Author Topic: HV and hydroxy  (Read 29468 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #56 on: December 07, 2008, 01:36:28 am »
P.S. The above tubes (150 of them) are about 2 foot tall each. These guys were going to compete in the vehicle X-Prize and have millions of dollars in backing. I was helping them try to increase output from the cell so the vehicle would run entirely on water instead of a mix of gasoline and H2.

Tad

Offline Login to see usernames

  • 50+
  • *
  • Posts: 68
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #57 on: December 07, 2008, 01:55:05 am »
HAHAHA , thats a huge cell   !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I believe you now Unclefester . Dam that shit is huge ...

Thats like 1000$ of stainless right there

Arent you supposed to have inductive reactance bigger than capacitive reactance ?


Let me go delete the post i made @ overunity


Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #58 on: December 07, 2008, 03:29:54 am »
HAHAHA , thats a huge cell   !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I believe you now Unclefester . Dam that shit is huge ...

Thats like 1000$ of stainless right there

Arent you supposed to have inductive reactance bigger than capacitive reactance ?


Let me go delete the post i made @ overunity


The power supply for that unit is very large. If capacitance increases (such as this case) then inductance must be lowered or frequency must be lowered in order to keep resonance. They had over 5000 american dollars in that unit in machining costs and stainless. They found some interesting effects and used them to create a new HHO booster unit that is more efficient than any other on the market and of course uses no electrolyte = ) I am told they will be selling them beginning next year. They would probably not be happy for me posting these devices but I doubt they will be checking this forum out anyway.

Use the calc below to play with parameters in order to understand the relations between L, C, and Freq

http://www.hamradioindia.com/HRI-Calc/LCCalculator.htm

Anyway, this is some of the research going on privately regarding these devices, but most have gone to plasma units since they are cheaper, simpler and more reliable. I was paid to do the electronics and perform some of the research along these lines. However since the economy is waning the money has started to dry up and investors are less apt to throw money around now.

Tad

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #59 on: December 07, 2008, 03:42:41 am »
Ok, after seeing 150 tubes in parallel with such great length i am assuming you guy's used very clean water? I have seen the effect with 6 tubes and tap water at around the resonate freq of the chokes, But by no way can i understand 150 parallel tubes with that length.

It must have been a very efficient device, and you and i both know efficiency doesn't mean dirt.


I respect the way you chose to present the truth,, But i am curious, Did you stop work on these setups and just drop it and move on with your life, Or did you take a different direction...

Br, Brian, The guy that doesn't try to get something from nothing such as stan claims, But the guy that tries to Take it to the atomic level bypassing the need for high amounts of gas as stan also claims!

This unit used steam distilled and then deionized water. Current on start up was a problem because of the massive surface area. Once it got running the current would drop down and not burn the power supply out, but it was touchy. Tap water would have burnt the power supply out very quickly because it would have wanted to pass large amounts of current through the mineral content.

I stopped work on the submerged types of cells for reasons previously stated, but I continue work on small engines with plasma reformation of water and or emulsified fuels (this is what my investor desires so I have to stick along these lines). This is for modification of gen sets of both diesel and gasoline units and uses both plasma reformation before intake and also plasma spark systems to enhance the effect further.

I look at it as either using nature, or using brute force. Nature, just as Bedini has stated will buck you and fight you the whole way, unless you go along with how nature wants us to use energy, and it is all transients. The things we learned to snub out in school because they burn electronics out are the exact things giving us energy on the cheap. This is the key to Gray, Tesla, Meyer, Bedini, Adams and others. It is the same effect seen across all devices and therein is where all of these devices are connected. Just as Tesla stated, the solution to all the worlds energy problems rely on high voltage at very short pulse duration, it is the key to obtaining all the energy we could ever need.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #60 on: December 07, 2008, 05:17:28 am »
Plasma reformation allows us to create hydrogen from any source, whether it be a hydrocarbon, or water. It uses very tiny particles of water or fuels, and since these particles are so small, the electric field can easily break them apart. Unlike a submerged cell where we have liquid in mass quantity it takes large amounts of energy to break them up compared to a plasma converting a very light particle. You see the larger the field surrounding a particle (energy density per molecule) the easier it is to break the particle up. We don't have this luxury in a submerged cell because we have a highly loaded power supply which is trying to break up a high density liquid.

I suppose a good analogy is a rock crusher. The more rocks you throw in at once, the more the engine has to work on order to break those rocks up into smaller ones. The less rocks you throw into the jaws, the less work has to be performed at one time. Plasma physics is a complex science and the equations I cannot comprehend (I am not schooled in physics nor complex mathematics) but it is easy enough to adjust the field to be strong enough to make hydrogen on demand from vapor.

This is what Stan was doing with the water injector, it took a very small amount of water and placed it into an intense, but low power field. It would create enough energy just from one droplet to force a piston in an ICE at least once, which is all we need. The lighter the particle (I.E. the better atomized) the easier it is to break it into it's constituent components (atoms) which some then recombine into the molecules they are attracted to combine with. This means we can use a fraction of the power it would normally require in a submerged electrolysis cell and create far more hydrogen on demand as it enters the intake of the engine, regardless of whether it is a turbine combustor or piston, etc.

We can easily create a fine vapor or atomized stream by ultrasonics, or heat to create steam (as Meyer did). And we can also control the flow of vapor and the voltage level and current of the field breaking the vapor. So now we have ideal conditions that are extremely simple to build versus the electronics required for a submerged cell. We can vary the vapor volume by a simple butterfly valve or needle valve so we have full control of throttle using only one simple, reliable component. It also means we have no large tank but only a small (i.e. 1/2" diameter) nozzle which the vapor flows through. If we need more volume of hydrogen we simply add more nozzles and apply the same power supply input to them and thereby multiply our fuel input on demand. The government labs are working on this at a feverish pace. LANL and others are wanting to use these techniques on fuels because they can increase mileage by 50 percent or more and reduce emissions by 90 percent. When using a water vapor along with this setup then we can improve those stats even further. On diesels we use a pump to force the vapor into the intake under pressure thereby dealing with the vacuum issues with those engines. You can also pull the vapor/hydrogen stream into the engine via the compressor on a turbo and eliminate the need for any other type of pump.

My investor is of course wanting the "holy grail" of fuels which is of course running straight distilled water into the plasma stream to drive an engine. We require TDC or later timing in piston engines because hydrogen has such a rapid flame rate it will try and force the piston down before it reaches top dead center which causes the engine to run poorly and sometimes not at all. Plasma ignition is obtained by a simple capacitive discharge ignition running in the 700 to 1000 volts DC. When the arc from the stock ignition is created the capacitor discharges it's current across the established gap and we have a large plasma ball created inside the combustion chamber, which further breaks any molecules down into hydrogen rich streams and then immediately fires the mixture. So we have a slightly higher load on the alternator, but it plays us back in power and the ability to run (mostly) water and only a tiny amount of gasoline is needed. Soon there will not be any need for fuels to get the engine running and we can pre-charge the intake with hydrogen rich gas to start and run. We are not there yet but we have only been working on this scheme for about three months and it already shows good promise.

Hope that helps,

Tad

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #61 on: December 07, 2008, 20:44:57 pm »
I just finished working with Bob Krupa on the firestorm plugs. This whole scheme was to make a large amount of plasma from a spark plug only. This means we need more energy since we are working with a straight hydrocarbon fuel which has not been well atomized (current day fuel injection is quite poor at atomization), so we ended up needing at least one joule of energy and our bench tests ran upwards of 3 joules to get the job done.

We found that the higher the voltage, the better plasma ball we could develop, even if we lower the capacitance, we can still get good plasma because of the voltages involved. We were using 1200 volt rated SCR's to dump the charge which worked well as long as the transients did not get out of hand and falsely trip the gate. In this case you would get a misfire, sometimes a double pulse, sometimes it would fuse the gate and destroy the SCR (this normally did not happen unless we were running tens of joules of energy at higher voltages, 1000+). I have video of some destructive tests we performed on these plugs at 100+ joules and it showed that this much energy should never be needed.

But if we are already working with a hydrogen rich stream before it enters the combustion chamber then we don't need nearly the amount of plasma from the plug we would otherwise require, since we are simply trying to break up any left over vapor that was not already processed and increase the efficiency further. A constant 10 amperes from the alternator should get the job done, or 1 ampere from the generator head if it is a stationary generator making single phase AC. The only reason to go any higher than this input is if your fuel stream has not already been processed as stated above.

One of the contenders in the vehicle X-Prize I believe is using this system. They are claiming 120 miles per gallon on a ford 5.0 litre V-8 and intend on winning the X-Prize based on this system. They also have some other unique systems for increasing mileage even further but will not divulge what they are until they have patented them after the contest has ended.

Tad

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #62 on: December 07, 2008, 22:35:25 pm »
The old Meyer tests were as follow. I remember well on input and output because I knew I had to be accurate.

Input to the inverter was only 1.2 amperes @ 12vdc, thus we have 14.4 watts total input. Output showed 200 LPH until the cell cooled down and had to be re-tuned. Any higher current on the input of the inverter at it would fry the primary of the step-up trans, so I had to keep input low and work with resistance on the secondary side. Worst case scenario is that the input would bounce around 12 to 15 watts max. It was easy to measure the input with a simple current shunt so it had to be accurate to probably 10 percent I would imagine.

I am not claiming anything however, I am here to help because you guys asked for help. I was giving you a background of my experiments and how they might help you in your efforts. If I was claiming results and then having to argue back and forth I would not be here, except to defend myself against Dankie's claim of fraud or deception.

I feel as though I have given you all the information that I could possibly divulge without getting me in too much trouble with the investors and people I have helped, although I have probably said a bit more than they would have wanted me to. There are thousands of private funded experiments going on all over the planet and almost all will never divulge their data. Many of these experiments do not need nor want to ask any questions because of privacy and also they usually do not need any more data other than the Meyer and other patents. A decent amount of electronics experience and lots of time in the lab are all anyone needs for duplicating the early Meyer process.  If you understand Ohm's law and a little bit about electrolysis and resonance, then any of these experiments can be duplicated.

Beyond that I am no longer working on the old Meyer process for reasons previously stated and have not worked on it except to give advice in over 10 years. There are much simpler, and more productive systems to spend my time on, especially if they are funded projects. These things take time and money, and if you don't have an abundance of either then all you can do are the simple reproductions which hold no value commercially.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Jr. member
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: HV and hydroxy
« Reply #63 on: December 08, 2008, 00:25:09 am »
Well, the same cell built by Stan would have been much higher output, and probably had computer controls for tuning. Output should only be limited by the voltage, surface area,  and how much water can pass between the electrodes to flush out the gas. Stan told me he could break one gallon of water per minute at 10KV, which would mean tens of thousands of liters per minute if my calculations are correct. But yet again, it would be better still to use that 10KV @ microamperes of current to break a vapor.

Also remember that regardless of whether it is  Orthohydrogen or Parahydrogen we need upwards of 10,000 LPH just to idle a 2 liter 4 cylinder engine, even though we can have up to a 75:1 air/fuel ratio.