Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ford Explorer Community - Maintenance - Modifications - Performance Upgrades - Problem Solving - Off-Road - Street
Explorer Forum Covers the Explorer ST, Explorer Sport, Explorer Sport Trac, Lincoln Aviator, Mercury Mountaineer, Mazda Navajo, Ford Ranger, Mazda Pickups, and the Ford Aerostar
Well from what I understand when you lean it "way" out, quite the opposite will happen. Since the AF mixture is more abundant in oxygen, the computer will force to compensate and fatten up the mixture.
Well from what I understand when you lean it "way" out, quite the opposite will happen. Since the AF mixture is more abundant in oxygen, the computer will force to compensate and fatten up the mixture.
The computer will adjust when in closed loop to the stoich set in the tune. Remember, this can be changed. If changed the computer will only adjust to the stoich commanded, and this is only in closed loop. You may see 14.5 in one set of data but you shouldn't see huge differences from the stoich commanded in the tune. If you do, something is not right and you'll have inconsistent results.
I suggest everyone go to this site and read up. http://www.fordfuelinjection.com/ This will give you a very good understanding of what's going on in a PCM.
This is the O2 sensor controller I am building today and will probably play with it a little as well. I guess I will have to get all the junk off the hood and pull her out of the garage. Since it was retired, I havent driven it. Its been 3 months. Well off to radio shack
Road trip to Naples, FL and back ( ~ 200 miles round trip ).
Parameters:
HHO generator using Baking Soda at ½ teaspoon/quart distilled water
MAF Enhancer set for highway driving
BP 91 fuel
Custom computer tune
First leg – neither HHO nor MAF Enhancement used
Speed GPS monitored 68.4 MPH average
Ambient temperature 92 F
Coolant temperature 211 F
Transmission temperature 142 F
A/F ratio 14.7
Miles driven 104
Gas mileage 30.1 MPG
Second leg – HHO running and MAF Enhancement running
Speed GPS monitored 68.4 MPH average
Ambient temperature 94 F
Coolant temperature 210 F
Transmission temperature 144 F
A/F ratio 14.5
Miles driven 102
Gas mileage 36.2 MPG
MAF Enhancer was tweaked during first 10 miles at constant speed ( 68 MPH ) on the second leg.
Remained in closed loop entire trip as set up in PCM tune. No detonation was heard when using HHO/MAF Enhancement.
A 20% gain in fuel mileage was achieved.
I am confused by the A/F readings. Any comments?
I feel there is more mileage with better tuning of the MAF Enhancer.
Well I just got my Jaycar handheld digital controller, but I didnt realize I was going to have to put it together. I have to solder the components and everything. Should be fun. It only took about a week to get here from down under. Here is the kit.
Well I have only put about 65 miles on my Mounty since I installed the HHO but I do believe I am getting about a 10% increase in MPG so far with mixed road and stop and go driving.
Advance auto parts has these new fuses that light when blown. It is easy to make a warning LED as well for about 5 bucks. Below is a link to a sight that will tell you what resister is needed to make your led work. I would use a lower intensity LED I imagine below 400mcd. You dont want an LED lighting up the inside of the cab at night. You can solder the resister directly to the LED(The longer leg I think) and heat shrink it. Radio shack has the holders as well. Also maybe not important is the viewing angle of the led. It may not matter but I would get one with a wide angle.
Remember that hydrogen is a fuel so it will enrichen the AF mixture versus leaning it out when injecting it. You have both hydro (fuel) and oxygen coming from the HHO device. If you look at the mass of each coming in when compared to each other then it would look like the oxygen would overpower the added hydro. That is not the case. What you need to do is compare the amount of extra hydro coming in to the amount of gasoline. Then compared amount of extra oxygen coming in compared to the amount of air flowing into the engine already. That will give a better reference for the scale and proportion in which the added HHO is really affecting the AFR.
I say that you getting a 14.5 AFR while on the HHO is exactly indicative of what should happen. Proportionally speaking you have a decent amount of additional fuel coming from the hydrogen which will enrichen the mixture of running your regular tune with the HHO.
According to my calculations you may want to retune for the HHO while seeking a 14.9 stoich for the added H in the HHO mixture you are seeing with your current system. Should see better mileage and provided my mathematics aren't off; it should be without detriment to the driveability to the vehicle either.
The computer will adjust when in closed loop to the stoich set in the tune. Remember, this can be changed. If changed the computer will only adjust to the stoich commanded, and this is only in closed loop. You may see 14.5 in one set of data but you shouldn't see huge differences from the stoich commanded in the tune. If you do, something is not right and you'll have inconsistent results.
The computer will adjust up to a point. It will of course go off of STFT (short term fuel trims) and then as long as adaptive is turned on then it will also have learned LTFT (long term fuel trims) too. These LTFT's do not change often so that would be why Al's vehicle went more rich while injecting the HHO even though while in closed loop the PCM searches for stoich. For the AFR to reflect a 14.7 stoich with the HHO the LTFT's will need to be zero'd out and adaptive allowed to learn the LTFT's again. If the HHO does come in with some sort of constant flow then the newly learned AFR should come out to the somewhat stable 14.7 AFR it is normally looking for. This result is assuming that the amount of the HHO being injected doesn't push the AF mixture so rich where the PCM cannot compensate enough through LTFT's. I do not quite know if this is what you were trying to say or not Jake. If it is then its all well and good.
Remember that hydrogen is a fuel so it will enrichen the AF mixture versus leaning it out when injecting it. You have both hydro (fuel) and oxygen coming from the HHO device. If you look at the mass of each coming in when compared to each other then it would look like the oxygen would overpower the added hydro. That is not the case. What you need to do is compare the amount of extra hydro coming in to the amount of gasoline. Then compared amount of extra oxygen coming in compared to the amount of air flowing into the engine already. That will give a better reference for the scale and proportion in which the added HHO is really affecting the AFR.
I say that you getting a 14.5 AFR while on the HHO is exactly indicative of what should happen. Proportionally speaking you have a decent amount of additional fuel coming from the hydrogen which will enrichen the mixture of running your regular tune with the HHO.
According to my calculations you may want to retune for the HHO while seeking a 14.9 stoich for the added H in the HHO mixture you are seeing with your current system. Should see better mileage and provided my mathematics aren't off; it should be without detriment to the driveability to the vehicle either.
Actually, I have to wonder how much of the additional mileage was due to the HHO vs how much impact the mileage was impacted by playing with the O2 sensor readings. The fact that there were mileage gains even with a blown fuse for half the trip tells me it may not be the HHO that's gaining the fuel economy.
If you're playing with the O2 sensor signals, how can you tell if you are, in fact, leaning out the mixture or not? Isn't it the O2 sensor signal that tells you what it's doing? Seems a bit counter-intuitive to me...
(Not an attack on you, Al, just making a point here...) Once again, I'd just like to point out that this is a marginally-scientific, non-analytical test in a completely uncontrolled environment. The gains Al has seen may or may in some part be due to the HHO generator, but with all the variables he introduced in his 'experiment', the results must be taken with a large grain of salt.
Well, please forgive me for asking some logic-based questions before jumping on the band-wagon.... I'll re-state the questions without the criticism.
1) How much of the added mileage was due to artificially leaning out the fuel mixture by tweaking the O2 sensor signal?
2) How much of the additional mileage was due to the HHO generation?
3) Does manually tweaking the O2 sensor signal with the adjuster box directly affect the displayed reading of the AF ratio you monitored, or is the reading an accurate measurement of the remaining O2 in the exhaust stream? (i.e. if you're adjusting the signal, doesn't that impact the reading displayed?)
