statistics, measurement and experimental design. I'd offered the test as a favor, not to be their lackey, operating on their timetable. I'm not getting a consulting fee for this.

The simple truth is that their curves show nothing other than that there is no measurable difference in performance, and certainly nothing even remotely close the the 20% performance differences they have been claiming. The fuel ratio info has been misinterpreted, and simply shows the the engine is operating in open loop, which has no influence on ordinary fuel economy at all -- because all engines operate in closed loop, other than in very rare full-throttle condition -- a condition not required for the EPA urban or highway cycles which we use as a measure of fuel efficiency.

Perhaps after the experiment, you can come back and discuss the possible sources of experimental error you see.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: California
Posts: 2363
Good Answers: 63
#350
In reply to #349

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 7:07 PM

Isn't all data significant depending on the confidence level?

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#356
In reply to #350

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 10:06 PM

Yikes. This could lead to a very long discussion. We can say that all data is significant in some way, and we can say that an apparent difference is significant to some confidence level. But if you give a group of people rubber bands to use in measuring 2x4s, you can reasonably say that the data is unlikely to be "significant" in any realistic sense of the word.

But the last thing I would like to do is introduce something beyond the most basic concepts -- even those are difficult enough in this thread. I don't have endless time for this BS. Even very good dynos do not reliably measure to any better than one percent, and Dyno Jets are not "very good" dynos, in the sense that a "real" dyno is apt to be $150,000 or more, and a Dyno jet is apt to be $20,000 -- market value tells the story. This isn't to slam Dyno Jets (and some of their models do in fact have brakes) but their main use is for quick and dirty hp runs, drag stip style. Because they are inertial, as soon as you back off on the throttle even slightly, the readings go haywire, and they are incapable of reading a steady state power, such as would be similar to highway cruising.

So... it would be a rare person who would claim that a single run showing a difference of one hp (at peak where it is always measured, contrary to my friends assertion -- for the obvious reason that this makes the engine appear "better") which represents essentially a 1% difference (within the error band for even a very good dyno with a very good operator) can be considered an indication of any thing meaningful.

John and Ben can be forgiven for being unfamiliar with dynos and there level of accuracy -- but the fact that one run was shut down before the other, (making it look at if hp suddlenly drops off in a perfectly vertical line) means that the runs were not carefully controlled. In practice, the dyno operator starts to back off on the throttle when he sees that "that's all she wrote" and will back off earlier on a second run because he's already found the hp peak, and most operators will not flog an engine needlessly. In Dynojets, this leads to part of the run after the hp peak being typically unreliable -- sometimes dramatically so: obviously in these runs you can not take the ends of the runs literally, because it looks like the engine explodes and suddenly stops producing torque. Some dynojet curves are comical, as you can see from an earlier link I supplied.

In this article you can see that differences of 10% from dyno to dyno are common, whereas you would expect much better accuracy than that: how difficult can it be to measure torque accurately, rather than simply more or less repeatably?

Once we have five or six very close runs at one condition and five or six in the other condition and have found a very small or very large difference, then we may want to talk about confidence levels -- but I sense that half our audience is not all that tuned into such things, but will kind of "get it" upon seeing the data.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#352
In reply to #349

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 7:36 PM

blink said.... " I'll build or find an HHO unit. I have no interest in working with people such as Ben who are so obviously rude and advesarial"

I did not write such things....

I did not say this unit will produce 20% horse power

"I said 20% mileage" with an improvement of horse power

and that this dyno test I provided was not done with the unit in question... and can not be valid because I provided it...

I did not call you any names ...

and you will not find or build a unit that will work..

any hho device using normal electrolysis will prove to be useless , every one knows this....the only way you may see a gain in mileage is with a EFIE sensor tricker , but a companied with that sensor tricker will be more NOX emissions

I do not require any help from you good sir.... thanks for your effort...

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#354
In reply to #352

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 8:36 PM

Ouch!

My system works just fine without electronics. Everyone knows that. LOL

If DkWarner would like to evaluate one of my systems on his vehicle I would be glad to loan one out. I believe he would follow instructions before inserting his own rationality instead. I also believe he is recognized as a level headed critical thinker with experience. I doubt Blinky's capabilities and also his intentions. I would not trust any results obtained by him because he is obviously biased. The other reason is that he does not understand how the ecu operates.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
4
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#355
In reply to #354

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 9:48 PM

I'm more than a little surprised, but quite pleased with your vote of confidence!

I would indeed read and follow the instructions (in fact that is one of my primary functions - to read instructions so others don't have to!), and I'd love to evaluate one of your units. BUT, I'm afraid I already have way too many unfinished projects (one of which was started here on CR4 around 2 years ago), so thanks for the offer, but I'll pass up this one. It is really hard to say that, but I have to put my work first.

In addition, I do have a more varied experience than most, and have some level of expertise in a number of fields, but modern internal combustion engines is not one of them.

I don't know him personally, but from observing his posts over considerable time, I know that Blink has way more knowledge in automotive areas than I do, and so far I hold him in high regard. If your unit does work, then loan him one, and he will prove it! Fortunately, patience is one of my stronger points - I'll wait for Blink's results, and yours. Please do post them on CR4!

Dick

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 4)
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#366
In reply to #355

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 8:54 AM

Maybe I will. Depends on whether we can agree on his bias. In many of his posts he has stated that it can't work, won't work, etc. Is that the person you would want testing your device without you there to point out his mistakes? I have put almost 2 years into this and during that time I have learned much. I am not about to hand my system over to a guy who would be biased against any positive results.

Like someone stated before the best test would come from a party not aware of what they were testing. The results can easilly be skewed by the installer or operator not following directions. There are many ways to do it wrong, but only one way to do it right.

Register to Reply
3
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: California
Posts: 2363
Good Answers: 63
#367
In reply to #366

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 11:32 AM

A person prejudiced against your product is exactly who youn want testing it. It is easy for a person who wants to see great things happen to provide results that appear to indicate such. However, it is much harder to get results that convert a person pre-biased against. This of course assumes they would be actually trained in scientific investigation methods and understand the concept of personal bias and how to avoid it in testing protocol. It is a pretty common practice in physical sciences to understand and attempt to remove bias from testing practices. If you can not stand up to scrutiny by the critics, then your research is invalidated. Keep in mind Heisenberg and Bohr had to stand up to days of public scrutiny by Einstein in a symposium to discuss quantum mechanics, and in the end through mathematical proof and scientific arguments, they overcame every argument Einstein attempted. Afterall, a significant number of the faithful can be healed by snake oil just through the placebo effect. These are the people who can be told something works and will believe without evidence if the sale was spun correctly, and will go their entire lives believing it performs as stated with no clue otherwiise even with evidence before them to the contrary. I would hope you don't just want faithful believers to accept this technology, because i can tell you the EPA and State of California won't be faithful believers (well maybe the politicians will for the right donation), they will want valid proof of performance.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#359
In reply to #352

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 1:08 AM

I did not write such things....

You're right. I had you confused with your dad, whose post several others have also taken as abrasive... and apparently it was intended to be insulting, although it's hard to be insulted, because he is obviously describing someone he does not know. Sorry to attribute his words to you.

But in any case, I'll find a unit elsewhere, or build one. I'd rather not have someone hoping for either good or bad results.

any hho device using normal electrolysis will prove to be useless , every one knows this...

I am inclined to agree with you that HHO devices using normal electrolysis do not work, but would like to prove it to myself. Also, I don't think that everyone knows that HHO units do not work by themselves -- we've certainly had plenty of promoters visiting CR4 who claim otherwise. There are also engineers here who would like to know what HHO alone does. There is no consensus among vendors re the requirements to make an HHO unit work.

Again, sorry for accusing you of being rude.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#360
In reply to #359

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 1:22 AM

no problem....

I wish you luck...

I will post results on my site,,, as soon as I get a Big Rig on a dyno

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#353
In reply to #349

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 8:24 PM

I hope you read what you write. You say open loop has nothing to do with fuel economy? Fuel economy most definitely IS affected by open loop operation. An ecu uses the open loop map to run an engine richer during warm up and heavy acceleration. If an engine goes into open loop in any other circumstance it is due to an engine fault. Normal operation is done in closed loop. When in closed loop the engine runs leaner and stays in closed loop until some sensor voltage or value falls outside of the ecu parameters.

I saw the same chart and it did not show open loop operation. It showed a change from one variable (HHO). (The baseline is the one on the bottom).

I have a scangage and have used it for many months and I can tell you it is not adequate. The idea of reading a pulse at the injector is futile also. The return circuit in the fuel system is impossible to monitor as it sometimes contains fumes and not liquid fuel. The only way to know how much fuel you used is to measure the fuel. I do this in all of my other tests, but this application is more difficult. When I can afford to dedicate a vehicle to testing it will not be a problem mounting a see through tank in the rear of the vehicle with accurate fuel measuring capabilities (cone shape) and all stock gas tank components.

There is no cheap and easy method of verifying mileage other than filling up the tank. That method has been good enough for plenty of people capable of determining how much mileage their car gets without a computer or anything. Some of them don't even need a calculator to do the math.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#357
In reply to #353

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 12:35 AM

You say open loop has nothing to do with fuel economy?

No, I did not say that. I have no idea what you are talking (writing) about. Please quote my text.

Your understanding of open and closed loop operation is essentially correct, and I find nothing there to disagree with, although you have left out some critical details. What you fail to mention is that in the EPA cycles, and in ordinary operation, open loop operation essentially never comes into play, (other than during warm up) because full throttle operation is not necessary for the EPA cycles (nor for ordinary driving, from which the cycles were developed). My van gets about 6 mpg or so when under full throttle, or even less if the speed is low enough, but over the course of a week it never operates in open loop (other than for less than a minute during warm-up) unless I do something stupid like pull out in front of someone, and feel the need for full throttle*. There is simply never a time when it is necessary to operate at full throttle in ordinary driving. This is even more the case for people who will spend hundreds of dollars or thousands of dollars for fuel saving devices: they invariably drive as if with an egg under the throttle foot.

Why do I mention the EPA cycles? Because they are the only reliable, repeatable standard we have. (We have Prius drivers claiming 55 mpg and some claiming 30. Obviously, the difference is not a measure of the car or its equipment -- it is a measure of driving style, duty cycle, terrain, etc.) Only with a standard to measure against do MPG claims have any validity for the machine. My van at times gets a legitimate 100 mpg. Advertising that my technique of filling tires causes that would be silly wouldn't it? It gets 100 mpg because I am going downhill.

Warm-up? Most cars that are not approaching antique status have heated O2 sensors. Even my old 1996 Honda van is out of open loop within 100 yards of pulling out of my driveway. The Scan Gauge lets one observe these transitions. These brief excursions from closed loop have very small effects on overall mileage, because they represent in my case about .1% of operating time. All this is beside the point, however, because any test that has any hope of being accepted must be under closed loop conditions -- otherwise you are introducing too much variability.

* But even then, I virtually never use full throttle because even my old van will spin the tires on a downshift from second to first.

When I can afford to dedicate a vehicle to testing it will not be a problem mounting a see through tank in the rear of the vehicle with accurate fuel measuring capabilities (cone shape) and all stock gas tank components.

That's a reasonable approach for you, or anyone with something to gain or with loads of time and money. For me, it is not, because I don't have the time, motivation or funds to waste to to find the right fuel pump, design the bracketry, etc. (Many years ago I just hung a calibrated flask under the hood.) A pulse width indicator is plenty precise enough to show an instantaneous difference, for the same reason that the entire idea of pulse width control works so precisely: there is never a case where the injected amount varies appreciably from the calculated amount. I've forgotten the limits from my time working in a fuel injector plant, but they were much less than 1% for a particular pulse and pressure. Obviously, this changes over time (thousands of miles), but does not change over the course of a test.

There is no cheap and easy method of verifying mileage other than filling up the tank.

We'll see. In the past, pulse width measurement has corresponded nearly perfectly with dyno testing using real (multi-thousand dollar) fuel flow equipment. As an alternative, the EPA tests are actually done on exhaust mass, as collected in a large bag. This is simple, and extremely accurate, but weighing a large bag is a little tricky, (but not all that difficult). But again, it's asking a little much of the average HHO experimenter -- where does he get this leak proof huge bag, etc. The problem with filling up the tank, is that another experimenter in another part of the country is unlikely to be able to repeat the test condition. Then we simply have hearsay.. the situation we are trying to avoid. When I was running a motorcycle dyno, a real dyno run would show that hearsay is useless. We had people claiming 100 hp for machines that put out 40.

The idea of reading a pulse at the injector is futile also. The return circuit in the fuel system is impossible to monitor as it sometimes contains fumes and not liquid fuel.

The regulator is after the injectors, so what happens in the return line is of no consequence in measuring injected volume. If you imagine that the injectors were injecting into test tubes, you'd get a perfect indication by measuring the volume in the test tubes. Pressure regulation and the ratio of pulse width to injected amount are both values that are very stable, and certainly close enough for measuring the gross differences we are looking for. We are not trying to compare one claim of 15% improvement with another of 16% or even 20%. We are at this point only trying to discriminate between zero effect and a gross effect, such as 20%. If we can demonstrate that pulse width measurement, which can be done very cheaply, gives an accurate result on a dyno, where we can control the variables, then HHO experimenters will have a technique for demonstrating the effectiveness of their devices that techies are more likely to accept.

I saw the same chart and it did not show open loop operation. It showed a change from one variable (HHO).

The only way to make a reasonably accurate DynoJet run is under full throttle (see links provided before). Full throttle is open loop, as you have correctly stated. Only under open loop can you see the sort of mixture variation shown in the graph: closed loop operation does not permit such variation, for many reasons... such as the need to pass the manufacturer's emissions certification, fuel efficiency, catalytic converter life, etc... all the things that have lead to three-way catalysts and closed-loop operation being the standard for combustion control. In closed loop, the ratio is right at 14.7 (plus/minus small adjustments for temperature etc that do not change during the course of a run).

It sounds like you have your own testing plan pretty well sorted out. I'll see what I come up with, and if you like it, you can use it. If not, don't. I'm not even done with my third tank yet, so perhaps on the next fill-up the Scan Gauge will be completely wrong. Seems unlikely, because it operates in the same data used by the ECU to calculate injection amount -- but it is too early to say. Most Scan Gauge users seem very impressed with their accuracy -- but they could be loony toons, I suppose.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#358
In reply to #357

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 1:07 AM

Thanks for taking the time to explain all this! I'm learning a lot!

I've never seen a dynamometer being used, except in CA smog tests, and perhaps I wasn't paying good attention then. As I recall, the engine was being run at a constant speed, presumably at a predetermined load, while the exhaust was being measured. Not having access to the guts of the dyno, I assumed it was sloshing some oil around in some kind of a labrynth to use up the energy. I'm fairly sure it wasn't an inertial device like the dynojet that you have been describing, and I'm virtually certain that it was not at full throttle, but I'd gladly accept correction if I'm wrong!

Keep up the good work!

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#361
In reply to #358

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 1:28 AM

You are precisely correct, although many of the smog devices use eddy current brakes or generators as a brake. The units I used to build were hydraulic, with the drum driving a hydraulic pump, and with the torque indication being calculated from hydraulic pressure. Speed was measured by counting gear teeth with a prox switch. The hydraulic tank was the chassis of the unit, so we had perhaps 100 gallons of hydraulic fluid and a lot of surface area -- so typically you'd go daft from the noise before the fluid would get too hot.

You are right re throttle setting. The idea of the test is to maintain a load that is not too far from actual driving conditions.* The dyno operators get surprisingly good at holding a rock solid constant speed, (the test aborts if they fail to keep speed within the correct limits at the correct times) which sounds easy, but it is a little like flying a plane, where a novice pilot is always correcting too much and flying a sine wave.

It is this type of dyno I'll use in the experiment.

* A while ago, I gave my son an old Daihatsu I'd had sitting around for a couple years. It flunked its first emission test after its resurrection, because it couldn't maintain speed under the prescribed load. Poor car sounded like it was ready to blow, with loads of detonation. The timing, it turns out, was far from correct, so after fixing that and cleaning out the EGR circuit, it did quite well.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#364
In reply to #357

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 8:20 AM

The scangage averages. If you run an entire tank of gas it will be accurate. If you drive 40 miles it will not. Either way you can not depend on injector pulses to verify fuel consumption without checking it against liquid fuel used. There is no substitute for testing the volume of fuel used during an experiment.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#368
In reply to #364

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 9:15 PM

Either way you can not depend on injector pulses to verify fuel consumption without checking it against liquid fuel used.

Sort of, but you don't need to quote an mpg figure, just a percentage difference, and pulse width is ideal for this. It is essentially the way an aircraft fuel totalizer works, (which are like totalizers used in industry for all sorts of fluids): they are extremely accurate. Just as each pulse sent out by the full flow sensor in a totalizer represents a tiny amount of fuel passed, so does the pulse width of an injector: 1000 pulses at 20 ms equals a small qty of fuel. You don't need to know that qty, only that 1000 pulses at 25 milliseconds is a 25% greater amount. (There is actually a constant having to do with the opening and closing time vs the fully open time, but you can filter that out if you do an injector volume test and a couple different pulse widths prior to doing your dyno runs -- for the average joe, however, this is overkill: you can just use the difference in pulse width as the difference in fuel flow.)

I helped start up a fuel injector plant for Ford, and the entire plant opening was delayed, costing many $millions, because of a single cotton fiber that found its way between the pintle and the stop plate on one injector of the many under qualification test. For qualification to pass, all the injectors would have had to produce the same volume per million cycles, to very tight limits. Because one had the fiber, the stop plate and pintle surfaces were no longer perfectly parallel and they beat into one another, changing the stroke by a micron or two. They are assembled (and most final machining also was done) in clean rooms, but somehow, one fiber found its way in. As I said elsewhere, the tolerance was certainly no more than 1% across the whole group, but in practice was incredibly precise for any single injector. So if you have a constant pressure relative to atmospheric (which the regulator assures) then a given pulse width translates to a given injected amount to within less than one percent. You can go to a fuel injector test shop to verify this for yourself.

So if you use a constant dyno load, when the HHO is on, the pulse with will drop by (for example) 20%, indicating, with very nearly perfect accuracy (to the limits of how accurately you measure pulse width) a reduction in fuel flow of 20%. Do this as many times during a single, constant speed, constant load run as you need for the confidence level you want. Then, move on to a different speed and/or load. Obviously, if you were calculating actual and actual total quantity used, you need to do a lot of easy but tedious math. You don't need to do that, however. All you need to say is that at some typical road hp (say 15) the fuel consumption is reduced by X%. You don't need to calculate a MPG figure* or an actual fuel flow figure, just a percentage difference.

Or just find a dyno shop with a brake dyno and a Taylor flask, and be done with it in no time. This is only hard if you want both cheapness and accuracy that others will accept. If the EPA accepted road tests as being adequate, then they would not use dynos.

Another possibility is to have SAE Magazine, or Combustion and Flame (I think that's it) magazine, do a test with side-by-side identical cars, (one with one without HHO) driving from one city to another, and with fillups done at the same pump and same pump positioning. If the drivers are supplied by the magazine, many people would accept the result, I'd think. The magazine staff would install the unit and verify that only the unit is the difference.

You are right that the scan gauge averages, but the percentage accuracy at 10 miles is as good as it is at 300. It functions as a totalizer. The apparent inaccuracy is in the fillup: with a small fillup you have large percentage variations even when precisely positioned at the same pump: the amount you put into the tank differs, it is not the scan gauge that differs. The scan gauge is not guessing how much fuel you are using, it calculates the consumed amount every two seconds and keeps adding to the total, just as an aircraft totalizer does.

Turns out this is pretty academic for me. I am leaving CR4, but I am not the one you need to convince anyway. I received a threat via CR4 mail from someone (no one in this thread, and apparently unrelated to HHO) that was almost impossibly strange, but I have to take it seriously. Perhaps you can carry on with coming up with a test method people will accept. If Dick had the time, he'd be a good bet for running a test -- but poke around... there are several people with solid automotive and combustion control experience here. The use of a state dyno, which can provide a constant load is a good bet.

University help would be great.

Take care.

*which takes yet another type of (yet more expensive and complicated) dyno and coast down tests to do well.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 6215
Good Answers: 248
#369
In reply to #368

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 11:45 PM

Sorry to hear about the threat. And thanks for the vote of confidence! If we weren't so busy right now with so many projects, I'm sure my boss/partner would love to contribute to the testing, but right now we have to keep some planes flying...

Good luck, and I hope to see you here again, perhaps under some other avatar...

Dick

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#370
In reply to #368

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/23/2009 1:33 AM

why would any give you a threat?

and it must have been bad too take it seriously...

but I guess you don't want to take any channces...

may I ask.... do you know why some one would do that..... or what did they said

Register to Reply
Power-User
Hobbies - Musician - New Member Engineering Fields - Manufacturing Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Endless Mountains of NE Pa, USA
Posts: 298
Good Answers: 20
#371
In reply to #368

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/23/2009 10:34 AM

I am saddened and Angry that you have to leave this site because of a threat against you. There is apparently no shortage of Idiots, Fools and Subversives, even here.

I wish you good luck and good health and hope that you can come back as soon as possible!

You will be Sorely missed!!

Jeff

__________________
Courage is not the absence of fear, but the inner resolve to rise above it....or the inane lapse in judgement brought on by copious imbibitions....Egre Flagrus
Register to Reply
Power-User
Canada - Member -

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 435
Good Answers: 4
#372
In reply to #368

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/23/2009 11:30 AM

Hi Blink,

I really hope that you will take this personal threat to the proper authorities. They take this kind of stuff very seriously and have ways to locate where it came from (to a certain limit). I wish you all the best....

__________________
Handle every stressful situation like a dog. If you can't eat it or play with it, just pee on it and walk away. - unknown.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru
Hobbies - RC Aircraft - New Member Hobbies - Automotive Performance - New Member Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Fort Lauderdale Florida
Posts: 5708
Good Answers: 123
#374
In reply to #368

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/23/2009 2:02 PM

Stay safe, and please rediscover us.

__________________
Bob
Register to Reply
Active Contributor

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21
#375
In reply to #368

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/23/2009 11:57 PM

Hello Blink,

A threat of any kind cannot be tolerated, as Rick suggested go to the authorities, they have means to know where the message originated. We are with you.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#376
In reply to #368

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/24/2009 5:47 AM

Sorry to hear about the threat. I would expect someone to try that with me, but not with you. If you can get ahold of some FBI types and have them get information I am sure they can at least narrow down where the threat came from even if they can't find the person.

I appreciate your help so far and if you get a cheap pulse circuit for testing fuel consumption maybe you can post it in a new thread unrelated to HHO or have someone else like Dk post it for you. I will probably have proper test equipment soon and will have a program with the dyno to do all the testing you described. We plan to rent a dyno from Mustang Dynamometer for shop use and for tweaking. Scangage is great for OBD2 and up, but my van is the last OBD1 so it won't work on it.

I think the only testing a home mechanic can do is to drive the vehicle and fill up the tank. Of course this means parking on a level surface. If the test is less than a tankfull the car has to be in the same spot every time you fill up at the same pump. We use a piece of chalk to mark the tire position for the next fillup. Filling up to the top of the fill tube is the only acceptable method and you have to be sure there is no air bubble in the tank. The other problem with this is leakage from the filler tube. My son's car had a bad clamp and he found out how important it is to check the condition of his filler tube hardware.

If there is a scangage installed you can clear the mpg when you are on the highway at speed and have accurate mileage from then on. I like to watch throttle position LOD, MPG and rpm. These variables relate to what you should expect your mileage to be going up a hill or coasting. The LOD is load on drivetrain and if you pull a lot of amps it will show it at idle or while coasting down a hill. More lod will require more throttle. Scangage is a great verification tool, but I would not depend on it for short runs. It is as accurate as testing the amount of gas required to fill-up at a tankful.

The easiest test for proving results is a container mounted in the rear of vehicle for testing. It must contain the same parts as the stock tank (salvaged) and be capable of sealing with a vent. When the tank is run until the engine dies the level can be marked and that mark used for verification that it ran out of gas and didn't die for some other reason. Testing with this type of tank should be done on an interstate. Fortunately there are plenty of gas stations. Just pick one and make a loop back and forth for testing. Going both ways for each test and filling up at the same spot at the same pump is great for accuracy. With the new tank installed this willl be impossible because you are running the engine until it stalls. Then you will measure a predetermined amount and fill the tank again for another test. Pick a good highway with wide and flat shoulders unless you have a racetrack for testing.

Register to Reply
3
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#335
In reply to #332

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 11:12 AM

No you need to actually read Blinks post(s), about the dyno results. The caption on the torque graph states a decrease. Probably statistically insignificant, just like the gain in HP. The results are inconclusive, without a series of tests. A series of identical tests would probably show similar deviations without HHO. There is certainly no evidence of real gains that would justify the expense on adding this to my car.

Maybe you have some data to share or could point to some...

There is nothing to lead to the conclusion that HHO injection is not a net waste of energy, resources & money for a 3 liter dodge engine.

Calling Blink a liar, certainly raises questions about the validity of your opinion.

His views are based on logic & science, what are your's based on?

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#336
In reply to #335

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 11:42 AM

My results are based on actual use. You assume that when someone develops a technology they must have backers and facilities. Assumptions run rampant in this thread. I make quite a few assumptions about the intentions of Ken. I assume he never really wanted to test this. I also assume people jump behind him to attack anything that differs from what they have been taught.

Any unbiased party reading all of the posts will see where the bias lies.

There will be plenty of testing done this year by several manufacturers and third parties. I will post my findings when I have dyno results. Anything less will be unacceptable here, that is painfully obvious. When dyno testing is payed for and the results are in posting them here will be purely educational.

The title of this thread involves testing. I have no doubt that it was never Ken's intention to verify any results. If I need a reason to support my conclusion it is merely that if it works he will be forced to say so and lose his standing as a respected peer.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#362
In reply to #332

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 2:04 AM

I didn't misread the graph. I said that torque is lower, which you can see if you read the chart (the dynojets give you the peak values at the bottom, more-or-less automatically). The peak hp differs by just under one hp (97.74 - 96.78 = .96) which is not enough to be considered significant by any reputable dynojet operator. So neither difference, the lower torque or higher hp are significant.

The runs were done differently, with an earlier shutdown for the base line. Timing is essential in dynojets because they are measuring acceleration not torque, and then calculating torque via f=ma. If you shut down a little early, the torque and hp appear to drop off, but you're not measuring the engine, you're measuring the operator's timing -- it is simple and common operator error.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Associate

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 26
Good Answers: 1
#340
In reply to #313

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 2:55 PM

I disagree with you here blinky one ; your not even close and obviously know nothing about dynamometer tests or h.p ratings its obvious to me your out of your field of expertise if indeed you even actually have one, other than self aclaimed . horsepower is at the top end , your crappy honda has what 150 h.p ? do you think it uses 150 starting off normally from the lights ... no its not even useing 1/2 of that horsepower , so why do you think its rated at 150 ( just a number ) its when its giving all its got , it has the potential of produceing that h.p., of course its going to shpow the same up to the peak , but this shows its capable of giving an increse of h.p as a total .. You educated self aclaimed wizards have been declareing all along that it will decrease the power from the motor , not increase it ... you ask us for testing results , and when we finally break down and give them to you knowing that your going to tear everything down but give you credit for being open minded enough to look at it , you reliably follow the first guy who open his mouth in ignorance and all follow suit ... just a bunch of cattle type mentallity , scientists ... no they're open minded and willing to entertain an idea ... engineers ... no they will look at designs and ideas to determine if their structurally sound , when proof is given them even if it is from a opposeing idea , they are mature enough and intelligent enough to have a look ... Our data was by the state of texas , and also from an independant dyno shop , but i guess its easier for you to think we bribbed them for the results then to actually think maybe by some small possibility YOUR WRONG !!!!!!!!!!!!! Your not even able to figure out with your self aclaimed high IQ. HOW TO MEASURE A LIQUID FUEL , seems to be beyond your capabilities and this after 2-3 months ... you people are pathetic .. we're opting out of this stupid waste of time , not interested in your grand opinion , its not worth nothing to anyone in the REAL WORLD ... go and waste your piers time not mine . this site is like a bunch of dumb assed cows walking across a field , one blindly following another and all lead by an idiot

Register to Reply
Guru
United States - Member - USA! Hobbies - Musician - Sound Man Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - More than a Hobby Technical Fields - Technical Writing - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: City of Roses.
Posts: 2056
Good Answers: 101
#343
In reply to #340

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 3:06 PM

I can understand if you are upset with a few members of this site, but to discredit, make wild assumptions, and berate everyone that uses this great resource and the members in it is completely asinine. You don't know the first thing about me, or my beliefs, or 99% of the people you just slammed for that matter. I sir, do take offense from your umbrella statements directed at many highly respected and intelligent people around the world.

__________________
Don't believe everything you read on the Internet!
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#345
In reply to #343

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 3:47 PM

Easy Rv. If you were constantly accused and attacked you might feel the same way. Try introducing an idea that most people around you disagree with and see how you are treated. It takes incredibly thick skin not to be bothered by all the attacks. I am sure that statement was not directed at you.

He knows there are intelligent people here that is why he came here for help. I feel the same way. Instead of help with testing he gets attacked constantly as do I. We are still no closer to an acceptable test method for inventors to use to verify mileage. The focus of discussion almost always strays into accusation and defamation. Nothing productive can come from this type of behavior.

The fact still remains that we are no closer to acceptable testing other than dyno time. Had those who said they would help come up with a plan for testing said in the beginning that dyno testing was the only acceptable method we could have saved much time and dignity. It is also apparent that reading dyno sheets is not a science and seems to be subjective depending on who is looking at it. Knowing this why would anyone submit dyno readings here? To be criticized some more?

Try walking in his shoes before making judgements.

Register to Reply
2
Guru
United States - Member - USA! Hobbies - Musician - Sound Man Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - More than a Hobby Technical Fields - Technical Writing - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: City of Roses.
Posts: 2056
Good Answers: 101
#351
In reply to #345

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 7:35 PM

Trust me, my statement about knowing nothing about me, holds quite true. I've build HHO units, plenty of them, I've road tested them, I've seen strange unexplainable things. I've argued about this topic til I've been blue in the face, I've walked those shoes plenty. The fact is, I was never able to prove any of the things I saw/experienced, which doesn't mean they don't exist, but I had, and have no ground to stand on. I had a buddy who was operating a business selling, installing, and testing HHO units, he had a couple large contracts with rather large fleets just before the economy took a nosedive. When he was still in operation I offered him the opportunity to use the alternative energy Lab at Oregon Institute of Technology, to get some credible testing done. He never took me up on the offer, why I'll never know, It was free... Since then, I have washed my hands clean of HHO, thrown in the towel, It was a battle that I understand has been going on for ~100 years with no results. I have decided to spend my time on more "real world" work. Just because I'm not actively working with HHO doesn't mean i still don't have an interest, if someone else is possibly providing proof one way or another. Quite frankly, I don't care If it works, or completely fails, I would just like to see someone present the information to prove it one way or another. The arguing like middle school kids is a bit over the top, and quite counter productive.

I have to be at the recording studio in 30 Min's, so I'll step off my Rant now, I apologize for getting worked up, but this all seems so silly to me.

__________________
Don't believe everything you read on the Internet!
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#365
In reply to #351

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 8:46 AM

I hope to be the one to show you and others positive results from HHO. I presume your friend had some installations that showed improvements. I wonder why he didn't take you up on the free dyno time too.

When I first started building HHO devices they were terribly inefficient and the output varied in quality and volume. I would get good results while the unit was cool, but as soon as it heated up the results would go away. Then I built a huge output cell and installed that to see what would happen and my mileage went down.

So I started making better, more efficient systems with less output and the results began to stabilize. I tried effie units and O2 spacers too. When I was introducing too much HHO the effie helped keep me out of open loop.

Now my system uses no electronics except for a pwm to control HHO output more easily. This may not work on every vehicle. I have used it this way on Dodge, Ford and Chevy. As for the rest there may be a need for O2 controls.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#344
In reply to #340

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 3:16 PM

I feel your anger. Some of the people reading these posts are genuinely intrigued with the idea that a new advance has been made. I personally have proven to myself and others that vaporization of fuel increases performance as well as HHO. Both are effective methods of reducing carbon emissions and increasing power and mileage.

I will be presenting both technologies at the next event in Jarboe's Mill Md. the last weekend of this month. I have produced enough results to convince investors and partners who are not scientists. I intend to prove these technologies at several universities this year depending on funding. Others are doing the same thing and I expect reports to be out from the EPA some time this year. I will share results with the CR4 community for information purposes so they can be kept up to date with technology. I am not interested in the WHY, only the HOW.

Register to Reply
2
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member Safety - ESD - New Member Engineering Fields - Transportation Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Technical Fields - Procurement - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Engineering Fields - Architectural Engineering - New Member Technical Fields - Marketing/Advertising - New Member Engineering Fields - Food Process Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Mariposa Ca
Posts: 5800
Good Answers: 114
#346
In reply to #344

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 3:50 PM

Oh cool results.

Feel free to share.

An inconclusive dyno & a bunch of testimonials is all I've seen...

There should be 100's of thousands of miles of test results.

HHO is in no way new.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#347
In reply to #300

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 3:58 PM

well for your viewing pleasure.... we posted the dyno and emission tests on this page ,,,,, http://www.johnhenryhydrogen.com/test%20results.htm

we did the tests and for that reason it should be void ....but

any one can see in full view that the air fuel mixer is a bit leaner with a bit better performace....

I never said it would increase the horse power or toque by 20%

I said the mpg would be increased by 20%... but it really cant be determined by provided sheet data which is void...

but hey ...it was the very first attempt at any results... with the first unit... pulling too many amps... with low production....

all though it does show at the least at par results with a lean mixuter...

enjoy tearing it apart.... but at least its full size this time

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#317
In reply to #291

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 5:11 PM

For tire changes, you would of course recalibrate for tire size, which you can easily do with the Scan Gauge. After having done so , your ordinary speedo will be incorrect, but the Scan Gauge speedo and odo will both be correct. Such calibration ease is one of the reasons the Scan Gauge can easily be made more accurate than the typical trip computer.

Re HHO, no, you wouldn't need to, nor want to, recalibrate. Doing so would invalidate the test.

Pulse width measurement is actually overkill: the Scan Gauge will tell you what you need to know if you don't screw around with it after calibrating it once. When HHO is injected, we know (and all agree, I think) that the volume of gas is too small to have any effect on the MAP sensor (or MAF sensor) (and therefore on injected fuel amount or Scan Gauge readout). For there to be any measurable effect from HHO, it has to operate in a way which is not understood, because we know that the combustion speed improvement often cited by both scammers and experimenters only occurs at far greater H2 concentrations. So to have any effect, the HHO injection should cause a significant increase in power as soon as it is turned on, which the driver compensates for by reducing throttle... and then fuel flow would be reduced -- and that would be correctly indicated on the Scan Gauge, making pulse width measurement or expensive "real fuel flow equipment" unnecessary. (I'll probably still tinker with the pulse width reader as an electronics challenge.)

Because the HHO amount is incredibly small and stoichiometric*, there is no effect on the O2 sensor, and of course, no automatic richening of the mixture that most other promoters of the "technology" claim -- they claim to believe that the reason their HHO units do not work is because the computer is "fooled" by HHO into making the mixture rich, and that you must "fool" it again to make the mixture leaner: you must buy their "efie" to do this. Dennis Lee extends this -- the HHO unit does not work unless you buy his efie, and use his solvent in the tank, and use magnets around your fuel line, and heat the fuel. Taken together, these also have no effect -- but it certainly ropes in a lot of people... and keeps naive installers endlessly befuddled, and knowledgeable ones endlessly amused by how easily people can be fooled.

When HHO is turned on, because there is no effect on the O2 sensor, there will be no change in injected fuel volume -- there is no reason for the ecu to make a change: you've added a tiny amount of gas in a stoichiometric ratio, and have only lost a little efficiency because you generated that gas at a loss -- but the loss, like the effect of the gas, is far to small to measure. If the HHO somehow magically increases torque, and therefore horsepower, then the driver will back off on the throttle to maintain a speed and load on the dyno (or in real life on the road). Only at that point would fuel flow change. However, we know from your dyno test that there is no change in power, so no need to back off on the throttle. Therefore nothing changes, just as you'd expect.

The scan gauge and the driver's foot will indicate the same thing -- no change. (This was shown in the Popular Mechanics test: the driver could not tell when the unit was turned on.) Pulse width (which measures actual fuel flow directly) will show the same thing: no change... but really, it's overkill. 30 amps worth of HHO (less than half a hp worth) is simply too little to have any effect at all on any engine parameter -- and the key ones, namely power and torque, are clearly shown by your data to be completely unchanged.

I wish you'd produced the dyno curves long ago. We'd all have wasted less time.

* It is worth noting, for perspective, that breathing anywhere around the air intake for the engine should be expected to have more effect than an HHO unit has -- in this case a negative influence: your exhaled CO2 should act as a fire extinguisher. With a little effort, you can briefly exhale at a rate of about a liter per second -- about 60 times the rate of the average HHO unit... so if HHO logic actually worked, then you'd want to avoid breathing out during a tune up because, should your breath find its way into the air intake, the engine could stall. That scenario is silly... but not so silly as believing that infinitesimally small amounts of HHO should affect any engine bigger than a bumble bee.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Commentator

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 69
#331
In reply to #317

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 8:13 AM

I was like you Blink before I found the truth. What they say is true, "The truth will set you free" or in your case, shut you up.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Power-User
Hobbies - CNC - New Member Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 163
Good Answers: 6
#285

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/07/2009 12:25 PM

why the name change? just want to keep up with your test results. havent heard anything for some time.

Register to Reply
Active Contributor

Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 21
#286

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/07/2009 3:08 PM

Hello you all ...

Ben, tell us something, whatever results you may have gotten, I'm sure a lot of us are anxious to know.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 94
#288
In reply to #286

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/08/2009 1:35 AM

I would love to show some dyno tests ,,,

but the tests have been done by the inventers... so it should be dis regarded because it was not tested by a un-bias {3rd party}....

but we do planned {this month} a dyno test on a 18 wheeler that will be un-bias {3rd party}... the results will be posted on the site www.johnhenryhydrogen.com

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#315

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/19/2009 3:56 PM

I am not retired, so I cannot afford to spend a lot of time on debunking all the over-unity, HHO, magnet motor, Searl effect, etc claims that show up on CR4. John appeared to earnestly believe that he was getting 20% improvements in engine efficiency, so I agreed to spend some time coming up with an inexpensive test that might show, to the satisfaction of CR4 members (who tend to be a pretty bright, technically engaged crowd, with some appreciation for both engineering and science), that HHO injection either does or does not have any beneficial effect. Nothing from my background in chemical engineering, teaching auto mechanics, designing, building, and running dynos, and from my understanding of combustion science, would lead me to expect a beneficial effect from HHO injection -- but like anyone with a scientific bent, I am willing to look at the evidence.

But it turns out that his own data shows no effect. You can see that I might feel jerked around. We know (and John agrees) that HHO cannot work by "replacing" fuel with HHO (there is too little HHO to make a difference on that basis). So the HHO must increase power dramatically (in some way that is not understood -- because the way that is understood -- by speeding combustion -- only starts to happen with far far larger amounts of H2), so that the driver backs off on throttle, thereby reducing fuel flow. But it turns out there is no increase in power, and there is not the increase in torque that John had claimed. Perhaps he misread the graphs.

John's claim of 20% improvement is extraordinary. But I gave him the benefit of the doubt, and spoke with him on the phone before starting this thread -- he and his son seem pretty bright, and certainly not incapable of reading a dyno chart. So you can imagine how I might feel a little jerked around when I find out that his claim of 20% improvement is refuted by his own dyno charts, which show no measurable improvement at all. Had he provided these charts 300 plus posts ago, the thread could have ended way back then -- and we all would have wasted less time, and fewer insults would have been thrown at well-intentioned and knowledgeable sorts like Garthh. If John has already shown that the technology has no effect, and if other tests show the same thing, and if scientific theory and ordinary engineering common sense support the contention that there should be no beneficial effect... then what the heck is the point of this thread??

In rational discussions of H2 injection (some of which exist here on CR4) we see that H2 injection is anything but a panacea to improve performance even when the H2 is supplied "for free" thermodynamically. Engines running on H2 produce less power than those running on gasoline, as the BWM dual fuel 7-series car shows. One must come up with truly convoluted thinking to propose that H2 or H2+O2 injection can significantly improve performance in a production gasoline engine. In addition, given that the current HHO "technology" is not one iota different than that proposed in a 1918 patent (and the patent drawings actually show a far more "professional" looking unit than the abortions typically seen in the HHO world), one must come up with a really convoluted conspiracy theory to explain why Toyota and Honda are "allowed" to produce highly efficient cars like the Insight and Prius, but that HHO technology is somehow squashed by the oil companies, etc etc etc... I know a guy from Maine who's been getting 100 mpg for about 10,000 miles now... and still no death threats against him. Go figure.

Until someone shows something credible to support further investigation, (instead of John's charts that clearly show no beneficial effect at all) I've got to come down on the side of science and engineering and away from side of magic. I'm outa here.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
3
Guru
United States - Member - USA! Hobbies - Musician - Sound Man Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - More than a Hobby Technical Fields - Technical Writing - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: City of Roses.
Posts: 2056
Good Answers: 101
#338

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 11:55 AM

What is the point of all these negative comments aimed at each other? As far as I can tell, slamming one another gets none of us any closer to any kind of resolve. The question is about HHO and it's potential or lack of potential. Right now, as far as I can tell, NO ONE has any substantial evidence Either Way, which can unambiguously prove that HHO does or does not work.

How about we all focus on the Real Matter at hand. The results have nothing to do with who is presenting them. the only people who need to prove they are credible are the ones actually performing the test, which in my opinion, should NOT be the one presenting the Data. If any Data is to be taken seriously, its needs to be gathered/tested by a unrelated, unbiased, unassuming, party. In fact It would be great if the party/s responsible for testing, had no clue what it was they were testing, but simply relied only on the test itself.

Lets Lay aside our petty differences, and get some resolve on the age old debate.

__________________
Don't believe everything you read on the Internet!
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Associate

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 26
Good Answers: 1
#342
In reply to #338

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/21/2009 3:06 PM

I agree with you completely , and thats what we've done and you can see how its been received , its too bad its wasted on deaf ears .. Negitive comments , thats all we've ever got from these guys , verbal abuse , name calling considered as scammers and thieves ... Open minded there not , engineers , im doubtfull , scientists ... its feels good having a good laugh ocassionally , thats a good one right there

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - RC Aircraft - New Member Hobbies - Automotive Performance - New Member Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Fort Lauderdale Florida
Posts: 5708
Good Answers: 123
#373
In reply to #338

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/23/2009 1:01 PM

Thank you for a breath of sanity. GA.

__________________
Bob
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4484
Good Answers: 246
#363

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/22/2009 2:22 AM

Looks like Ben and Greenandclean have some tests underway that they will report on before too long. I'll continue to fool with this as time permits, but I have several deadlines pressing in the next month, so I'll have to curtail my CR4 time. If I do anything worth reporting in the next month, I'll stop in briefly.

__________________
There is more to life than just eating mice.
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Model Rocketry - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: East of Seattle, Washington state Republic of the 50 states of America
Posts: 2045
Good Answers: 36
#377

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/25/2009 2:57 AM

Hey Blink if you find out who then let us know.

As for the dyno test grafts, by them selves, are inconclusive but if the alternator was drawing an additional 30 amps then the hydrogen had a net gain of power equal to the additional net loss of power driving the alternator.

The question then becomes what percentage of the original HP (non HHO) is 30 amps plus conversion losses? Is that quantity significant?

To break-even with the conversion losses of an electrolysis unit, even making browns gas, shows an improved power output.

Someone my have voiced this already but with all the classroom bully antics I don't read too deep. My interest in the science has kept me wading in this muck fest LONGER THAN I LIKE! and I would prefer to to keep my personal bias in check and spend my energies on understanding the dynamics of what is going on in the engine and not our group.

Soap box slowly roasting in oven for syngas.

Brad

__________________
(Larrabee's Law) Half of everything you hear in a classroom is crap. Education is figuring out which half is which.
Register to Reply
Associate
Engineering Fields - Automotive Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere in the Pacifics...
Posts: 43
#378

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/25/2009 11:15 PM

Check this out old video, last year...

"The Fast and the Curious Hydrogen Enhanced Car Dyno Tested"

Copy paste the above line and search it in youtube...

This is a dyno test of a Mitsubishi Lancer... showing more than 1 HP gains...

The dyno runs also proved that Hydrogen enhancement stopped the car from smoke belching.

Engineers - please scrutinize. Thanks...

__________________
We are no better than the causes we are fighting for...
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Hobbies - Model Rocketry - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: East of Seattle, Washington state Republic of the 50 states of America
Posts: 2045
Good Answers: 36
#379
In reply to #378

Re: The HHO Test Plan

05/25/2009 11:31 PM

Hey ehnriko, the link seems to be not working, or it could just be me

__________________
(Larrabee's Law) Half of everything you hear in a classroom is crap. Education is figuring out which half is which.
Register to Reply
Register to Reply Page 4 of 5: « First < Prev 2 3 4 5 Next > Last »

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Andy Germany (16); Anonymous Poster (6); awelch (5); ba/ael (4); ben 78 (75); Blink (26); bob c (23); Bricktop (6); Cyberfool (54); Desertphile (1); dkwarner (26); ehnriko (22); Garthh (35); gigaconcept.com (2); greenandclean (19); Hendrik (1); henry 78 (23); ky (23); Magichands65 (2); Milo (3); naturalextraction (2); onecraftydude (16); RCE (11); Rick@cae (1); RVZ717 (14); snygolfgs (11); someguy (2); Tad (2); the wrench (2); U V (8); Unitech (3); WWkayaker (1)

Previous in Forum: Air Density Calculation   Next in Forum: INHIBITING RUSTING OF A CAR BODY

Advertisement