and i thought i was just about the only person doing it on the planet
till i saw this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMYNiE-KOn4
which must have been inspired from watching these (joe xogen partly narrating)
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=iZmmXCUQoF8
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=A0T7Oph_RYg&NR=1
i was adding hho to my car for a while by thrusting the hho outlet hose down the throat of
the carburetor and got similar results (noticable vapour increase)
did not use bubbler
flashback arrestor i made from fishtank airstone which works very well
im guessing hho production is doubled at least maybe even more
H2o man, dont you have some data on how much more hho is produced by measuring
amount of water used?
heyah,
and how you measured an increase in how much is your cell producing?by bigger bubbles it was producing?
I thought Zero concluded there was no increase in production, just bigger bubbles. Think about it, there is about 14.7 psi atmospheric pressure at sea level, so reducing that number to 0 psi would mean larger bubbles. Kinda like taking a balloon diving, only backwards. There's the same amount of air, just less volume. You would really have to have a lot of vacuum to break the atmospheric pressure and get into true "vacuum", more than an engine draws anyway. Anyone tried a pump? I wonder if you could just route the hho ouput into a cheap 12V compressors intake. They have a teflon piston so no worries about sparks...hmmm
:) so i see more people agree on that.My first thought was also bigger bubbles volume,that's why i asked.
Why would u like to pressurize this HHO?I think it is a good idea with this teflon stuff in the compressor.
I don't want to pressurize the hho, rather place a strong vacuum on the reactor. It appears other production units are using pumps. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u03hPyGaMFU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u03hPyGaMFU) (https://overunityarchives.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gethydropower.com%2Fphotos%2Fsilverback001.jpg&hash=3e472895ddf056208f1f4e3b9041c50774f6ccce)
nice pic ! people likes plexiglass in their cells ;D wonder how good it works... anyhow i have a problem with my unit,i think one of the problems are bubbles themselves.As i see it ,the bigger the bubbles in volume the more surface they occupy when stuck to the electrode.And a bubble has to go up.When using vertical plates as on this pic u showed,the bubbles will have to slide on the surface of the electrodes.Comparing to the bubble under normal pressure,u have here less gas per volume of a bubble,so less gas will rub you a bigger electrode surface.Now multiply it by amount of bubbles u have... I feel that Amps will go lower and so the production of the HHO.Right now i am making a cell with ball electrodes,just to have the bubbles removed faster and to have even concentration of charge on the surface of the electrode.
Yeah I saw some steel ball bearings on ebay and had a similar thought. There's an awful lot of surface area on a sphere... I wondered about charging them (using as neutrals) how the polarity would work out. Seems to work pretty good for the earth and it's magnetic field, might work out good for us too. It might be cool to do some tests with spacing. Electricity takes the path of least resistance, but is the least resistance through the core of the ball or on the surface? http://stores.ebay.com/ToolSupply/304-Stainless-Steel-Bearing-Balls.html (http://stores.ebay.com/ToolSupply/304-Stainless-Steel-Bearing-Balls.html)
i wanted to use balls because they have curved surface so the bubble will deatach faster from the top hemisphere,but now as i come to thinking it will have a problem with the bubbles on the bottom hemisphere(bubbles will still slide on the surface).So maybe half balls will be the best.I like the sphere because it has even distributed charge on it,so every part of the surface works the same load and i can exactly controll the currents and energy in the cell.If u could deliver the charge from the center of the ball it would have the same resistance to every point on the surface.So working with a half balls will be the best i think.u can connect the current at the kern and all the bubbles will go away faster.So the electrodes cluster would look like the eggs in the carton egg holder.Eggs will be the electrodes.
About the bearing balls,those ARE HARD steel.No way we could drill them,cutting into half may be easier.
<mod>
ok i just saw ur link now,they have also soft steel balls,but it is in US,i am in Europe so i will have to find somone here around.
I am too, Germany myself. I can get them shipped here though through the U.S. postal system.
heres my 2 cents, if under vacuum wouldnt that draw the bubbles to the surface quicker and possibly make them pop at the surface faster? therefore creating more usable electrode area? since most poeple have tiny bubbles that cloud up the water and kind of hang around in pergatory too long
Quote from: vdubdipr on April 16, 2008, 10:32:28 PM
heres my 2 cents, if under vacuum wouldnt that draw the bubbles to the surface quicker and possibly make them pop at the surface faster? therefore creating more usable electrode area? since most poeple have tiny bubbles that cloud up the water and kind of hang around in pergatory too long
You are so right,,,, The bubbles are bigger but the gas is stripped from the SS faster and faster so it gives more room for more bubbles to form and so on,,,, I have found a big increase in gas and less amps because it is easier for the eletrons to do thier job,,,,,, On the ball idea,,, 'postive energy' goes always on the surface of any given metel where as 'negitive' energy will go into the middle of metal or wire,,, read up on Tesla and Victor Schauberger ,,,,cool post as always best wishes RZ
@vdubdipr
It could be true what u say.That the bubbles are not clustering to form bigger ones is surface tension force of water ,i think.By heating up water surface tension goes low VERY fast(adding detergents will create some reactions in electrolite so is possibly bad idea to lower the tension by using them).
@rockinricki
As we stay here with simple electrolysis,the more amps u have the more mass of HHO is being produced.So having high Amps says u have more mass produced.Having bigger bubbles says not that u produce more gas.There are two things to keep in mind
1)how lower pressure affects the water vapourisation(how much of your gas is water vapour?)
2)how lower pressure affects the minimal volts needed to do the job.
The second question is more or less like this:
One electron has to join ion H+ to create a stable atom,so electrons are being transferred to the gas we produce.So the more electrons u pump into the water the more gas u can make(more electrons per sec is more Amps).We need some minimal Voltage to split water,but maybe with lower pressure bond is being stretched and easier to brake?
I want to use these spheres so i can measure if the voltage can drop.Voltage on the sphere is so easy to control,because charge is spread even across its surface.
I guess the only good measurement of how much (more) gas u r producing under vacuum is to compare the amount of water that is being split.Of course u will have to condensate all the water vapour(let the gases to cool down by placing some ice and salt mixture around the output tube).Measure the water amount before and after some time of the electrolysis.
a)electrolyte volume factor:
I guess that with bigger bubbles we loose more volume of conducting water between the electrodes.So less volume is transporting the ions and less amps can be used,resulting in lower gas production.(bigger resistance of the electrolyte).Can u visualise it?
b)electrode effective surface factor:
As counter acting effect could be that bigger bubbles go faster away leaving the more effective electrodes surface to contact with water(lower resistance of the electrodes).Then more electrons can reach electrolyte resulting in more gas production.
c)electrolite disturbing factor:
As u put more volume through the water it is mixing it very well,maybe ions have to deal with the turbulence of water they travel in (like a ship in a storm)?Also going around the bubble is easier if it is smaller (total trip of ion will be shorter with smaller bubble)?
As u see i have here a lot of factors in my mind ???
I guess the only way to say what is better is to try to test the power suppied levels and amount of slitted water.
One thing is sure:we want the bubbles to go away out of electrode surface as fast as possible and to leave the electrolyte (between the electrodes) as fast as possible also.
hi guys
i am a hho fanatic undergoing rehabilitation
im allowing one day a week on this hoping itll taper off towards total disinterest
hho investigation has cost me money time running around getting parts days off work and failures
and success in testing
testing is root cause of my troubles
after 100's maybe 1000's hours of study using wire tubes plates
bench tests as well as motor tests............
vacuum electrolysis is the key
you must have looked at the vid links i posted
dont you see anything?
seems to me that engine vacuum SUCKS hydrogen AWAY from the plates (or whatever)
you dont need a blower or irrigator to move the bubbles
this is worth your consideration......
long and narrow plates say,1"x 6" naybe 7 plates
eigth of an inch below waterlevel
vacuum's gonna suck evrybit of hydrogen outta there
not so with tall electrodes
big bubbles? i thought oxygen was big bubbles (which should be minimized)
the fine small stuff that comes from neg plates is what were interested in
downside to this is water-electrolyte consumption is a hell of a lot
upside is 2x3x4x increase in hho
resolution didnt last long
take a look
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tH13Vfv-Lc
:o what if you applied pressure? The boiling point would rise and let you send through more powa if your materials can handle it
under pressure the bubbles dont rise as fast reducing surface area of electrodes, and then the whole operation becomes alot less safe... the only time youd want pressure in the water fuel cell is if you wanted to run a lil motor on hho alone, as far as ive tested and concluded
Even though it looks impressive, electrolysis of water under a vacuum is more like opening a can of soda. Your creating more water vapor than hydroxyl. It looks like the bubbles are being sucked off to create more gases but in fact you are seeing the creation of water vapor. Water turns to vapor at 0 atm.
As far as using balls as electrodes, Google "The Patterson Power Cell".
Have a great day!
Quote from: HeairBear on April 26, 2008, 07:32:29 AM
Even though it looks impressive, electrolysis of water under a vacuum is more like opening a can of soda. Your creating more water vapor than hydroxyl. It looks like the bubbles are being sucked off to create more gases but in fact you are seeing the creation of water vapor. Water turns to vapor at 0 atm.
As far as using balls as electrodes, Google "The Patterson Power Cell".
Have a great day!
Aha, now that makes sense! It doesn't explain the 50% drop in current though - unless of course there is only half the hydrogen produced under vaccuum... The earlier aussie vid. showed 'gas' been given off without any voltage applied to the cell at one point. Although the guys there seemed to believe it was hydrogen, it's much more likely just water vapour. Question: would you experience an increase in mileage with such a simple setup - no electrolysis, just using the engines vaccuum???
Most cars today would not benefit from adding water vapor. Gasoline already has a good amount of water in it and ethanol even more. Ever driven a car that runs better when it's really humid or raining?
Quote from: HeairBear on April 26, 2008, 11:03:52 PM
Most cars today would not benefit from adding water vapor. Gasoline already has a good amount of water in it and ethanol even more. Ever driven a car that runs better when it's really humid or raining?
Good point :) However, the Aussie vid. shows the car actually starting and continue running as the commentary states that the electrolysis voltage has been disconnected. This doesn't make sense...
The "Joe Cell" is different from regular electrolysis. The claims state "Orgone Energy" is produced and not so much hydroxyl. I have heard many claims of vehicles running on Orgone but to this day I haven't seen one that can run for longer than 5 minutes at idle in park. Come to think of it, electrolysis is the same way. coincidence? For more information about Orgone Energy, research Wilhelm Reich.
- except it's not a Joe-cell! I'm familiar with joe-cells and this doesn't share any of their characteristics. First, it's using caustic soda as an electrolyte and the commentary makes clear that the engine is running off the visible gas produced. Also, the gas is piped into the air inlet, whereas the joe-cell doesn't require anything other than a dead-end bolt connection. Finally the commentary on the cell make-up implies (to me anyway) that this is an 'ordinary' electrolysis cell.
What intrigues me about all this is that the math (apparently) makes it clear that there is no way you could run an engine on this amount of hydrogen - but apparently it does, so is someone telling us porkies? Maybe this flavour of cell is also producing 'orgone' as well, or 'mainly', even! The problem with this stuff is that practically no one can reliably produce it...
well the thing with hydrogen is that u can run it very very lean(combustable process but with very little power).I can imagine an engine idling on hho,but exact calculations how much hho would be needed will have to be done.I will try one of this days.