Hydrogen Injection 1

[rwaicus]

We currently have a water electrolysis unit that produces 1600 ml/min of gas on demand that is fed into the air intake manifold (after the intercooler). The engines are typically 25 l diesel engines, single turbo.
Our target fuel savings are 10% and we are getting a mixed bag of results in the field.
First off is this enough gas being produced to see consistent results? Some ideas we have for the discrepancies is the varying amount of carbon deposits in the engine and/or the ECM adversely compensating for the gas injection in some vehicles.

 

[Lou Scannon]

What is the point of using electricity to produce hydrogen to produce shaft power in an IC engine? Why not use the electricity to produce shaft power directly? Is there an economic or legal proposition that is inducing you to do this?

 

[rwaicus]

The basic premise is that the device is retrofitted to an engine in the least intrusive way possible. We are realizing hp and torque gains as well as reduced emissions, all of which are goals. We can’t seem to determine what causes the variance in gains. The best results appear on older engines, which seem to point to engine cleaning going on.

 

[GregLocock]

1600 ml/min is 1.6 litres/minute. Is that really all you are making? If your 25 litre engine is turning over at 600 rpm that's about 1 part in 5000 of the mixture.

Unless the hydrogen is a waste product from some othe process it is hard to beleieve that you'll see any net benefit in efficency.



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[rwaicus]

Thanks for the info Greg.

What would be your guess for flow rate (for the above) to realize a 10% gain in fuel savings?

Ron.

 

[GregLocock]

Well, obviously you need to replace 10% of the diesel with hydrogen.

So, keeping to the above, you are breathing about 7500 litres per minute, and probably burning about half that at full throttle.

that'd weigh 4.5 kg, so you need to supply .45/34=.013 kg of hydrogen per minute. I think that works out at 150 litres per minute, ie 100 times as much as you are using.

There are additional benefits from hydrogen injection, it doesn't just replace the fuel. None the less, I'm not surprised your results are inconsistent.



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[unclesyd]

GregLock,
Aren’t we getting to a point to where you are going loose either the top or bottom end of the engine with a big bang?

I’m like you H2 is too expensive as a purchased gas and very expensive produced with a small electrolysis unit.

 

[muuramenian]

If you produce hydrogen with the elcetricity of the alternator, you should going down in efficiency because of the inefficiency of the alternator in producing electricity and of combustion in producing mechanical energy. In a perfect world the net change would be zero, as energy isn't free. You take power off the crank, which is turned into fuel,which is burned to turn the crank.

As i understand, hydrogen injection has little to do with hydrogen powering the engine, but to for more efficient combustion, the same as water injection. Would that be an option? You are injecting the oxygen that comes out of electrolysis too, right?

Propane injection is another option i've heard of, but know little of.

 

[GregLocock]

If you want to get to grips with the real benefits of hydrogen injection then you need to read papers written by various students who have worked with Harry Watson

http://www.mame.mu.oz.au/people/staff/harry_watson.html

personally I think it is unlikely to come to much, similar gains could be designed in much cheaper, but as a retrofit, or on an enormous engine, it may have some virtues.





Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[1Bluegrass]

If it is of any help, Ford has two of their engines in limited production using hydrogen injection.
A v6 for airport equipment and there v10 for E 450 BUS application.
I believe they may be the first to get to this level.

 

[blatk]

Check out the CHEC site. It talks about hydrogen injection in depth. You're not replacing hyrocarbon rich fuel by adding hydrogen and oxygen, the 2 gases produced in electrolysis, you are causing a more efficient burn thus more power and better tailpipe stuff.

 

[HydroScope]

rwaicus you are very very vague!!

as you can see you cant pull the wool over anyones eyes on this forum we are all educated enough to know that you can't get something for nothing which is what your cyclic energy flow from this set-up suggests.

You mention injection of gas but what gas???you in America don't people refer to petrol as gas there?? you mention hydrogen in the title and a electrolysis process you might be injecting oyxgen for all we know? or a mixture of both oxy and hydrogen!!. how did you seperate them?? or are you suggesting benifits from browns gas??

this is an idea that people have been trying to sell since 1912!! not to mention the latest wave now reaching the high tech

http://www @

http://www.dynamicfuel.com/.

it fully describes what you have to say. and it is likely you work for them attempting to come up with something witty about your no go product. but boy it's a good looking site ;o) onya mate ;o)

the only reason you may find some gains some of the time if you are indeed managing to successfully inject hydrogen into the combustion chamber without backfire( not easy to do!!) at any rev range will come from the fact hydrogen burns with a wide varity of flame speeds depending on whether it is in a rich or lean env.

IF!! you got better results from older engines this flame speed is likely to be compensating for the old and out of time cams, injectors, valve seats etc. money would be better spent on a cheaper tune up and last longer than the parts you are using.

don't speak to Dr Watson he doesn't have time for such conversation he is a busy man, what people have said here is good enough ;o).