newbie2vette

First let me start by saying I am not posting this thread to start a long discussion about Hydrogen. I've been experimenting with my 1972 LT1 with the system I design for it.

As per the NASA test, hydrogen increases flame speed hence the timing should be retarded to fully take advantage of its capability. The 72 LT1 is timed at 4 degree BTDC, to retard it it will be at 2 degree BTDC. At this setting with the hydrogen being induced the RPM climbs fast but the TQ is gone, I started to increase the timing to where I've heard 350 loves to be at (8-10 degrees BTDC). Well, at 8 BTDC, definitely lots of power and TQ, at 10 BTDC even better.

My understanding is at TDC the piston is at the highest point, BTDC is on the way up to TDC. Let's say 2 BTDC is an inch or so from the top. so is saying 8 BTDC is funther down. Am I envisioning this correctly? Those smarted than I would like to hear your thoughts. Because I am not able to explain how is it I've advance the timing and get great performance when it was suggested by NASA to retard it.

bluthundr

I have no idea about injecting hydrogen into your engine, but it seems if it is not added through the metering system of the carb, you are just adding more fuel into the mixture, making the overall mixture rich, and it will take more time for that extra fuel to fully ignite and expand.

DRIVESHAFT

You are correct. When you advance your timing you are firing the plugs when the piston is further from TDC.
Of course 2° BTDC is no where near 1" down the bore, but you have the concept down.
If Hydrogen reduces optimum timing, you may only see it at total timing settings.
Your engine may run best with 30° of total timing instead of the more common 36°.
FYI - I just pulled that 30° out of the air. I have no idea where it will run best when burning hydrogen.

Mike Ward

What volume or mass flow % of hydrogen are you injecting?

gkull

What you need to do is either get your distributor recourved or buy a new distributor with only about 20 - 22 degrees of mechanical advance.

Then you use a dial back timing light and rev. your motor to 3500 rpm to ensure that all the advance is in and set the total advance with the vac advance disconnected to 36 or 38 degrees. So initial is something like 16 - 18 degrees at idle.

Motors really like 16 -20 degree at idle, but you have to limit the total advance.

Two of the guys at work have hydrogen generators on their cars. The 2009 Ford F-350 4X4 really likes hydrogen. Modern fuel injection can compensate 100's time per second to have the optimal timing and air fuel ratio. The BBC carbed car is a pain. As rpm increases the alternator puts out more amps to break the water in two. Both the oxygen and hydrogen are piped into the carb base unit that is intended as a N2O squirter. So being the 2-1 ratio it should not change the A/F ratio in theory. but the production rate is not linear with rpm or power output. How much power it adds? I don't know. The ford does get a couple miles more per gallon

newbie2vette

First thank you for entertaining my question. I've been reviewing some old notes from school about timing. I've come on accept that I can push it abit further than 10 BTDC, but I am going to re-verify the "total timing" to 36 degree.

On another note, the amount of hydrogen being induces is about 2-2.5 lpm which is about the correct ratio for the 5.7 liter eng. The standard practice by the HHO community is .5lpm per 1 liter of eng displacement.

Ford diesel loves Hydrogen and for some reason the way Cummins is designed it performs even better than Ford diesel when hydrogen is induced.

As soon, as I get the timing to my liking I planned on putting this on the dyno to see the tq/hp.

Mike Ward

That volume of hydrogen (in a gaseous state equivalent to ambient baro) per minute is not sufficient to influence performance one way or the other so it's no real wonder that your timing experiments showed the opposite of your expectations.

For calibration, in the same time period a 5.7L engine would pump 14,250 L of air (5.7.L x 5K RPM/2)

The in-car hydrolysis units that run off the battery and alternator consume more energy than they produce so you'll still end up worse than you started with, no matter how much hydrogen is produced. I assume you are aware of this and are doing this experiment for the sake of fun and nothing else.

newbie2vette

along with the "Timing Sticky" in here and what data I've collected, I performed the "All In" check. As prodicted, at 10 BTDC my total timing was 30 degrees. I advanced the initial timing to 12 BTDC, now the total is around 32-34. I also, did the "knock test" taking the car down to the suggested RPM, but I took it below 1k RPM just to check what happens, WOT no knocking the car just accel and got going.

The entire experiment with inducing Hydrogen is to prove with hydrogen acting as an "Enhancer", meaning it will assist in efficient burn of majority of the fuel being induced, in this case the car being carborated "Induced" is the perfect word to use.

One thing I've done to this car I went with smaller carb to reduce fuel induction.

I've been thrown all the theory about the amount of L air this size eng or another eng will take in. This is one of those experiment that most applied theory and what's been publish cannot explain the gain in performance and mileage. It must be experienced first hand, that's building/hooking a system up and fooling the ECU to the modern cars drive and smile pass the gas station. One thing I forgot to share, I am sorry I said this was not a discussion about hydrogen but I am passionately about this process.

Most of my previous cars were BMW, Porsche and Mercedes, all required and govern by the manyfacturers to use high octane gas 93+ and even some Imports. With hydrogen being induced none of them no longer use the high octane and still perform and not produce the black carbon build up you see on most tailpipe due to their rich running condition.

The other reason, taking old high mileage vehicles to run efficient and produce less poplution. To buy a new car this days just to gain 2-6mpg one will spend thousands and have the payment to boot. Why not find a process to improve what's already paid for.

Okay, I am off my soap box. Thank you everyone for pointing me to the right direction to verify my conclusion on timing and the process to set it properly.