Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed

[tao]

The capacitance of the cells are a problem in terms of giving it a value. This is not only just because everyones cells will offer a different surface area to everyone elses, but also that the state of the dielectric layer will be different. I.e. how 'conditioned' the electrodes are in terms of the dielectric layer thickness.

Purely out of interest, I recently did a rough calculation of the capacitance of Bob Boyces 100 cell (6" x 6"), assuming 10 microns of dielectric and came up with a figure of 258nF.

The thing about the water is, that although it conducts (it is a non-linear resistor), it is far less an efficient conductor than metal. In water, large ions are travelling through the electrolyte, carrying their charges from one side to the other.  You can actually see the disturbance in the water that this causes. On the other hand, electrons are tiny (you can't see the metal moving) and effectively only have to travel between one atom and the next. A bit like a line of ballbearings in a tube, if you fill the tube and then push an extra one in one end, another will immediately pop out the other end. Hence electron flow is near instantaneous, where as ion current through an electrolyte is very slow.

This leads me to think that even 'unconditioned' electrodes will show some capacitance, as the ions are physically so much slower than the electrons that they will not be able to keep up with the charge exchange in order to balance the circuit when faced with a near instantaneous squarewave pulse. Electrons then will tend to pile up on the cathode with every pulse, while the same can be said about the +ve 'holes' on the anode.

Initially I thought that the size of the gap between the metal electrodes might become irrelevant if the dielectric was the oxide layer, but on thinking about this further, the closer the two metal electrodes the more intense the electrostatic field across the water before the oxide layer breaks down. 

All good stuff!

Considering the ions and their role here... It would make sense to want to restrict their movements by not allowing them to journey from one electrode to the next. So, like you said, 'a near instantaneous pulse' should be used.

I would also like to bring to your attention a find I had, which might actually be true and play a key part or not. It involves pulsing the 'tube' electrodes of the WFC at their approximate or actual ACOUSTIC resonant frequency. I made this find by chance, but who really knows if it is merely a coincidence.

IF this process is involved, it could be somehow holding the ions from successfully moving from one cylindrical electrode to the other, or at least deterring them from doing so.

Anyway, just thought I would bring it up.

Here is my prior post about this:

Ravi,

Do you know the approximate frequency at which you are applying the square wave pulses to your WFC?



The reason why is related to some research I did with a well known 'water as a fuel' research group.....


Here was the crux of my interesting finding:

The findings are based on this youtube video from Dave Lawton: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miwbvsya3Ek , WATCH IT!


[4/1/2007 3:40:25 PM] Tao says:
Just doing a simple calculation a tube in plain fresh water, the equation from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_resonance shows f=(n*v)/(2*L) where n corresponds to the harmonic, v is the speed of sound in the water, and L is the length of the tube....

So, lets simplify this equation, n can be always 1, v is 1435 m/s in fresh water according to Wikipedia.

So, f = (1*1435)/(2*L) = 717.5 / L = f , Just for fun, lets take the frequency Dave was producing Hydroxy at in his latest video on Youtube: 3425.781Hz

So, 3425.781 = 717.5 / L , L = 717.5 / 3425.781 = 0.21 meters , So that would be 8.27 inches long.... So, how long in inches are Dave's tubes? Just curious........


[4/2/2007 11:26:20 PM] Tao says:
So, I asked how long Dave's tubes were, well, I looked up how long they were from an old post Dave did on the original forum back in 2004...


[4/2/2007 11:26:44 PM] Tao says:
Dave said that his tubes were about 12.5-13cm (which is about 5 inches long)


[4/2/2007 11:27:39 PM] Tao says:
so, calculating that into the equation: 717.5 / L = f , we have 717.5 / 0.1275 = f , so f = about 5650Hz


[4/2/2007 11:28:21 PM] Tao says:
So, based on what it says at the END of that video on youtube, it says that the hydroxy was being produced at 3425.78Hz


[4/2/2007 11:29:00 PM] Tao says:
BUT, they acoustic frequency came out to be 5650Hz, so I said, 'oh, too bad' seems there isn't much of a connection, I guess I need to
do more research'


[4/2/2007 11:29:10 PM] Tao says:
UNTIL, I just watched that video again..........


[4/2/2007 11:29:50 PM] Tao says:
Look at what Dave was pulsing his DC at in the video: 5714Hz!!!!
At 1:11 in the video you can see what he was pulsing at.......


[4/2/2007 11:30:58 PM] Tao says:
Based on the equation for acoustic resonance, Dave was pulsing his tubes at the EXACT frequency at which those tubes will resonate ACOUSTICALLY in FRESH WATER...



So, my finding was basically this:

Dave found the BEST gas production at the VERY SAME frequency that just so happens to be where his tubes resonate ACOUSTICALLY IN WATER... HMMM...

Maybe it is nothing at all but a coincidence, but maybe there is just something to it........................
? Last Edit: August 26, 2007, 09:02:47 PM by tao ?

[Farrah Day]

Hi Tao

Yes, I've seen your post before and read it with interest. It does make you wonder if there is any correlation between pulses and acoustic resonance. However, if this is so, then how the tubes are mounted (fixed), would surely be of crucial importance and surely affect the theoretical frequency, as would the water medium.

I find a problem with so many ideas floating about, is that unless you specifically research one area, you can easily end up with a mish-mash of theories that obscure each other and culminate in nothing. Focusing on one direction at a time I think is good. Then, if and when that avenue is exhausted, turn your attention to others.

So, I'll be leaving you to your acoustic resonance for the time being, Tao.  Will be very interested to know how your research in this area progresses.

I'm not seeing the ions in tap water to be a real problem at the moment, as with fast rise voltage pulses they simply shouldn't be able to move fast enough to do much work.  My analogy: I think of them as soldiers arriving late for the battle. Electrons will be amassing at the cathode before the ions have had time to register it!

Hence, I would expect there to be a bottle-neck of electrons on the cathode, even without any substantial dielectric oxide layer.  The question then is, can this bottle-neck build to such a potential that water molecules themselves are encouraged to ionise?

This is where I feel a little unsteady at present. However, I have a theory:

I know that water molecules are continuously ionising and then reverting back to water molecules, it is a continuous and continuously reversible process. I also know that water tends to convert back to molecules faster than it ionises, hence there will always be more water molecules than ions (note that, I'm talking about water itself and it's ions, not the ions of impurities within the water).

What then if the high electrostatic field on the plates allows the water to ionise as usual, but then discourages it from reforming as water.  Think about it, a water molecule ionises, but before the reaction can reverse it is now influenced by the high electrostatic forces on the electrodes. Does it reform with another lowly charged ion or head for the 'bright light' of highly charged electrode 'city'. A bag of crisps or an 'all you can eat' gourmet meal at a top notch restaurant.

Apologies for my very unscientific analogies.

[tao]

Hi Tao

Yes, I've seen your post before and read it with interest. It does make you wonder if there is any correlation between pulses and acoustic resonance. However, if this is so, then how the tubes are mounted (fixed), would surely be of crucial importance and surely affect the theoretical frequency, as would the water medium.

I find a problem with so many ideas floating about, is that unless you specifically research one area, you can easily end up with a mish-mash of theories that obscure each other and culminate in nothing. Focusing on one direction at a time I think is good. Then, if and when that avenue is exhausted, turn your attention to others.

So, I'll be leaving you to your acoustic resonance for the time being, Tao.  Will be very interested to know how your research in this area progresses.

It was all merely a passing thought, as I know the process is more inline with what you outline below...

I'm not seeing the ions in tap water to be a real problem at the moment, as with fast rise voltage pulses they simply shouldn't be able to move fast enough to do much work.  My analogy: I think of them as soldiers arriving late for the battle. Electrons will be amassing at the cathode before the ions have had time to register it!

Hence, I would expect there to be a bottle-neck of electrons on the cathode, even without any substantial dielectric oxide layer.  The question then is, can this bottle-neck build to such a potential that water molecules themselves are encouraged to ionise?

Agreed.

This is where I feel a little unsteady at present. However, I have a theory:

I know that water molecules are continuously ionising and then reverting back to water molecules, it is a continuous and continuously reversible process. I also know that water tends to convert back to molecules faster than it ionises, hence there will always be more water molecules than ions (note that, I'm talking about water itself and it's ions, not the ions of impurities within the water).

What then if the high electrostatic field on the plates allows the water to ionise as usual, but then discourages it from reforming as water.  Think about it, a water molecule ionises, but before the reaction can reverse it is now influenced by the high electrostatic forces on the electrodes. Does it reform with another lowly charged ion or head for the 'bright light' of highly charged electrode 'city'. A bag of crisps or an 'all you can eat' gourmet meal at a top notch restaurant.

Apologies for my very unscientific analogies.

Interesting idea, I hadn't know about the continual ionization/reformation of the water. So the idea of catching the water at these key moments via our pulses could very well work. Need to think about it some more.

[twohawks]

@tao  Thank you (very much) for your post.  You know, I had read your positings on this somewhere else, but I didn't quite understand it all at the time (probably didn't have the full context as you placed here).  Now I get you, and I am very grateful for your following progress and thoughts here and posting your comments.  I find this very helpful, even if I feel FDay's feelings to be staying the course on certain considerations are very valid.

1 thought stands out in my mind with regard to your post... as I have run into a lot of info regarding votices while chasing this dragon, I have seen it suggested that possibly Meyers went with tubes due to the potential vorticular influence and how that may affect certain stresses and movement both in the mass of the medium and with the idividual molecules themselves.  Its a bit too complex for me to take on here, and I need to study way more, but based on what I loosely gather so far ...the considerations for acoustic resonance you describe would/could strongly relate in this regard.  There seem to be some folks out there really looking into this, but it seems that it is not very well studied as yet - but certainly very compelling.

-----------------------------------------------
  So just to mention for anyone here (even preppies like myself)... please do not hesitate to air your considerations to the conversation - we never know where it may serve to help any of us to be getting a better leg up on the situation as things unfold. 

  @FD:  Wouldn't it be fair to say that Tao's consideration doesn't fall outside the scope of your intended focus considering its still an aspect of cell resonance, and that's under consideration here (even if its a little adroit in some characteristics)?

------------------------------------------------
@FD  Considering the high frequency required for pulsing the cell plates/tubes in the current scenario, and with regard to the question of electrode spacing that previously I posed, 4 things come to mind:
Either...
1) the spacing of the plates would not matter because the ion movement caused by the shifting charging states cannot travel that far anyway, or
2) the spacing of the plates as close as possible might be important with regard to affecting a certain "water tension state" (more on this in a moment), or
3) the spacing may be important to affecting how potential (for) arcing might be imposed, or
4) the deal with how spacing is managed is to do with something else.


Per # 2 and possibly #3 as well..., the reason that comes to mind is that in watching various videos having to do with related experiments I have noticed commonn situations where either points placed extremely close together underwater, or a point placed right at the surface of water (usually just touching, but neither held 'above' nor 'in' the water) creates a great deal of 'response' (usually arcing / sparking).  This response-propensity has been related by some to the qualities of water when laying thinly upon a surface, or at a body of water's own surface, i.e, how the molecules tend to line up in formation in these circumstances and how that also effects the potential [charge] state.
   So it flashed in my mind Meyers' idea of maintaining water space at/as the thinnest possible sheet between two electrodes ...might be related to these observed phenomenon. 
   *I would be interested in comments on this.
-----------------------------------
Regarding:

water tends to convert back to molecules faster than it ionises, hence there will always be more water molecules than ions

    Is the following the more accurate statement? ...reformation of water constituents (ions and electrons) back into water molecules takes less energy than does ionizing water molecules.
    If so, then I question the last part "hence there will always be more water molecules than ions"... because I question... does "faster" necessarily mean "more"? 
And I think that may depend largely on the 'state' water is in... 
-------------------------------------
So then your next statement would make more sense to me...

What then if the high electrostatic field on the plates allows the water to ionise as usual, but then discourages it from reforming as water

...and the bright light and all that... really seems to be what is observed because a reaction does remain present, i.e., ions are displaced and, as gasses, they rise up.
---
Now this makes me think, so....  Are excess electrons liberated in the water during the ionization process, and what might that mean?  I am uncertain if I have seen this discussed(?). 
    I have to spend time to ponder that, but right off the top, if so then "in the moment of truth" wouldn't any excess electrons in the wash be (madly) rushing toward and amassing at the anode against the dielectric [chrominum oxide layer in the case of SS], creating a kind of "electrical vacumm" in the water... "choking" the water of its [excess] electrons so that, well I would think in an ideal(ly balanced) environment, there would only be ionized gasses left [with their 'attached' electrons only], O2's against and moving toward the cathode side, rising up as they move, and H2's against and moving toward the Anode side, also rising up.

I am just walking through it in my mind and wondering if I am envisioning this logically (or maybe even in the neighborhood of correctly - gods forbid!), and if it presents anything useful or not?   I would be interested in your thoughts and expounding on that description (taking it further).

-------------------------------
Cheers,
HTH

edited at 12:06pm pt

[Farrah Day]

Hi TH

There are no excess electrons in the water, liquid doesn't work like solids. Any electrons are either part of an atom or ion.

I think that if we build up too high a charge on closely spaced electrodes, or space the electrodes too closely, that there may be a real danger of plasma arcing. This would be undesirable as this action would certainly deplete the charges on the plates and create a massive current surge through the circuit. Therefore, we would actually want the dielectric to breakdown well before the electrostatic charge became high enough to cause arcing between the electrodes. A happy medium needs to be found.

I was not surmising about the water molecules reforming as water more readily than they ionise - the term 'faster' was probably misleading. However, this is a fact. Also a fact, is that water ionising is an endothermic reaction. As water molecules bump into each other, this can create the energy required to ionise, but that energy quickly dissipates and the ions reform as water. Ionising therefore requires additional outside energy to take place in any great numbers, as a result energy in the form of heat can be taken from the environment and hence the cell tends to run cold.  So TH, yes, ions reverting back to molecules takes less energy than ionisation.

My problem with the resonant frequency of the tubes, is that this frequency may be totally unrelated to the optimum frequency for the rest of the circuit.

Also, I now tend to think that Meyer's 'resonance' is a bit of a misnomer. His, so-called 'VIC' is actually a dc series resonant charging cct, like the ones used to drive Tesla coils. The circuit can't resonate because of the blocking diode, but it can double the supply voltage across our wfc. We certainly would not want to drive this circuit at it's resonant frequency as we would get the inductor reactance cancelling the capacitive reactance of our cell and the only thing left to restrain current flow through the cct, would be the resistance of the wire making up the coil.

No, the last thing we would want to do is find the resonant frequency of this circuit.  What would suit us much better would be to have quite a high frequency, as the inductor would then pose a very high reactance to the flow of electrons, while our water capacitor (in theory) would provide very little opposition. I say there, 'in theory' as in practice our water capacitor will not react like a normal capacitor at high frequency, because the ions in the water cannot react fast enough. Hence we still get out bottle-neck of charges on our electrodes.

My thoughts at present are along the lines of a highish pulse frequency in order to let the inductor work for us in inhibiting current flow through the cct, whilst still allowing a steady build up of charges on the electrodes.

One problem I am finding, is trying to relate our wfc as a capacitor to the functions of other capacitors. There seems to be no real, factual, information anywhere on this is, mainly expect because what we want our capacitor to do is not like anything you would normally want a capacitor to do.  We are in essence using a capacitor in a novel and not fully understood way.