Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: problem with hho on 5500 w diesel generator

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Roland Jacques View Post
    How did you come up with 60%???

    I believe the burn efficiency of a new modern engine is about 95%.

    not even close if your gas engine was over 75% efficient you'd get water out the exhaust constantly so check that #
    Daniel
    the only thing you cant do is the thing you dont want to do

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,418
    The newer cars are much more efficient when it comes to fuel than most people think. I believe that there is only 2 to 4 % fuel that is unburnt and used in the catalytic converter on a new car that is in perfect condition. As far as total efficiency goes it is in the 60 plus % range. I will try an dig up documentation for this. I have it somewhere if I can find it. If not some one else will. Anyone with documentation one way or the other now is the time to get it posted.

    What is interesting is that by burning most, if not all, of that 2 to 4% gives you in the the range of 20 to 30% increase in MPG. Now that is what I want explained. The total efficiency has to have gone up because of this and exhibits its self in lower exhaust temp and cooler overall engine temperatures. Now you add other things like water injection etc. and it goes up even more.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb."

    ONE Liter per minute per 10 amps which just isn't possible Ha Ha .

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    28

    fuel efficiency

    in a carburated stock engine is around 30% -hydrogen injected 50-60%
    fuel injected low compression around 45 to 60% - hydrogen injected 65- 80%
    high compression fuel injected well tuned up to 75% - hydrogen injected 85%+
    kawasaki 750cc n/a with hydrogen injected reports 97% with 20%increase in hp but cant find the data on that so that off top of my head
    but this is from a bottle not a generator
    Daniel
    the only thing you cant do is the thing you dont want to do

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    126
    OK, here is one thing that bothers me about the whole the engines today are better and more efficient.


  5. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    28
    ya its an epa thing i have a 22000#truck with a 5.9l mechanical diesel engine (low tech) that gets 12mpg and my neighbor has a new dodge 7500# pick up 6.? cummins (high tech) computer controlled and he only gets 16mpg and mine puts out 50 more hp so much for technology
    Daniel
    the only thing you cant do is the thing you dont want to do

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    1,079
    Quote Originally Posted by pwteng View Post
    not even close if your gas engine was over 75% efficient you'd get water out the exhaust constantly so check that #
    I do believe we do get water out constantly. (George Wiseman's book)
    Sometimes you can see the vapor, but even if you cant see the vapor doesn't mean it not there.

    Clarification on my understanding with efficiency numbers.


    Fuel BURNING efficiency, and FUEL efficiency are two completely different things.

    Fuel burning efficiency
    is what is going on in the combustion chamber. How much of the fuel going in is burned before leaving the cylinder.
    Best case, this number has been said to be 95% for some current car models. (I don't remember where i read the 95% number, but it was the newest engine. 95% did sound high to me also, but the source was very credible.)
    Older models much less. more worn engine less also.

    Fuel Efficiency - is fuel energy value in, compared to kinetic energy value out.
    The best case here on most gasoline engines is about 35% range. This is where the improvements can be best realized
    When you're one step ahead of the crowd you're a genius.
    When you're two steps ahead, you're a crackpot."

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    1,079
    Numbers

    Burn Efficincy-
    After some more thought. I'd assume the 95% burn efficiency number that I read also includes the results of the waste spark. The before waste spark number is the one that is relevant to us & I don't know what that number is so yeah it is sure to be a good bit lower.

    Fuel Efficiency -
    It can be confusing some energy numbers could be measured at the crank shaft, some at the wheels, some possibly at the piston before the rotary power loss conversion.
    When you're one step ahead of the crowd you're a genius.
    When you're two steps ahead, you're a crackpot."

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,418
    Roland there is a article showing exactly how much unburnt fuel is in the exhaust and it is a small portion in new modern cars just enough to keep the cat working. This has nothing to do with fuel economy but just unburnt fuel. People keep saying that we are wasting 30 to 50% of our fuel out the tail pipe and that is just not true. I will try and put my hands on it and post it. As I remember it was 2 to 4 % of fuel is unburnt. Any more than that and the O2 sensor shuts down the amount of fuel being injected.

    Now fuel economy is a total different thing and is related to a host of things which are not limited to internal friction, outside friction, thermodynamics, combustion, and yad yad yad. Fuel economy has to do with work done over some amount of time. Unburnt fuel is just that unburnt fuel.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb."

    ONE Liter per minute per 10 amps which just isn't possible Ha Ha .

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    GA
    Posts
    1,079
    Quote Originally Posted by myoldyourgold View Post
    Roland there is a article showing exactly how much unburnt fuel is in the exhaust and it is a small portion in new modern cars just enough to keep the cat working. This has nothing to do with fuel economy but just unburnt fuel. People keep saying that we are wasting 30 to 50% of our fuel out the tail pipe and that is just not true. I will try and put my hands on it and post it. As I remember it was 2 to 4 % of fuel is unburnt. Any more than that and the O2 sensor shuts down the amount of fuel being injected.

    Now fuel economy is a total different thing and is related to a host of things which are not limited to internal friction, outside friction, thermodynamics, combustion, and yad yad yad. Fuel economy has to do with work done over some amount of time. Unburnt fuel is just that unburnt fuel.
    Yep, that is my understanding as well.

    As far as the Waste spark goes.
    I thought it was used on the exhaust stroke to give a second chance to burn any residual fuel. As i look into it, it turns out to be just to simplify some ignition systems so probably has minimal effects on unburnt fuel.
    When you're one step ahead of the crowd you're a genius.
    When you're two steps ahead, you're a crackpot."

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    13

    hho 5500

    Quote Originally Posted by astrocady View Post
    This is an interesting thread. I have always been told that diesels require LESS HHO than gasoline engines. The formula I was given is 1/2 liters of HHO for each liter of gasoline engine displacement and only 1/4 liter of HHO for each liter of diesel engine displacement. I do wonder, though, if this formula is truley for HHO or is it for bottled pure hydrogen? What do y'all think -- IS this the accepted ratios???

    I do agree that a generator will almost certainly hae the simplist of mechanical fuel injection systems.

    It does seem from my experience that getting 1.5 LPM of HHO from only 20 amps is a bit optomistic. Are you sure half of that isn't steam?
    That is correct. This is really getting interesting.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •