HHO and Audi A6 TDI 1994 140 CV

Tips, advice and tips to lower your consumption, processes or inventions as unconventional engines: the Stirling engine, for example. Patents improving combustion: water injection plasma treatment, ionization of the fuel or oxidizer.
fabthy
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 4
Registration: 02/04/10, 16:02

HHO and Audi A6 TDI 1994 140 CV




by fabthy » 16/06/10, 20:10

Hello,

I am starting an experiment on two diesel vehicles; a Clio and an Audi A6. They are equipped with a drycell that I bought as a kit in the USA.

Note that the use of HHO on the Audi prohibits the turbo from operating.
I think this is due to the Mass Air Flow (MAF) sensor.

The AUDI TDI 140 CV gearbox 6 has, unless I am mistaken, a BOSCH MAF.

What should I do to lure such a system?

Furthermore, do you know of a database which would group together all of the HHO modified vehicles (in France) with the performances achieved?

Thank you for your answers.

cordially
0 x
Fabthy
User avatar
xtrabart
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 8
Registration: 23/01/10, 23:11




by xtrabart » 16/06/10, 22:37

DRYCELL !! 6, 11, 16, 21 plates ???
I think it will be hard to find convincing results for HHO, because: do a little calculation ...
what is your volume of gas HHo released per minute?
, the best kits deliver max 6l of gas per minute
; suppose we have a 2 liter engine.
4-stroke engine therefore, this engine swallows 1 liter of air per engine revolution, - at 2000 rpm, it therefore consumes 1000 ld of air ...
So at 2000 rpm, you provide your engine with 6/1000 of a percentage of gas, i.e. 0,6% of detonating gas ...
It is very little gain compared to the effort of your alternator to provide up to 20 or even 25 A to generate 6 l of gas ....
In short, I don't want to break your spirits, but little chance of finding convincing results ...

NB: these values ​​are quite general and can vary but not within large ranges to observe an improvement in the result ...

I had tried ... http://hho.car.is.free.fr
I had more results in gain in consumption by adding 200 grs of air in the 4 tires than all these kits.

However, the ecopra kit would connect me well but given the price and the gain obtained, I would have to do around 80000 km to amortize it ...

Currently, the best .. for me ... it's 6 to 8% of SP95 / E10 in my full of GAS OIL for lack of oil ....
0 x
Image
User avatar
Capt_Maloche
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 4559
Registration: 29/07/06, 11:14
Location: Ile-de-France
x 42




by Capt_Maloche » 17/06/10, 00:39

Hello,

Indeed, we have already answered this in a simple way

You use fuel to run your engine, which in turn turns the alternator, which produces current, which current will produce by electrolysis a little H2 + O2

hum, let's see the result:

Motor efficiency 30% and again, at favorable speed
Alternator efficiency 85%
Electrolysis efficiency 60%

so at the start this makes 0.30 x 0.85 x 0.60 = 0.15 about 15% of fuel efficiency in the fuel in the best of cases to produce a little bit of explosive gas.

The good thing is that by "burning" H2 + O2 will produce a little water vapor favorable to combustion, but in% so negligible that you have little chance of seeing any fuel economy.

sorry, there is no miracle on it, just a little placebo Image because as you have spent money and time in this system, you support less and pay attention to your consumption.


on my company clio III, according to my "mood" my consumption can go from 5.5 to 4.7 L / 100 and without any equipment :D
0 x
"Consumption is similar to a search consolation, a way to fill a growing existential void. With, the key, a lot of frustration and a little guilt, increasing the environmental awareness." (Gérard Mermet)
OUCH, OUILLE, OUCH, AAHH! ^ _ ^
oiseautempete
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 848
Registration: 19/11/09, 13:24




by oiseautempete » 17/06/10, 07:20

xtrabart wrote: suppose we have a 2 liter engine.
4-stroke engine therefore, this engine swallows 1 liter of air per engine revolution, - at 2000 rpm, it therefore consumes 1000 ld of air ...
So at 2000 rpm, you provide your engine with 6/1000 of a percentage of gas, i.e. 0,6% of detonating gas ...
It is very little gain compared to the effort of your alternator to provide up to 20 or even 25 A to generate 6 l of gas ....
In short, I don't want to break your spirits, but little chance of finding convincing results ...

...


Your calculation is wrong because you forget that modern diesel engines are all quite highly supercharged, so they swallow much more air than that ... Note that an Audi 140cv without turbo has about the same performance as 504 diesel from the 70s ... and probably higher consumption because the compression without supercharging is much lower (~ 19/1 instead of 23/1)
The HHO is just a good way to enrich its manufacturer, but certainly not its buyer ...
0 x
fabthy
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 4
Registration: 02/04/10, 16:02




by fabthy » 17/06/10, 18:32

Hi,

Thank you for your answers.
I can already see that forum is much more active than the one I used to post, namely "http://www.generateurhho.com/forum".

I don't know who to believe. And I do not wish to believe but rather give me the means to assert. For now, I'm starting the experiment, and I'm even building my own DRYCELL cells.

On the American sites one finds however sacred performances: 10 MPG going to 35 MPG with the HHO. This does not leave me indifferent. We can also read, on sites in France, that the minimum savings that can be made is 10%. Optimized it seems that this system can achieve 50 or even 60%. Again I ask to see, that's why I am currently performing the tests.

The HHO is experimental, I have taken this point into account. No scientist in the Orthodox world is interested in it.

So without talking about Stanley Meyer or this American who uses HHO to provide energy to his house and his vehicle (seen on TF1), I consider that there is no smoke without fire.

To come back to your answers, I understand that if I am able to recharge a battery with a solar panel and that I therefore use the latter to power my DRYCELL then I will start to save on fuel. And above all I will pollute less.

Am I wrong or right on this last paragraph?

Regards and thank you in advance for your answers.
0 x
Fabthy
fabthy
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 4
Registration: 02/04/10, 16:02




by fabthy » 17/06/10, 19:03

Response to xtrabart:

The drycells that I use are 9 mounted plates: -nnn + nnn-

The engine is smoother, that's obvious, but maybe it's a "placebo" feeling.

Still, my wife drives the car, she is reluctant to my experiences and ended up admitting that the vehicle was more flexible.
This is a CLIO 1,9 D 1994.

I watched your experiments on http://hho.car.is.free.fr.
It is important, as the Americans say, "you have to fool the computer" to lure the probes (Lambda, MAF, MAP), this is the problem I have on the Audi A6. These decoy elements are not yet available in France so it is necessary to buy them in the USA.
This is why I think that your experiment is not finished and that you cannot conclude.

I take back what I wrote in the previous post, I want to demonstrate myself by going to the end (perhaps of my stupidity) if the HHO really increases the octane number and allows to realize the savings announced everywhere on the Web.
I'm not talking about Stanley Meyer, I'm not talking about a purely HHO diet.

cordially
0 x
Fabthy
fabthy
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 4
Registration: 02/04/10, 16:02




by fabthy » 19/06/10, 12:48

Hello,

Thank you for this summary.
It is indeed the Pantone process, I browsed the latter on the Quanthomme site.

You seem very skeptical about HHO.
So I ask you a first question:

As part of an improvement in the octane number with a flow rate of 1 liter of HHO per minute from a DRYCELL powered by its own battery itself recharged by a solar panel as found on this econologie site, do you think it is profitable?

In addition, I have already created the basic Pantone reactor found on the Quanthomme site, but I find that installation on the vehicle is much more difficult. This is why I installed a DRYCELL on my vehicles.
I find that of the HHO much simpler, and removable very easily.

My second question:
Is there a table where you can consult the tests (HHO or Pantone) on the vehicles with the savings made?
The results you can read on Quanthomme do not satisfy me

We look forward to hearing from you very soon.

cordially
0 x
Fabthy

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Special motors, patents, fuel consumption reduction"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 288 guests