Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Overunity electrolysis - 31 times more effective gas production than with DC

Started by hartiberlin, July 30, 2014, 08:22:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Les Banki

Quote from: MarkE on July 31, 2014, 12:19:25 AM
The joys of shrill. 
The first document is a set of shouted assertions, many that were pasted into the post above.
The patent document describes using SITs in a cascode configuration to build high voltage capable switches.  An IGBT could be used if the problem of the floating gate were addressed.

The patent describes charging the gate-anode capacitance with a portion of the inductor flyback.  The problem remains that a discharge path for the gate charge is not provided.  The next time that the circuit is to fire, the gate is charged deeply off.  Other embodiments in the patent that use pulse transformers overcome the problem with the cathode to gate winding of each pulse transformer.


MarkE,

You may have fooled a few readers on this forum in the past with LOTS of empty words in your 2885 posts but I (for one) know who you are and what you are trying to achieve...

You are NOT very good at it.... (are you still getting paid???)

For ONCE, I will call your bluff:

Since you are SOOOOOOOO clever, please provide your EXACT, working circuit diagram for replacing the Static Induction Thyristor in this device!!
If you can't, its time for you to SHUT UP!

Cheers,
Les Banki

MarkE

Quote from: Les Banki on July 31, 2014, 01:09:14 AM
MarkE,

You may have fooled a few readers on this forum in the past with LOTS of empty words in your 2885 posts but I (for one) know who you are and what you are trying to achieve...

You are NOT very good at it.... (are you still getting paid???)

For ONCE, I will call your bluff:

Since you are SOOOOOOOO clever, please provide your EXACT, working circuit diagram for replacing the Static Induction Thyristor in this device!!
If you can't, its time for you to SHUT UP!

Cheers,
Les Banki
More shrill, what joy!  You know, if you've been struggling to come up with a circuit, then instead of being shrill you could always just ask for help.  Note that the IGBT gate is properly referenced to the emitter. 

TinselKoala

Quote from: MarkE on July 30, 2014, 06:07:52 PM
There waveform looks like they had issues with grounding.  They did not offer any schematic of their measurement set-up.  So, determining exactly what was going on is basically impossible.  The reason that I think the bursts 400ns apart are two sides of one pulse is because the leading edge of the second burst is the opposite polarity of the first.  Their DC waveform is at about 7.4 Volts which makes no sense for a 12V supply.

Your exponential pulse is the sort of thing one would expect from a flyback which sort of looks like what they wired.  They describe the operation as a flyback as well.  I see no justification for the SCR.  And the SCR gate should be pull-dwon to the cathode.
Agreed. The paper and the Figure 7 are illustrations of scope abuse. There is no data in the paper that justifies any power measurement except for the DC power level in the control.

QuoteThe waveforms of the input power of the electrolytic cell are obtained by the high speed oscilloscope and
found that it is the pulsating pulse of 200 nano second with frequency 100 MHz which is depicted in
Figure 7.
The input power required for the production of 0.58 mL/Sec with conventional DC source is 18 watts.
But the application of nano pulsed power supply power required is only 0.58 Watts.
It is even possible from this statement that they did their power math calculations on the exact screen data in Figure 7.  In other words, not only are they not depicting the pulse properly, they may not even be considering an entire cycle of the pulse train.
But the paper is so poorly written and lacks the detail that we here are accustomed to, even in a Joule Thief measurement! that one simply cannot tell for sure.

MarkE


Marshallin

Quote from: MarkE on July 31, 2014, 05:37:22 AM
More shrill, what joy!  You know, if you've been struggling to come up with a circuit, then instead of being shrill you could always just ask for help.  Note that the IGBT gate is properly referenced to the emitter.

Sorry mark this cant simulate current surge capability of SITh thyristor.
Right now only way i see is with array of IGBT in paraller

Anyway we all know that indian reaserch is not best. Thats why i post you Japanese one here.
Very similar one is "Water Electrolysis with Inductive Voltage Pulses ". I think this topic is worth investigating. I dont expect any overunity but it will be nice to have ability to produce more hydrogen with smaller electrolysis without producing lot of heat.