fixaze Project Page 4

The plates after washing them off with a spray hose.

The two outside plates were in very good condition...with the active inside surfaces looking almost new.  The center plates were dark and rusty...though they were still solid.

Seems this result is different than I expected...I picked up the idea that the + plates would go first...while it seems the - plates take the worst of the wear.

I am calling the plates that take the 12V wire the + and the side grounded to the frame the -.

I have read that the electrons actually travel from the - to the + though.  If so...this might explain the loss of Fe (iron oxide) from the center (-) plate...it is being carried out by the electrons?

The first 900 miles was done using NaOH (Crystal Draino) at 3/8 tsp per jar plus distilled water...the next testing will use 1/4 tsp baking soda per jar.

Might eventually reverse polarity to put some wear on the outside plates.

* After cleaning and recharging the jars...I only get 1.5 A draw at 75F...adding another 1/4 soda tsp per qt only manages 2.1 A.  Will run this awhile to see if it improves and look for some Roebic drain cleaner.

* Bought some Roebic NaOH and will retest using 3/8 tsp per jar after I reverse polarity to put the wear on the outside plates.

...........

time moves on.....

* After finding little actual plate loss with the center plates...I left the polarity as is and added 1/2 tsp Roebic and distilled water per jar.  Not seeing a lot of amps cold...so I might need to add some more.  But since I will be testing at the same time as using fuel additives...maybe not.

INTENTIONS: After I retest for heat gain and gas production under summer driving conditions...I will probably stay with this type generator due to it's space saving design and modularity (meaning that any number of cells can be used).  The center plates (-) might eventually be replaced with 316 ss.

I don't see any problems with using glass...the jars can easily be protected from physical shock...the only problem I can see is thermal shock if the jars are running hot and are hit with cold rain during a storm.

FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS:  Finally seeing some cons for this design.  The gas production seems to be mostly at the top of the area where the ss is in the electrolyte...mostly due to the minimal cross section of ss able to conduct current?  This will result in faster wear at the top of the (-) plates...further reducing the ss cross section over time.  This problem might be helped some by switching polarity so that the (-) plates were on the outside...doubling the amount of ss to wear.  But this still doesn't solve the basic issues with the design.

The Mr G cell seems to have solved this problem by using the very wide area of ss going down into the electrolyte...and using a much larger reacting surface area.

MORE CONSIDERATIONS:  While I like the Mr G cell's performance...I understand and trust my own design....so I'll stay with it.  Bought 12 widemouth Ball Mason jars and will use the metal lids...change polarity...with the center (+) plate insulated with a grommet and inner tube rubber.  These changes put most plate wear on the outside (-) plates...the metal lids seal better...don't melt.  The widemouth lids have more room for connections, etc....even though plates might be a 1/4" wider. Will not pull air through the cells due to increased electrolyte use.  Will try to set up an easy way to top up the cells using a syringe (?) or whatever..without removing the lids.

EVEN MORE:  After thinking about it awhile...I've realized that there is little advantage to the 3 plate design...other than maybe obtaining more plate area per jar when using small mouthed jars....or they could be used with small mouth or large mouth jars if there is space for only 2 jars.

With the wide mouth jars...a 2 plate design would be easier to construct...and more plate surface area could be had.  The issue remaining is the deterioration of the (-) 304 ss plates.

A new system design where there is a minor air bleed into the cell(s) controlled by adjustable bubbler caps...output goes thru a one way valve....then thru a copper loop clamped to a double walled exhaust downpipe...then thru a DIY flashback arrester (rubber gas line filled with 316 ss wool)....then thru a fuel filter to keep any ss wool out of the engine.  Finally the gas goes into the centrally fed PCV line into full manifold vacuum.

Hopefully...the filter...flashback arrester...and one way valve will stop any backfire getting to the cell(s).

Most ideas are from other successful systems.  The lack of a bubbler avoids winter freeze issues...at least for the bubbler.  And issues of bubbler backflow.

Doubting if I'll see much % gain from these 2 cells since this is in a carbed car with no functioning O2.  It is as much a test of the design as anything....so the next similar system goes well.

First system test went OK...no burning smells or anything on a 90F day.  Seems that bubbling air into the bottom of the cells allows them to run maybe 15* cooler...around 115F vs 130F under similar condition with no air bleed.  8.7 A hot.

A second run on a 70F day saw jars at 92F and 6.0 A cold...7.4 A hot. Temp on HHO output line at fuel filter was 118F hot.  Wondering if the rubber fuel lines on the copper loop will get too hot...they are about 4" away from the double walled down pipe.

Seems like it's good to go.

Pic of a DIY back flash arrester.  A rubber fuel line filled with medium 316 ss wool from McMasters.  I'd guess that their fine ss wool would be more effective though.  Just be sure to run it thru a filter...ss wool in your engine is not good.  The filter also acts as a flame arrester.

........................

After seeing some videos on youtube on flashback arrestors...I realize that I haven't been taking the explosive characteristics of HHO seriously enough.

Steel wool is flammable.  Bronze wool probably is too when exposed to an HHO flame.

I'll redo this using solidly packed fine bronze wool plus millet...and a copper or brass pipe....and still use the filter as a safety.

Might try using graded play sand.  Won't burn and should be consistent in size.  Housing cannot be made of rubber...obviously.

The cells after ~500 miles using Roebic....not as much stuff collected. The only difference other than that is the addition of the irrigation bleeders in the caps that allow metered air to be bled into the jars and down to the bottom. Deposit is around 1/2" deep...maybe deposited at about 1/2 the rate per mile as for the Draino.

Used around 3/16 tsp Roebic per 24 oz distilled water in each jar.