Check out zerofossilfuel's HHOmeter. The only back pressure it creates is the weight of the 520 ml plastic bottle, which can accounted for before the test. It is resettable on it's own, and gives very consistent results accurately. It is incredibly easy to make, and the concept can be adapted to make a much more accurately calibrated design. I agree with you on the point of accuracy. His design is affordable and able to be scaled up. Hope this helps.
I now have seen sid'e design and am inclined to agree with jamestfergussen about the accuracy issue. I am going to make one that resets itself and is incredibly accurate and will share my design when completed. Skewed results do nothing but lie to us all.
Well, I am not proud of it, but this is what I came up with. (See my video response above)
The hoses/tubes are too much trouble to use and will not give consistent results.
A sealed chamber with a metered outlet that has as close to neutral buoyancy as possible appears to give the most consistent and repeatable repeatable results.
- it is subject to error in atmospheric pressures and/or altitude where the test was conducted. We would need to figure out how to compensate for this.
- it needs a small weight (less than 1 ounce) added to the lower side of the tank to keep the metering hole as the lowest point in the tank. This is to ensure gas does not escape early.
- Ideally, The water tank needs to be large enough where the sealed chamber does not touch the side of the tank.
To be absolutely accurate, you would need to seal the terminal end, fill the tube with 250mL or 500 mL of water and where the water comes to, make a mark on the tube at the water level.
The terminal end would need to be fixed to about 2 centimeters below the surface of the test tank. the mark you just made would need to be also fixed at the water level of the tank.
time starts when gas begins to force water out of the tube. Time ends when gas escapes from the terminal end.
You could use a larger tube or pipe., but it would take special considerations.
- The terminal end of the tube must point straight down into the water to prevent back filling of the tube.
- The depth of the output must not change as the device is used. This is to keep the back pressure on the device equal at all times. 1/4" should do it, but to be fair, you may need to use 1 or 2 cm.
You could manage item #1 by clipping the tube to the side of a bucket a set distance from the top edge.
You could manage item #2 by letting the bucket overflow into another container. (A bucket within a larger bucket). You coule try using something that floats, but that would be difficult to keep vertical and at the same depth all the time.
The problem with vertical displacement is that at some point the weight of the water displaced will overpower the device that is driving the measurement device.
If you tolerate measuring time against 95 mL rather than 250, 500 or 1000 mL, it can still work, but with this small of volume is susceptible irregularities of the generator if the output is not flat.
Ideally you want a measurement device that treats large and small generators as equals.
After thinking about it, the only relevant point with how deep you submerge the tubing is the distance from the terminal opening to the surface of the test tank. We all would need to agree on what a 'fair' depth should be.
That would also make the size of the tank no longer relevant as long as nobody was 'cheating' by putting the tubing under 2 feet of water to temporarily reduce the volume of water to be displaced within the tubing.
Wow, thanks for the idea. I didnt think of, and I agree that the rising launcher method is wrong. It seems I guess in my opinion that puttin a little bottle (250mL) under water and bubbling up a tube seems accurate mostly.
I think a more accurate version, because of the short amount of time it takes to fill 250 ml, would be to have a larger reservoir of water, say 1 gallon/4 quarts/close to 4 liters.
This could be an idea...it would be nice to see 4 liters of water displaced from a jug in a minute...that is some serious production!
I do not see it happening with most of our HHO devices and still have enough amps to charge the battery properly on the car.
I think once someone can verifiable mesure system flow they should setup a service for certifiing units that will be sold. Some what like UL does for tosters. if you want the cert you send your unit and get it certified and then you can put a certified by sticker on your product.
Oh to live in a purfect world.
what your doing is great
would be nice if yoou posted a how to build your unit or a link to where its located
Great Video I have similar Issues with flow rates/true in advertizing
I have looked for a flow meter and you can find them for Hydrogen (major bucks) and oxygen (not bad) but there is nothing set for HHO. The ball in the meter needs to be set up for the specific gas that is flowing and right now not a big market for HHO flow meters
I saw one once on one of these YouTube videos, but I can not find it anymore and the guy never answered my emails as to where he got it. It was a nifty meter!
Check out zerofossilfuel's HHOmeter. The only back pressure it creates is the weight of the 520 ml plastic bottle, which can accounted for before the test. It is resettable on it's own, and gives very consistent results accurately. It is incredibly easy to make, and the concept can be adapted to make a much more accurately calibrated design. I agree with you on the point of accuracy. His design is affordable and able to be scaled up. Hope this helps.
flipster12000 3 years ago
I now have seen sid'e design and am inclined to agree with jamestfergussen about the accuracy issue. I am going to make one that resets itself and is incredibly accurate and will share my design when completed. Skewed results do nothing but lie to us all.
flipster12000 3 years ago
I got tired of getting my hands wet. See my last video response.
Pros:
A lot of vertical travel for a very small amount of gas. Very fine milliliter measurements are possible.
Only requires 350ml of water to run.
Water is only used as a seal or gasket. It is not being pushed around during the test.
Weight supported by the gas is constant throughout the entire range of travel.
Cons:
Needs a lot of headroom to be able to measure 1 liter of gas.
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
Well, I am not proud of it, but this is what I came up with. (See my video response above)
The hoses/tubes are too much trouble to use and will not give consistent results.
A sealed chamber with a metered outlet that has as close to neutral buoyancy as possible appears to give the most consistent and repeatable repeatable results.
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
It does have a number of weakness though.
- it is subject to error in atmospheric pressures and/or altitude where the test was conducted. We would need to figure out how to compensate for this.
- it needs a small weight (less than 1 ounce) added to the lower side of the tank to keep the metering hole as the lowest point in the tank. This is to ensure gas does not escape early.
- Ideally, The water tank needs to be large enough where the sealed chamber does not touch the side of the tank.
lutherp40 3 years ago
LOLLL you guys are too cool.
BGrade15 3 years ago
The fact that you are putting so much effort into this is admirable.
If you get it right, then that would be such a bonus!
mrjamestferguson 3 years ago
Let me make a video to demonstrate. (I will need to run to the store for some 1/2" tubing.)
lutherp40 3 years ago
I belive that I am going to make a 200 mL version. I already have a piece of 3/8" here not doing anything important.
For a 200 mL 'standard':
A 10 foot (3.048M) length of 3/8" (9.53mm) tubing with a mark at 2.763 Meters from the terminal end "should" represent 200mL.
lutherp40 3 years ago
Ok, there is the problem with using tubing.
It is a royal pain to get all of the air/gas back out of the line to ready it for the next test.
The larger the diameter of the tubing, the worse this issue becomes. That why I was was originally suggesting 1/8" tubing.
Let me fade back and think about this some more.
lutherp40 3 years ago
To be absolutely accurate, you would need to seal the terminal end, fill the tube with 250mL or 500 mL of water and where the water comes to, make a mark on the tube at the water level.
The terminal end would need to be fixed to about 2 centimeters below the surface of the test tank. the mark you just made would need to be also fixed at the water level of the tank.
time starts when gas begins to force water out of the tube. Time ends when gas escapes from the terminal end.
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
For a 250 mL 'standard':
A 10 foot (3.048M) length of 1/2" (12.80mm) tubing with a mark at 1.943 Meters from the terminal end "should" represent 250mL.
For a 500 mL 'standard':
A 10 foot (3.048M) length of 5/8" (16.00mm) tubing with a mark at 2.487 Meters from the terminal end "should" represent 500mL.
This of course is assuming my math is correct.
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
95mL volume for 1/4" tubing seems a bit small to smooth out the measurement of HHO generators that do not have 'flat' outputs.
The 'calculated' volumn for a assorted 10 foot (3.048M) length of hose are:
1/4" (6.35mm) diameter = 96.528 mL
3/8" (9.53mm) diameter = 217.416 mL
1/2" (12.80mm) diameter = 392.216 ml
5/8" (16.00mm) diameter = 612.837 mL
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
You could use a larger tube or pipe., but it would take special considerations.
- The terminal end of the tube must point straight down into the water to prevent back filling of the tube.
- The depth of the output must not change as the device is used. This is to keep the back pressure on the device equal at all times. 1/4" should do it, but to be fair, you may need to use 1 or 2 cm.
See part 2
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
You could manage item #1 by clipping the tube to the side of a bucket a set distance from the top edge.
You could manage item #2 by letting the bucket overflow into another container. (A bucket within a larger bucket). You coule try using something that floats, but that would be difficult to keep vertical and at the same depth all the time.
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
You had me going there for a while...I was following so intensley, watching it unfold in my head.
It is an idea that needs some polishing...I had not thought of a HORIZONTAL device to measure...this is an interesting concept!
This needs some follow-up!
Great idea!
mrjamestferguson 3 years ago
The problem with vertical displacement is that at some point the weight of the water displaced will overpower the device that is driving the measurement device.
If you tolerate measuring time against 95 mL rather than 250, 500 or 1000 mL, it can still work, but with this small of volume is susceptible irregularities of the generator if the output is not flat.
Ideally you want a measurement device that treats large and small generators as equals.
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
Ok forget everything I just said for using 1/8" tubing.
I measured the volume of liquid that could be held by a 10' length of 1/4" tubing. It will hold only about 95ml.
For a 1/8" tubing, it is probably about 1/3 that volume.
The total length of tubing required for this kind of test is unmanageable.
sorry about wasting everyone's time with this concept.
lutherp40 3 years ago
Part 2
The only issues that come to mind I can think of are:
- How deep the coil of tubing is submerged into he tank (deeper penalizes smaller output devices)
- Difficulty reseting the the device for the next test. i.e. refilling the tubing so that it is completely filled with water for the next test.
lutherp40 3 years ago
After thinking about it, the only relevant point with how deep you submerge the tubing is the distance from the terminal opening to the surface of the test tank. We all would need to agree on what a 'fair' depth should be.
That would also make the size of the tank no longer relevant as long as nobody was 'cheating' by putting the tubing under 2 feet of water to temporarily reduce the volume of water to be displaced within the tubing.
lutherp40 3 years ago
I will leave 'automatic start/stop of the stop watch' for "others" to figure out. ;-))
lutherp40 3 years ago
How about a length of 1/8 tubing coiled in a flask, beaker or other 'standardized' container.
The length of tubing to contain the volume of 250, 500 or 1000 mL (actual length to be determined)
Time is started when the gas begins below the surface. Time ends when gas is expelled from the open end of the tube.
To be accurate the tubing must be positioned as close to the surface yet completely filled with water as to not penalize micro/small cells.
See part2...
lutherp40 3 years ago
I agree, there needs to be some sort of simple standard for measuring output. It needs to be something that always supplies consistent results.
I am not for any device that is required to force water 'uphill' as micro or small cells will not return accurate results.
You also need some way to make starting and stopping the stopwatch/timer consistent or automatic.
lutherp40 3 years ago 2
Wow, thanks for the idea. I didnt think of, and I agree that the rising launcher method is wrong. It seems I guess in my opinion that puttin a little bottle (250mL) under water and bubbling up a tube seems accurate mostly.
Thanks for the great information!
Ben.
BasementBen 3 years ago
I think a more accurate version, because of the short amount of time it takes to fill 250 ml, would be to have a larger reservoir of water, say 1 gallon/4 quarts/close to 4 liters.
This could be an idea...it would be nice to see 4 liters of water displaced from a jug in a minute...that is some serious production!
I do not see it happening with most of our HHO devices and still have enough amps to charge the battery properly on the car.
mrjamestferguson 3 years ago
Yea, that sounds great and accurate! But do you think that having 1 gallon of the gas would compress it a little bit under the water?
Your deffinetly right that lots of people exsagerate on their production.
Thanks for your help
BasementBen 3 years ago
I think once someone can verifiable mesure system flow they should setup a service for certifiing units that will be sold. Some what like UL does for tosters. if you want the cert you send your unit and get it certified and then you can put a certified by sticker on your product.
Oh to live in a purfect world.
what your doing is great
would be nice if yoou posted a how to build your unit or a link to where its located
Good Luck & work Safe
Hydroginist 3 years ago
Now, that is an idea!
mrjamestferguson 3 years ago
Great Video I have similar Issues with flow rates/true in advertizing
I have looked for a flow meter and you can find them for Hydrogen (major bucks) and oxygen (not bad) but there is nothing set for HHO. The ball in the meter needs to be set up for the specific gas that is flowing and right now not a big market for HHO flow meters
Hydroginist 3 years ago
I saw one once on one of these YouTube videos, but I can not find it anymore and the guy never answered my emails as to where he got it. It was a nifty meter!
mrjamestferguson 3 years ago
Good one! 5 Stars!
Careica 3 years ago
Thank you!
mrjamestferguson 3 years ago