Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of these Archives, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above.
You can visit us or register at my main site at:
Overunity Machines Forum



Linnard?s hydrogen on demand system without electricity !

Started by hartiberlin, October 04, 2005, 06:54:25 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 16 Guests are viewing this topic.

ResinRat2

Walter, you wrote:
"When I read the experiment notes of yours, when the electrodes (anode and cathode) are connected with out any electricity you get only Hydrogen. So with the ?L? shape reactor that Dr. Griffin shows on his original YouTube Video, I?m assuming the Hydrogen is generated in the larger side and, if I capture the gas there I would get (pure?) Hydrogen. Am I right in my assessment so far? Yes, you are correct. The gas is pure hydrogen on that side.

Now (if I?m right) then the smaller chamber will yield the Oxygen, which I can (or not) utilize for some other process.This is also correct. Most of the oxygen will be captured as oxide of the sacrificial metal (zinc), this can be liberated with a reverse current that will reduce the zinc oxide back into zinc.      

Some question I have for you guy?s are what kind of (Non Gas) connection do you think works best between the two chambers? Could a simple electrical (maybe solid (SS 314) electrode)) connection suffice or is there need for the actual electrolyte in each chamber to connect (a liquid connection)?You need the electrolyte connection, this is the catalyst that allows the reaction to occur spontaneously.

Good luck Walter. I appreciate your effort and look forward to your observations, ideas, and results. Thanks very much.

Research is the only place in a company where you can continually have failures and still keep your job.

I knew immediately that was where I belonged.

walterj7

New question I have to resolve is Hydrogen still produced at the Negative electrode (tungsten/carbide)  and Oxygen at Positive (Zinc) plate?

In other words is the polarity the same as normal electrolysis? I'm thinking of the electricity generated by the reaction is it the same polarity as normal electrolysis? I'm assuming so, but need to verify.

Walterj

ResinRat2

Hi Walter,

When the electrodes are connected with a copper wire the reaction begins spontaneously; the hydrogen comes off the tungsten/carbide(-) and whatever oxygen is produced comes off the zinc(+). Same polarity as regular electrolysis.

Good luck,

Dave (RR2)
Research is the only place in a company where you can continually have failures and still keep your job.

I knew immediately that was where I belonged.

walterj7

Resin,

With the connection between chambers made by electrolyte, I understand why you made those angled holes between chambers. However it seemed that you were worried about contamination of Gases. Ok I understand that and I was/am worried about that.

I?m thinking of building something that looks like the ?L? shaped one, mainly because I?m not to good with miniature stuff!  I know we/I haven?t actually seen it, and the small reactor looks different, but this electrolyte connection without allowing gas to contaminate the other side looks kind of important to me and I?m interested in exploring your thoughts on this subject. I know from your posts at the time of construction you were not very happy with how the angled hole thing worked out.

Do you think a more conventional opposing baffle might do the job if all your worried about is gas contamination while still giving maximum electrolyte contact to the chambers?

From the picture on the video it doesn?t look like he (Dr. Griffin) has anything very complicated, if in-fact anything at all in that demonstration. After all he didn?t really show anything except making 70 liters of Hydrogen (per minute) and that with (he said) Iron ? elemental Iron if I?m not mistaken. What was that all about do you think?

Regards,

Walterj

ResinRat2

Resin,

With the connection between chambers made by electrolyte, I understand why you made those angled holes between chambers. However it seemed that you were worried about contamination of Gases. Ok I understand that and I was/am worried about that.  The reason I was worried about contamination was because I did not want any oxygen gas mixing with the hydrogen gas. The hydrogen gas is going into a fuel cell and producing electricity. If oxygen gets into the hydrogen side of the fuel cell it can interfere with the production of electrical current. The way I want my reactor to work there will be both hydrogen and oxygen gases coming off at the same time. That is why I needed to keep them from mixing.

I?m thinking of building something that looks like the ?L? shaped one, mainly because I?m not to good with miniature stuff!  I know we/I haven?t actually seen it, and the small reactor looks different, but this electrolyte connection without allowing gas to contaminate the other side looks kind of important to me and I?m interested in exploring your thoughts on this subject. I know from your posts at the time of construction you were not very happy with how the angled hole thing worked out. What I was disappointed in was that the angle of my holes are not quite steep enough to completely stop the mixing. This I will correct in the future. Again, this is because I am putting the gas through a fuel cell to produce electricity.

Do you think a more conventional opposing baffle might do the job if all your worried about is gas contamination while still giving maximum electrolyte contact to the chambers?  Draw me sketch of what you are thinking of. I am open to any ideas right now.

From the picture on the video it doesn?t look like he (Dr. Griffin) has anything very complicated, if in-fact anything at all in that demonstration. After all he didn?t really show anything except making 70 liters of Hydrogen (per minute) and that with (he said) Iron ? elemental Iron if I?m not mistaken. What was that all about do you think? His reactor was set up to just produce hydrogen, and that?s all. He was not interested in regeneration of the zinc electrode because all he was doing was running a small go-kart engine off of it. Any oxygen that was produced would just go into zinc oxide or into the engine and burn.  No fuel cell involved there.  My guess is he was using one of the experiments that use an acid-iron reaction. That?s why he mentioned elemental iron. I am using experiment #13 which uses tungsten/carbide-zinc-sodium hydroxide. His reaction is (as he mentioned) higher catalyst (concentration) levels. So it was out of control for him.

What I am doing differently is I am going to use two fuel cells. One will feed current back into the reactor to regenerate the zinc and produce oxygen at the same time that hydrogen is being produced. The other fuel cell will power some device (fan, etc.) That is why mine is not the same as his.

Research is the only place in a company where you can continually have failures and still keep your job.

I knew immediately that was where I belonged.