Stanley Meyers revisited

[PULSED)ReverseH/Ofuelcell]

Anyone who is entrusted and serious about replicating or helping us replicate the water fuel cell please go to "http://www.waterfuelcell.org/Resources.html" and join the forum! Also it mite help to look at my other post WATER FUEL CELL: HIGH VOLTAGE: WHOLE PROCESS it shows everything I?ve learnt so far. How to build all the chokes transformers and capacitors and stuff!

All help is wanted!

Thanks,

Pulsed,

[kentoot]

@chuck

Yes, it isn't so easy to build a variable inductor / transformer. But if the variable winding is indeed for HV pulse amplitude tuning, then I believe there is another solution. I believe you don't even need the variable winding if the input square wave duty cycle is adjustable, in Stanley's case it's fixed to 50%.

So I suppose you can try NOT putting the variable winding at all, just make the step-up transformer and the top fixed winding. The bottom variable winding is gone, so the on that side the WFC is connected directly to the transformer. Then you can adjust the HV pulse amplitude by varying the voltage and duty cycle of the input (primary) square wave.

On the winding location I think it doesn't matter all that much where you put the secondary windings on the toroid core. You can put it on top of the primary winding or put it on another area of the toroid.

On adjusting the duty cycle of the input wave, try not to saturate the transformer because it will cause excessive wasteful current consumption. So on adjusting the duty cycle, try with small ON values first (maybe 10% ON, 90% OFF) and increase the ON period bit by bit until your pulse can actually cause a voltage build-up on the WFC.

Also I believe in order to achieve the voltage build-up on the WFC, the WFC mechanical construction must follow closely Stan's configuration. If you decide to alter the electrode configuration or distance, then the transformer winding may also need to be changed. This is because a (pulse) transformer can only deliver so much energy before it saturates. If you increase the gap or area of the WFC electrodes, the transformer will have to be wounded some more turns so it will be able to store & deliver more power to the WFC. I believe the electronics and the WFC mechanical configuration is very much inter-related. we just can't design the WFC separately and expect the same electronics to work for all sort of WFC.

[passion1]

@chuck


On adjusting the duty cycle of the input wave, try not to saturate the transformer because it will cause excessive wasteful current consumption. So on adjusting the duty cycle, try with small ON values first (maybe 10% ON, 90% OFF) and increase the ON period bit by bit until your pulse can actually cause a voltage build-up on the WFC.

Kentoot

Thank you for the advice. When you say "adjusting the duty cycle, try with small ON values first", do you mean the duty cycle of each individual pulse must be 10% (instead of 50% as per Meyers patent) or are you referring to the gate duty cycle, i.e. to switch a train of pulses on for 10% of the time and off for 90% of the time?

[keithturtle]

I would think the latter, with no pulses at all for 90% of the duty cycle.   I'm working with that chapps controller, but my scope cain't figger out the two different sets of pulses.

Or mebbe it's me...

Back to the pond,
Turtle

[kentoot]

It's the duty cycle of individual pulse. The reason that 50% may not be valid is because we might not have the same exact electronics and WFC setup as Stan did. It might be fine for him, but it's a different story for us, since we change this and that to our own taste.

For example, if we use different kind of toroid core & different no. of turns, that means the saturation point will also be different. That's why we should try with a small ON duty cycle first, and slowly raise the ON period bit by bit until we can see a gradual voltage build-up on the WFC electrode.

What if we don't see that voltage build-up even at 99% ON duty cycle? well, please don't forget to put the diode in series with the transformer (this is an absolute must for charge build-up), if that's in place then my guess would be that the transformer doesn't have enough power to deliver the necessary HV pulse 'punch' to the WFC or there's something wrong with the WFC.

Maybe the WFC 'leaking' too much charge, in that case try to isolate the water between the electrodes as much as possible. If the charge in the water can 'move' to a lower potential point, then we have ourselves a leakage. The charge (and the water) should remain between the electrodes.

If the transformer is not good enough, maybe we should increase the turns (while the ratio remains intact), or increase the ratio, or maybe switch to a toroid with a bigger core dimension to allow more energy storage in the transformer. Who knows, it might just work. Or you could try to put the WFC electrodes slightly closer together. Well, anyway, this is all easy for me to say , it's a lot tougher when you actually do it.

For the gated pulse train, I believe it's for the water to 'rest' or 'recover' (whatever that means) once the pulses successfully dissociate the water. So the pulses should stop once the water dissociate, let the water 'rest' (i'm not comfortable with this term ) for a while before the voltage build-up process starts again with a new pulse train. So again the number of pulses needed for water dissociation maybe different from 1 configuration to another, I believe it's not a fixed no. of pulses. But let's not concentrate on this, concentrate first on getting the charge build-up successfully, first things first.