HHO: Is it alchemy? Or will it improve gas mileage on a ’99 4.0 SOHC Explorer?

[JTX]

A bunch of threads are doing that to me to. Its the site

 

[manaen]

Yes it's quite refreshing isn't it

actually it's not doing it for me now...

 

[Josh]

Well today I installed a MAP sensor enhancer on my O2 F250 today. According to my scan gauge, I was averaging just over 20MPG driving around town with minimal effects on EGTs. I usualy get between 13 and 16 around town. I know diesels are quite a bit different, but the results are promising to my antire project. I plan to build a O2 sensor controller to use on my explorer. If I can find a cheaper EGT gauge, I might consider using one when I start testing the O2 controller. I plan to do these mods in steps. I will do the O2 sensor controller first then the HHO. That should prove wheather the generator is adding to the sensor enhancement. I will most likely need to remove my O2 sensor and install an extender. Lucky for me, My O2 sensor was relocated to the driver side header.

My mileage was calculated using a Scan Gauge II. From what I read, it measures the injector output and compares it against distance traveled. I don't know how acuate it is yet, I just filled upand I will keep track and see.

 

[rocket 5979]

I think you're right about the deviation but I think he needs adaptive off to get the full story. He's got to get those previously learned values out of the equation, correct?

Turning adaptive off would make for one less variable to try to account for. Though, after testing and AFR's are dialed in I would turn it back on; but that would be a little while before that would happen.

 

[CDW6212R]

...
My mileage was calculated using a Scan Gauge II. From what I read, it measures the injector output and compares it against distance traveled. I don't know how acuate it is yet, I just filled upand I will keep track and see.

I use a Scangauge constantly in my work truck. The mileage calculated is adjusted each time the fill up value is reset. It is not extremely accurate, but about 1/4 of the time it is right on. Each time you add more gas than it predicts, it subsequently reduces the fuel use rate. That means that it learns your fuel mileage based on the use of each tank of gas. You do have to fill the tank and reset that each time. My usage varies massively due to my work use, so my experience of the accuracy is not likely to be common. Regards,

 

[briwayjones]

I use a Scangauge constantly in my work truck. The mileage calculated is adjusted each time the fill up value is reset. It is not extremely accurate, but about 1/4 of the time it is right on. Each time you add more gas than it predicts, it subsequently reduces the fuel use rate. That means that it learns your fuel mileage based on the use of each tank of gas. You do have to fill the tank and reset that each time. My usage varies massively due to my work use, so my experience of the accuracy is not likely to be common. Regards,

My Scangauge seemed to stop working right. At first it seemed to do a decent job of predicting the fillup. Sometimes it wouldn't ask how much I put in when I filled up. I assumed it didn't ask because what it predicted ended up being the same as what went in? Is that how the Scangauge works. Anyway it would still ask most of the time. Then it started getting way off, about half a gallon or more every fillup. And I would fill all the way up everytime, not just a few gallons and go again. Then it stopped asking me to input how much I put in at all, everytime. And I know it wasn't recording things right. Anybody experience something like that with their's?

 

[Josh]

You can tell the SG how much gas you pu it in with the fillup function right?

 

[CDW6212R]

Yes, it's in the MORE section. Mine has basically always done that, but I do have to select the "MORE" and "FILL UP" to get the screen which shows the gallons used. That's where you change the amount to the actual gallons. It shows a percentage there also I believe, part of the accuracy I guess. Mine is usually off by 1/2 to two gallons, generally high, then low, then high etc. My greatly fluctuating mpg is hard for it to keep up with. It cannot tell when I am idling for long periods, versus normal use.

The SG is a very good guide for mileage, and much better than the stock message centers. Those have no learning ability at all.

 

[redmiata1]

As with most of you, I have read everything I can find on this subject. I've read entries from all kinds of people making claims all over the spectrum. Some say they have lost MPG, some say no effect, some gain 2 or 3 MPG, and some make significant claims of improved MPG. Unfortunately we don't know who is being honest and who isn't. I personally believe "some" of the people making significant claims are being honest. So what's up?

Perhaps another variable is being left out of the equation. I agree with the insignificance of the amount of HHO we are injecting. Although hydrogen is a fuel, logic would say it couldn't have the desired effect (at least in the magnitude we are looking for). Additionally, I agree people's significant gains are most likely due to leaning out their engine as opposed to HHO injection. We will all agree that running you engine too lean is asking for trouble.

Here's the piece that might possibly be missing from the conversation. As HHO burns in your engine, it converts back to water and immediately flashes to steam. This steam provides additional power to your pistons. This whole process also provides a cooling action within your cylinder head. Is it possible that we can safely run our engines a bit leaner (without causing damage) because of this cooling action?

Assuming this line of thought is correct, the 2nd law of thermodynamics argument goes out the window, because we are not actually trying to add more power than we use to create the HHO. Also assuming this line of thought is correct, the Niagra falls argument goes out the window, because our goal is not to add enough HHO (fuel) to affect our mixture. In this scenario our goal is to provide a bit of power from the steam along with some cooling action so we can safely modify our MAF and O2 signals to achieve leaner fuel mixtures.

I'm not arguing that I'm right...I'm just throwing my thoughts out there.

 

[CDW6212R]

I don't think any water is produced at all from the gaseous volume added. The volume of HHO is spread randomly in the A/F mixture. Those molecules of hydrogen and oxygen never meet again I'd say generally. They should be burned entirely with the normal A/F mixture.

 

[Inspector Bill]

my thoughts on what's happening inside the engine....

Hi all
I put in two water4gas style electrolyzers in my 02 xlt. I went from 19 to 25 mpg. No other tweaks as of yet, but some will be needed.
Anyway....
Adding the HHO seems to me to have the effect of raising the octane of the fuel air mixture. This allows the gas inside the cylinder to be compressed more and get closer to TDC before firing allowing more of the energy to be used when the piston is on it's way back down, the way it is supposed to instead of firing before TDC and pushing against the piston and causing the pinging. From what I understand some engines monitor the pinging and adjust fuel mixture to compensate. So, it seems to me we are not mainly gaining power by burning the hydrogen, we are just making the gas combustion process more efficient and therefore taking less fuel to achieve the same amount of power.
The comments on the Hydrogen and Oxygen recombining into water getting power from steam. I agree that is an impractical assumption because of being mixed with the other gases in the intake manifold. I did though fill a gatorade bottle with the browns gas from my electrolyzer. I did it by filling a bucket with water and letting the gas displace the water in the upside down gatorade bottle. Then I laid it on it's side and lit it. Just make sure you don't have anything valuable in front of the bottle when you do it, like say an 02 XLT grill.... ouch. A lot of power in there. I noticed there was water on the table where it was after it shot off. I did it again and made sure the bottle was dry and there was no water inside. It left water again. So, I would surmise that some does get re turned into water, some energy was lost to light and some to heat and some to sound.
Random thoughts and observations....
My next tweek will be to put a pot in line on my maf sensor. It's like what Al did. Then I'll have to do something with my O2 sensors and finally an additive to the gas its self.
I don't think the guys who want to tweek the computer to give them the right stoich are going to be too successful because we can't accurately regulate the amount of the browns gas going into each particular cylinder. I've noticed production rate of the browns gas is not constant it seems to vary with water temp, concentration of dissolved solids in the water, (the electrolyte) and the degradation of the cathode and the anode. The only way to regulate it would be to compress it and store it and regulate it's release. This would put a bomb in your car. The other thing is everyones gas is a different blend. The 14.7:1 is what you want with test fuel, real gas, just the n-Heptane and iso-octane and when all the other things like MTBE and ethanols are added it lowers the stoich.
All it seems that the O2 sensors do is monitor how much pollution is coming out the pipes, if the exhaust is too cool/too lean then it's not polluting enough so it adds fuel, if too hot then it leans it.

If you want to read an interesting piece on browns gas and its unique properties read this. it starts out as a real dry read, but it was worth it.

http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/freenrg/hydroxy.html

I do have a question. Right now I am powering my unit by hooking it right to the + on the battery. I did make an inline fuse. Opening my hood so many times a day is not very practical. How do I find a wire in my engine compartment that is only hot when in the run/acc mode? As you can tell I'm not a mechanic I'm working with a Haynes book and it is no help with this.

I in no way am saying what I've said is gospel, just my observations from tons of reading and a little bit of my own experimentation. I would like to get over 30 and think I can do it with a couple of other tweeks. If you want to know how they work, I'll gladly share. Sorry for rambling so long...
Bill

 

[Josh]

I do have a question. Right now I am powering my unit by hooking it right to the + on the battery. I did make an inline fuse. Opening my hood so many times a day is not very practical. How do I find a wire in my engine compartment that is only hot when in the run/acc mode? As you can tell I'm not a mechanic I'm working with a Haynes book and it is no help with this.
Bill

Bill
I would use a relay rate for the amount of amps you are pulling as well as rated for constant duty. Install a switch in your truck that is attached to switched power. Having this type off setup will ensure you never accidentaly leave your system running and you will have the option to turn it off if needed. Also, because of the amp draw, you don't want to hook it just anything. I looked for switched wires using a voltmeter. You can poke the wires or find some electrical connectors and test with key on and off.

 

[briwayjones]

You can tell the SG how much gas you pu it in with the fillup function right?

Nope, it stopped asking me. It used too except for about 1 in 10 fillups but now it doesn't ask at all.

 

[Josh]

Nope, it stopped asking me. It used too except for about 1 in 10 fillups but now it doesn't ask at all.

I don't understand when you say it stopped asking me. Do you mean when you go to the fillup menu, it does not ask anymore?

 

[96SportWheelin]

So yeah, not to deter from all the enticing mathematics and theoretical talk.... but can anybody back up anything they are talking about? I mean some actual results would be nice to see here?

These things take like 1/2 hr to an hour max to install, so are you guys installing and waiting for these fancy relays and such to start measuring your mpg? Why not start measuring without adding the optional equipment so that yourself and others on here can have something to actually argue about.

By all means, I'm not saying that anybody theories are incorrect and I don't want to go through the headache of figuring that math and whatnot out, but I do believe that if those who have done it would post some actual numbers after using the system, that it would be more beneficial to the community.


-l8r

 

[briwayjones]

I don't understand when you say it stopped asking me. Do you mean when you go to the fillup menu, it does not ask anymore?

Correct! When I fillup I go to the More Menu, then Fillup, it used to ask me how many gallons I put in and you could of course adjust it. Now it does not ask anymore.

On the Scanguage 2 is the setting for the number of gallons your tanks holds still just to the nearest gallon or did they actually make it to the nearest 10th of gallon like it should be?

 

[seth247]

remember guys.

All combustion creates water vapor. The gas could add a very small amount compared to the normal combustion.

Keep in mind that fire is simply a chemical reaction known as oxidation.

When the hydrocarbon(gasoline) is "oxidized"(burned) the oxygen molecules bond to the hydro and carbon. This creates DiHydrogen-Oxide(water) and Carbon-Dioxide(CO2) along with a few other trace elements.

This is the reason why your tailpipe produces fog on a cold day.

So I doubt very much that the steam is a factor. But I'm no genius. :scratch:

 

[aldive]

So yeah, not to deter from all the enticing mathematics and theoretical talk.... but can anybody back up anything they are talking about? I mean some actual results would be nice to see here?

These things take like 1/2 hr to an hour max to install, so are you guys installing and waiting for these fancy relays and such to start measuring your mpg? Why not start measuring without adding the optional equipment so that yourself and others on here can have something to actually argue about.

By all means, I'm not saying that anybody theories are incorrect and I don't want to go through the headache of figuring that math and whatnot out, but I do believe that if those who have done it would post some actual numbers after using the system, that it would be more beneficial to the community.


-l8r

Where are your results/data?

 

[friech]

Hi all

I do have a question. Right now I am powering my unit by hooking it right to the + on the battery. I did make an inline fuse. Opening my hood so many times a day is not very practical. How do I find a wire in my engine compartment that is only hot when in the run/acc mode? As you can tell I'm not a mechanic I'm working with a Haynes book and it is no help with this.

Bill

I am using the supply side of F21 (Turn signal fuse) for the. On my rig that's located on the drivers side dash fuse panel. Run a wire from there through a toggle switch and then through the bulkhead to your relay in the engine bay.

 

[rocket 5979]

Adding the HHO seems to me to have the effect of raising the octane of the fuel air mixture. This allows the gas inside the cylinder to be compressed more and get closer to TDC before firing allowing more of the energy to be used when the piston is on it's way back down, the way it is supposed to instead of firing before TDC and pushing against the piston and causing the pinging. From what I understand some engines monitor the pinging and adjust fuel mixture to compensate. So, it seems to me we are not mainly gaining power by burning the hydrogen, we are just making the gas combustion process more efficient and therefore taking less fuel to achieve the same amount of power.

Not exactly. Raising octane only helps so much. That is why you don't see people running racegas in normal compression N/A cars. There is a point of diminishing returns that you will reach when raising octane. While Hydrogen may help raise octane a little I doubt that is where the gain is coming from. It is coming from the additional fuel being able to be burned while saving gasoline.

I don't think the guys who want to tweek the computer to give them the right stoich are going to be too successful because we can't accurately regulate the amount of the browns gas going into each particular cylinder. I've noticed production rate of the browns gas is not constant it seems to vary with water temp, concentration of dissolved solids in the water, (the electrolyte) and the degradation of the cathode and the anode. The only way to regulate it would be to compress it and store it and regulate it's release. This would put a bomb in your car. The other thing is everyones gas is a different blend. The 14.7:1 is what you want with test fuel, real gas, just the n-Heptane and iso-octane and when all the other things like MTBE and ethanols are added it lowers the stoich.
All it seems that the O2 sensors do is monitor how much pollution is coming out the pipes, if the exhaust is too cool/too lean then it's not polluting enough so it adds fuel, if too hot then it leans it.Bill

Using the correct stoich is critical to efficiency and proper burn of the fuel and aircharge. That is what stoich is all about. It would not make sense to modify "in effort of efficiency" but then refrain from tuning it properly, thus gaining even more efficiency. Regardless if you can monitor the exact amount of HHO going into the engine you can at least get a close estimate and base the stoich, and tuning on that. While it will never be perfect unless the HHO flow is perfectly regulated the AFR's will be much nearer what they would need to be than just leaving it all alone.

What exactly do you mean by everyones gas is different??? If you mean gasoline then you are mistaken in the amount of difference caused with respect to AFR. Whether you run 87 or 93 octane gasoline your AFR's will still be the same. Or were you referring to the "different kinds of gas" as in that people are using different formulations of "green gas"? If that is the case then of course the person will have to figure what stoich will be for their given mixture but it still is worth it to make sure things are properly and efficiently tuned. I would see this effort as more mandatory than option in an EFI vehicle as it will be the only real way to recalibrate the PCM to work with the HHO or other additional fuel, versus working against it thus hurting efficiency. If you only want to run adding HHO certain times but run only regular gasoline at others then this is where a multiprogram flipchip would come in handy. Flip the switch and you are using your HHO tune, flip it again and you have your regular gasoline tune. Remember that chips cannot be used on the 02+ 4 door Explorers.

Your explanation of how the O2 sensors work is slightly oversimplified. It all depends on which O2's you talk about. The front O2's (pre-cat) are for monitoring closed loop AFR's and they do not care about how effective the catalytic converter is, or monitoring the pollutants. The rear O2's (post-cat) are for monitoring how effectively the Cats are doing their job. Even if they sense too many "pollutants" the rear O2 sensors do not affect the air fuel mixture whatsoever. All they do is monitor and throw a code if they sense the cats aren't doing their job of controlling emissions correctly. The rear O2's are passive in other words.






While it may seem like I am splitting hairs especially in the last paragraph of this post there are really some big differences that are being talked about here. If you guys want the most chance of MPG benefit out of one of these HHO or browns gas systems then I would recommend a good study of how the PCM actually regulates fueling, calculates airload, and final spark. Once this is understood it will give a much better base of knowledge to build off of. Gladly Aldive knows how to custom tune as well so there is at least one person who is testing the results of these new alternative fuel systems as well as understanding what should be happening with the electronics and PCM.