HHO Injection, 30% better milage from water?

LurkerMike

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Location
Atlanta Jawja
TDI
-Whitey: 2000 Jetta GLS, Red: 2000 Jetta GLS 5-speed
Has anyone seen this?

http://tampatrib.com/Business/MGBKD7YQIGE.html

Clearwater Man Puts Technology To Work
By WILL RODGERS
[FONT=arial, helvetica]wjrodgers@tampatrib.com[/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica]Published: Nov 27, 2005[/FONT]

http://tampatrib.com/Business/MGBKD7YQIGE.html
Clearwater Man Puts Technology To Work
By WILL RODGERS wjrodgers@tampatrib.com
Published: Nov 27, 2005

Cut: Denny Klein demonstrates the flame on a welding tool powered by a machine that uses water and an electrical charge to create fuel. "You get a huge energy response," Klein says. "But this gas is very, very safe."
CLEARWATER -- Denny Klein thinks he has found a new commercial use for hydrogen technology.
Working in a small, two-room shop at the Airport Business Center, Klein, 63, said he has developed a gas that speeds welding and fusing times and improves automobile fuel efficiency 30 percent.
Although the technology Klein uses -- electrolysis -- has been around for decades, he said it's the form of gas that comes out of his electrolyzer and the characteristics of the gas that set his hydrogen technology apart.
Klein's gas is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. Sound familiar? Yep, it's water.
Electrolysis is a process that uses an electrical charge in water to separate the hydrogen from the oxygen. But coming out of Klein's gas generator, the H2O 1500 electrolyzer, it's not water, he said. Klein, president of Hydrogen Technology Applications Inc., calls it HHO, or the brand name Aquygen.
"You get a huge energy response," Klein said. "But this gas is very, very safe."
Klein -- who employs eight people, four in Florida, three who handle licensing out of Kentucky and his son, Greg, in Ohio -- is no engineer. The Ohio native attended Ohio State University and Capital University in Columbus, Ohio, for business administration.
His aptitude in hydrogen technology came from self-study. He has worked alongside engineers in whirlpool spa and suntanning businesses, and says he has six employees with doctorates on his advisory board.
Klein said he has a patent pending on the gas he has been working on for 12 years. Various models of his H2O electrolyzers are being used across the country in high school shop classes and undergoing testing to be certified for use in welding shops.
Flipping a switch on his H2O 1500, Klein picks up a hose with a metal tip, creates a spark, and instantly a blue and white glowing stream shoots out of the metal tip.
He holds the tip with his fingers to prove how cool it is to the touch, unlike such a tip when oxy-acetylene is burned for welding. But the instant he sets the flame on a charcoal briquette, it glows bright orange. Then, within seconds, he burns a hole through a brick, cuts steel and melts Tungsten.
The temperature of the flame is 259 degrees Fahrenheit. But it instantaneously rises to the melting temperature of whatever it touches, Klein said. Those temperatures can exceed 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit.
"You can't do this with any other gas," he said.
Klein also has outfitted a 1994 Ford Escort station wagon with a smaller electrolyzer that injects his HHO into the gasoline in the car's engine. He said he has increased his mileage per gallon by 30 percent.
That also is undergoing testing from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other private motorsports companies, Klein said.
Klein said he has 19 projects in the works.
Ali T-Raissi, director of the hydrogen research and development division of the Florida Solar Energy Center, said he is not familiar with Klein's HHO or electrolyzer. But he said applying hydrogen technology in that way comes at a price.
T-Raissi said mixing the hydrogen with gasoline will require a change in the typical car engine. And creating the gas requires electricity, which comes at a cost.
"You can increase your mileage performance, but you have to ask: Am I still ahead, or am I behind?"
Klein said his formulation of hydrogen doesn't require altering an engine. And his electrolyzer cost about 70 cents an hour to operate, which he considers a bargain.
Klein said his method for introducing hydrogen into a vehicle to increase mileage is superior to hydrogen used in fuel cells.
One of the biggest challenges facing hydrogen fuel cells is storing the gas. To meet today's driving requirements, it would take a lot more hydrogen than can now be stored safely in a vehicle. Klein's HHO is made on-demand and mixed directly with the gasoline in the engine at slightly more pressure than is currently there.
He said he plans to take Hydrogen Technology, which now has private investors, public in the first half of 2006.

:confused: :confused: :confused:
 

mrGutWrench

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Aug 29, 2002
Location
Carrboro, NC
TDI
'03 Jetta Wagon, 5-speed, 563K Miles (July '23)
LurkerMike said:
Here is more info...
__. MB and other companies have been working on hydrogen technology with government sponsorship for ~20 years. Now a guy who runs a tanning bed company is going to come along and make something easy and cheap that they've never heard of?

__. Sure you can do what he describes here but electrolysis to separate H from H2O is *very* expensive and energy intensive -- it costs a lot to get the fuel! But I'm guessing he's come up with some magnets or snake oil that will make it all work perfectly ... and he'll sell them to you for a very good price. Probably even make you a "Distributor" if you pay enough $$$$.
'
 

MrMopar

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Location
Bloomington, IL
TDI
none
Pure bull$hit.

Maybe his electrolyzer is good for gas welding if it can use electricty to create the gas on the job site for a reasonable price, but I'm not believing for an instant that his 1994 Ford Escort is getting the fuel economy he claims.
Ali T-Raissi, director of the hydrogen research and development division of the Florida Solar Energy Center, said he is not familiar with Klein's HHO or electrolyzer. But he said applying hydrogen technology in that way comes at a price.
Exactly. The actual people doing the mainstream work don't know this guy exists. Where does the electricity come from to create that hydrogen gas? Overhead pickup lines, like the old streetcars? One super-long extension cord? The "price" of applying hydrogen technology like this is that it costs MORE to fuel a car that way than leaving it alone.

Pulleazze, a "patented formula" for hydrogen? Calling it "HHO" instead of hydrogen and oxygen? This guy is so full of $hit, his eyes are brown. Good for him that he found a journalist that actually put him in print. Now I can see the caliber of people that universities award journalism degrees to . . .

I want to speak to his private investors. Seriously, show me the money. I'd like to see an actual person that's investing in this scheme - not just a mention in a newspaper of a unnamed source of funding.
 
Last edited:

Fortuna Wolf

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Location
Wilmington, NC
TDI
2002 Jetta TDI Auto Sedan
*Hydrogen will autoignite at a 4% concentration at 1 ATM.
My ALH engine has a compression ratio of 19.5. So 19.5 ATMs - This means that H2 at a .2% concentration in the intake will have the same partial pressure once fully compressed (optimistic assumption). This is all that's required for auto ignition. In reality with the much higher partial pressure of oxygen I think we colud get auto ignition at a lower concentration.

The engine has a displacement of 1.9L (I assumed this was equivalent to 1.9L of gas at atmospheric) per cycle. I assume that 1 cycle is 2 rotations of the crankshaft (4 stroke cycle). So, cruising along at 2000 rpm we have 1.9l*2000/2 cycles/m * (m/60s) = 31.5 liters per second. We would need .2% of that to be hydrogen. 31.5 L/s * .002 = .063 L/s H2. 22.4 liters per mole of gas at STP. 0.063L/s * mole/22.4L = 0.00218 mole/s

The enthalpy of formation for 1 mole H2O from 1 mole H2 and .5 mole O2 is 286kJ. 286kJ/mol * 0.00218 mol = .804 kJ/s of energy is required to supply enough H2 at an impossible theoretical minimum. This is 804 watts. 804VA/12V = 67 amps.

Ouch. 160 watts I could believe. Even 300 I'd be willing to try.
But 800W? And if you assume the electrolysis to be 60% efficient that's 1.3kW.
Remember that my assumption was that my car was using 30 hp driving around. 30hp = 22kw, so 1.3kw is 6% of the output of my engine. Oh wait, I forgot alternators aren't 100% efficient. Assume 80% (realistic but optimistic), 1.3/.8 = 1.63kW or 7.4% of my engine output would need to power this.

Possible flaws in my treatment of the problem...
*I didn't take into account how much energy the injected H2 and O2 would put back into the engine. Update: If all the H2 were completely burned again it would return the same amount of energy: 804 watts. Assume the engine is 45% efficient (optimistic!), so 361 watts back for 1.63 kW in. We would then only need to provide 1.27 kW to sustain it.
*My assumption about the relationship between engine cycles and RPM is wrong. (2 strokes per rotation, 4 strokes per cycle, 2 rotations per cycle)
*We're really compressing more like 2.03L into .103L per cycle (assume 1.9L displacement and 19.5:1 compression ratio).
*There needs to be quite a bit of unburnt fuel for this to work. Its equivalent to raising the cetane of the engine. Can we burn an extra 5.8% of the fuel to break even?
*The autoignition number I used (4% min) is equivalent to 30mmHg of H2 and 155mmHg O2. I assumed that we would still need a partial pressure of 30mmHg of H2 when compressed. But, we would also have a partial pressure of 3022mgHg O2 - 4 times the concentration of pure oxygen at STP. A smaller fraction of H2 would suffice. How much smaller I do not know.

At first it looks bad until you notice the last possible flaw listed. I don't know the answer.
Still, the ease of which one should be able to construct a test system, install it, and the ease of the test should still warrant further consideration.

The numbers seem very borderline, like they could almost work. Reality could go either way. In a TDI engine, as efficient as it is at burning all the fuel, mmm, it probably won't work. But in an older diesel I wouldn't ignore it.

Uh, I'll break out a chemistry book sometime over the next week and run an equation to see what the autoignition concentration of H2 would be with 3000 mmHG of O2. If its considerably below 30mmHG, like <5mmHG I swear I'll build one of these systems and test it because it should work.

PS: If it works, its called Fortuna's mod! Damnit, I need a mod named after me.
 
Last edited:

bigtom111

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Location
Kentucky, USA
TDI
99 Beetle, 97 Passat, 03 Jetta
"The temperature of the flame is 259 degrees Fahrenheit. But it instantaneously rises to the melting temperature of whatever it touches, Klein said. Those temperatures can exceed 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit.
"You can't do this with any other gas," he said."

This is pure unadulterated BS and against the law (of physics). I bet he has perfected cold fusion too. It is well known that cold fusion powers most hot tubs.:p
 

LurkerMike

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Location
Atlanta Jawja
TDI
-Whitey: 2000 Jetta GLS, Red: 2000 Jetta GLS 5-speed
1 revolution of the crankshaft in a 4 cylinder 4 stroke engine (gas or diesel) will see two cylinders fire.

The next revolution will see the other two cylinders fire.

A "flat crank" will fire two cylinders at the same time. Flat's are used almost exclusively in V8 racing engines for more low-end torque (simulating a 4 cylinder with H-U-G-E bores). They vibrate horribly and sound like a dump truck.

Most 4 stroke engines are "even fire" by design today where the firing points are equally spaced along the 360 degrees of crank rotation (720 degrees per individual cylinder cycle). In a 4 banger this is typically every 90 degrees that a cylinder fires.

The Dudge Viper V10 is a notable exception as it is an odd fire motor and sounds horrible like a dump truck when revved up.

But we can probably safely assume the TDI's are even fire "round" cranks and every cylinder is probably firing exactly 90 degrees of crank rotation from the next.

That would be about .95L per crank revolution.

"So, cruising along at 2000 rpm we have 1.9l*2000/2 cycles/m * (m/60s) = 31.5 liters per second."

I think it should read:

".95l * 2000 rpms = 1900 liters per minute
1900 liters per minute / 60 seconds = 31.666 liters per second"

Wow! That's still quite a bit of hydrogen as you first calculated!!!

Maybe the hydrogen is lowering the surface tension of the diesel fuel droplets? <grin>
 

Fortuna Wolf

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Location
Wilmington, NC
TDI
2002 Jetta TDI Auto Sedan
Remember that we only need .2% of that 31.6L/s
If the massive increase in the partial pressure of oxygen (20 fold increase, 3 times atmospheric pressure) doesn't decrease the the amount of hydrogen necessary to achieve autoignition. I strongly suspect it does. If it does by several fold then the math says "build the bloody thing, it ought to work"

As smooth as the TDI engine is I do assume that it takes 2 full rotations to go through a complete engine cycle (all 4 cyliders going through 4 strokes) so yea, I agree with you.
 

Fortuna Wolf

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Location
Wilmington, NC
TDI
2002 Jetta TDI Auto Sedan
PS: The more "reputable" companies doing this are claiming 10-15% mileage and power increases for IDI and other less efficient engine designs - the few which say anything about TDIs are more conservative at 0-5% increase in mileage and power.
 

JamesBa

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2006
Location
Maryland
TDI
GOLF '02
I asked my friend, Dr. Andrew Pouring of www.sonexresearch.com for his comments on this new energy from water process. Here are his comments:

The Second Law of Thermodynamics says you can’t win! Overall, you will get back only a part of the electrical energy that you put in to produce the H2 and O2.

If you mix back these to gases, you have an explosive mixture.

If you go further to breakdown the H2 and O2 to what they call HHO, first of all it takes more energy, then, I have no idea of what the stability of this is, or what it is, if it is possible at all.
 

schwechel

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Location
Slinger, WI
TDI
2003 Jetta, Galactic Blue
Ummmm........I'm no molecular engineer or anything, but isn't HH0 = H20 = water????? I think the Man Show did a bit on this once, where they tried to outlaw di-hydrogen oxide (H20) because it could be fatal if enough of it got into your lungs..........this thread reminds me of that.
 

hank miller

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Location
Monticello, MN
TDI
'06 Jetta
I wish reporters would get a chemist to comment on stories such as these. Or should I say editors refuse them until someone qualified comments?

Any chemist would have screamed BS as the idea that his flame was cool to the touch, yet heated instantly to the temperature needed. When something burns it burns AT the heat of fusion, no hotter or colder. You can look that temperature up in a book. Burn more fuel and it all burns at that temperature. The heat may seem hotter, but it is just more intense, the temperature is the same.

As for putting his finger in the flame, that is no problem, so long as you don't hold is there too long - the sweat from your finger evaporates (this works better if you are nervous - some professors have demonstrated this so often they got confidant, didn't sweat, and burned their hand) and insulates your hand from the heat - until the steam blows away.

Now using electrolysis to inject hydrogen into a diesel engine is known to be a net win in some cases, but it isn't a miracle. (It doesn't violate any laws of physics, it changes characteristics of the combustion for the better)
 

Hobbes22

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Location
Michigan
TDI
New Beetle, 2006, Red
www.hydrogen-boost.com is selling these hydrogen units for $750+. The "great claim" is they finished a 2005 Tour De Sol event and got 99 mpg. Their scoop is at: http://www.hydrogen-boost.com/June%202005.html

I tracked down offical results at: http://www.nesea.org/transportation/tour/FIN-Monte%20Carlo-style%20Rally-RESULTS5.xls

At the bottom of the page for vehicle #81 (hydrogen-boost), Note 9 says "Judges deemed driving style unsafe". Also the notes make you wonder how well the event was actually monitored when you read Note 1: "Entrant filled car at home (20 miles away) and unable to top off at start site - Adj. -.5G"

Wouldn't you think an official would be in charge of filling each car before they go and when they come back? The whole things just doesn't sound quite right.
 
Last edited:

mrGutWrench

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Aug 29, 2002
Location
Carrboro, NC
TDI
'03 Jetta Wagon, 5-speed, 563K Miles (July '23)
Hobbes22 said:
(snip) Wouldn't you think an official would be in charge of filling each car before they go and when they come back? They whole things just doesn't sound quite right.
__. Oh, yeah. Total ripoff. If they only had part of their apparatus using some kinda oil, I'd smack 'em upside the head with my reppty bat!
'
 

Fortuna Wolf

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Location
Wilmington, NC
TDI
2002 Jetta TDI Auto Sedan
Well, when I get a bit more free time I'll build a test chamber (just a liter or 2 of water and stainless electrodes) and exhast it with Y into the CCV before the CCV filter. I shouldn't need an air pump. I'll use a potentiometer or similar device to adjust the current through the electrolysis cell. Vag-Com and a copilot on the highway should give me enough data to determine the veracity of the claim.

The people claiming 50-150% more mileage are full of crap btw. I'm expecting a maximum of 15% gain, and more realistically 0-5%.
 

Fortuna Wolf

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2006
Location
Wilmington, NC
TDI
2002 Jetta TDI Auto Sedan
Jezz, I can't believe I forgot about the turbo!
1 ATM is ~14.7 PSI. The turbo boosts to 13 PSI continuously, nearly doubling the air intake pressure. This will result in nearly doubling the compression. Thus, we need 1.87 times less hydrogen for autoignition.

This is really looking like it might work.
 

TDIMeister

Phd of TDIClub Enthusiast, Moderator at Large
Joined
May 1, 1999
Location
Canada
TDI
TDI
Yes, please do share your results when you get it up and running.
 

silvershad0w

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Before I bought my TDI I was looking at electrolysis on gasoline engines as a mileage booster. I believe what is necessary for this to be effective is operating the engine in a safe lean state. Now a standard gasoline engine will begin to lean misfire upwards of 16.5:1 afr. At this ratio the EGT is also becoming prohibitively high. For years engine researchers have used brown's gas/hydrogen injection devices (aka electrolysis) to test the lean burn characteristics of SI engines on dynos. Using the gas as a supplement, the engine will continue to fire reliably into the 20:1 AFR range and above. What is interesting is the EGT's at this ratio are also on the back side of the curve, into the safe range once again.

At light throttle i.e. steady state cruise where low HP is required, the lean burn operation could potentially save a substantial amount of fuel by increasing fuel efficiency in this operating range. Therefore it has been hypothesized that this, while being a net energy loss, can indeed create a more efficient running gasoline engine under controlled and specific circumstances. Of all the electrolysis garbage out there I have never seen a proof of concept presented in this fashion with reasonable scientific method and explanation. In order for this to work, you either need a wideband tunable injection system that is programmed to allow for this operation, or a carburetor where the system is simply leaned out on the primary jet to what would normally be lean misfire range.

I have no additional thoughts currently on the applicability of this scheme to CI engines unfortunately, although a similar situation could exist. Sorry for the long first post. ;)
 

mrGutWrench

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Aug 29, 2002
Location
Carrboro, NC
TDI
'03 Jetta Wagon, 5-speed, 563K Miles (July '23)
silvershad0w said:
(snip) I have no additional thoughts currently on the applicability of this scheme to CI engines unfortunately, although a similar situation could exist. Sorry for the long first post. ;)
__. Hey, Shad. Welcome to the Club! And a good, thoughtful first post. But has anyone discussed where electrical energy to split water into "HHO" (I'm NOT making this up, you know!) is going to come from? If someone is making the point that it's "free", then the whole equation falls into the "snake oil" region, and that becomes a open target for the Reppty bat!
'
 

nicklockard

Torque Dorque
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Location
Arizona
TDI
SOLD 2010 Touareg Tdi w/factory Tow PCKG
A diesel engine is always in the ultra-lean burn regime, except when overfueled and spewing smoke out the back. Combustion efficiency is damned close to 100% under nominal operating conditions. At startup when the engine is still cold and a lot of heat energy is lost to warming the block and head, there *may* be a smidge of room for improvement.

In order for H2 injection to give a net gain, it would have to contribute more to the overall efficiency of a diesel engine than the inefficiency of electrolysis, which is significant. It's been mentioned that it moves the effective ignition timing up. Fine, why don't we just tweak timing up with chiptuning and forget the unneeded expense and hassle? Because NOx would go up. So the argument I see being proposed is that hydrogen injection (a great reducing agent) prevents the formation of more NOx whilst simultaneously advancing timing.

Still, that advance in timing, how many more miles per gallon can that net? I'd guess on the order of 5% at the cost of higher peak cylinder temperature and pressure. The original claim is that his system costs about 70 cents per hour. Translated into gallons of diesel (at today's prices of $3.14/gallon), that's 22% of a gallon, or nearly a quart of diesel *extra* being burnt per hour.

Examining the simple case at steady state: my car travelling at 70 mph gets about 45 mpg, consuming 1.56 gallons of diesel in that hour. Running the hydrogen electrolysis cell would bump that up to 1.78 gallons/hour. In order to just break even, it would have to save 0.22 gallons in that same hour, or net me 51.3 mpg at the same speed.

Their claim is that it does better.

Does this seem likely?
 

mrGutWrench

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Aug 29, 2002
Location
Carrboro, NC
TDI
'03 Jetta Wagon, 5-speed, 563K Miles (July '23)
nicklockard said:
(snip) Their claim is that it does better.
Does this seem likely?
__. Nope, at least not without an alternator about the size of ... um, Iowa -- and what would it do to fuel economy to have the engine load to generate that much electricity? This whole concept is a practical nonsense IMHO.
'
 

LurkerMike

Veteran Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Location
Atlanta Jawja
TDI
-Whitey: 2000 Jetta GLS, Red: 2000 Jetta GLS 5-speed
What if you use a wagon and line the hood and roof with PE cells to make the electricity and you only drive on bright days in the dessert?

Of course people in Seattle would be screwed, but who cares about them, eh? ;~P
 

dieselgeezer

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2006
Location
Richmond, Virginia
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI 5spd
So, this device basically generates a cetane enhancer that may or may not increase combustion efficiency? This is beginning to read like the acetone thread.
 
Top