Forget the 50 mpg carb; this guy has a 80 mpg Mustang

[Hornet33]

I didn't figure using the browns gas would take the place of gasoline. I am extremely skeptical of the claims regarding the use of the conversion gadgets on gasoline vehicles. To date I have not seen any 3rd party analysis of the results of using the gadget. I doubt that adding a 1.5 to 2.0+ liter per minute of hydrogen and oxygen will have anything but a trivial impact on the hundreds of cubic feet per minute of air flow through a vehicle engine. That large amount of air also contains more than a trace of oxygen so adding a trivial amount (.5 to .75 liter per minute of oxygen as a third part of the browns gas) to the amount of ambient oxygen is not likely to have a significant impact. To prove that it does would require the use of a lab dyno analysis and no one seems to be willing to do that.

Tell you what, when I finish my booster and have some data of my own I'll put my truck on a dyno if you pay for it. I don't know anyone who has a dyno so it would cost me a bunch of money to do it. I do however own a calculator, a pen, and a notebook so when I take a receipt with the amount of gas I buy and do the math in relation to how far I drove since the last time I filled up I can get hard data from that. That's what everyone else has been doing and they are seeing very good results so something is working. Also I don't think an engine is moving hundreds of cubic feet of air a minute through intake.

But the offer stands if you want lab tests. You get the lab and pay for the tests and I'll bring my truck and booster.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Depending on your location, a chassis dyno may not be that far away. Over the past decade or so they've become very popular and much more affordable. Most areas of 75K population or more have one or two. The new cars with computer controls being hotrodded is the biggest contributor, they tune them with a lap top or PC while they're on a chassis dyno. I think we're at about 110K population now and we have as many as 4 in business at any one time.

[Maverick]

Hornet,

You already know non dyno comparisons on the road on differing conditions makes the results invalid and totally subjective. Particularly when there is no lab work done before as well as after the modifications were done. If it makes you happy to make an unsubstantiated claim go for it.

FWIW I wasn't talking about your specific situation only either but you are also welcome to think I was as that is your problem not mine. My particular objection is towards the folks who market a piece of technology, make claims for improvements of mileage, power, sexual attributes of the user, hair restoration of same etc., and sell the same product without any 3rd party analysis. If their product was such hot stuff they would be demanding an independent test to prove it. At that point they just might be able to show unequivocally that they have a real product that is worth the investment. Secondarily that would also negate any oil company hit squads that might be called in to "eliminate the competition".

Just what are the manufacturers of this little gadget promising you will see in your vehicle?

[Holden McGroin]

... got to get my calcs better...

[SD67]

Also I don't think an engine is moving hundreds of cubic feet of air a minute through intake.

Just for the sake of argument, the numbers on the Holley carbs are their rating in CFM, so a 350 Holley would have a max. flow of 350 Cubic Feet per Minute, a 650 would flow 650CFM, and the 750 would flow 750CFM.  

[Holden McGroin]

My booster at "full" operation and going through two bubblers is running right at 5psi on the core. Now my measurements are done using the water displacement method. I'll fill a 2 liter soda bottle with water, place that in a bucket of water and turn it upside down. The output line from the booster goes into the bottle and I time with a stopwatch how long it takes to displace 2 liters of water. Right now I'm getting right at 1.5 liters a minute of HHO gas at 1 atmosphere outside pressure and 5psi booster pressure.

So P = 14.7 + 5 = 19.7 psi 19.7 * 144 = 2896.8 psf

I'll assume 80 deg F ,,, 540 Deg R

you made a stochiometric mixture gas of H2 and O2 out of H2O...

Mole % will be 16 weights of O2 for 1 weight of Hydrogen... so 1/17th of your gas is hydrogen.

Using partial pressure, we can assume 1/17th of the pressure is due to H2, 16/17 of the pressure is O2.

P = 2896.8 psf / 17 = 170.4 psf

R  = 1545/MW Mw of Hydrogen

=> 2.016 => 1545/2.016 = 766.34

V = 1.5 L = 1.5 (0.03532 cu ft) = 0.0471 cu ft

PV = MRT  (Ideal Gas Law)

170.4 * 1.5 = M * 766.34 * 540

M= ..0006 slugs ==> ..0199 lbs.

at 60 kBTU per lb you have produced 1,193 BTU's of hydrogen...

[Baitman]

So P = 14.7 + 5 = 19.7 psi 19.7 * 144 = 2896.8 psf

I'll assume 80 deg F ,,, 540 Deg R

you made a stochiometric mixture gas of H2 and O2 out of H2O...

Mole % will be 16 weights of O2 for 1 weight of Hydrogen... so 1/17th of your gas is hydrogen.

Using partial pressure, we can assume 1/17th of the pressure is due to H2, 16/17 of the pressure is O2.

P = 2896.8 psf / 17 = 170.4 psf

R  = 1545/MW Mw of Hydrogen

=> 2.016 => 1545/2.016 = 766.34

V = 1.5 L = 1.5 (0.03532 cu ft) = 0.0471 cu ft

PV = MRT  (Ideal Gas Law)

170.4 * 1.5 = M * 766.34 * 540

M= ..0006 slugs ==> ..0199 lbs.

at 60 kBTU per lb you have produced 1,193 BTU's of hydrogen...

  Thats not much is it

[Hornet33]

Guess what?? An old Coast Guard buddy of mine has one of his sons going to the local ATI college for deisel engine machanic and they have a dyno lab at the school. I'm going to get in touch with Mathew (the son) in the next couple of days and see if his teacher might want to get involved with this little experiment. If so I'll have a dyno test done before I install the booster and then go get anouther one 30 days after the install and see what the tests give me.

Maverick I'm not trying to start a bunch of crap with you. I actually think like you do. I'm a pretty skeptical person about most things but the HHO boosters I've researched the hell out of and I was impressed enough to give building one a try. Your right though, some independant third party controlled lab testing needs to be performed and I'm all for that. If I can make the arrangments to get into ATI's auto lab and get a baseline for my truck before and after I think that would be great. I'm an Electronic Technician by proffesion so I'm a firm believer in hard data.

I wouldn't have even considered trying to get tests like this done had you not brought it up, but now that the bug is planted I'm going to try and make this happen. I'm really interested to see what happens.

I'll keep the BBS informed as to what is going on and I'll post whatever results I get.

Fair enough??

[SD67]

[Maverick]

Yep Hornet it sounds pretty good. I'd like to see hard data on it one way or another. Looking at the amount of gas flowing into the intake vs the amount of ambient air just does not make the situation look like there is much chance of any substantial improvement in either performance or mileage. There is not enough power in the minimal amount of hydrogen to make a change in the engine output. I am very disappointed that the folks who put these things on the market don't have the confidence in them to really test it.

[moot]

First trials for EEStor passed above expectations..

next material milestone with EEStor is the third party verification of permittivity of their production materials

[Hornet33]

By the way I have an appointment this Friday to get my truck on the Dyno at ATI. This is the pre install run.

We're going to check fuel flow, intake air flow, exhaust flow and content, engine water and oil temps, manifold pressure and horse power output for the following conditions.

25mph 0 grade, 10% incline grade, 10% decline grade, 2500lb tow load 0 grade
35mph
45mph
55mph
65mph

5 minute runs at each parameter. The data will be saved on the computer and when I come back after the install we'll run the exact same test routine and get a comparision for the 2 runs. It'll be interesting to see the results. What got better, what got worse, what changed in the performance curve.

[soda72]

First trials for EEStor passed above expectations..

ZENN is suppose to make a electric car using EEStor's technology in the next year or two.

If EEStor's technology dosen't pan out, altairnano's Lithium-titanate battery being used by pheonix motorcars looks like a decent option..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9wEo_teikU

[Furball]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/09/travelandtransport.carbonemissions

The Electric Lightning GT appears to have everything an ecoconscious lover of British sports cars could want: a luxury interior, a top speed of 130mph and acceleration that would put a Porsche to shame

http://www.lightningcarcompany.co.uk/

[CAP1]

Hornet,

You already know non dyno comparisons on the road on differing conditions makes the results invalid and totally subjective. Particularly when there is no lab work done before as well as after the modifications were done. If it makes you happy to make an unsubstantiated claim go for it.

FWIW I wasn't talking about your specific situation only either but you are also welcome to think I was as that is your problem not mine. My particular objection is towards the folks who market a piece of technology, make claims for improvements of mileage, power, sexual attributes of the user, hair restoration of same etc., and sell the same product without any 3rd party analysis. If their product was such hot stuff they would be demanding an independent test to prove it. At that point they just might be able to show unequivocally that they have a real product that is worth the investment. Secondarily that would also negate any oil company hit squads that might be called in to "eliminate the competition".

Just what are the manufacturers of this little gadget promising you will see in your vehicle?

lab work and reality are like theory and reality. they seldom agree, and reality almost always wins........