We are possibly talking about 5 different types of energy transfers. Mechanical to electrical,(= Loss in energy, agreed) electrical to chemical (=loss in energy, agreed), chemical to chemical (???) and chemical to mechanical and even mechanical to mechanical.
I just think problem for some not understanding how this does not break any laws of TDs, may be they don’t consider the chemical to mechanical energy transfer and the mechanical to mechanical transfer and how they work together. During the combustion, energy transfers from liner to rotary. This works better at different points and less at others. At TDC or “0” degree no energy is transferred, between 10 and 60 ATDC degrees much energy is transferred, and between 100 and 175 little energy transfer. If gasoline starts burning 20 degrees BTDC or more, and continues to burn to 180 degrees ATDC and more, then some of that energy has little to no chance to be transfered to the rotary crankshaft. If the burn curve is shorten (by speeding the flame) and the same energy (or even less) is in effect squeezed into the optimal transfer points then that would equal more energy transferred and less energy wasted. You can see why this does not break any Laws of Thermal Dynamics. IMO, Further evidence of this happening, is the lower exhaust temps, lower head temps, and lower hydrocarbons in the exhaust. IMO These 3 things point to faster more complete combustion.
I will cut to the chase. Bottom line is my personal generator tests has in fact shown lowered fuel consumptions when boosting with HHO. (Which are easily duplicated by anyone) I electrolyzed water with power generated from the 12 volt side of the generator. The load being constant and the same in all tests. 3000 watt generator under 1900 watt load. The governor controlled the throttle position. The least amount gain I saw was 8%. That was without changing anything on the engine.
This does not prove that it works on every engine, but it does prove my point. If I get fuel efficiency gains consistently, on this simple ICE, then this alone proves HHO boosting CAN’T be breaking any Laws of Thermal Dynamics.
Here are some papers…
http://www.floridabiodieselinc.com/HHOdiesel.pdf
Here is 1 paper on the effect of Hydrogen boosting. But it is not the same ratios that most find beifial. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19770016170_1977016170.pdf
Here a video Of a Young man’s collection of papers on the subject HHO boosting. (You can find the papers he mentions by Google searches) He is apparently doing this for his Doctorate thesis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4BQ4nfn2To&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DSYs0qIa-U&feature=related
Most folks who play with HHO boosting say that the gain comes from the new flame speed and burning cariterstics. And don’t attribute any other factor. http://www.fuelsaver-mpg.com/store/how-does-hho-work . (Personally I do think there is other factors)
I plan on doing more tests this summer to isolate the effects of the water vapor from that of browns gas. I will be trying to see how far I can push this gains, weather it be water vapor & or HHO.
I just think problem for some not understanding how this does not break any laws of TDs, may be they don’t consider the chemical to mechanical energy transfer and the mechanical to mechanical transfer and how they work together. During the combustion, energy transfers from liner to rotary. This works better at different points and less at others. At TDC or “0” degree no energy is transferred, between 10 and 60 ATDC degrees much energy is transferred, and between 100 and 175 little energy transfer. If gasoline starts burning 20 degrees BTDC or more, and continues to burn to 180 degrees ATDC and more, then some of that energy has little to no chance to be transfered to the rotary crankshaft. If the burn curve is shorten (by speeding the flame) and the same energy (or even less) is in effect squeezed into the optimal transfer points then that would equal more energy transferred and less energy wasted. You can see why this does not break any Laws of Thermal Dynamics. IMO, Further evidence of this happening, is the lower exhaust temps, lower head temps, and lower hydrocarbons in the exhaust. IMO These 3 things point to faster more complete combustion.
I will cut to the chase. Bottom line is my personal generator tests has in fact shown lowered fuel consumptions when boosting with HHO. (Which are easily duplicated by anyone) I electrolyzed water with power generated from the 12 volt side of the generator. The load being constant and the same in all tests. 3000 watt generator under 1900 watt load. The governor controlled the throttle position. The least amount gain I saw was 8%. That was without changing anything on the engine.
This does not prove that it works on every engine, but it does prove my point. If I get fuel efficiency gains consistently, on this simple ICE, then this alone proves HHO boosting CAN’T be breaking any Laws of Thermal Dynamics.
Here are some papers…
http://www.floridabiodieselinc.com/HHOdiesel.pdf
Here is 1 paper on the effect of Hydrogen boosting. But it is not the same ratios that most find beifial. http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19770016170_1977016170.pdf
Here a video Of a Young man’s collection of papers on the subject HHO boosting. (You can find the papers he mentions by Google searches) He is apparently doing this for his Doctorate thesis.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4BQ4nfn2To&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DSYs0qIa-U&feature=related
Most folks who play with HHO boosting say that the gain comes from the new flame speed and burning cariterstics. And don’t attribute any other factor. http://www.fuelsaver-mpg.com/store/how-does-hho-work . (Personally I do think there is other factors)
I plan on doing more tests this summer to isolate the effects of the water vapor from that of browns gas. I will be trying to see how far I can push this gains, weather it be water vapor & or HHO.
Last edited: