Author Topic: Three Stages In Meyers System  (Read 3028 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Hidden

  • 50+
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Three Stages In Meyers System
« on: July 16, 2009, 20:31:52 pm »
It has been suggested by Radiant_1 in another thread that Meyer's System can be broken down into 3 stages and I basically agree with this. 

These stages are  1. Gas Production  2. Ionization  3. Triggering.     

However,  I take issue that Stage 1 (as it was described) is a part of what could be called a Meyer system.   

Stage 1 of the Meyer System was described as follows.

"...first Gas production for example, efficient resonant pulsed electrolysis, various Hydrides (salts/metal salts that when heated release hydrogen), or straight DC electrolysis.."  (Radiant_1)

Meyer clearly called this stage of his system a non-electrolysis process that relies upon natural water and voltage potential rather than current to disassociate the water into a primarily hydrogen/oxygen gas mixture. A true Meyer system would use Meyer's non-electrolysis method of gas production.     

Stage 1 as described in the above quote cannot properly be called a Stage 1 of a Meyer system because it uses electrolysis.   

It should be obvious that HHO gas can be produced practically via different forms of electrolysis and that these processes can be more efficient than  Faraday theoretical limit.

What is not obvious and what is yet unproven,  is that that HHO can be produced at highly efficient levels with the non-electrolysis process described by Meyer,  where  pulsed DC ( unipolar pulses) is sent through a blocking diode,  and 1 or 2 resonant charging chokes in series with a water capacitor forming an LC resonant circuit. And where at resonance of this LC circuit,  water is  disassociated by voltage potential rather than by current. 

While in theory one might be able to convincingly explain how this could work,  in application it has not been proven to work at all. In every case that I am aware of  where a Meyer VIC is involved in an attempted replication, leakage current through the water prevents any significant high voltage potential from developing  across the water capacitor. The water does not "charge up".   Methods such as the use of highly resistant SS wire for the chokes, in an attempt to limit current, have only led to a reduction or complete elimination of gas output.

Unless and until this leakage current problem can be solved in the lab with a working device instead of with seemingly correct and convincing theories,  the VIC  remains an unsolved mystery.    Unless I have missed something. the systems that are said to be Meyer replications (Stage 1) still rely upon current and therefore should be considered electrolysis as opposed to Meyer's non-electrolysis method.

This first stage is primarily what differentiates Meyer's System from any other.  In other words, if we build a system that uses a heated hydride, and/or Pulsed DC current ... and then proceed to stage 2 we would not have a Meyer system because it is electrolysis based.  Likewise, if we use hydrogen from a tank and move to stages 2 and 3 we do not have a Meyer system.
What makes a true Meyers Stage 1 (non electrolysis) so attractive is the claimed huge gains in HHO production vs required input power.  Without these huge gains in Stage 1 HHO production efficiency over even the most efficient electrolysis method, proceeding to stages 2 and 3 will probably not get us too far in regard to total system efficiency and/or the development of a device than can be used practically, considering the power requirements of these next stages. 

Unless Stage 1 is super efficient, what we will end up with will be little more than a very nifty  and very expensive to operate demonstration model of the explosive force of monoatomic hydrogen.   A practical system that serves a useful purpose depends upon stage 1 being super efficient.

As for me, I have not quite given up on Meyer yet.  I am having one last try at replicating a true Meyer Stage 1 (non-electrolysis).  If that fails I will move on to something else that may be more promising. 

Anyone want one of these?

I won't even try to guess how much it costs.

« Last Edit: July 17, 2009, 01:56:47 am by Goeytex »

Offline Hidden

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Three Stages In Meyers System
« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2009, 21:35:53 pm »
I agree with you for the most part...except the fact that Stan completely removed stage one, and moved to all in one "Water Spark Plug" shows us that stage one isn't really too important.
What is important is a cheap and efficient source of Hydrogen....I believe Meyer's original "stage one" electrolyzer worked by RF broadcasting INTO the water (water molecule being an antenna). This is the reason I believe there is a "impedance matching circuit" that most are leaving out. Impedance matching is the true means of tuning an antenna (not 1/4 wave like we're told)'s in all the old radio books.

Anyway...even if you were to use just normal electrolysis...the gains in heat released from mono-atomic Hydrogen reforming to molecular hydrogen is about 1000 times greater then what it takes to dissasociate molecular Hydrogen to Atomic hydrogen...if that 1000x gain in energy release is enough to augment the cost of making Hydrogen from water is not proven, but, I am pretty sure it is...and...even if it isn't...the best thing is the Hydrogen isn't consumed (unless you allow the hot newly formed hydrogen molecule to hit oxygen which will then ignite)....but, a "sealed unit"...aka Stan's magnetic gas generator and Easer could operate indefinitely with the same hydrogen (eventual "poisoning" of the gas with metals happens...but for all intent and purposes you could cycle it back and fourth "indefinitely")

Check out my posts in my work space to get some modern patents on the process...Blacklight Power is using it...and so are others.

Offline Hidden

  • 50+
  • *
  • Posts: 58
Re: Three Stages In Meyers System
« Reply #2 on: July 16, 2009, 22:09:57 pm »
Its nice to see that we at least agree on something.

But, why do you suppose that  Meyer omitted any mention  of  RF broadcasting into the water ( Kansias?) or of a special  impedance matching circuit ?   

Was Meyer possibly  mistaken  in his explanation of his early systems ie. VIC ?   

If most are leaving this impedance matching circuit out of their replications,   then that would  imply that some are not.  Can you direct me to a replication that includes  this impedance matching  circuit ?   I would like to see the circuit.


Offline Hidden

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 986
Re: Three Stages In Meyers System
« Reply #3 on: July 16, 2009, 23:45:05 pm »
As far as skipping stage one and going into stage 2 or 3, i think you'll be missing something very important.
he says by increasing voltage amplitude you get ionization, so stage 2 is stage 1 only kicked up a few notches on voltage.
this is also where the spherical resonant cavities come into play, and i have not seend any of these
then in stage 2 you need the electron extraction circuit, before you can attempt stage 3.
in the injectors the electron extraction circuit is used to ionize ambient air in the gas processor, and this ambient air then extracts electrons from the ionized water, in a moment of time
and to go back a few steps, in stage 1, would ideally be the time to perfect burn rate adjustment via exhaust gas mixing, and henceforth getting a practical hydrogen burner operational, as well as play with magnetized Hydrogen and Oxygen running through a coil of copper pipe with pick-up coils on it to make a simple EPG
in fact the above 3 things can be done by anyone who has any gas production no mater what the method and efficiency

Offline Hidden

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1021
Re: Three Stages In Meyers System
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2009, 00:55:54 am »
@ radiant, when you speak impeadance circuit it would be the bifilar chokes correct?  it seems to be that with a simple setup stan just pulses standard variable voltage through a high speed gating scr, only using the positve recitfied dc curent to feed the choke..  so if anywhere there should be some impeadance matching it would be  here.. stan says equal length wires are needed on the choke.. to  wind them like a standard bifilar inductor isnt what needs to be done.. it needs to be done just like vic 6-1  delrin bobbin but i dont think it needs to be the same design and mesurments for the cavities..think about what a normal choke will do.. the wires share physical interaction with eachother during the change in potentials.. the more winds means more volts.. when they are wound normal they only share a linear benifit.. when they are wound in cavities it gives the wires more interaction with each other in a helping way.. but it also helps restrict more amps i think because electrons dont like to travel away from a electromagnetic core when it is building potential?

Offline Hidden

  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 387
Re: Three Stages In Meyers System
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2009, 11:51:13 am »

Zs is:
1- primary coil
2- all 4 coils
then impedance must match with
1- secondary coil, chokes, wfc
2- wfc

we match impedance by varying frequency, since impedance is freq dependent.

Impedance matching is the electronics design practice of setting the input impedance (ZS) of an electrical load equal to the fixed output impedance (ZL) of the signal source to which it is ultimately connected, usually in order to maximize the power transfer and minimize reflections from the load. This only applies when both are linear devices.
bold: what I have been thinking for a while, we want it the other way around, max power to chokes, and min power to wfc load to maximize reflections [=cell is rejector = current lag = inductive circuit]
This will heat up the coils instead of the wfc - no power will go to the wfc, but voltage will be 'seen' by it.
your opinions please.