Overunity.com Archives

The generator:  Home-built Muller style brushless disc, 16" rotor, 2" x 1" neo magnets, #6 AWG magnet wire, S-260 soft iron shot amorphous cores, 3" long coils, 200 volt/35 amp FBR's, 10,000 uF/80 volt caps, #6 wire.  Supply is 24 rectified volts to 8 battery bank & two 5000 watt inverters.

The electrolysis reactor: Model 16 (16 quart) HEALTH pressure canner/cooker, 300 sq. in. of aluma-ti alloy anode/cathode coil, 24 vdc, plain tap water (no electrolytes other than normal alkalinity), plastic lined so neither current nor water contacts the vessel.

The motor:  Model "N" Briggs & Stratton small engine, 12 volt electronic timing via opto-coupler, car coil, and one-shot 555 with counter, home-made carburetor w/ flashback bubbler.

Progress at this posting:  Chemical engineer being consulted with regard to additive to water which would imitate a hydrocarbon without the pollution.  2H2/O2 mixture produces a detonation rather than a flame front combustion and thus produces more noise than power.  Motor has briefly (very briefly) run on it's own using the 2H2/O2 mixture.  Accumulated water in both intake and exhaust is ice cold.  Motor fan is being used to pump air back through the reactor to act as a turbo-charger (pressure) and I think this is diluting the mix to a non-detonative state.  Without it, there is not enough supply pressure to motor and it draws a vacuum with sucks out all the water in the carburetor flashback arrestor.

Objective is to get the motor to power the generator to electrolyze the water to make the fuel to power the motor, etc.

More will be posted as develops.

Tryto run it at 30:1 air: H2 + O2 mix !
You need less hydroxy gas foir a motor, so mix it with air
to get  a slower burning and less detonation !
Please keep us informed ! Many thanks !

Regards, Stefan.

Hi Ron

Cool project - good luck!

For what it is worth --- I spent much effort on using H2O2 in my engine with the same results --- Lots of bang - little else (not always in the engine either)
When I decided to seperate out the H2, My engine will at least run on it's own ( streached definition of run)

If you are interested in how I am accomplishing this at this point , let me know, I will post

Dave

Hi Dave,
sure post it. Please let us know, how you can run an engine
closed loop on theis energy.
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan
I will post at my earliest opportunity, but I must let everyone know, this is not open loop.
I have developed a battery management system plus trying to optimize H2 production, at the end of the day I am using grid power, the batteries will go dead, the trick is range - I am already challenging the limits of a DC motor with an IC
More later
Dave

OOPs!
I responded hastily and guess my fingers were not working with my brain -- my previous response should have read closed loop
Sorry
Dave

Here is a photo of the homemade carburetor setup. 

Latest progress report is:  The motor will run on the 2H2/O2 alone.

Problem:  I can't produce enough fuel to meet the motor demand.  Have to let pressure build up in reactor before starting.  Motor will run until pressure (fuel) is used up and will run very well.

The plain air adjustment setting you see in the second photo is the one which provides the correct hydroxy-to-air ratio.  (three 1/8" holes)

I forgot to also mention that the timing was changed to 15 degrees ATDC.  The exhaust sounds are not the sharp retorts you are used to hearing when gasoline is used as fuel.  The exhaust with 2H2/O2 is much softer and I fear the engine power will be much less also.  Haven't tried to run anything with it yet but it just sounds that way.

I'm still trying to figure out a way to make enough fuel.   :-\

Dave

I found this forum i was reading earlier, he says he managed to produce 2litres in 2 minutes, (enough to maybe run a v8 he says).
http://forums.cjb.net/hpnow-about2.html

There are also thoughts about incorporating this with high frequency electrolysis to increase production rates further.

Also on the watercar yahoo group there is something about using a bubbler (they could do with sorting the information out to create a single file with all the information needed as its a bit spread out and hard to find any useful info), and i think what they say is that by allowing to h2 /O2 to bubble through the water, it traps some moisture and so when the mixture ignites it also turns the moisture to steam helping to increase the pressure. They say it also helps cool the process down.

You say you have to let pressure build up in the reactor. How much 2H2/O2 is stored in this? And how long does the engine run for on this stored fuel?
Just to get a rough idea of the rate of production (litres/min ?) which needs to be attained.

Kane

There is no evidence that frequency can electrolyze any faster than direct current.  There's a lot of talk about it, and a lot of ideas, but I have found no verification anywahere that it performs better.

The reason the gas is bubbled through water is two fold.  One is to keep a flashback from going back into the reactor.  The other reason is to dry the gas.  After the reactor gets hot, there is a lot of moisture in with the hydroxy and running the bubbles through water condenses that moisture and it tends to stay in the bottle of water.

I am making hydroxy at a rate of about a liter a minute (a little less than a one liter pop bottle) with 300 sq in. of aluma-ti cathode/anode @ 24 vdc in plain tap water.  It is not enough to make this engine run.  This little engine requires 6.28 cu in. per stroke.  Multiply this times 1800 rpm and you get 11,304 cu. in. per minute that is sucked through the motor.  It'll empty the small amount of pressure in the vessel pretty quick.  Longest I've ever run it is about 5 seconds at one time but it runs very well when gets enough fuel.  Making enough hydrogen/oxygen to run even this tiny engine is going to be a challenge.  I can't imagine trying to supply a V-8.  There must be a secret I am not aware of.  Wish I was........I'm open to ideas, folks.  The setup is all here and all that needs to be done is make it function within the capability of the materials I have available for production.  Those facts are in the first post.

If you look at pic 8 in the forums website you cited, you will see the condition of the water.  My water does not look like this even after hours of running.  It stays clear with only a tiny amount of red material (rust?) in it at the bottom.  I attribute this to what is already in the tap water as my electrodes do not deteriorate in any way.  A 16 quart container such as I am using goes a LONG way.  Water level does not go down even after hours of fun.   :)

how do you think altering the compression might affect the running?

sorry im just guessing here  :P

this is something i would really love to see work.

another idea would be ... if you could build an ideal motor for h2/o2, what difference would there be between that and an ordinary gasoline/petrol engine?

as i have the tools and equipment here that would enable me to build a smaller "simplified" model to test different designs.

Now THERE is a good idea.  Build a motor to suit the fuel.    Maybe someone here has that know-how.  I don't.  My field of expertise centers around electricity.  I'm way beyond my knowledge-base with this motor/fuel thing and really in the dark as far as the chemistry of what I'm trying to accomplish.  What I do know is that one has to be on top of things with this hydrogen/oxygen mixture or IT WILL take command.......that is NOT a good thing.   :D  I've had the bejeebers scared out of me a few times......thought I was dead.  Fortunately, all it amounted to was a loud bang.  (whew)  I'm really careful of what is going on with this stuff.  There is no such thing as too much precaution.

I really hope there is a way to figure out how to make this work too.  I'm sure on your side with that idea.  Even if just to be able to say we have a motor that runs on water is a mouthful if it never did do a lick of work.   :)

Hi Ronald,
try to use KOH as the electrolyte inside your water and
try to use graphite plates and magnesium plates as the electrodes.
Put the positive pole at the graphite and the negative battery pole
at the magnesium pole. Than you will get added gas output, cause
this is the highest electrochemical difference between metals-materials,
which are still (easy,sometimes not so easy) to get.

Also another trick would be to use a coil around the electrodes and try then
to pulse that coil with DC pulses.
As the water builds then up an internal voltage difference, the water might be
easier to split.

Look at:
http://www.harti.com/waterled/
You might try an electrode inside the coil and the other outside the coil.
I did pulse it with 100 Hz graetz bridge rectified 12 Volts pulses and the
LED light up due to the difference voltage in water generated by the pulsing
magnetic field.

Also you could try to add an ultrasonic bubbler.
When I tried this, I had no very small bubbles anymore,
but only very big bubbles of hydroxy coming out in the electrolysis.

So there could still many things to be tried.
Also it might be better to put 3 x 4 electrodes in series,
so the voltage will be divided and every electrode stack
runs only on 3 to 4 Volts or less.

Regards, Stefan.

another thought .... rc glow engines

these are usually something like 1-5cc ? and can get hold of them for around ?10s

the larger ones produce around 1hp i think

and if you can run it on a 4% mix of h2/02 and air then production wouldnt need to be that high to run these small motors for test purposes.

the only problem i can forsee is trying to use a spark plug instead of the "glow plug" that they usually use.
Unless the temperature of the glow plug can ignite this h2/o2 mix?

ah well just a thought ...

Kane
Thanks for the link - interesting - but I can only get a 1300 cc 4Cyl to barely idle on 6 litre a minute (H2) I would like to know his secret if he can get a V8 to run on 2 litre/min ?? I still have a lot of optimizing to do but .........

Ron
I think Stefan's suggestion to stack electrodes or as I have done, separate cells, is where the answer is for producing enough gas. I have experimented with many series / parallel configurations. The results are predictible.? I am convinced the correct combination is mathmatically possible.? Power density is certainly another story.
I also found that about 15 degrees after TDC is about right. I also moved the cam timing back (valves open later) 1 tooth (probably 3 degrees). I am not decided as to whether this helped ??.? I have the plugs gapped a .010 inch, and am seriously thinking of trying glow plugs from a diesel. H + O mixtures really want to be water, so it takes very little energy to start the reaction ??
I am curious as to why you are avoiding using electrolyte.? It greatly increases output, and the concentration relative to the size of the electrodes controls the voltage drop across a cell. As I said, at that point the rest is math.

Dave

Quote from: h2o2go on April 10, 2005, 09:39:15 AM

I am curious as to why you are avoiding using electrolyte.? It greatly increases output,

It also increases the mess.  My main intent when I started this was to get a prime mover to run continuously on water which would power the generator and keep the batteries charged which I intend to plug most of the house into.  Previous experiments have shown that, while electrolytes increase the conductivity of the water, they also introduce other factors which would complicate a continuous duty cycle.  There would be an added residue factor, constant regulation of the concentration of electrolytes vs water, and the deterioration of the electrodes is increased.  These properties have no impact on a periodic operation or experimentation but when one considers the process running non-stop for days, weeks, and months.........it has to be eliminated as much as possible.  Therefore, I concluded that since our water has rather high alkalinity in and of itself, I elected to focus my attention on finding an alloy that would perform as well as possible with the ph factor in the straight tap water.  I found that using the alloy aluma-ti for both cathode and anode, I have absolutely zero deterioration of the electrodes and the water stays relatively free of gunk. 

I agree that adding KOH or NaHCO3 would increase the conductivity and also increase production.  I guess I was purposely trying to avoid having to do that because of the afore-mentioned reasons.  It might have to come to that though.

This is the shape and construction of the anode/cathode element.  The particular element you are looking at has seen at least 10 hours of use.  As you can see, there is zero rusting or corrosion.

http://www.eagle-research.com/browngas/myth/powerv.html

"Second, there is Hyper-Gas: which is mythical at this point because although we've had it happen spontainiously, we haven't been able to find a way to get it on demand. Hyper-Gas gives us thousands of liters of gas for only a few watts of electricity."

seems to me like we need to find out more about this hyper-gas.

although that website seems a tad dodgy  :P

Kane

Hi,

I don`t know if i can help to build H2O motor,but there can be some useful properties with my idea about nested cylindrical EM-fields theory.

The idea in my system is to collect / compress electrons evenly from environment with nested cylindrical electromagnetic fields.
If we have nested nested cylinders constructed so that every inner cylinder is slightly closer than next outer cylinder,this leads to system,where charge is compressed in between two innerst cylinder, when cylinders are connected to ac voltage.

That`s because when phase changes in cylinder, electon will move to next positive cylinder, in this case to next inner cylinder.
With this system we can produce charge and current between cylinders to produce hydrogen. It is only in question to collect and focus charge in the middle of the system,much like magnifying glass focuses energy from light.

In my system i use em-fields,but you can try to use metallic plate cylindrically formed nested structure,designed so that every inner cylinder is closer, than next outer cylinder.When every second cylinder is connected to different phase , electron will move to next inner positive cylinder,when phase changes, collecting an focusing charge to middle of the system to split H2O,

More information about nested magnetic cylinders and prime number resonance on my web-site:
http://www.kolumbus.fi/esa.maunu/

With best regards,

Esa Maunu

Thanks Ron
I get it - why no electrolyte.? We are on the same path but chasing a somewhat different end result. You want to replace Grid power which has pretty much been there maintenence free for 150 years.? My goal is to to replace fossil fuel in an automobile where I must compete with going to the filling station, removing the cap and filling up. (and paying whatever OPEC says I must) - some maintenance involved.

I find your electrode configuration interesting.
I am using a spiral neg electrode to gain maximum surface area in a minimum space.? It is stainless steel mesh.? the positive electrode is the S/S container - can't get more exposure than that!? I have about 2 1/2 inches between electrodes. The trick is to ionize as much water as possible.? That is where the electrolyte comes into play. I am using a Polyester sleeve over the Neg electrode.? This seems to work well for separating the H2 from the O2, as long as the process is driven hard enough to produce large bubbles.
But you are absolutely correct, Maintenance is what will make it a hard sell until the oil is all gone.

Question for all RE: the above discussion.
I am stuck on the idea that in the above configuration, the neg electrode (where +H ions collect) needs to be double the surface of the Pos electrode, where the -O ions collect, considering we are disassociating H ₂ O, for optimum exposure.? I can find no data, or even discussion to support this.? Does anyone have an opinion ?

THANX
Dave

As far as surface area to atom-count goes, the mass difference might also have something to do with it.  You can place many more smaller atoms on a surface than larger ones.  Although I have looked into electrolysis quite a bit, the drive seems to be to have as much surface area as possible, period.  On both the cathode and the anode.  I have never seen a discussion on cathode to anode ratio.

Question for anyone:
If you visit the Rexresearch site and the Garrett Caruretor of 1935, you'll see that he changes polarity peridically.
http://www.rexresearch.com/hyfuel/garrett/garrett.htm
Is this necessary?  Why?

Dave,
Without doing the tests, my gut says that the same size cathode and anode will produce the disassociation effectively.  I'm not an expert on electrolysis but as an electrician, you are only going to get equivilant conductivity on either electrode.  So twice the material surface would amount to half the current as the other one......hence half the production.  Make sense?  To me, it all evens out so you might as well go with the same sizes since I don't think you are going to get one electrode to carry twice the load as your other element through water.

id guess that changing the polarity would kind of act a bit like bubbling air through the system does.

ie it would release all the hydrogen/oxygen bubbles from their cathode/anode allowing more surface area for bubbles to form again.

maybe?

Ron

i know this isnt really electrolysis but

have you looked into bingo fuel? http://jlnlabs.imars.com/bingofuel/index.htm

1080litres/hour = 18 litres of gas a minute

should be enough to run the engine?

Ron
My take on why Garrett switched polarity was to reverse the transference (plating) that occurs on the electrodes.? I suspect that in 1935 there was not much available for material.? I have experimented with this and it does work.? I am not familiar with the material you are using but it sounds like you may have this problem licked ??? Where can I find out more about your material ?

THANX
Dave

Dave,

The alloy Aluma-ti is made by Inland Steel.  The particular item I used for the electrodes is a couple of Torctite heat clamps I purchased at my local Napa store.  (patent #4,312,526).  It has totally non-magnetic qualities so take a magnet with you to be sure you are looking at the right stuff.  I bought the 16" long, 3 inch wide ones)  That would probably be the easiest way to get a hold of some.  Look in the muffler / hot pipe clamps section of the store.

On another website it has been described a thus:  Aluma-Ti is a vacuum-degassed, interstitial-free steel containing columbium and titanium  As far as I can tell, the alloy is fairly new.  There is another form of it called Aluma-fuse which is for higher heat situations.

kane,

Yes I have messed around with the bingofuel.  I had such trouble keeping the arc going that I never did get to gather any data on current vs production.  Those carbon rods have a critical distance to maintain from each other in order to keep the arc.  To far apart, and it stops.  To close, and it just shorts out.  I suppose there is a way if one were to devise a computer controlled (amperage controlled) feed system but I have not gone there yet. 

If I can't figure out a way to increase my production of fuel, this project is going to go nowhere so I'm open to any options.  18 liters a minute............wonder how much power (current) that took? 

just some more info:

"A Must for Hydrogen

In order to do work on a piston, the fuel-air mixture needs to burn at a speed faster than the piston is moving. Low hydrogen flame speed is a disadvantage shared with most other gaseous fuels. For comparison, a gasoline-air mixture has a flame front speed that ranges typically from 70 up to 170 feet/second in IC engines, while an ideal hydrogen-air mixture has a flame front speed of about 8 feet/second. An average vehicle engine rotating at 2,000 rpm (33 revolutions per second) produces piston linear speed of 45 feet/second in the middle-stroke, which is already 5 times faster than the hydrogen flame front speed ! The fact that a hydrogen-air mixture has a flame front speed of about 1/10  that of a gasoline-air mixture, contributes to explain why hydrogen engines only run at reduced power and low rpm under load. However, the photo-detonation mode is extremely rapid and totally removes this limitation. This is why the detonation mode (not compatible with piston, but with the Quasiturbine) is critical for the future of the hydrogen engine."

http://www.quasiturbine.com/ETheoryDetonationEngine.htm

just trying to collect as much information as possible

An incarnation of Robert Kruppa's Firestorm plasma spark plug would be interesting to play with.....Fracturing H20 at or near a cylinder of correct volume and geometry would avoid the expense of high pressure storage, while maximizing torque at lower engine rpm's.

Peace,

TS

Ron
Thanks for the info on Alumi-Ti.? I looked it up and found a description calling it "Aluminized steel".? I can not tell from all the $2.00 words if there is aluminum in what you are using or not. Just FYI if there is Al in your electrodes and you decide to try some electrolyte (especially NaOH) you might want to read the results of my experiments on my Web Page titled Hydrogen from Aluminum.
http://home.comcast.net/~apdynamics/APD.htm
If there is Al present you will get an amazing amount of H2 for a short time, then you will need new electrodes.

Dave

Dave,

I have trouble viewing your website.  In 3 browsers (I.E., Netscape, and Opera) I get inactive buttons and the "main" page says UNDER CONSTRUCTION, KEEP CHECKING BACK or something like that.  I did manage to access the page on an individual basis using no frames.

Aluminum consumes a lot of energy when it is made so using it as a source of fuel makes no sense to me.  This is why I stayed away from that material.  It also makes a huge mess.  As far as I can determine from what I read, aluma-ti has titanium in it.  They call it aluminized but I am not sure that is actually referring to aluminum.  Maybe someone on this list with knowledge in alloys can answer that.  I can't.  I did try using baking soda once with the aluma-ti and it didn't seem to harm it any but that isn't an acid.  Baking soda leaves a white residue also.

Kane,

I am intrigued by that quasiturbine.  It looks like a complicated device that might require periodic maintenance but if it works, that's just part of the game, I suppose.  I wonder how much one would cost?  Didn't see anything on there about that.

Kane wrote: ""A Must for Hydrogen
In order to do work on a piston, the fuel-air mixture needs to burn at a speed faster than the piston is moving. Low hydrogen flame speed is a disadvantage shared with most other gaseous fuels. For comparison, a gasoline-air mixture has a flame front speed that ranges typically from 70 up to 170 feet/second in IC engines, while an ideal hydrogen-air mixture has a flame front speed of about 8 feet/second. An average vehicle engine rotating at 2,000 rpm (33 revolutions per second) produces piston linear speed of 45 feet/second in the middle-stroke, which is already 5 times faster than the hydrogen flame front speed ! The fact that a hydrogen-air mixture has a flame front speed of about 1/10? that of a gasoline-air mixture, contributes to explain why hydrogen engines only run at reduced power and low rpm under load. However, the photo-detonation mode is extremely rapid and totally removes this limitation. This is why the detonation mode (not compatible with piston, but with the Quasiturbine) is critical for the future of the hydrogen engine. http://www.quasiturbine.com/ETheoryDetonationEngine.htm"

Wow, thats EXACTLY the opposite of what I've read and experienced:
Hydrogen flame front propagation is around 8x faster than gasoline!
ref: ???? http://www.gotrice.com/users/shige/kataguruma/sc/too/67.html
"If the fuel is injected at the same place as for ram jet operation, the burn would take place after exiting the nozzle, so the solution has been to use hydrogen and in some programs air itself. The rate of burn with hydrogen is much faster than HC fuels, so the burn is contained and the result is thrust on nozzle exit."
..
???? http://nz323.allhell.com/petrol.html
" A 12:1 CR gasoline engine at 1500 rpm would have a flame speed of about 16.5 m/s, and a similar hydrogen engine yields 48.3 m/s, but such engine flame speeds are also very dependent on stoichiometry."
..
???? http://www.pillard.com/alt_fuels.html
" Hydrogen flames are invisible but propagate close to the gas burner orifice as the flame front velocity is about 10 times higher than for other fuel gas types."
..
???? Wiseman (Water Torch) says about 8x faster.
I believe that is closer, based on our (unsophisticated) testing.

Ron should retard his B&S test engine to at least 45deg ATDC (or more). It will run better.
The 'exhaust' won't exhaust anything when running hydroxy, it will suck!
That is because after a flash expansion, the mixture contracts to less than 1/1000 of original volume.
That sort of volume reduction causes his "ice cold" exhaust.

The plus side; at least he is trying something and gaining knowlege each time.
Pres

yes - thinking about it now, i dont know why i didnt realise that.

i guess this is a lesson - always do your homework  ::)

Pres
Interesting input.? What you are saying seems to be more in line with what I have experienced.? I find myself doing tuning "things" to slow down the flame front when fueling with H₂.?
I am not sure about "detonation" as opposed to flame propogation for combustion either. My back ground is automotive - sounds like yours is turbines.? Detonation in an ICE can be caused by many things but typically, a hot spot causes a second flame front which collides with the first. Most modern engines have minimized that by smoothing combustion chambers, etc.? I would bet even B&S has done some of that to get there engines to run on unleaded. The predominant cause of detonation in modern engines is combustion temperatures exceeding 2500 ^oF. At around that temp Nitrogen combusts.(air is 78% Nitrogen). This is an oversimplified explanation of NO_x Emissions challenge.? I guess, where I am going with all this: If they truely have a "Detonation" engine are they actually running on Nitrogen ???? The H2 would only be a means of getting these high temps quickly ??? This would explain their hardware challenges. Think about how violently N detonates.? I have pondered a Nitrogen engine for years.? I wonder if they are on the trail ???
Also, I am intriqued by your suggestion of firing at 45 degrees ADC.? The flame front would start after peak crank speed.? This seems to support a slower Flame propagation? ??? I can't help wondering how much power would be sacrificed for efficiency (that sounds funny when I say it)

Dave

So does that mean I also need to regear the valves?

Quote from: h2o2go on April 14, 2005, 09:43:07 AM

Also, I am intriqued by your suggestion of firing at 45 degrees ADC.  The flame front would start after peak crank speed.  This seems to support a slower Flame propagation  ??? I can't help wondering how much power would be sacrificed for efficiency (that sounds funny when I say it)

Dave

It makes sense to retard it that far if there is a 1000-1 collapse of volume.  If the exhaust valve doesn't open immediately after this collapse occurs, then the initial energy from the expansion would be dampened by the vacuum and you would be "sucking your piston" back.  This would tend to lose power also, yes?  I'm all about trying the 45 degree ATDC but I'd like to know first if I need to do anything with the valve timing too.  Maybe Pres can answer that for me.  He sounds like he's worked with Wiseman on the Eagle-Research website so I'm guessing he understand hydroxy a lot better than I do. 

Ron
I dunno ! I am still absorbing this whole 45 ^o ADC thing. As I indicated earlier, I run my engine at 15 ^o ADC with maybe 3 degrees later valve timing. ?The first thing that comes to my mind is: you do not want the intake open into the compression stroke, so configuring the engine to run at 45 ^o ADC would mean reconfiguring the cam to match that ?- not just gearing ???

hmmmm...........

Dave

Think about this for a moment......automobiles account for roughly 20% of pollutive emissions....and with the convoluted way they are going about it now.....they would be better off rapidly deploying the technology to stationary power plants and industrial concerns. ?And quit backdoor grandfathering these morally depraved cretins to the end of time.

I mean, come on.....If I didn't know better, ?I would say that these billions spent on 'hydrogen auto" research are a white wash. ?

I say keep the high pressure tanks and other clap-trap-crap at home and stuff the megacorp greed in a sack!

The fact that the greedy megacorp fat cats still manage to keep the focus on cars while being supported in utterly gut ripping the planet, says much about the apathetic state of our dying planet.

It has been said that: ?"The people end up getting the kind of government they deserve"......then by application of that same 'critical' logic, it may be inferred that we end up with the kind of planet we deserve.


If this is their idea of "phased integration" of the truly beneficial technologies that many now know exist.....then it surely reveals and highlights the warped ideals of the "greedy control freak culture" that runs the show.....safely ensconced largely behind that legally recognized, supremely destructive and anarchy engendering straw man, known as...

The Corporation. 

And as long as the gaping 'personal responsibility' loopholes, one of the chief reasons for which these 'hydraheaded' monstrosities were created, are allowed to continue unchecked....then 'Orwellianistic' hive culture will be the 'order' of the day.

As time wears thin, ?Such ones, with even a shread of remaining TRUE objectivity and decency......will see the reasoning behind just one of many Supreme Statements.....


"And I will bring to ruin, those ruining the earth"



Peace,

TS

Okay, TS you have a point in that the H2 push is a ruse.  Here is how this went down.

The 'green generation' as achieved not only voting age, but also lobbying age.  They are now leaving colleges with their masters degrees, ready to take on and change the world for the better.  Gas prices are...well we all know how well that's going. 

In any case these two(though not the only) factors have lead to pressure from the powers that be to do 'something'.  The petrol giants are sitting accross the table from the politicians saying, 'watch it, I hold the purse around here'.  So the politicians were in a bind.  The masses do the electing, but the corps do the funding....how to appease both...hmmm.

I know, says one of them...the people want alternative energy, right?  People are dumb...we will tell them that we're working on it.   Here's the solution to give them...Hydrogen. 
--At this point in the meeting the other oil execs are startled and pissed..."Hydrogen!!!??!?!!"
--Hold on, hold on...no sweat.  Where does most of the H2 come from?, he asks knowingly.
--I'll tell you where from...Natural gas refineries!  Everybody laughs maniacly, not believing what they are about to pull off(a change in technology without any change in the source--or profits--whatsoever!), downs their burbon and heads out to tell the masses how they plan to save them--all for a couple billion dollars in research grants that lead to technology that makes people feel like they're making a difference while they use the SAME--actually more--petro-resources. 

Brilliant!  Evil, but damn brilliant.

Let them develop the utilization technology...the real coup will come when someone figures out how to get H2 cheaply without natural gas.

You are right, Kysmett......"Brilliant" indeed, and quite a blinding 'black light' it is....

Buddum Bum.

(insert twilight zone theme here)


Peace,

TS

WOW !!
If only we could actually focus all that energy into actually developing a better way? :-[

Dave

Well, all politics aside...........back to why Ronald Classen is trying to do a water motor.  Because I want to make a closed loop energy system.  (generator providing current to disassociate water to fuel the motor to power the generator, etc)  Why?  I've lost track of the original motivation.  It used to be a challenge, now it's become an obsession.  Why?  Because of people who say it can't be done.  Maybe it can't...........but I'm not ready to throw in the towel yet.   ;)

Who knows?  Maybe something useful will come of it.  Maybe a water carburetor or whatever......who knows.  All I know is that I am open to suggestions and if Pres says 45 degrees ATDC is better, then I'll cut a timing wheel with the opto hole at 45 degrees and try it.  I was just concerned about the same thing Dave is.........we just CANT afford to have that intake valve opening at the wrong time.  It would get just too damn exciting.   :D  That's why I asked about the valves.

Quite right.? Sorry for the minor diversion there.? Man is a terrible judge of motivations, including his own, it seems.? Rightly discerning one's own motives is of paramount consideration.

I am currently searching for efficient methods of capitalization on water's specific physical states.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:EZJPMbxXqcUJ:www.swiftenterprises.net/pub/Overview.doc+noble+metal+crystal+splitting+h20&hl=en

There seems to be room, in my opinion, for discovery in the current methods used to produce H2O2....ice crystal structurization/deposition...etc.




Peace,

TS

Nice recovery.......... sounds like you guys might BE focused 8)
I have a sign on my desk that reads:
? ? ?
? ? ?Grant me the courage to change the things that I can
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?The strength to endure the things that I can't
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? And the wisdom to know the difference !

Some days I read it a lot .......

Dave

Judging by what I see around me, ?it appears that one true hope might rest with the idea of a 'communal consortium' of sorts. ?It's no secret that the world is rapidly dividing into such tight knit pockets of like minded individuals.....And, take it from one who knows, hanging it out there as an individual, though well worth the effort if needs be, has it's distinct and 'deflating' risks.

There might be an upside to those prepared to suffer one another in real life in the possible eventuality of the loss or degredation of this fine channel of communication.

Peace,

TS

Someone, somewhere, stated that the introduction into an engine of pure hydrogen and oxygen for combustion would eventually result in the metals becoming brittle.  Another invention, along this line is one I read about on another site where this problem was eliminated by mixing the h2 and o2 in with the incoming air intake and gasoline fuel mixture.  The results were reported to be much higher mileage.  Would this be a different path to consider here?  I mean, if the original fuel were still important, then why not step up the mileage with a conventional fuel, O2, H2 mix then work on changing the conventional fuel to something either unconventional or renewable (i.e.- alcohol, etc.).  Also, a bit of humidity in the system (with conventional fuel) will improve the engine performance.  Just a thought...

Ken

And the commensurate compression boost from 'molecular stiction' wouldn't hurt either.....Good points Ken!


TS

You must be referring to the Geet......75% water/25% gasoline.

I've considered introducing other substances such as maybe acetone or denatured alcohol but so far have not.  There is no intention of incorporating any petroleum product into this project.  If it should happen to run, we'll even figure out a different way to lube it.  While the recombination of H2 and O2 results in a different type of energy than gasoline by nature, the fact remains that it is by no means passive.  I'm certain it can be put to work if the proper conditions are met.  I don't know that a 4 cycle combustion engine designed for gasoline is the proper mechanical form to harness it but I'm sure there is one.

Maybe we should design a new engine first........then do what I'm doing.  LOL

I'll tell you this much..........until you've experienced a 2H2/O2 mixture of any quantity go through the recombination process, you simply cannot appreciate the awesome violence that water contains within.  It's pretty impressive.  (hint:  Keep your quanities very small if you plan to strike a match to it)   ;D

QuoteSomeone, somewhere, stated that the introduction into an engine of pure hydrogen and oxygen for combustion would eventually result in the metals becoming brittle.

this is just a small problem really, as i think the major part of it is trying to get the engine to run itself on h2/o2.

After that it would just be a small matter of producing engines out of material which wouldnt become brittle under the circumstances.

Kane

Ken
Your thoughts are probably going to be the end result of my efforts.? I posted a couple pages back about atomizing or vaporizing Biodiesel (or something) then introducing H2 at some strata in the charge to support combustion.
I am convinced that I have reduced the challenge of producing enough H2 to sustain combustion to mathmatics, but to date the numbers do not look good.? The current version of my system occupies all the space from the front seat area to the rear bumper of a little hatchback, and marginally sustains at idle.?
But, as Ron said, we first must know the limitations of a pure H2 (or H2+O2) system before we know how much fuel needs to be added.
I am still evaluating the value of water injection.? I know it improves performance in gasoline fueled engines under certain conditions and should behave as you describe, but to date, it seems the dryer the charge, the better, I keep building better and better bubblers? ???
I would appreciate hearing more of your thoughts on the subject.

Dave

How about a turbo charging system to boost the compression?  If compressing fuel/air mixes gives higher peformance, then why not here also?  Would a turbo charging system on a small engine make sense to possibly cut down on fuel use?  Or am I confused (again)?
;D

My suggested 45d atc was simply a generalization.

One way to think of a h2o2 ICE power stroke is more like
"if I smack the piston top with a hammer, what crankshaft
position will generate the most torque?"
(due to much higher burn speed of h2o2)

For example, consider a connecting rod length at 2x stroke,
90-arctan(1/2)=about 63d ATDC. That is also peak speed
of piston travel (or peak "crank speed"?).
Shorter connecting rod/stroke has peak speed occuring earlier.
(however, Ron's old B&S engine is probably closer to 2-1)

A very short time after the expansion, comes the over 1000-1
gas contraction - i.e. back to h2o.
You better have the exhaust valve open so it can suck.
Actually, it would be more accurate to call it an inlet port
-since air will be going in, not out.

If one were to describe an h2o2 ICE, it would be with only
an intake port and some means to eliminate, or absorb,
the very small amount of water produced each revolution.
(or no ports needed if you can figure out some way to quickly
disassociate the water back to h2o2 - its gaseous state)

Outside of developing a miracle engine like above, it might be
more realistic to use h2o2 to augment another, slower burning,
fuel.
One that stays expanded for awhile.
At least long enough to actually use an exhaust stroke.

Maybe a "three stroke" engine: (since exhaust is minimal-1/1800)
1. compression
2. power
3. intake

Pres

Pres,

I changed the timing to 45? ATDC, making no additional changes.  The results seem to be favorable insofar as I can only seem to run the engine for about 5 seconds before (I am assuming) it runs out of fuel.  The motor seems to perform somewhat better.....not quite so much violence in the detonation.  It's smoother.



Stefan,

Thank you for the link to Chris's electrolysis experiments at oupower.com.  It prompted some rethinking as to how I am producing my fuel.  There is a lot of material so it will take some time to digest all of that 70 pages of photos, etc.



Everyone,

It seems that the longer the process runs, the more moisture is produced.  I am assuming this is because the water heats up and gets close to boiling in the reactor vessel so there has to be steam involved to a certain degree.  I think most of this is being arrested and condensed in the flashback bubblers.  Having said that, I am noticing that the motor seems to perform better after the process has been running for a 1/2 hour than in the beginning.  This is because of the moisture in the air, right?  This poses the question:  How does one let the moisture through without eliminating the flashback arrestor?  (can't do without that)m  Somehow I need to introduce mist into the carburetor. 

There's a picture of it on the second page (I think) of this thread.  Any ideas?

The introduction of a cooler mist would, I think be preferable here.? Such as those atomization characteristics afforded by a 'nebulizer' or ultrasonic humidification device.....

There are various incarnations that may be produced with acceptable levels of cost and design efficiency.


Regards,

M.R.

from what i can see the flashback arrestor (FBA) is just a pipe which allows the mix to bubble through?

then how about submerging it in the electrolysis tank,
and from the heat of the electrolysis the water in the FBA might also heat up and add moisture to the mix as it bubbles though.

if submerging the FBA doesnt sound too good, how about adding a small reservoir in the electrolysis chamber and fill it with water, again the heat would cause water vapour and this could be fed into the mix after the flashback arrestor.

oh and Btw on egaspower yahoo group, from what i could make out somebody recently claimed to get their lawnmower to run on the "egas" (i think this is a h2.o2 mix)
im currently awaiting more information.

Kane

Actually you all have good ideas.  Kenbo0422 says to put a turbo on it.  Techstuff says to create a water mist.  Pres says to make it a 3 cycle.  Too bad I don't have a barrel of $$$ because I'd probably try to combine all of those attributes and see what happens if one "built" a real water motor.  Maybe we just solved the problem.

Any investors in here with an entrepreneureal spirit?   ;D  Kane said he has the tools and equipment to make a motor.

Ron wrote: "Too bad I don't have a barrel of $$$ because I'd probably try to combine all of those.."

Years ago, when I had the $$ to work on it, I didn't have the time.
Now I've got the time but no $$!
( one of life's conundrums )

Oh well,
have you wondered where all those electrons go when we ignite a volume of BG?
Any ideas on how to put them to use after a "big bang"? i.e. ignition.

Maybe possible to reuse them for making more gas?

It seems that a BG powered piston (with its inherent reciprocating motion) would
make an excellent free-piston air compressor. Say, to power an aircar.
Lots of pressure and volume available.
Ref:  http://www.theaircar.com/

Pres

Quote from: pres on April 16, 2005, 01:21:18 AM


It seems that a BG powered piston (with its inherent reciprocating motion) would
make an excellent free-piston air compressor. Say, to power an aircar.
Lots of pressure and volume available.
Ref:? http://www.theaircar.com/

Pres

I was thinking perhaps more on the idea of a 3 chambered rotary motor.  If the curvatures were right the compression stage could be eliminated.  Have an intake, ignition, and then let the cavity disappear as it comes around.  This would take care of the shrinkage part.  Then the only thing to worry about is what to do with the water drops just created.  This function would be the third stage (exhaust if you will).  Just squeeze the water out of a one way channel before it gets around to the intake again.  Maybe one could design a small set of lines (ribs) to keep a specific amount of moisture to create the correct steam for the next cycle.  ???


What to do with the electrons?  Use Charley Brown's diode array on the rotor surfaces.  (what do I know about diode arrays?)  LOL  They'd have to stand up to lots of heat and light.  Maybe we could capture the light from the explosion also.  Silica cells and diodes in the rotor.  Now THAT's a motor generator. 

sound's good on paper, huh?   :)

diesel engines ....

have upto 3 times higher compression than petrol (8:1 - 24:1).

It would certianly mean an improvement in efficiency,
although i have a little experience in auto engineering im not familiar with how compression relates to the amount of fuel needed. Would a 3x greater compression mean 3x less fuel is needed?
If this is the case im sure that with the current rates of h2/o2 production you could get it running.

But as i say if someone comes up with an idea that sounds feesible i have got the equipment and skills. I am also willing to put the time, money and effort into building a prototype.

I also have a spare 8hp briggs and stratton engine that i might experiment with this weekend if i have some spare time.
Im still trying to work out how they built there electrolysers on the egas group, as the information given is very spread out in the files ... they could do with consolidating it into a single file.

Although from the calculation below pasted from a message on the group it seems that it is possible to run the engine entirely off the h2/o2 mix.

"Dear All,

Attached is the theoretical computation on how much an alternator needs to power your egas systems.

If my calculations are correct, you will have so less power input required to run your system.


Here is the actual formula:

1.) Amperage output x voltage output = watts output
     i.e. 100amps output at 14.7 volts = 1470watts

2.) Watt output x efficiency = watts input required
     for 50% divide by .5, for 55% divide by .55, for 73% divide by .73

3.) Watts input divided by 745.7 = HP requirement

So, based on Brads experiments he is using 60 amps

12v x 60 amps = 720 watts

converting it to Hp:

720 watts /745.7 = 0.96553573823253319029100174332842 HP

SO he will get more than he would be using for his engine ... "


Kane

Quote from: Kane on April 16, 2005, 11:20:29 AM

diesel engines ....

have upto 3 times higher compression than petrol (8:1 - 24:1).

It would certianly mean an improvement in efficiency,
although i have a little experience in auto engineering im not familiar with how compression relates to the amount of fuel needed. Would a 3x greater compression mean 3x less fuel is needed?


Kane

I don't know about the less fuel part but if you could get the compression to about 400 psi, the mixture would auto-ignite by itself from what I've been reading.  No spark plug necessary.

Ken, All
I have pondered the possibilities of a turbocharger as part of an H2(O2) system and have not abandoned the idea but I am not sure a conventional application holds any answers ???
A turbocharger (or supercharger) forces more air (20% Oxy) into the charge, requiring more fuel to maintain the Stociometric A/F ratio.? This increases Volumetric Efficiency but not economy directly.
Our problem is: not enough fuel for normally aspirated conditions.

Second Thought................. (totally different)
Since we have a large volume drop with recombination (sucking exhaust), someone said 1000:1(?) I have been wondering how we could harness that energy ???? I am reminded that the first internal combustion engines were Atmospheric Engines.? I am going to go back and understand how they worked better and see where my weird thought processes take me.?
Anyone who wants to go along ......... jump in ;D

Dave

Just another thought after thinking about your 1000:1 recombination problem....  I'm assuming this is a 4 cycle type of motor.   If so, why not a combination 4 / 2 stroke setup.  The only modification I'm proposing would be a port in the lower cylinder wall to allow air in before the upstroke of exhaust.  Once the engine is up to operating temperature this may also aid in water removal during the exhaust stroke.  In order to keep atmospheric gases out during the intake phase, use a reed valve or some such device to only open when the vacuum is present.

It sounds like a 2 cycle motor would work better if one could figure out how to lube it while running.  I like the extra hole in the bottom of the stoke idea..........(wonder how to do that without screwing up the motor?)  You can tell I'm not a mechanic, huh?   ;D

Speaking of exhaust, I joined the Yahoo egaspower group and they said one person was having problems with exhaust valve getting too hot.  ?????  (I guess his machine runs or something)  In our discussions here, we have determined that the exhaust sucks.  This does not compute.  Now I'm really confused.  How can the exhaust valve get hot if it handles incoming air?

But........I'll worry about that if and when I ever get more than 5 seconds running time out of it.  I have had an idea or two thrown my way so it's just a matter of implementing them and see what happens.

I appreciate all the help and ideas.

One more note about H2 water engines....  The one idea that I've seen that seems to make sense (since the H2 / 02 is hard to manufacture fast enough) is one I read about that uses an electrolysis setup whereby the gases produced are an additive to the normal intake to the engine.  I believe one design (yes, the Ma'at or whatever, which is more complicated than needed, I think) uses a frequency applied to the electrodes.  The only reason I can see for this is to have an external input from the rpm of the engine to regulate the frequency, thus producing gas proportional to the need of the engine.  The claims in this case are mileage increases due to the H2 being incorporated into the burning process at a set percentage.  Yes, Ron, the Ma'at is stupid when it comes to electrolysis, DC is better.  I'm wondering though, if it isn't supposed to be used (the frequency) as a 'throttling' device, like a duty cycle on an electric motor speed controller....   ???

Hi All,

I've been working on splitting H2O and would like to take some part in this discussion. My opinion is that we should not dismiss the pulsed (high) frequency low amps, low volts electrolysis.

I am going over Stenley Meyer's patents (4,936,961; 4,798,661 and others) and going to try to replicate his devices. Looks like that Ma?as water car is taken from these patents too, but I think they are missing the patent?s trade secret. In Meyer?s patent the exact frequency is shown as 0Hz, as well as some other things are missing, but as I see it, there should be something in this. As far as I know, the patents are granted after witnessing the effect.

Meyer is using the water as a dielectric in a cap, so this helps in having low Amps, low Volts electrolysis (the claims, as far as I know, are for about 0.5A and 45V). By my opinion, the thing is to have a LC circuit in a resonance frequency. As water may have different resistance depending on its pureness, the cap will change, so he is using an additional variable inductor/coil to achieve the resonance (it could be done with different schematic for auto resonance). My guess is that the LC?s resonance frequency?s wave length needs to match the length of the water molecule or actually one of its harmonics. This way we can achieve a resonance in the water itself - have the molecules orientate and following splitting after enough charge build up in the ?dielectric?. It may also need to have exact distance between the electrodes to match that frequency?s wave length (harmonic).

I am not a chemist nor I am deep in electronics (however an electrical engineer), but after looking at some of Tesla?s inventions, the key for me is in the resonance.

So far I and on my friend have built a generator (10Hz-1MHz with 5A mosfet) and the electrodes and when time permits going to try all this. Does anybody have any idea what the frequency should be according to the above conclusions?

Cheers,
Christo

If this could be proven true, then water harmonics is probably the key to magnified production rates not possible with even a DC setup.  I would like to know how it goes with that.  I tend to go with the Tesla and Keely thinking in many of these things that harmonics or the 'right' frequency is a key to unlocking alot of things we aren't able to accomplish now.

Quote from: christo_g on April 20, 2005, 02:08:45 PM
Hi All,


So far I and on my friend have built a generator (10Hz-1MHz with 5A mosfet) and the electrodes and when time permits going to try all this. Does anybody have any idea what the frequency should be according to the above conclusions?

Cheers,
Christo

I read somewhere that 42K (give or take) was effective.  So I tried it.................and everything else from 500 to 500K Hz.  I tried 50% duty, I tried other frequencies and pulse lengths................I tried alternating current.  Nothing matched the DC watt for watt.

Having said that.......I certainly hope you can find the magic number because I need all the help I can get with volume of production.  I'm with Kenbo in that I am interested in your results.

Chris, Ron
Hear me out, then let me have it! OK
I too have toyed with frequency to disassociate water, but obviously not to the extent either of you have.
I too have tried to read Stan Meyer's patents and determined they are cryptic, but do not let me discourage you if you can crack the code.
Having said that, here is some of my conjecture based on a little research and a lot of thinking.
?? ? Observations
? ? ? ? ? ? 1. Freq of water is key but, there are more possible frequencies than water molecules ;D
? ? ? ? ? ? 2. Current flows thru an Electrolyser by ionization, which does not seem to respond quickly to changes, 8 or 10 minutes is
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? not uncommon. This puts trial and error way outside the limits of my patients :'(
? ? ? ? ? ? 3. Starting (or restarting) ionization requires much more energy than sustaining it, that is why a starter is required for a flourescent
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?tube. The process must be re-started with every pulse.? I am using 2 ea 1 farad caps with my battery management system to
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?sustain when switching.
? ? ? Conjecture
? ? ? ? ? ? I believe the only thing pulses do is cause the molecules to move faster, which does accelerate the process, but as Ron has
? ? ? ? ? ? ?observed, this is not enough to offset the off-time of the DC current
? ? ? ? ? ? A more managable means of speeding molecular movement is heat.? My consorts on a Electro-plating? Discussion Board tell me
? ? ? ? ? ? 20 Degrees C increase doubles the electrolyis (?)
? ? ? ? ? ? One area I have not abandoned is a design you can see on my website.? I used high voltage ignition coils to add HV spikes riding
? ? ? ? ? ? on the DC signal.? If I could get this right it should cause some agitation without dropping the DC signal ???? I have suspended? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? ? testing this until I can convince myself conditions do not exist in my design to allow a HV arc inside the cell :o

As I said: most of this is conjecture.? I posted to prompt intellegent response, so? BRING IT ON ;D

Dave

The high voltage spikes sound  good and possibly risky, but do any of you recall a thing call a 'Bingo Reactor?'  I think it is supposed to be a similar process to cold fusion or something....  anyway, the light coming out of one of these reactors makes me suspect alot of things going on in there and electrolysis surely should be one of them.   Would looking into a setup such as this make a difference, or sense for that matter?

Bob at oupower.com forum stated, that he got very good
results using a full wave graetz rectified output of a staircase wave
inverter at around 730 Hz.
So he used rectified the AC to full wave chopped staircase DC.
As this staircase waveform tends to increase the voltage in steps it seems
be easier to break the water molecules with every step jump.

Also pulses which will have a rising envelope amplitude will work !

This was told, before Bob was silenced by a few patent holders.

So try it this way.
Also Stanley Meyer was using increasing amplitude pulses !

Regards, Stefan.

Stefan
Some detail to the 2 coil set up I discussed above - I had spark gaps to control the HV. One fired at about 500V the other at 10KV. As I mentioned these rode on the DC circuit. The coils fired at 1KHz.? I observed a slight increase in output after about 10 minutes.? I also observed an increase in heat over running the reactor the same time period without the spikes.?
Could I be fumbling around in the same area you are discussing ?
I concluded that the coils were pulling about 12 Amps - if I increased the Amperage on the cell 12 Amps I would get more results, plus I had safety concerns :-\
Maybe I backed off too soon? ???

Dave

Could it be a bit of a shortcut to use a sawtooth pattern instead of steps to simulate the same effect and possibly simplify the circuit?

Hi All,
you could use such a pulse form to effectively split water:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/free-energy/files/OssieStuff/battery_charging_effect.jpg
Every pulse must be higher than the previous and if you use graphite electrodes you could
also regain some of the used energy, cause both electrodes will act like
a bettery in the pauses, so you can collect energy back from them.
This is, because they store the ions in their meshes and generate about 2.5 Volts
difference voltage when you use a good electrolyte.
So inside the pulse pauses you can use the cell to recharge a big capacitor and
use this "recycled" energy also for the next pulse with it.

Regards, Stefan.

I was referred to this patent by a person on egaspower group

http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=US006126794&PageNum=1&&IDKey=785F51E0C55E&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526d=PALL%2526p=1%2526u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526s1=6126794.WKU.%2526OS=PN/6126794%2526RS=PN/6126794

It uses a combination of pulses to get two different forms of hydrogen.  Anyone understand the chemi-terminology in this document?

It's an interesting approach.  Some of which I think I already accidently have going for me.  Like the pressure self-building part.......I can do that just pretty fast in my little setup.  I know I can reach 5 pounds before 5 minutes.  The patent says at least 1 pound a minute from tap water.  It also speaks of frequencies.  I'm using direct current but if you think about it, it's rectified so there are essentially "pulses" there. 

1800 rpm x 10 magnets = 18,000 rectified pulses
18,000 x 9 coils = 162,000 rectified pulses per second.

But I don't have the second low coil and frequency.

I'm currently trying to figure out what's going on that makes it so special but I don't understand the types of hydrogen mentioned in the documentation.

I just timed it.  The water was a little warm from previous attempts earlier today.

With the water temp at 100 degrees, I went from 0 to 5 pounds pressure in 2 minutes - 30 seconds in a 16 quart vessel using 24 VDC rectified current from the generator you see in the photo (very first picture in this thread).

So..........I'm doing twice as much as it says is minimum in the patent.  (I'm starting to attribute most of my problems to carburetor, I think)

Okay, let's try this again.  I misfigured it in the previous post.

It should be like this..........

1800 rpm x 10 magnets = 18,000 pulses
18,000 x 9 coils = 162,000 magnet passes per minute
rectified sine means 2 positive pulses per coil pass so
162,000 x 2  = 324,000 positive pulses per minute
324,000 / 60 = 5400 Hz

So my DC current consists of actually 5400 Hz.  It's not coming from a battery.

Quote from: rlm555339 on April 22, 2005, 04:59:10 PM
I was referred to this patent by a person on egaspower group

http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=US006126794&PageNum=1&&IDKey=785F51E0C55E&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526d=PALL%2526p=1%2526u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526s1=6126794.WKU.%2526OS=PN/6126794%2526RS=PN/6126794

It uses a combination of pulses to get two different forms of hydrogen. Anyone understand the chemi-terminology in this document?
I'm currently trying to figure out what's going on that makes it so special but I don't understand the types of hydrogen mentioned in the documentation.

In orthohydrogen the two protons are "spinning" in the same direction. In parahydrogen they have opposite spins. (Don't interpret "spin" too literally - it's a quantum property).

Hydrogen is normally 75% ortho, but this changes with temperature and magnetism - which is maybe how the patented device works.

The two forms of hydrogen are chemically identical but have slightly different physical properties which become important when handling liquid hydrogen - so NASA gets very excited about which type they are dealing with. See

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/SP-4404/app-a3.htm

Hope this helps,

Dinorben

NASA gets excited about alot of things.  My recent visit to Langley last year gave me a peak at the 'new and improved' FOAM insulation that will be EXPOSED on the main fuel tank for the shuttle.  I clearly stated above the noise of machinery "who's f**** stupid idea was it to have exposed FOAM on an aircraft that travels at those speeds?"  All I got was diverted eye contact and silence.

Makes you wonder about the other things they do.

Quote from: rlm555339 on April 22, 2005, 04:59:10 PM
http://patimg2.uspto.gov/.piw?docid=US006126794&PageNum=1&&IDKey=785F51E0C55E&HomeUrl=http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1%2526Sect2=HITOFF%2526d=PALL%2526p=1%2526u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm%2526r=1%2526f=G%2526l=50%2526s1=6126794.WKU.%2526OS=PN/6126794%2526RS=PN/6126794

Can anyone offer a speculation on the nature of the second coil mentioned in this patent?  All it says is:
Coil #104 is 1500 turns.
Coil has 17 - 24 Hz.

Now I fail to see how you can have a 1500 turn coil without the wire being insulated.  However, it doesn't say so and insulated wire doesn't come in direct contact with the water so that leaves question as to how it works.  Also, it doesn't mention a core so I am presuming there is none?
1500 turns of #26 AWG magnetwire is about a 2 amp coil if it has a ferrous core.  Without a core it would be less due to heating.  So.........having said all that,

"Can someone recommend how to build it, and of what, and what kind of wire?"

Thank you Dinorben.  So maybe if all the second coil (#104) has to do is alter the magnetism, then it doesn't have to directly contact the water. (meaning direct metal-to-water contact, not submerged)  Just the fact that the coil is energized and creating a field in the water is enough to give those lil proton guys a different spin?

The whole trick is to end up with the type of hydrogen that burns better than it explodes.  This would be better for the type small engine being used, I think.

how in the world did you get the patent pic to come up??  It doesn't want to work on my browser..  rats...

Quote from: kenbo0422 on April 23, 2005, 09:38:09 PM
how in the world did you get the patent pic to come up??? It doesn't want to work on my browser..? rats...

Try it this way.  Go to:  http://www.uspto.gov/

then do Search, then Patent Number Search, then insert this number: 6,126,794

When you get the patent, at the top you will see some red link buttons and one says Images.  click that and it will prompt you to download the viewer if you don't already have it. 

You will be able to pull up the whole patent then, pics and all.

Here is my version of the Stephen Chambers parahydrogen coil.  It should be installed by tomorrow.

Thanks Ronald for the info....  THIS looks interesting!  I've always liked to play with 555's, but now it kinda like making a hobby pay for itself....   Keep your fingers crossed.    ;D

Yeah, Kenbo.........you can tell by my login name that I'm a fan of both the 555 and the 339 IC's.  I even suggested that Texas Instruments manufacture them both in a single 16 pin chip back in 1999 when I entered one of their design contests.  (some outfit in Japan with a medical wireless thing won the prize)  Anyway, I've found out that if you have both of these IC's, there aren't many things you can't build.

I installed the parahydrogen coil and turned it on.........it worked perfectly.  So I fired up the main 24 volt elements and fried the fuse and 555 right from the get-go.  (sigh)  What's the name of that song?  "It's trouble-shootin time, I wanna quit now....."  la-la-la   ;D

Okay, here's the report on the orthohydrogen vs parahydrogen test.  It's rather unscientific but it's the best I can do in my position.

Same batch of water (no electrolyte), same equipment, same voltage across the 300 square inches of electrodes, same conditions, same (#16 x 1 1/2)  hypodermic needle for a torch tip, 5 pounds pressure.

With the parahydrogen coil turned OFF, all I ever got was detonations.  Blew the needle off the test bottle every time.

With the parahydrogen coil turned ON, it burned with a blue-white flame (a little orange on the tip) until the whole needle finally melted to nothing.

Conclusion:  The parahydrogen coil at 22 Hz did alter the state of the gas in some way. 

I will post this same message on egaspower group also.

Hi Ronald,
sounds interesting !
Did you just use the pulsed coil to generate oxyhydrogen
or did you also use your other electrodes inside the coil drivenn by DC to
generate the oxyhydrogen ?

Regards, Stefan.

My setup is basically the same as shown in Stephen Chambers patent photos (US Patent # 6,126,794).  The parahydrogen pulse coil is positioned directly over the main electrodes.  BTW, the patent also uses pulses to do the electrolysis also whereas I do not....so that's different.

The main electrolysis in my process uses 24 VDC, high amperage on 300 sq in of aluma-ti directly from the brushless generator.  The parahydrogen coil is separate; driven by the pulse driver shown in the pics a few replys back on this thread.  It is 12 vdc and is about 0.5 amps.  (basically 1 amp at 50% duty cycle).  Then the pulse generator is turned on, you can hear the coil "click, click, click" in the electrolyzer as it gets pulsed at 22 Hz. 

So to answer your question, the regular electrodes produce the hydroxy, and the parahydrogen coil conditions the hydrogen atoms (according to the patent) by making one proton spin differently thereby creating a particle that burns rather than detonates.  And from the testing I did, it appears to do exactly that to a degree.  Please note that there is no clear difinitive description of "HOW" to build the coil so what you see in the photos is my own conception of what I thought it should be.  I can't say that is the way Stephen Chambers did it, but nevertheless, it seems to do what it's supposed to do.

We'll see how it performs in the motor here soon, I hope.

interesting .....

i wonder what the flame front speed of this would be in the ICE compared to the old mix?

maybe this way the mix will work like propane or gasoline might in the motor, rather than detonating.

sounds promising to me  ;D

Hi Ronald, well done.
A different test would be, to have one electrode inside the coil
and the otherr electrode outside the coil.
If you pulse the coil, that is also a difference voltage between
the inner and the outer side of the coil alone in water already !

Look here for a test I had done about this:

http://www.harti.com/waterled

Maybe this way you can also extract more oxyhydrogen.

Regards, Stefan.

Just in case anyone tries to convince you that pulse current is better than direct current for electrolysis........
I'd make them prove that if I were you.

seems pretty logical to me.  half the supply - half the gas ....

although the comments on the egas group about the water acting as a cap also seems intriguing.
I guess to make that work the frequency would depend on the size/resistance etc of the water and chamber.
If what they are saying is true, that you need to tune the frequency to match the "capacitance", then all you would need to do
is measure the capacitance of the unit and calculate the best frequency range for that capacitance.

any more news on this new para/ortho mix (whichever it is).
Have you any planned date for testing it with your motor?

i think the results could be rather interesting.

are there any modifications to your motor that would need to be made before you use this new mix,
or would it just be a case of putting that new coil into the electrolysis chamber which is used for the engine?

thanks
Kane

Posted by: Kane
although the comments on the egas group about the water acting as a cap also seems intriguing.
I guess to make that work the frequency would depend on the size/resistance etc of the water and chamber.
If what they are saying is true, that you need to tune the frequency to match the "capacitance", then all you would need to do
is measure the capacitance of the unit and calculate the best frequency range for that capacitance.


Hmmmmmm....  kinda makes you wonder about all this resonance....  A tank circuit with water....  again, no pun intended.

Yes Kane, I have installed the coil into the vessel.  I will make no changes to the motor other than what you have seen in the photos unless some amazing revelation manifests itself.

Right now I'm trying to digest all that Stan Meyer material about his pulse injector / laser / whatever thing.  There's about 12 PDF's worth some of which have over 50 pages.  I'm trying to figure out how to  produce more gas without creating more amperage.  I can't afford to increase the load unless I completely rewire some of the generator leads and the electrolysis vessel.  60 amps is pushing the max of the wiring..........the generator has lots left to give but the whole point is to try to keep some of it to use for other things.

I am finding out first hand what many people have told me.  Dissociation of water by electrolysis takes tremendous power.  Hoping there's a better way but so far haven't found one.

You see all these patents but never any products.  Why is that?  Hey Ken, do they use DC or pulse to make oxygen on a submarine?

Ron,

The limited edition posting of the h2o car that ran all over the place said it had to have a 'double' size capacity generator to allow it to work with the engine.  I think you're on the right track since you've seemed to have discovered this by sheer frustration.   ;D

Ron,

I think they use DC on subs....  The hydrogen is kinda whisked away, so collection has to be done from one electrode powered from the onboard 'many hundred kilowatt' generators.

On another note....  The DC can be pulsed (42.8Khz)..... Maybe the key is not letting the voltage get too low on the bottom of the cycle so you don't have to kick start the process each time.  The resonant frequency may actually differ.  I don't know how calibrated those old findings were and the true numbers may also depend on temperature, purity (even with acid added) and possibly the size of the container.  A 'modern' setup would monitor and then control these parameters, especially after the ultimate frequency is found and tracked.  Food for thought....

I have been thinking about resonant freqs and bonding states.  If a bond were to be thought of like a bridge(humor me on this) and the material/energy that makes up that bridge had a resonant frequency, based on length among other things, then there should be a weakening of that bond as resonant frequencies and harmonics set up nodes in the bond itself.  It might 'shake' itself apart.  I read that the resonant frequency of water is about 2.5 GHz, in the microwave region.  That is for the whole molecule.  I am thinking about the bond itself.  Still working on this kernel of thought, I'll let you know if anything worthwhile grows.

Here is a link to look at that I have found http://www.csudh.edu/oliver/che230/textbook/spec07.htm

Microwaves rattling water molecules make steam.  Steam doesn't explode so it must simply be an expanded water molecule with the hydrogen/oxygen bond still intact.

Opposite polarities of 1.5 vdc tears those bonds assunder.  Maybe a good combination would be to apply the 1.5 volts in addition to adding a frequency of the appropriate magnitude.  (whatever that is)  Perhaps then we could just dissociate a whole container of water in one huge high-energy pulse.  POOF!  - - one second you have one cubic foot of water, the next second 1800 cu. ft. of hydroxy.  Wouldn't THAT be a wonderful thing?   ;D

Please figure that one out and let's both get rich on it. :)

microwaves in the range used in ovens do make steam.  But they are calibrated to that purpose, sending out 2.45GHz, instead of the 2.5, or perhaps a tad higher.  Just enough to 'rattle' them maybe and use the elasicity of the bond to help with the heat creation, but perhaps a little higher, more tuned frequency would dissociate them...an adverse reaction for someone warming up a cup of coffee, so obviously one whose avoidance is designed into the appliance.

Again just a thought kernel...I need to do some more research on the bond mechanics and physical properties.

I wonder if that strange effect where water will barely  boil in the microwave but flashes into steam when you move the cup or whatever has anything to do with it (I know the water is just superheated) In other words if you apply the 1.5 -3 volts to it when it is in that state do you get just steam or a mixture of steam , h2 and oxygen?  You might very well get the bang you spoke of although I dont want to be around close when you do.
Lee B

Quote from: fleebell on May 13, 2005, 07:39:24 PM
In other words if you apply the 1.5 -3 volts to it when it is in that state do you get just steam or a mixture of steam , h2 and oxygen?? You might very well get the bang you spoke of although I dont want to be around close when you do.
Lee B

Actually, Lee, it doesn't "bang" when it separates.  (so far)  It "bangs" when it recombines.  You'd just have to be careful not to let the pressure of that instant transformation get over 400 psi though, as that seems to be where auto-ignition occurs.  (or that's the general information I understand)

I am new here, I haven't done any work with this "physically" what I have done is researched/designed and made myself sick over this for over 5 years now.
I have developed an engine that has never seen the light of day,
what interests me is you said the exhaust "sucks" which means after combustion of said gasses they "shrink" to a thousandth their initial volume??? If this is correct I suggest fueling "both" the intake AND exhaust and putting 150psi pop safety valves on both "just in case" venting has to happen. "it has to, to some degree" I believe this will solve some problems. I also suggest you either disregard or ban kane, as I see it his initial comments on hydrogen combustion temperatures and flame speeds are similar to "misinformation" that I have been fed when discussing my concepts with government officials that were presumeably "in the know". Those kinds of comments when taken at face value can ruin a whole project or persons personal morale. It did not look to me like a mistake by the disinformation he gave in detail, it looked to me like malicious intent.
while I'm on the subject back to "feeding the exhaust" feed it some hydrogen since you produce twice as much as oxygen.

hello every body,
im new in this , i made small hydroxy gas generator, one liter water, stainless steel poles, 12v car battery, starting at the time of cranking the engine. my calculation shows to produce 49liter of hydrogen to run the car completly with water, but what i got is 0.5 liter hydroxy, can one help to make beter production,  each 200 RPM in engine speed needs 7liter hydrogen, so we can compine gasoline with in the same engine.
Regards
Jalal

when you put it that way it doesn't seem so fuel efficient, now does it???

NO ,IT STILL NOT

IT BECOMES HOT AFTER 15 MIN, BUT WITH LESS PRODUCTION

jalal the best voltage for producing hydrogen  is 1.25-1.35 volts, this seems to
be what is documented frequently as the best, tweaking the current/amperage,
anodes/cathodes/ h20 salinity and other things also help get marginal gains, much like souping up an engine. The problem is.....
the engines you are using, they are made for gasoline,diesel/propane, the engines of today are dinosaurs and the fuels are nothing like any kind of h2/02
mixtures, I have spent over 5 years designing an engine, to run on any fuel,
but until I build it it is "speculation" I consider my engine only 50% completed until it becomes a physical reality. I am also disgruntled  that I devoted over 5 years of my time to this,then asking for any kind of assistance to speed up the prototype's build and I am still flying solo and feeling "paranoid" I don't find this fair but I will carry on just like the majority here operating on shoestring budgets and making due with what they have. But I'll tell you it's DAMN hard building a
mechanical device that betters todays technology with no assistance, no
consultation with professionals, no sponsors/grants,no support,no existing bolt on pre manufactured technology,no studies or technology even remotely related to it,. It just sucks. I feel like I'm building a plane from scratch, but enough whining,
If any1 knows how to build or where to get a hundred horsepower or so turbine
or airmotor let me know, I don't want to build 1 if I don't have to,
thanx.

since this thread is where a lot of combustion happens I would like to ask a few questions and will probobly duplicate these questions in my questions post.
I would really appreciate if any1 knows the temperature of pure hydrolysis h2/02
combustion, how hot is it burning??? not to be confused with a h2/02 mixed with atospheric air.
Also rlm555339  I believe you should try NOT to combust atmospheric air. Try to accomplish burning ONLY the products of your electrolysis, if that means a way smaller engine so be it, it might be quite powerful, I really don't know until I have
some sort of experimentation area chock full of goodies.You also said you're combustion mixture will self combust"detonate" @ 400psi "general information"
I disagree, for an example I'll use a diesel engine, diesels suck in an air charge the piston goes up compressing that air charge to lets say 1500psi at top dead centre or a little b4 which then = combustion with no help from spark or glow plugs. why? when the charge of air is compressed to that pressure at that speed it becomes very hot, hot enough to cause that fuel to explode once injected. the psi really has no bearing, what matters is how hot the compressed gas is. you could pump a container with h2 or 02 or both to 1500 psi if you kept it's heat down by pumping slowly and or cooling the said container otherwise kablam.
also the products of your electrolytic separation would love nothing more than to recombine with eachother back into water so it's best to keep them separated until detonation for maximum combustability. I apologize if this has been no help.
At the least it was an excercise for me.

Property     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Hydrogen   Methane    Propane    Gasoline
Specific Gravity at NTP     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0.07    0,55    1,52    4,0
Normal Boiling Point (K)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?20,3    111,6    231    310-478
Critical Pressure (atm)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?12,8    45,4    41,9    24,5-27
Density of Liquid at NTP (kg/L)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0,0708    0,4225    0,5077    0,70
Density of Gas at NTP (kg/m3)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0,838    0,6512    1,96    4,40
Density Ratio, NTP Liquid/NTP Gas    845    649    259    150
Diffusion Coefficients in NTP air (cm2/s)    0,61    0,16    0,1    0,05
Diffusion Velocity in NTP air (cm/s)    2    0,51    0,34    0,34
Quenching Gap in NTP Air (mm)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0,64    2,03    1,78    2
Limits of Detonation in Air Vol (%)    18.3-59    6.3-13.5    3.4-35    1.1-3.3
Minimum Energy for Ignition in Air (mJ)    0.02    0.29    0.305    0.24
Auto ignition Temperature (K)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?858    813    740    501-744
Flame Temperature in Air (K)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?2318    2148    2243    2470
Maximum Burning Velocity in NTP Air (cm/s)    278    37-45    43-52    37-43
Energy of Stoichometric Mixture (MJ/m3)    3.58    3.58    3.79    3.91
Specific heat at constant pressure (J/g K)    14.89    2,22       1,2
Ignition limits in air (vol %)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?4-75    5.3-15       1.0-7.6
Ignition energy in air (mJ)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0.02    0.29       0.24
Ignition temperature (CËš)     ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 585    540       228-471

*Note:
NTP : Normal Temperature and Pressure .= 1atm (101.325 KPas) and 293.15 K (20 CËš ).

I HOPE THE ABOVE INFORMATION WILL HELP YOU, IT CONTAINS THE PROPARATIES OF Hydrogen   ,Methane ,   Propane ,   Gasoline .

REGARDS
JALAL

it helps but I still have a question, maybe I did my math wrong but I was looking at
93.15 K (20 CËš ). I did the math with that on flame temperature and I got 158.14 CËš
That can't be correct, could some 1 help, I was hoping pure h2 02 combustion would be
high temperature in around "2300 CËš"

Re: Problem of feeding hydrogen into a petrol engine.

It looks as if Jean Louis Naudin did it years ago:
http://www.theverylastpageoftheinternet.com/Hydrogen/Naudin/naudin.htm

He is using hydrogen and carbon monoxide in the ratio 3:1, and says it
works a treat, although he doesn't say how much power he gets from his
Honda generator set. But it appears to be an off-the-peg item with a
plastic tube where the carb used to be.

I still don't understand how it can work when petrol or propane has a
formula in the area of C6H8 or thereabouts. The burning of one
litre of vapour will generate many litres of combustion products to
push the piston down. Not the same story with H2.
Paul.

A great thread, just finished reading it again. Lots of good work and input from participants.
Any latest updates?

Few  thoughts that may improve gas generation.

Let?s start by looking at the water molecule as a charged dipole. It is slightly polar by nature and very unique in that respect.
So from an electrical stand point it maybe beneficial in producing more H O gas if on top of a continuous DC field applied to the electrodes to add a pulsed DC.

The continuous DC field will keep the molecules aligned (+-) (+-) and the pulse will add the electrostatic vibration.

The idea is to effect as much as resultant vibratory amplitudes as possible with minimum power. When the molecules are aligned within the field it is easier to excite them in unison since their natural random motion about is now more controlled. It?s like walking on a bridge, if all the small steps of many people are synchronized it?s much more likely for the system to resonate and fail.
Everything in nature has a harmonic. Everything resonates. There has to be a electropulse frequency that would cause the highest amplitudes and possible fracture(disassociation) into H and 0

Now on top of that let?s also consider the molecule as mechanical unit. With similar reasoning as above there has to be a mechanical frequency that would cause it to vibrate above it?s threshold and break it apart.
I have mentioned Sonoluminescence before
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1095.0.html

The more I read into that process it appears as at the right frequency(s) water breaks apart forming Plasma ? or according to some 2H and O at the stoichiometric level but then instantly collapses recombining back to water releasing huge amount of energy through scalar type of wave (or other form)  as some links suggest.
Energy input to the piezo?s is very low. We only need the excitation of water per se. and overcoming the natural dumping effect due to random molecule movement. But that?s where the electric filed comes in place.

Stoichiometric reaction is endothermic and produces pure vacuum plus water. This is also verified by results from this thread and others.

Now lets combine both an electrically induced vibration with a mechanically induced one, Experiment with frequencies and phases to effect a vibration above the threshold.

The idea again is to effect as much as resultant vibratory amplitudes as possible with minimum power

Would the continuously polarized plates (base DC field) capture the H and O ions thus preventing the collapsing of the bubbles?

It should be an interesting experiment, and reading some of the setups here it maybe easy to perform and measure gas out puts vs power inputs. The pulsed DC on top of the continuous  DC same polarity should be the easiest to perform. Some of the posters here already have the setups and electronics in place.

And just to throw everything at this water molecule, lets add a magnetic field, pulsating,  possibly on top of a stationary one?

Anyway just few thoughts to consider. Thanks again folks for this great thread. Especially Ronald for starting itt, his setup and perseverance.

Quote from: rlm555339 on April 09, 2005, 03:55:43 PM
There is no evidence that frequency can electrolyze any faster than direct current.  There's a lot of talk about it, and a lot of ideas, but I have found no verification anywahere that it performs better.

The reason the gas is bubbled through water is two fold.  One is to keep a flashback from going back into the reactor.  The other reason is to dry the gas.  After the reactor gets hot, there is a lot of moisture in with the hydroxy and running the bubbles through water condenses that moisture and it tends to stay in the bottle of water.

I am making hydroxy at a rate of about a liter a minute (a little less than a one liter pop bottle) with 300 sq in. of aluma-ti cathode/anode @ 24 vdc in plain tap water.  It is not enough to make this engine run.  This little engine requires 6.28 cu in. per stroke.  Multiply this times 1800 rpm and you get 11,304 cu. in. per minute that is sucked through the motor.  It'll empty the small amount of pressure in the vessel pretty quick.  Longest I've ever run it is about 5 seconds at one time but it runs very well when gets enough fuel.  Making enough hydrogen/oxygen to run even this tiny engine is going to be a challenge.  I can't imagine trying to supply a V-8.  There must be a secret I am not aware of.  Wish I was........I'm open to ideas, folks.  The setup is all here and all that needs to be done is make it function within the capability of the materials I have available for production.  Those facts are in the first post.

If you look at pic 8 in the forums website you cited, you will see the condition of the water.  My water does not look like this even after hours of running.  It stays clear with only a tiny amount of red material (rust?) in it at the bottom.  I attribute this to what is already in the tap water as my electrodes do not deteriorate in any way.  A 16 quart container such as I am using goes a LONG way.  Water level does not go down even after hours of fun.   :)

Hi I hope you read this for I am going to tell you a secret. If you let the chamber make a vacuum it will take less energy to produce gases, but since the energy going in is fixed you get more gases being produced. Vacuums should be about .1-.2 ATM's. This is how an 8 cyl can run on it, it uses it's own vacuum to make it more effienct. The more you rev the engine the more gases will be produced, because the more vacuums produced as the engine rev's up.

Yes, this is what I have also seen.

If you use a vaccuum, you get much more gas production
for the same amout of input energy.

I am still looking for a good pump, which can pump HHO gas
and will not blow it up.
If anybody has a cheap version from Ebay or other sources, please
post a link to it.
Many thanks.

Regards, Stefan.

@paul-r

i can not find by naudin
Input Power
VS
Output Power
(as usual by Naudin)

Not to see that 2000 Watts will be load
perhaps 200 ???

The input power  was  for other  energizer fromhim 25amp@30 volts = 750 watts !!

Come this now also from this generator ??
or it is connected over the power-supply to his line voltage ??

I can not see and follow this connections.
I cant read any knowledges.

Some othe Links shownd an 5cm gaz-flame from this bottle that was produced with 750 watts . I think (hopefully) the newone produce more gaz , need more input ! (alsos more than output from generator?

Quote from: pese on February 12, 2007, 09:53:00 AM
@paul-r
I can not find by naudin
Input Power VS Output Power
(as usual by Naudin)

No, he doesn't quote it like that. He claims 20 times gas output
than you would get from traditional electrolysis:
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/bingofuel/html/bfr11.htm
The implication could be that if the output from traditional electrolysis,
as taught in schools, represents the value obtained according to
the "law of conservation of energy", then there should be scope to show
overunity.

When it comes to his Honda generator, there is no prony brake to measure
power. I am convinced that a new type of IC engine is needed for HHO.

1. The gases burn and expand, producing a power stroke.
2. These gases (steam) condense to water producing suction,
     and therefore a second power stroke.
But these processes do NOT take the same time to happen. This
is a BIG problem for ordinary crank type IC designs.
Paul.

@Oaul

aha ! this is another thing  as appel to banana !
but this not your fault.

Are youthure that 20 time more is enough ????

You cant it .
You dont know his meaning , what is conventional.

To say , it produce  x liter Gaz with  1Kw DC-Current
that is to use  for the Motor :
1 liter Gaz + 4 Liter Air  to burn in an Motor ,
that is the simplest to do,
Than can understand all people , also me !

All others is "Wishi-Waschi"

Nothing that is "clear " will only used to fake .
To belive
to ...


Pese

Say if anyone is interested in seeing the math of vacuum's effects on electrolysis take a look here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,1500.30.html

I have shown with pure science the effects that vacuum will give. Plus I gave a lot of info about the effects of charged water. I just hope that everyone will get off of using gasoline soon, before this war on terror is over, so we all can see the true face of those who do us harm. I took another look at the Joe Cell and have some new theories as to how it works, with only science, for too many end up in failure when tring to get the device to work for it to be of science. So I took it a look into this technology for myself, sort of an in the bottle perspective. I am not done with all of my studies but I think I have figured it all out. So far I can say the technology is very different than standerd electrolysis. Well, to me water is the wave of the future. So I am trying to get a lot done to get things moving towards that future. Take care all and lots of luck to everyone.

[/quote]When it comes to his Honda generator, there is no prony brake to measure
power. I am convinced that a new type of IC engine is needed for HHO.

1. The gases burn and expand, producing a power stroke.
2. These gases (steam) condense to water producing suction,
     and therefore a second power stroke.
But these processes do NOT take the same time to happen. This
is a BIG problem for ordinary crank type IC designs.

Well, there is one engine that supposedly takes H2 high flame speed into design consideration ; the Larson RADAX

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8507662210221625210&q=hydrogen+car&hl=en

I think it has its roots in the Bourke design from the early-mid 20th century
http://bourke-engine-project.com/14507.html

The lack of con-rod arc movement helps the power transfer in this design.
Now let's find someone to build it.
After all, most of the stuff we're talkin' about is two decades old or more; has it been suppressed and if so is it worth getting back into the mainstream of discussion?
Where do we go from here?

Keith

I've created a feature page about this here:
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Muller_Dynamo:Replication:Ron_Classen (http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Muller_Dynamo:Replication:Ron_Classen)

• Ronald Classen's Replication of the Muller Dynamo - With as much work as has gone into this prototype, you would hope that Ron might be into over unity.  He's looking for feedback from those who might help him prove and improve what he has. (PESWiki; Oct. 14)

I didn't see any relation to water at the time I built the page.  It wasn't until I looked here at Overunity.org that I saw that this same device was being used in an H2O electrolysis scenario.  Perhaps this is a marriage of the two that David Wenbert has been talking about?

This evening, Ron wrote the following in response to my question about the difference between what is posted here at Overunity.com versus what I featured at PESWiki:

QuoteDuring this project, the machine was being belt-driven by a hydroxy powered motor.  The loop was the generator would feed current to the battery bank, which would put DC to the pressure vessel, which would inturn create hydrogen/oxygen from water, which would power the motor which would turn the generator...........etc, etc, etc.  It actually would do that after a fashion if the pressure was allowed to build up to around 5 pounds.  Trouble is.........the motor used up the gas faster than it could be produced so the fun was short lived.  It did sort of prove the concept though.
I've done experimenting in a number of different "free energy" areas and have come to the conclusion that dealing with electricity is the easiest, cleanest, and most straight-forward way to approach this.