+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 36

Thread: Just asking, DOES A PWM REALLY DO ANYTHING?

  1. Default

    wcorless - HHO under pressure is a hydrogen bomb!
    ..
    Hydrogen by itself is not that inherently dangerous. But add oxygen to hydrogen in any concentration above 4% Hydrogen and you have a highly volatile and unstable gas mixture. It is the oxygen in the air that makes hydrogen gas unstable (ever sit and watch a violent thunderstorm?).
    ..
    The secret to HHO as a motor fuel is in volume production in-place and the ability to meter production as demand calls for it.
    ..
    Since 2006 two Geo Metro cars have been operating on HHO in Tuscon Arizona with little or no major issues. But they have never run with absolutely no problems. There is a definite difference between the engines running on HHO, the engines running of Compressed Hydrogen Gas, and the engines running on regular gasoline. The best results are with compressed hydrogen gas. HHO comes in third (behind gasoline).
    ..
    Fuel injection is a simple remedy. But Hydrogen Fuel Injectors are expensive. LPG is a common motor fuel now, and there are a lot of LPG fuel injectors on the market. But the difference between LPG and HHO is like water and maple syrup (totally different). Hydrogen is number one on the periodic table (which means it is the smallest and lightest molecule). Hydrogen lines leak, and sealing them is a task by itself.
    ...
    Solve these issues and you are step two of ten towards HHO as a motor fuel.
    ...
    dataman19

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gary Diamond View Post
    I can't understand why anyone uses them, if you want to cut down current add more cells. i can't possible see how adj the freq. and pluse width duty cycle does anything Please prove me wrong.
    Gary diamond
    To undertand more about a pwm you should consider reading this http://www.hhogaskitwizard.com/blog/what-is-a-hho-pwm/

  3. Default

    I’m a self-taught (the education you get in a college these days isn’t equal to that of a good highs school when I was growing up) mathematician and engineer, an ardent physicist, and I’ve been building HHO boosters since 1972 (when the gasoline stations were all closed one morning – the start of phony economic maneuvering intended to raise gasoline prices to four dollars, get more control to the ocean and the planet while doing the same thing to congress, etc, etc, etc,).

    I did some more tinkering in the early eighties, that along with designing a farm to run entirely on animal waste, build a Tesla Turbine, experiment with solar furnaces, and a bunch more. In the last two years (fuel prices, again), I’ve been building and testing HHO boosters again. Thus far, I’ve built twelve different kinds (I published some of the testing and photos on a website I’ve since given up), and I have to agree with “Gary Diamond” here in that most of what came of modulating, moderating, and pulsing current was blown fuses.

    Painless might want to put some numbers where his Xs and Ys are, in other words. I work everything out with math first – you save a hell of a lot of money spent on mistakes that way – and you’ll discover that way that moderating the amount or proportion of KOH in the electrolyte not only saves time and money spent on building and ruining, it gets gas mileage equal to anything you get from “PWM.”

    I’ve also learned, categorically and incontrovertibly, that outside of certain mathematical constraints – the performance numbers having to do with the specific engine – one is wasting his time in trying to get more HHO production. The Second Law of Thermodynamics does apply here (it doesn’t apply everywhere, as some would have you believe), and that means you’re trying to improve the efficiency of the way your car burns fuel more than anything else.

    With my 2000 Toyota Corolla, 1.8 Liter engine, the best HHO injection has proved to be 600 to 800 milliliters. That’s at 55 mph highway speed (around town, your guess is probably as good as mine). If I could get someone to build me a new computer (an airline captain and ex-Navy fighter pilot friend is trying to prevail upon computer chip designers to do that for me), I could be more certain, but this is what my math and experiments have told me.

    How much you will improve efficiency of your engine has a lot to do with your engine and its condition. My Toyota (we’ve got a new Jaguar, too – but my wife drives that while I use its computer to help know what going on in the Toyota) has 151, 000 plus miles on it, still doesn’t use any oil, and runs like the proverbial watch. You can not only feel the difference in the engine’s performance when the HHO cell is in operation (something with which my wife scared hell out of herself and smashed our trash can with one day when she took my car to work), careful tests on the road leave no doubt (I hooked a gallon container to the fuel lines, drained the regular tank, and traveled until the gas ran out, for instance). I also noticed recently that when Firestone changed my oil after a year having passed between changes that the oil was so clean it had everyone going to the computer – unable to believe the oil was that old.

    You will probably have to either relate amount of HHO production and injection to engine displacement or actually calculate how much vaporized fuel is being used at certain engine speed (size of displacement, rpms, et cetera), do the Ideal Gas Law computations, and calculate proportion of HHO to vaporized gasoline. The former is (obviously) simpler and just about (for all practical purposes) as accurate. Just draw the proportion: (for instance) 600 milliliters to 1.8 liters (my Toyota’s engine displacement).

    Don't forget to account for loss of HHO to leaking. Hydrogen is the "leakiest" substance known to man - it goes right through metal even most kinds of steel. It has to get to the cylinders as fast as possible, something I've tried to calculate by means of the Ideal Gas Law, expansion, etc. - without a hell of a lot of luck (basically, "guesstimate"). This comes down to "proof in the pudding" - see how the various amounts of HHO injection effect engine speed, etc.. Use a rubber hose, for instance (yeah I sure do use that term a lot) expect to lose a big proportion of the HHO before it gets to the engine.

    I’m very interested in how everyone sets up their circuitry, by the way, the reason I happen to have come to this site. I’ve had good success (I hate the word “luck”) with increasing the air flow over the HHO cell, even with diverting airflow through the radiator fan. Location of the cell in the engine compartment has much to do with cooling, too – something I’m “fooling around” with at present.

    Anyway, I hope to hear from anyone who’s having success with HHO methods – ideas are the real gold of physics and science, and like the precious metal you find them everywhere.
    Last edited by judoknight; 11-10-2010 at 01:43 PM.

  4. Default

    I had a post on here that was rather negative in reading and the last few weeks have been a real eye opener for me. I joined another site and promptly got banned for voicing my apparently uneducated point of view, so I thought I'd clean up my posts over here! Anyway, the stay over there was good and I learned enough to re-evaluate my opinion on HHO for auto use. I want to get back into it, soon, full time, but even still I've done a few tests using it. My setup is in a computer case so i can drag it around and do different things with it.

    For anyone that has not had much success, I will offer this (perhaps you went down my road...)

    You have to make a fair bit of HHO efficiently, and not just steam, and not be sending caustic solution into your motor. At times i managed to make better volume than I do now, even, but at the cost of amps. Simple and useless information for the experienced hobbiest, but not so simple for the newb. Worse, you can't be making, and sending into your motor too much HHO either.

    Both of my attempts, first ones at HHO auto use fell prey to these situations. initially i was making too little HHO to have effect and later I was making slightly too much. I now believe that a goal of 2.0-2.5 lpm for my 6.9l diesel will do the trick. You can't spend 40 amps on HHO generation, and be wasting your effort even more dramatically if your engine isn't capable of utilizing that gas, which was my final mistake. It is a fine balance.

    A PWM does help. It helps the newb learn to be a veteran
    , which I am not, but I've made leaps and bounds in a few weeks. The best gain I ever got before was negligable at best, and today on a road trip, I actually calculated a 15-20% gain, over a 100 mile trip.

    As I see it, in a perfect world, you will gain all the HHO experience you need to design, redesign and perfect the perfect HHO setup for you vehicle where the cost (amps) is offset by the output (liter per min) for YOUR engine wherein you have created better use of your fuel, more complete combustion, and the overall end result is that it gave back to you the horsepower to make the stuff (alternator) + a little gain.

    Thing is, you do have to start with a reasonably efficient reactor or your battle is futile, which was my problem for quite some time!

    The PWM helps you learn this by being able to pulse current (less current is used over time) or just dial back the current, period.

    in time, you will understand (i hope anyway... im still learning!) what your vehicle really wants, and you can control all of those variables by making a suited reactor, running a suited concentration (to hit the amp draw) that gives you the needed volume of output.

    At that point, the PWM most likely just looks good on the dash. And, it'll help on long trips when your reactor gets to hot. Or extremely hot summer days, maybe even too. Consider this: if the PWM was miraculous, it wouldn't have a knob on it, or two! The real secret is to read what others know (hhounderground.com is a good start) - MY PWM compensates for my reactors "not-so-perfect" match to my diesels needs, at best. A finely tuned match between reactor and motor, would render my PWM unneeded under most circumstances, including ALL short trips in my vehicle.

    in the meantime, it helps me learn.

    Thats only how I see it, there very well could be a whole lot more to it. Hope i don't get banned :P

    thats my 2c

    * my motor is a 1989 6.2l (Detroit Allison designed?) diesel motor with only a MAP sensor, no computer. As i understand it, the MAP sensor is there only to assist the emissions control. Given no catalytic convertor (in mine) and a simple pollution control system, I am not yet convinced that MAP adjustments would yield a whole lot better results, but i can certainly see many engines needing (esp. gas jobs) a fair bit of electronic "tweaking" EFIE, MAP, MAF sensor - a lot of spoofing may be required to stop the motor from dumping in extra fuel. Also, the 6.2l diesel is a bit of an inefficient underpowered "dog" to begin with. A slight increase of say 4-6% H.P. -seems- to help stop my transmission from dropping a gear on hills, which in turn, could be responsible for fuel savings. Also, a 6.2l diesel when a high miler (mine has 380,000 km on it) is notorious for having stress cracks in the block, and heads. Introducing any mods for HP increase, at all - is not recommended, you may experience spontanious engine leaks due to the motor finally giving up the ghost under duress. For that reason, a Generation I Cummins 6cyl or early gen 7.3l ford might be a better bet for HHO. In my case, my truck truly is my beater, and owes me nothing, so I'm ok with experimenting. Also, I have a 6.5 ready to go in it, if need be, so I'm less cautious. Good experimental vehicles are inefficient vehicles, and simple vehicles with minimal pollution control circuitry. Old diesel jettas, carbed toyotas (though they were pretty well designed for economy). Diesels offer the advantage of not having to deal with the timing of a spark plug in the whole equation, though many still would have MAP/MAF/EFIE.
    Last edited by kcarring; 12-01-2010 at 04:27 AM.

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gary Diamond View Post
    I can't understand why anyone uses them, if you want to cut down current add more cells. i can't possible see how adj the freq. and pluse width duty cycle does anything Please prove me wrong.
    Gary diamond
    I find it interesting that most people simply use a PWM to control the current through an electrolyser in order to maintain the unit at a specific working temperature. In reality of course we want as much hydroxy produced as possible all of the time and so a PWM would not really be necessary in a correctly designed electrolyser.

    The PWM was not originally designed to simply control the current or the heating of an electrolyser, and in fact has an altogether different purpose, which stems from the work of Puharich and Meyer, then more recently by Dave Lawton, Ravi and others.

    The real idea behind using a PWM was to break down the water molecule by a method other than simple Faraday Electrolysis - but sadly this seems to have been lost to most people.
    Farrah

    It's what you learn after you think you know it all that really counts!

  6. #26

    Lightbulb Pwm square wave frequency

    I am lead to believe that with 20,000hz-50,000hz square wave and an amplifier(music),placing both pos and neg output wires(speaker) In water with alu foil wrapped on each tip will split water! So if we could get our cells(plates) to resonate at that frequency sirely it would help with production and a pwm would become more effective in its use???,
    Last edited by H20-HHO; 03-01-2011 at 03:59 PM. Reason: Oops,missed a bit!!

  7. #27

    Default

    A PWM will also protect your electrodes from premature corrosion. I built colloidal mineral generators for many years and controlling the current as the mineral strength in the water increase is vital. You can also get current runaway with that process which will produce larger and larger particles. That translates to rapid loss on the electrodes.

    Although it takes less technology to control colloidal generation current then with HHO cells.

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brent View Post
    A PWM will also protect your electrodes from premature corrosion. I built colloidal mineral generators for many years and controlling the current as the mineral strength in the water increase is vital. You can also get current runaway with that process which will produce larger and larger particles. That translates to rapid loss on the electrodes.

    Although it takes less technology to control colloidal generation current then with HHO cells.
    I think that what you are alluding to is very different to what people here are trying to achieve, which is basically the production of hydrogen and oxygen... and as much of it as possible.

    I have never witnessed stainless steel electrodes corroding even from high current electrolysis. I have seen a mineral build up on the cathode when 'hard' water is used, but this is not corrosion.
    Farrah

    It's what you learn after you think you know it all that really counts!

  9. Default

    Farra, Here is what it looks like.
    Attached Images
    "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 .

  10. #30

    Default

    What a mess!

    MOYG, I've never seen anything like that. But then I only ever use low concentrations of NaSO4 as my electrolyte, if any at all.

    So I strongly suspect it is down to the very high concentrations of very corrosive electrolytes (KOH and NaOH) that most people here tend to use. These poor electrodes are basically immersed in extremely strong acids or alkalines, which are then made more active by continuous ion current flow. Stainless steel is good, but its corrosion resistance has its limits! Not to mention the fact that if the metal is reacting like that, then the gas output will be reduced by non-productive chemical reactions.

    To me this is just one more good reason to minimise the concentration of such electrolytic compounds.
    Last edited by Farrahday; 04-16-2011 at 05:05 PM.
    Farrah

    It's what you learn after you think you know it all that really counts!

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

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