Home     Savings     Test Results     Diesel     FAQ     Newsletter     Order     Contact

 

Home

 

Savings    

 

Test Results

 

Technical Information

 

Testimonial Video

 

Demo Video

 

Newsletter    

 

Order    

 

Contact

 

 

 

 

EPA Approved Dynamometer Test Proves Reduced Emissions and Improved Performance

 

 

California Dynamometer and Emissions Test Analysis

 

          On July 17, 2007 a late model Dodge pickup truck equipped with a Cummins diesel engine was taken to Olson Ecologic Lab, an EPA approved dynamometer testing facility in California.  The vehicle was given a standard emissions dynamometer test with and without a Hydrogen Boost hydrogen generator operating.  Notice I did not say with and without the Hydrogen Boost system operating, because the whole system was not used.  Only the hydrogen generator was installed and running at 30 amps. 

This was not a test that was recommended by me to show the benefits of the Hydrogen generator.  I would have recommended a hard working, high throttle test protocol.  This test never used the engine to produce anywhere near maximum power/torque.  The test was basically equivalent to a leisurely drive around the city, with many minutes of idling and only one short stretch of 58 mph driving and a couple shorter 30 mph stretches.  This may be an okay test for emissions but certainly not for performance, but we still got some useful data from the test data forwarded to us by the testing facility. 

Of course the expectation of the people sponsoring the test was to see a great increase in mileage and reduction in total and individual emissions.  If they wanted that sort of results I could have told them what sort of test protocol needed to be performed.  Never-the-less we did get some valuable information by examining the raw data.  First let me describe the raw data. 

The computer disk we were given contained three usable files containing over one thousand paragraphs of numbers separated by commas.  I knew that this sort of file could be more easily analyzed by putting the information into a spread sheet, so I opened the file with a spreadsheet program and the data fell into place.  There were 58 columns and 1062 rows on the spread out data.  Only a few columns were important and were not too difficult to find, though I had to make a few assumptions as to what the abbreviations were.  For instance I assumed that the columns labeled THCd, COLd, NOXd, CO2d%, TORQUE, Tr mph. and HPdy, indicated hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, carbon dioxide emissions, torque, tire speed, and horsepower output at each of the 1062 data points during the test.  Another column labeled HHCd may have indicated heavy hydrocarbons or particulate matter in the exhaust.  If so there was a 16.2% reducing in particulate matter with the hydrogen generator operating.

I concentrated on the usual emissions and the torque/horsepower columns.  I saw no abbreviation that could easily translate into fuel consumption so to get any indication of fuel consumption I was forced to use CO2 emissions as a % of the exhaust to give some indication of fuel used.  This could not have been done with a gasoline engine because the % CO2 would always be near constant.  But with a diesel with no throttle and no exhaust recycling (I don’t know if this engine has EGR) we could get some indication of fuel used by looking at CO2 emissions.  The fact that with the use of hydrogen the HC and CO emissions were reduced, thereby producing more CO2 emissions without using more fuel, does skew our results to the conservative side if we use CO2 emissions as an indication of fuel consumption.

 

Analysis

 

          First let me list the total accumulations of the amounts from the spreadsheet.

 

 

 

HC

CO

NOx

CO2

HHCd

torque

test 3

7914.8

21388.5

85920.7

608.179

12606.2

19930.9

test 5

6810

18653.8

88029.2

628.961

10580.8

19749.3

test 6

5502.7

22573.2

86914.1

616.695

9853

20009.5

Test 3 to 5

14.0%down

12.8%down

2.45%up

3.42%up

16.2%down

0.91%down

 

Looking just at the totals of the columns we get the chart above, but that does not show the whole story.  In the chart above test 3 indicates the pre-installation baseline test, test 5 indicates the test done with the hydrogen generator operating, and test 6 is a post test baseline repeat.  The bottom row indicated the increase or decrease with the use of the hydrogen generator above or below the baseline amount. 

          It was determined by analyzing the Purdue University dynamometer tests that the use of a hydrogen generator at idle and low throttle settings was a waste of energy because we were not taking advantage of the hydrogen we produced at low throttle settings.  Analysis of this test also shows the same thing.  In fact it shows that not only mileage was affected, but emissions as well.  Since we had 1062 data points to separate out the low throttle settings from the medium throttle settings, we could segregate the results and see what the hydrogen generator would do for us if we just turned it on when the throttle setting was appropriate.  During examination of the spreadsheets I found that when this truck engine produced less than 30 ft pound of torque the hydrogen was not appropriate, at least not at the 30 amp production rate used on this test.  So I separated the below 30 ft lb torque data points from the greater than 30 ft lb torque data point and got the following summary:

 

Torque

NOx

HC

CO

torq/CO2

0-30

up 24%

up 2%

dn 6.2%

dn 84%

30-80

dn  3%

dn 31.4%

dn 19.1%

up 6.5%

 

          This obviously shows a marked decrease in all emissions at power settings above 30 ft lb torque output.  If the test had even challenged the engine at a high power setting we may have seen some real savings in the torque/CO2 emissions column.  The engine is capable of hundreds of ft lbs of torque so even running at 80 ft lbs at 58 mph cruise was nothing of a test for Hydrogen Boost. 

          However when we analyze the few data points above 80 ft lbs of torque we see the results expected with Hydrogen Boost.  Though the number of data point above 80 ft lbs is fewer, meaning less reliable, we see that as the torque increases above 80 ft lbs the fuel efficiency improves dramatically.  Below are the improvements in fuel efficiency and emissions with Hydrogen Boost at data points above 80 ft lbs of torque.  

 

Torque

Torque/CO2

HC

CO

NOX

HHC (particulates)

80+

up 1%

dn 14.9%

dn 13.7%

up 2%

dn 21.3%

82+

up 6%

dn 14.7%

dn 12.9%

up 0%

dn 13.5%

83+

up 10%

dn 14.6%

dn 12.2%

dn 2%

dn 13.7%

Top torque

up 15%

dn 10.5%

dn 11%

dn 12%

dn 14%

 

          Our testing and experience has shown that Hydrogen Boost is especially beneficial at higher throttle setting with diesel engines.  But even at the low throttle settings and torque outputs of this leisurely test drive, the benefits of Hydrogen boost are clearly seen, in mileage expectations as well as emissions reductions.

 

Summary:

 

          Use of the hydrogen generator at moderate throttle setting common to city driving on this diesel powered pickup truck gave the following results:

 

3% reduction in NOX emissions

31.4% reduction in volatile hydrocarbon emissions

19.1% reduction in carbon monoxide emissions

16.2% reduction in heavy hydrocarbon (particulates) emissions

6-15% increase in torque per %carbon dioxide emissions (indication of fuel consumption)

 

Use of the Hydrogen Boost fuel heater and engine treatment would give better results.

 

 

Click here to ORDER NOW

Home    Savings    Test Results    Technical Information    Newsletter    Order    Contact

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Home

 

Savings    

 

Test Results

 

Technical Information

 

Testimonial Video

 

Demo Video

 

Newsletter    

 

Order    

 

Contact

 


Free counters provided by Honesty.com .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Help

Help

Help