Hi,
After watching a video of Dr stiffler who use his SEC with electrodes into water to burn it, i'm asking myself if it can be a heating system.
Here is the video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aanRgpfv144&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aanRgpfv144&feature=related)
Of course only the flame don't produce a lot of heat but maybe with a metal plate on his top or something like this able to dispatch the heat into a room.
It don't use a lot of power to do this, so maybe it can be a good and cheap way.
But i don't have any SEC now, the tuning of his device seems hard to replicate. Maybe with another simple device we can produce the same effect.(joule thief and his pulsed dc/ac ?)
Any suggestion/help ?
Here is the video N°1 of his experiment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsX-j53_FDg&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsX-j53_FDg&feature=related)
He show that he need only 22.8V an less that 10ma (~0,03watt ?).
With the flame we can run a stirling motor(no?) and make the device self running in the same time it warm up a piece metal.
Isn't it interesting ?
Very nice, and such a low consumption, the battery might last longer than anyone cares to personally wait for to die?
As the bubbles don't "bang" when lit (in Dutch, HHO is know as the direct translation of bang gas), perhaps the flame may not be producing crazy heat like HHO flames are often demonstrated to do? Would be great to learn more about that flame. But already, I'd love to be able to buy such a setup, as an alternative to a candle. Candles are for sissies.
Hi Kamax, yes, sounds like a good idea, use flame to run sterling motor which turns a small generator to produce electricity. Give it a shot.
Mark
hi kamax.
you could just go directly to electricity. like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_GqE5aDR68
remove the led and loop it back to the input of the SEC. ;)
i am currently experimenting with something along these lines with a 15-3.
edit:
there is the JTEC also. the user lumen? has mentioned it a couple times IIRC.
http://www.johnsonems.com/?q=node/2
I must first build a SEC, i will try do do this. If someone with a already build SEC can confirm me that it works with a SEC 15-3 or must be another version (18-?), this can save me some time.
For the bubble who don't "bang", i think it's because his special piece of aluminium filled with fiber glass. I'm not a specialist but maybe the gas is mixed with air into this with a special ratio which give the flame instead of a bang.
@wilby:
Nice alternative but that's not what i'm looking for. I prefer use water instead of candles.
Quote from: kamax on October 18, 2009, 01:10:14 AM
I must first build a SEC, i will try do do this. If someone with a already build SEC can confirm me that it works with a SEC 15-3 or must be another version (18-?), this can save me some time.
For the bubble who don't "bang", i think it's because his special piece of aluminium filled with fiber glass. I'm not a specialist but maybe the gas is mixed with air into this with a special ratio which give the flame instead of a bang.
@wilby:
Nice alternative but that's not what i'm looking for. I prefer use water instead of candles.
yes, i understand that. what i am saying is, substitute the flame produced by the SEC for the candle and use the electricity to run the SEC instead of the led. as i confirmed in my last post, it works with a 15-3 (modified a bit) for me. i haven't tried it with my 18-1's as they are currently occupied doing something else.
Oh very good news that it works with a SEC 15-3 :)
Can you confirm the low power consumption of the device to produce bubbles ?
I don't have thermoelectric stuff under my hands now but thanks for your help. It can be a simple self running device with this, yes.
Quote from: kamax on October 18, 2009, 03:58:05 AM
Oh very good news that it works with a SEC 15-3 :)
Can you confirm the low power consumption of the device to produce bubbles ?
I don't have thermoelectric stuff under my hands now but thanks for your help. It can be a simple self running device with this, yes.
yes i can confirm. 12V @ .075-.080A is my input.
yes. ;D
Is there a way to build your own Peltier thermos?
Link to Stifler's paper using SEC to perform electrolysis. Per the paper, efficiency is 96+-2%. Unless there is more recent info I'm not aware of, this will not yield a self running device which requires efficiency >100%.
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/documents/16970890/download
Quote from: spoondini on October 18, 2009, 11:49:09 AM
Link to Stifler's paper using SEC to perform electrolysis. Per the paper, efficiency is 96+-2%. Unless there is more recent info I'm not aware of, this will not yield a self running device which requires efficiency >100%.
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/documents/16970890/download
there's lots of info you aren't aware of. build one and find out. read all of the docs work. watch, listen and comprehend all his videos and connect the dots. or don't and be satisfied with your incorrect assumptions...
regardless of which you choose, please don't post incorrect assumptions like this one "Unless there is more recent info I'm not aware of, this will not yield a self running device which requires efficiency >100%."
More recent information that I'm not aware of........?
Quote from: spoondini on October 18, 2009, 04:56:02 PM
More recent information that I'm not aware of........?
well, it's not recent as in yesterday, but yes, there is more information that you are not aware of... obviously.
Then please share, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Quote from: spoondini on October 19, 2009, 04:59:27 PM
Then please share, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
i did share, and no, extraordinary claims DO NOT require extraordinary proof. you are positing a hopelessly flawed argument.
case in point, big bang theory. summed up as, 'at first, there was nothing...then it exploded.' big bang theory 'defies gravity' and violates innumerable laws of physics, it remains a HYPOTHETICAL mathematical model, yet it is promoted as truth by NASA and institutions of higher learning around the world. and that's only one example among many. your most sacred 'truths' of popular science are in reality EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS which have never required EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE.
You're ducking the question. You made a statement that using an SEC to create HHO/burn water a self running device is possible. You would be the first on this board/in the world to achieve such a self running device. Per Stifler's own research, he does not claim OU - just high efficiency. If you have evidence of COP>1, please provide. Otherwise you are just encouraging someone to waste their time on an unachievable objective. Time better spent pursuing other avenues which show promise.
As for the big bang, it's an extraordinary claim with many unknowns, but the theory itself was developed to explain observable phenomenon, not the other way around.
1) Homogeneity of space at large scale
2) Redshifting
3) Observable expansion of space moving outwards uniformly
4) Background microwave radiation
5) Age of stars
And many other observable phenomena backed with hard data, performed by repeatable experiments.
Please don't comment about things you obviously know nothing about.
Quote from: spoondini on October 20, 2009, 08:58:12 AM
You're ducking the question. You made a statement that using an SEC to create HHO/burn water a self running device is possible. You would be the first on this board/in the world to achieve such a self running device. Per Stifler's own research, he does not claim OU - just high efficiency. If you have evidence of COP>1, please provide. Otherwise you are just encouraging someone to waste their time on an unachievable objective. Time better spent pursuing other avenues which show promise.
As for the big bang, it's an extraordinary claim with many unknowns, but the theory itself was developed to explain observable phenomenon, not the other way around.
1) Homogeneity of space at large scale
2) Redshifting
3) Observable expansion of space moving outwards uniformly
4) Background microwave radiation
5) Age of stars
And many other observable phenomena backed with hard data, performed by repeatable experiments.
Please don't comment about things you obviously know nothing about.
i have ducked no questions. point in fact, i have responded to each of your posts, point by point, even your hopelessly flawed arguments...
it is possible. if you did your OWN due diligence and could listen and comprehend, you would know that. i have no obligation to provide you with anything. did you want me to build it for you and present it to you on a silver platter for your birthday? is that what you meant by share? quit waiting for someone to stick a silver spoon in your mouth, get off your lazy ass and build a SEC.
the big bang THEORY is an extraordinary claim with no extraordinary evidence. so is the THEORY of relativity. i will say no more about your off topic, hopelessly flawed statement.
you have no idea what i know or know not about. to suggest you do is asinine and is nothing more than another of your logical fallacies.
Well, for the moment if the device can be self running or not is not my first goal. I just want to produce HHO(?) with very low watts. With the flame i can try to produce some heat and maybe some electricity from the light of the flame that can run my little solar panel.
I have build a crap SEC 15-3 with what i have under my hands and even it don't work very well for the moment, it's a very interesting device. I have to wait some day to receive the correct part to build a good one.
I'm open to every people who want to help or give some info on what can work or not but don't begin a sort of fight when exposing different point of view.
The only way to know if it works is to try the complete setup i want to test.
Quote from: kamax on October 20, 2009, 03:14:42 PM
Well, for the moment if the device can be self running or not is not my first goal. I just want to produce HHO(?) with very low watts. With the flame i can try to produce some heat and maybe some electricity from the light of the flame that can run my little solar panel.
I have build a crap SEC 15-3 with what i have under my hands and even it don't work very well for the moment, it's a very interesting device. I have to wait some day to receive the correct part to build a good one.
I'm open to every people who want to help or give some info on what can work or not but don't begin a sort of fight when exposing different point of view.
The only way to know if it works is to try the complete setup i want to test.
:) you got one assembled, that was fast. i'm just too used to people like spoondini ignorantly talking and never building. when you get your SEC 'cohereing' in wireless mode, send me a private message.
Well, i suppose my SEC 15-3 is good now. With 1,7V input(solar panel), i have 64V DC or 104 AC.
It's very sensitive to my body/hands/wires. Only the transistor is not a MPSA06, i have a KSP06 (it is the same?) but my best result are with a BC548B.
Next step is to test this with water when i have some inox electrodes.