Meyer type WFC - from design and fabrication to test and development.

[Farrah Day]

Thanks Praktik

Page 2 seems so long ago I'd forgotten uncle Festers post.

[Farrah Day]

Ok, hopefully find some time to experiment over the next few days.

I've had my D14 Lawton cct built for quite a while now, but today I finally got it boxed up and running.  Connected it up and was pleased that it seems to function perfectly.  Scope displayed good pulsing and gating. Quite impressed by the apparent stability of this little cct.

Like many people I was not able to get hold of the BUZ350 mosfet, so I used a substitute that I had at hand, seems to work fine, though I've yet to add my bifilar inductor into the equation.

Mosfet: RFP40N10 - 100V, 40A, 160W, with a very low drain to source resistance of just 0.04 ohm.

Now to do a couple of inductor windings.

[Farrah Day]

I believe there are clues, more often than not, over-looked with reference to the Meyer-type production of H2 & O2.  The more I investigate things the more I think that we are over-complicating the theory, and that indeed the process is not as mind boggling as we are often led to believe.

One important clue is the fact that Meyer-type wfc's run cool and that standard electrolysis will quite quickly boil the water.  Research will tell you that ionisation is an endothermic reaction (ie. it draws energy in the form of heat from the environment), so ionising water should be a cool process. And, it is. It is only the fact that the non-water ions (electrolyte or mineral impurity anions and cations) that carry the a large quantity of charges through the water in standard electrolysis generate this heat during the hustle and bustle of movement.  Remember that the electrolyte we add to water carries the current but does not actively take part in any reaction at the electrodes.

In standard electrolysis the water molecule is not ionising and then itself travelling to the electrodes, rather it is ionising at the electrodes, thereby generating no heat of travel itself.  Hence, it's not the water ionising that heats up the water, it's the current flow of the electrolyte ions.

So, if we can simply encourage the water to ionise without the help of charge carrying electrolyte ions, the cell will run cool.

I've seen Meyer's depictions of electrons being extracted from the water molecule, and this simply makes no sense whatsoever.  It is unclear just how many electrons Meyer thought he was pulling from the water molecule (I've seen depictions of 3), but even if you could pull away the two hydrogen electrons, this would leave you with 2 +ve hydrogen ions and a neutral oxygen atom. In this scenario, there would be nothing attracted to the anode other than the electrons - hence no gas given off at the anode.  None of this makes sense and I think is an example of the over-complication I speak of.

It makes far more sense to assume the easy and obvious, and work forward from there one step at a time. And, if the most obvious proves not to be the case, move on again to the next most obvious idea.

To me the obvious answer is that by pulsing, all we are doing is encouraging the water molecule itself to ionise at the electrodes, so we do not require a high electrolyte ion flow through the water.

I'm also now suspecting that it may have nothing to do with dielectric breakdown (either of the chromium oxide or the water itself), as this would likely cause high current arcing.  We do not get this!

I'm almost convinced we are trying too hard, looking too deep for the answers.

What then of our white calcium coating on the cathode?

Well, this is obviously a natural reaction of the minerals (mostly calcium carbonate) in the water, but it does help the process by producing a very high resistance layer that drastically reduces current leakage through the cell.  I think that it allows enough charges through to react with the hydrogen ions, but very little surplus charge to react with ion impurities (remember that the hydroxyl and hydrogen ions are more electrochemically reactive than other anions or cations in the water). Or, as it makes for a better capacitor with the calcium compound layer, there is always a surplus of charges on the electrodes, which act to maintain ionisation during off pulses.  Hence, less power is required.  Or possibly a combination of both!

This is where I'm going to be focusing my experimentation. I'm going to assume this is what is happening and try to devise a way of either proving or disproving it. 

I then have my game plan.

[razasunny54]

Hi Farrah Day,

       I agree with you. Im in electrical engineering and Im replicating this as my project for university. I have built the cell and im using calcium carbonate to condition the cells as suggested. I believe that water dielectric breakdown never occurs and water is never acting as a capacitor because its resistance accross my cell is only 3 K which is WAY to low for a capacitor therefore its just acting as a resistor. We only have the bifilar chokes in the circuit that act as the induction and they also have capacitance between the coils and the reason to choose bifilar coils is to change its capacitance between the coils therefore when we are pulsing through, we charge the inductors and then they discharge in the capacitor. I think we are still doing electrolysis but its more efficient as we are just restricting the current flow using the choke. Im am testing my cell day and night with different setups and different chokes. Will keep you guys updated. Lemme knw what you think.

[Farrah Day]

Hi Raz

Glad to have you on board.

I've played through hundreds of ideas and theories in my mind and on paper, trying to get a handle on the science that could be behind them, but many seem to be in the realms of fantasy indeed having no real scientific foundation on which they are based.  And, I truly believe that the main source of the problem comes back to Meyer's limited understanding of science and electronics alied with his eagerness to produce over-complicated, very scientific jargon-filled - but ultimately nonsensical - patents and technical briefs.

For me now, it comes down to one simple point. Ionisation of the water molecule. And, however it is achieved the reaction equation and results are the same, so everything balances as it should.  We simply have a more efficient way of encouraging the water to ionise - as simple as that!

What is unknown at present it seems, is the mechanics of exatly how this is achieved.  Yes we know pulsing and voltage play a part, as indeed must charges on the electrodes, but we don't know exactly how it is all coming together.

You'll find that the calcium carbonate works a treat, though you are best to do it in stages, removing the cell from the water and letting it dry out periodically (every 2 - 3 hours after a 0.5 amp dc run I found to be effective). If you don't do this, the coating does not harden very well. By removing the cell periodically, the coating hardens (I think effectively cures like cement).  Also it is less likely to flake of as it dries when you build up thin layers at a time.

The bifilar coil according to Tesla is capable of storing many times more energy than a simple inductor, so may be a key factor in efficient energy exchanging.  Again this may well tie in with other factors.

Dogs, I know uses a high resistance (10 meg, I think) in his Meyer-like cct replication. But as we know, a resistor will only waste energy, dissipating it in the form of heat, so I'm not inclined to go that way.  Inductors being very much more energy efficient are surely the way to go.

Wouldn't it be funny if the critical pulsing frequency had little to do with the wfc capacitance, and all to do with the frequency at which the inductors would create the greatest opposition to current flow?  Our wfc capacitor would still charge over time, and hence ionisation can take place, but little or no current would be able to flow through the cct.

I feel very close to a 'Eureka' moment!