Author Topic: Seems Craig Westbrook found something  (Read 11840 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2387
  • Testing
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2012, 21:26:04 pm »
All I see is a series of plate cells placed in a horizontal tube with the production making its way to one end. I have yet to test it but its acceptable test to run!.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 125
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #9 on: October 01, 2012, 00:38:11 am »
@everyone:
Replication and accurate input/output power measurements are the scientific method to validation.  I would believe this setup if it were replicated and power measurements were taken by a trusted third party lab.  I can secretly hide a hydrogen cylinder in that setup and even uplug all of my electrical gear while "producing" 10 gallons a minute.  It's been over a year and I have yet to see even one replication or commercially viable product for sale. 


Regards,

mina

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2387
  • Testing
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2012, 01:37:38 am »
We are the small group that appears to be left, We're all going to make a global change together!! Unlike this guy We will all Prefect whatever is brought by Whoever brings it!

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 421
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #11 on: February 11, 2013, 15:30:27 pm »
Why in the world would you have HHO at 120psi!?!?   That's a disaster waiting to happen!

At any rate, those working to replicate Meyers aren't interested in any HHO pressure btw.  The Meyers works we are interested in were about creating HHO on demand, the instantaneous release of the energy in water as needed, not by pressurizing it.  You're comparing apples to oranges.

TS

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #12 on: February 11, 2013, 19:16:16 pm »
Craig,
  Let me chime in.  I watched a couple of your videos.  You appear serious, and are espousing doing things the right way.  The ONE thing I dont like about your numbers is that you use Gallons Per Minute of a gas.  Which is INCREDIBLY misleading and varies by temperature and pressure.

  I would like to know How much ENERGY it takes, start to stop, to electrolyse 1 Gallon of water.  For example, I believe the number is 16.5KWH/Gallon of water.  10 Gallons of water= 165KWH of power consumed.
This should be measured on the outside of the equipment (Watt Meter into the power source).  It can be reasonably estimated by consuming 8oz of water, and projecting the total.  The final information should include:
- Amount of water in the resevoir to start, stop
- Temperature of this water at the start
- Temperature of this water at the finish

  This would allow us to understand the net efficiency of the system you have produced.  It removes the PSI issue, backpressure, temperature, etc.

  For example.   A 5 Gallon container, that is raised 20 deg C (25 to 45) while being electrolysed the old way is requiring 26KWH of power!!!  Just to warm the water.
A telltale sign that an efficient system is being used is simply that the water does not absorb so much heat.  [This was a rough back of the envelope calculation with rounding]

  I agree you sound like you were being attacked.  Lets not FEND off those attacks with more attacking back.  Lets just get to the facts.  I am curious to know what type of system you are building.
3000 Watts RF to me, means 3V @ 1000Amps = 3KW.  And under normal conditions, that would take about 5+hrs to consume a Gallon of Water.  And if that is the case, then the question simply
becomes "So What?"...  Unless your water temperature drops or does something else amazing, you are not creating state of the art, you are leveraging what people know/understand.

  I personally like the Gallon of Consumed water as the measurement.  It removes a LOT of variables.  It is easier to measure.  And for vehicular applications, if we use 1 Gallon of Water = 2.5 Gallons of Gasoline,
then we know if we consume 1 Gallon of gasoline every 30 minutes, our system BETTER be able to REDUCE 1 Gallon of water in 60 (2X) minutes to be safe (And hopefully without 16ft tubes<g>)

Wishing you luck...

Kirk Out!


Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #13 on: August 26, 2017, 01:39:56 am »

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 176
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #14 on: August 29, 2017, 07:01:36 am »

Its not cool at all , to come onto this forum and go off at steve . its his site

Ive never actually heard of Craig Westbrook before but what should be noted is that Stan Meyer never released info on gas production . theres no video anywhere , no independent testing anywhere .
^ this is simple indisputable fact

stans gas flame vid segment plus ,  joe cell flame vid  , george wisemeans flame vid  show equal potential of gas and presure sustained to maintain a flame .   Les Banki showed impressive gas presure generated .
Its pointless to reject Stan but theres truth saying he never revealed the what and the how , with his circuits

 

Online Login to see usernames

  • Administrator
  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4441
    • water structure and science
Re: Seems Craig Westbrook found something
« Reply #15 on: August 29, 2017, 21:13:48 pm »
Thanks guys.
I have met and seen many frauds in this new energy world. Its a shame.
And of course such a reaction only confirms it.

cheers!