Negative Ion Generator in Intake

[Divco man]

Google Neg. ion gen.(NIGS, from here on), and you'll find people selling air purifiers that are said to put out ion energy, and produce ozone. They'll compare it to the air during a rainstorm, waterfall or at the beach, and talk about how its refreshing, soothing, blah, blah, blah. Check out the science, it turns out ozone is a carcinogen. I don't care either way, not worried I'm gonna give my motor cancer, nor am I wanting to help it to feel "one with the universe".

Science does seem to agree on several things; NIGs do remove particulates from the air. They discharge a high voltage static electric charge (out the discharge needle array) which puts a (-?) electric charge on the particles, and they are attracted and stick to surfaces with an opposite (+?) charge, thereby cleaning the air.The units they sell for homes have a removable (to clean) plate behind the array.

This high voltage static electric discharge also seperates the water molecules in the air into Hydrogen and Oxygen, hence the talk of making ozone. Hmmm can you say Hydroxy? In a semi-closed system like I'm planning, it could also be said to be a de-humidifier, as the water in the air is turned to hydroxy, its not water any more.

What I've got isn't one of those finished units, its whats inside. I bought 4 units from Goldmine, a Co. that sells surplus electronic stuff.Its a plastic box with the electronics in it, about 2"x2"x 1/2", has a 2 wire cord to put an electric plug on, and has a single wire coming out that goes to a smaller plastic box, that has 4 1" long needles coming out. Its listed as 110v. input, 7.5K.V output.They had a 12 volt unit they were selling, but I wasn't sure it would do the job, and when I decided to mbuy, they were out.Being surplus, thats the way it is, which is why I got 4 of these units, @ $4.00 each. Besides, they wear out eventually.

The set-up; Structurally, like a cold-air intake, tho I might actually heat it, we'll see. Anyway, on top of the carb a honeycomb screen from and reccomended by Predator, whenever the air filter isn't right on top of the carb.Eliminates turbulence. A plastic elbow on the top of the carb, hooked to about a 3' plastic pipe pointing forward, with (maybe) an air filter on the end of that.Just back from that front end,(cause I don't like the idea of 7.5 kilovolts being discharged near the top of the carb) I drill holes in the pipe for the needles to poke thru, and down into the intake stream, and mount the array to the pipe. Could mount the other box to the pipe, as well, and then run the power cord to a switch, and from there to the inverter.

Now, the Ifs; Suppose I cut the pipe mid length, and splice in a 6" long piece of metal pipe, thats grounded to the frame, and take the air filter off? Think the pipe would have all the dust and dirt stuck to it, and none would go in the engine? K&N eat your heart out! A No-Resistance air filter! Would make any concerns about the carb screens being a restriction moot! From what I've gathered, I'm pretty sure 1 of these units is fully capable of handling 400 cfm of air.To test it, I could put an air filter 'after' the metal pipe, and run it that way for awhile, and see if the filter caught anything. Unlike regular air filters, I don't think the metal pipe could get full of stuff, (if I didn't clean it) and stop working. I THINK the charged dust particles would cling to the ones that were already there.If this works, I could design it so its easy to change out, and make an extra metal pipe.

On the water molecules, plenty of others have talked about how Hydroxy, as an accelerant, could speed the burn. Concern would be this; 1 day last week, here in the Phoenix area, the humidity was 5%.We're about to start our monsoon season, today its about 20%, and if we have a thunderstorm it would go to 90%+. Would different levels of hydrogen and oxygen make it difficult/impossible to keep tuned, or would it not make that much difference? Don't know.I suppose I could set up a water injection system to insure the level would be a certain amount all the time.Lets see, I'm going to inject water into the intake, so I can ionise it into hydroxy. Sounds a little patchwork, to me.

As a de-humidifier; I don't know that anyones ever run an ICE on de-humidified air.I think when people do water injection, it slows down the kernal speed a little, which makes sense. As the droplets of water are vaporised into steam, they absorb heat. Heat that would otherwise be vaporising gas droplets.So, it should, it seems, speed my flame kernal propogation, if the air is moisture free. Course there will still be some water in there, from the gas.Anyway, this is yet another thing I'm gonna try.Jim

 

[Lazy JW]

I love this stuff! 8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)

 

['68falconohio]

A suggestion for your metal pipe...errr, i mean 'air filter'. A thought would be to media blast the inside of the pipe with stainless steel shot or some other media harder than the pipe. The excessive dimpling should create a greater surface area increasing your dust capacity.

 

[Divco man]

Great tip on increasing surface area! That got me thinking about using corrugated aluminum tubing.But then I thought that might cause a boundary layer, which would interfere with the dust sticking. So, then I thought about how the dust is going to 'want' to travel down the center of the pipe.

So, "How can I encourage the particulates to go to the outside of the pipe?" Eureka! Turbonators. The 'Vortex action' will push the particles out!....Hold it. Aren't they made out of metal? They could push the particles out, AND increase the surface area.In fact, I was talking about a 6" section of grounded metal pipe.Actually, at the front I would want plastic for the discharge needles, and I wouldn't want the needles too close to the metal, because of arcing, but I could still have a 2 or 2 1/2 feet of metal, with several turbonators in it, and then transition back to plastic before the carb.That should collect enough dust, even if I'm driving in a dust storm!

So, I could put the oil cooler at the front of the pipe, to cool the oil AND heat the incoming air. The air is heated, particulate free, totally dry air thats richer than normal in O2 and Hydrogen. And, is flowing with less resistance than 'normal'. Hot Damn!

I know dry air absorbs moisture more readily than wet air. I wonder if dry air mixes with vaporised gasoline more readily, as well. Or, maybe its apples and oranges? Yet another "If"

The other is the argument for cold air intakes; Cooler air has more density. Yet hotter air vaporises gas better. Well, easy enough to try it with the oil cooler in front of the pipe, and not, and see which works best. Oh, and glad I'm keeping you entertained. I'm benefitting a lot from the input, and just laying this all out for someone else is helping to clarify it for me!Jim

 

[Divco man]

Even though I started a thread on Firestorm plugs, really haven't talked about ignition.I'm set up to convert to a Duraspark (electronic) distributor, and have a couple of Ford modules around, though I'll probably go with a GM HEI coil, or MDI.

I was talking to an aquaintance, who's more into airplanes than cars.Was trying to explain the Omni-valves to him, how they can enable you to have enough low end torque (alledgedly) to idle at 300 rpm, and still be able to start from a dead start without the engine dieing.I do pulse and glide driving, (basically, coasting to stops, and no jackrabbit starts) and it saves a lot on gas. "Imagine how much more it would save, if when I let off the gas at say,..1/8 mile from a red light, and coasted up to it, and sat there till it turned green if the motor was idled down to 300 rpm."

He said theres another way you could get the same effect, at least on the idleing.Some airplanes, (not really sure whether he was talking in the old days, or what) had something which would work.In a car the distributor hold down bolt literally holds the distributor into the motor, but it also locks its setting. In these planes, it holds it down, but it can still rotate. Theres an arm on the distributor, with a cable hooked to it going to a lever in the cabin, with several detents, and a stop at each end to limit the travel.Airplanes need a lot of power to climb, not nearly as much once they've reached cruising altitude.Kind of like the idea for overdrive on cars, but airplanes don't have gears. They also don't have stoplights, or gas stations. Anyway, in addition to throttling back when they reach cruising altitude, they move this lever to a different detent, to lower idle and save gas.

ECM equipped cars do this, with the computer adjusting timing.To bad the ECM doesn't know when your coasting up to a light, or sitting at a red light. Maybe a pressure sensor on the gas pedal. Take your foot totally off the pedal, and it idles it back. Idle, it seems to me, is normally set high enough that when you step on the gas, you go. (say 1000 rpm's or so, on my ECM equipped 89 camaro)At 300rpm it would probably stall if you stepped on it.Anyway, on my Divco, I could just do it with a lever, and detents. Does seem to me we're wasting a lot of gas, idling while coasting at a higher RPM than we need to, to keep the motor running. And the only reason seems to be so we'll have responce, when we step on it. Thats a lot of wasted gas!

Doubt it would be practical for mass marketed cars, safety issues, etc but, its something I'll definetly look at on my Divco, and might even think about how I could get the computer to co-operate, so I could do a different method for the same result, on my Camaro.Jim EDIT; Obvious from the context, in some cases when I say "IDLE, I mean adjusting the TIMING to lower the idle.Late night post, was tired. :roll: Jim

 

[Thad]

Hydroxy, does not exist you combine HH and O ya got water. Chasing anything down that road will just waste time.
Manual adjustment of ignition timing which is what the aviator was doing, is not old school but PRE- school. This is before vacuum or centrif adjusting was developed ala model "T" et al. It's a '47 HD hardtail that will break your leg and toss you over the handlebar if you get it wrong.
No resistance flow air filter. Simple get one big enough that will flow what is needed. Old trick in racing where you had to run airfilter was to double stack.
ECU does not define what the vehicle /engine is doing. It just measures conditions, rapid increase in manifold vacuum, sudden and continuing decrease in RPM, decrease in load, deceleration. Sounds like coasting to me. And the ECU adjust accordingly--- 30 times per second

 

[Divco man]

Thad, I was using "Hydroxy" as a shorthand term, for which I meant the increased levels of hydrogen and oxygen in the intake air.As Hydrogen is highly flamable, and Oxygen is an accelerant, it seems reasonable to me that it MIGHT, SLIGHTLY increase the flame kernal speed. And the science seems very clear, that a negative ion generator does split the water molecules into hydrogen and Oxygen. I'm actually as or more interested in the possible advantage/effect of totally dry, or humidity free air as intake, and the intriguing possibility of the filtering system. And, if this had cost me,...say, $150.00 to try, I probably wouldn't pursue it. $4.00, and a little time to play with it, whatIgot2lose, you know? I'll probably get far more than $4.00 worth of fun out of playing with it, even if there is no benefit.
Sorry, don't know what you mean by "double stack", could you clarify.

On adjusting the timing, I realise vacuum advance does this to some degree, but, as I said seems to me our low idle is set for starting out, and there could be a lower setting, just for no-load conditions, like coasting up to and sitting still at a light.Maybe even modifying the vacuum advance, I'm just thinking out loud at this point. Also asking you all who know a lot more than I do; What would be the challenges or things to beware of in trying something like this? Would it be important to only adjust when idleing, (foot off the gas, out of gear), to adjust it slow and steady, etc.?I'm assuming the 47 HD that breaks your leg and sends you over the handlebar is from getting it wrong, and then trying to kick-start it.If so, I'm only talking about making a relatively subtle adjustment while its running.Possibility of damaging the engine?Jim

 

[Lazy JW]

I would guess a dual-vacuum advance distributor coupled with a thermostatically controlled vacuum switch in the coolant could be modified to do roughly what you are asking on a fully warmed up engine. Especially since that is exactly what several manufacturers did in the early 1970's on many emission controlled engines. This what they did to keep the idle speed down, and is why those engines were timed with the initial advance at 0º.
Joe

 

[Divco man]

Ahhhh, so Detroit did think of it, and try it. I assume the vacuum switch in the coolant was to have it idle at a "normal" rpm when cold.Once it warmed up, with no pedal it would idle down as discussed, but the double vacuum advance would insure that when you stepped on the gas, the timing would change so it wouldn't stall?What engines, if you recall?Real question any Fords with Duraspark? I've modified a 300 inline distributor so as to convert to electronic ignition.Pretty sure it doesn't have double vacuum advance.
Also, how well did it work? Maybe they just dropped it when they went to ECM's? Jim

 

[Divco man]

Thad, and all; Last nite, (while checking my eyelids for leaks)I had an :idea: :duh: moment. I have read, on other forums, both sides of the debate on "Hydroxy" and electrolysis.

On the one hand, the argument of those who have drunk the cool-aid makes a certain amount of sense, (to me). If you introduce a flamable gas, (Hydrogen) and an accelerant, (oxygen) into the combustion chamber, it seems like it should speed the combustion process.

And, the arguments of the detractors, saying like Thad, "Hydroxy, does not exist you combine HH and O ya got water. Chasing anything down that road will just waste time." didn't completely persuade me as to why it doesn't work.

I'm not a chemist, but if the Hydrogen and oxygen recombine/reconstitute back into water, BEFORE combustion, than they aren't flamable gasses feeding the combustion process anymore.All you've got is an overly complicated form of water injection.Highly likely that either the heat of compression, or the mere fact of pushing those hydrogen and oxygen molecules into close proximity to each other, or both would cause them to 'turn' back into water.So, to start down the patchwork road, maybe if you only introduced 1 of the gasses to the intake, and vented the other to the aptnosphere, then they couldn't re-combine into water. Except there is probably enough hydrogen and oxygen, just naturally in the aptnosphere, that would combine with whichever gas you picked to use, that it would still turn into water.Now, at last, I think I get it.Still might pursue this as an alternative filtering system. Actually, the way I started down this road, was seeing that some of the car manufacturers are incorporating negative ion generators into the A/C systems, to filter the cabin air.Found it on a google search.I believe (going from memory again, so not sure) that it also 'helps' the A/C to run better, by 'removing' the moisture from the air.

Having this in mind as a plan "B" use for these generators, and them only costing $4.00/piece, made it easy for me decide to go ahead and get them.Jim

 

[StrangeRanger]

ECM equipped cars do this, with the computer adjusting timing.To bad the ECM doesn't know when your coasting up to a light, or sitting at a red light. Maybe a pressure sensor on the gas pedal.

One of the principal inputs to the PCM is the TPS (Throttle Position Sensor.) The PCM knows exactly when your foot is not on the pedal. It looks at the TPS, the VSS (Vehicle Speed Sensor) and the MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure Sensor) and it knows when you're off the throttle going down a hill, coasting to a light, idling or whatever else you might be doing and adjusts fuel and spark accordingly. If you want to debate what those fuel and spark settings should be, all well and good. That's what MegaSquirt is for. Implementing a manual override simply adds another level of unneeded complexity for no discernible purpose.

As to Turbonators and other such hoaxes, let me simply point out the obvious: anything you stick into the airstream reduces the energy and therefore either the velocity or the flow (or both) of the air. Whatever benefits they claim to achieve through adding turbulence are technically impossible in a dry flow system (such as either port or direct EFI) since there is NO fuel present when the air passes through the device and the airflow will return to laminar almost immediately past the obstruction.

The problem with the whole Brown gas/HHO/hydroxy BS is that none of the proponents look at the entire energy balance involved. No matter how much energy they may derive from the addition of separate H2 and O2 streams to the combustion process it will ALWAYS be less than the energy required to separate them in first place.

 

[Thad]

Do a google on earth atmosphere composition. Oxygen 21%, Hydrogen trace. Basically that means free atmospheric hydrogen does not exist. And there is no way to process atmospheric water vapor in a useable volume, keep the two gases separated and then use later down stream.
Not wanting to ran on your parade. Still something as interesting as NIGs and that cheap begs to be used for something. Hey remember Edison's first lightbulb had burnt cotton thread filaments. Did not last long or even work well but look where it lead.

 

[Divco man]

No worries, "raining on my parade"; it gives me more aptnospheric moisture for my NIG! Seriously, (I wasn't being very clear. When I was talking about using just one of the gasses, I was talking about something producing greater volume, like the electrolisers).So, if they, (people using electrolisers) just put the O2 in their intake, and vented the hydrogen to the aptnosphere, there wouldn't be enough hydrogen in the intake stream, to combine with the added O2, and turn into water.

Still, in order for that to be of benefit, there would have to be some indication that the combustion process was lacking enough O2 to begin with. I know they talk about "Oxygenated fuels", other than that is there anything to indicate the combustion process in a typical engine is runnning out of oxygen before the combustion cycle is complete.

As you say, as interesting and cheap as these NIGS are, its certainly worth playing with. Theres also the prospect of serandipidy (sp). Sometimes, someone has a problem or challenge, and a theory for how to resolve it.In pursueing the project, they may or may not solve the challenge, and it may or may not work the way they think it will, but it can still lead to something useful.

Remember 8 track tapes? The original patent for a closed loop tape system that they are based on was held by engineers at Mattel Co.In the '60's, they were trying to come up with a doll for girls, that would talk. They didn't want the girl to have to open up the back and turn the tape over every so often, as that would destroy the illusion. (I know, like pulling on a ring on a string wouldn't). Anyway, they came up with the "Chatty-Cathy" doll, sold millions of them.

Then, they used the system to make large, 4 track tapes, that were used for Muzak. So no one had to change the tape, on the "elevator music" playing in grocery stores, etc. Then, it was used for consumers, for 8 track tapes. Boy, did they get mileage out of that idea!

Anyway, I don't think I will be pursueing electrolisers, even to just use the O2. Probably be easier to add a little food grade hydrogen peroxide to the gas.Jim

 

[Divco man]

StrangerRanger,
You said "The problem with the whole Brown gas/HHO/hydroxy BS is that none of the proponents look at the entire energy balance involved. No matter how much energy they may derive from the addition of separate H2 and O2 streams to the combustion process it will ALWAYS be less than the energy required to separate them in first place."
Yes, this is the other argument made by detractors of Browns gas/Hydroxy. The proponents come back with "We're not using the "hydroxy" for the energy involved, but for its benefit in speeding up the combustion process by adding hydrogen, which burns FASTER than gasoline, and Oxygen, which is an accelerant."
Detractors simply come back with "You can't get something from nothing" argument.
That argument (both sides) has been unresolved in my mind, although I have been highly sceptical of the whole "Hydroxy" thing all along.Just couldn't resolve the debate, logically, in my own convoluted mind.Now I have come up with an argument that works for me;You just end up with water in the combustion chamber, as the gasses will re-unite prior to combustion.Please don't anyone try to dis-abuse me of this notion, as it works for me.
As for the turbonators, I know they don't work as usually applied. I was thinking that if I'm using the Negative ion generator in a metal tube, as described, the dust particles are charged with static electricity, which attracts them to the inner surface of the tube. But the velocity of the air stream is going to make them want to go down the center of the pipe. Something like a turbonator might, momentarily, push them to the outside, so they would be more likely to stick to the pipe, removing them from the intake air, and keeping them out of the engine. In addition, since the turbonator is metal, and fastened into the pipe, said particles would stick to it, as well.
The reduction in velocity caused by the turbonator would presumably be offset by the elimination of the 'traditional' air filter for this sytem.Hey, its something to 'play' with, (keeps me out of trouble".
As for the whole TPS thing; I was perhaps, confusing things by talking about this whole idea of lowering the idle speed while coasting, for 2 different vehicles and systems.Your absolutely right, on a ECM controlled car, using a "megasquirt' system (NOT a manual overide) would be the way to go.For my old carburated, no ECM truck, some type of manual system would the most practical.Jim

 

[nightwatchman59]

I'm only posting this as a typing exercise.... and just maybe someone else tried this. I took a 5 gal. walmart water bottle and stabbed 2 lengths of stainless steel all-thread through it near the bottom. I used an old pair of modified jumper cables w/ alligator clips to run 12v from the battery to the bottle. A length of garden hose connected the top of the jug to the air cleaner. The jug was filled 2/3 full and 1 box of baking soda thoroughly mixed in for conductivity. Electricity was clipped to the rods and bubbles appeared, like an Alka seltzer commercial.....
The results....
The truck (1984 F 150 4x4 / 300-6 / 4spd/ 35" BFG's) went from 14mpg to 18mpg when I used the system.
I removed the system when I moved - I needed all available bed space. I also found the jug's minor leak had put baking soda all under the bed.... nasty.

The truck isn't driven enough to warrant further investigation w/ this. I'm currently recording 18-20mpg from a tune up and timing advance.... and another experiment... :rolflmao: !!!!!!!

 

[Asa]

I'm only posting this as a typing exercise.... and just maybe someone else tried this. I took a 5 gal. walmart water bottle and stabbed 2 lengths of stainless steel all-thread through it near the bottom. I used an old pair of modified jumper cables w/ alligator clips to run 12v from the battery to the bottle. A length of garden hose connected the top of the jug to the air cleaner. The jug was filled 2/3 full and 1 box of baking soda thoroughly mixed in for conductivity. Electricity was clipped to the rods and bubbles appeared, like an Alka seltzer commercial.....
The results....
The truck (1984 F 150 4x4 / 300-6 / 4spd/ 35" BFG's) went from 14mpg to 18mpg when I used the system.
I removed the system when I moved - I needed all available bed space. I also found the jug's minor leak had put baking soda all under the bed.... nasty.

The truck isn't driven enough to warrant further investigation w/ this. I'm currently recording 18-20mpg from a tune up and timing advance.... and another experiment... :rolflmao: !!!!!!!

I wonder why the thought that this works won't die.
If it actually gave that much energy off every single vehicle on the planet would have had it equipped years, if not decades ago.

You probably saw a placebo effect, you thought you were going to get better MPG, so you drove accordingly.

 

[Divco man]

Sorry, can't accept that logic; If you could make a war plane, that would be 'invisible' to radar, someone would have done it, a long time ago (stealth bomber, etc.) If you could make a lighting device, by passing electric current through a filament, someone would have done it, a long time ago (lightbulb) etc.
On the other hand, there ARE concepts which continue to persist, (but just don't work) like "if you could run an Infernal combustion engine, on fully vaporised gasoline, you could get phenomenal mileage, (Doesn't work, because of BOTH the inherent nature of gasoline, and the inherent nature of Infernal combustion engines), and the idea of running an ICE on H20, i.e. "Hydroxy".
And then, the explanation of 'why someone hasn't done it yet', that there is this vast conspiracy to BLOCK such technology.

There's been some interesting and comprehensive research done, over the last 30+ years, on how we make deisions. Long and short; we actually make decisions in our subconsciou mind, which is dominated by emotions, NOT logic. Then, after we have MADE the decisin, our conscious brain goes thru a process of rationalisation, finding logical, (or seemingly logical) reasons to justify the decision. Applies to ALL decisions we make. So, while this applise to which brand of soap we buy, etc. it also applise to decisions we make, on what to BELIEVE.

In other words, ultimately we believe what we WANT to believe. So, Democrats/liberals, Repubs/conservatives, Atheists or Christians, etc. all BELIEVE what they belueve, because in the end they WANY to believe those things. And so, likewise, people believe in Hydroxy because they want to, and also believe such technology is being 'suppressed' by some vasdt conspriracy because they want to believe.Human beans; Legumes with legs! :rolflmao: Jim

 

[StrangeRanger]

Personally, I continue to believe in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. :rolflmao:

 

[xctasy]

seen it all before....

See http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll24 ... ide010.jpg

http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/features/1023772/brock-tribute-lots-of-bad-energy


The Polarizer issue had reached crisis point shortly before the Sydney motor show. Holden had quietly issued a statement saying it could find 'no technical merit' in the Polarizer, and could therefore not endorse its use. The statement was a Holden face-saver in what had become an ever-widening rift. It was obvious by then that Brock's Milford tests had washed out, but both Brock and Holden had signed a legal agreement not to publish the results of the tests. Now he was talking conspiracy. On November 25, on the telephone, he told me: "It's pretty obvious what's happening. GM has looked at this and said 'Why should Brock have it? We'll develop it ourselves...'"

Behind closed boardroom doors, the fight grew more heated. Holden wanted Brock to drop his Polarizer; Brock said no. He retaliated by refusing to allow his signature to be used on the 500 Permanent Red Commodore Group A road cars. Holden built them as homologation specials for his racing program; now he was thumbing his nose.

"After all," he told me, "I am permitted to say what I feel, so I reserve the right to put my name on what I wish to put it on - and it won't be on this latest car."

His signature was scratched off the Momo steering wheels. He'd only en­dorse the car - give it full Brock status - if it was fitted with his Plus Pack - a euphemism for the Polarizer. Some cars were sold that way.

Holden, fearing consumer fraud claims, wanted nothing to do with Po­larizers and, on November 12, Holden boss Chuck Chapman wrote to his dealer network. He advised there would be no more 'polarizing' on Holdens. HDT, apparently, agreed not to fit the device.

It would be better if they had made it out of a lolly material because at least for 469 dollars, you could have eaten it. Dick Johnston c.1986 of the Energy Polorizer

 

[nightwatchman59]

There was no "placebo effect". I did the experiment to see if there was any benefit. The results were marginal overall, put positive. Looking back, it was interesting, but not really worth the effort. I'd encountered electrolysis as it's used on ships when I served in the Navy and wanted to play w/ it when I saw someone selling a "system" on YOUTUBE. If you ever played w/ a torch, then you know a little O2 can change everything quick. I might try it again now that I've got the 'ol truck runnin' really good... trouble is, I don't drive it much lately... as far as tossing a staic electrical charge around an air / fuel mixture??? I'll pass...