Ionizationx: a clean environment is a human right!

Projects by members => Projects by members => J. Miller => Topic started by: jim miller on January 21, 2011, 18:26:33 pm

Title: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 21, 2011, 18:26:33 pm
under construct ion Area, Mass,Acoustics
last edit 24 1 2011 adopted "inverted 7" bracket terminolo gy
added some Dr Scott Cramton links

This is the place where I'm putting theoretic al calculati ons of
mass, area, and acoustics of two Cramton style HHO cells.
 
The purpose is to look at the various ratios of relative areas,mass, and acoustic propertie s and to compare them to the
ratios that are obtained from the Meyer Demonstra tion Unit.
 
One of the basic differenc es between the Cramton style cell and the Meyer Demonstra tion Unit is which of the tubes has the most
freedom to vibrate. In the Cramton units the inner tube is supported by a "Z" spring and can vibrate in and lateral and veritical direction, while the Meyer style has an outer tube which
can vibrate in a mostly lateral direction with a more limited ability
to vibrate in a vertical direction limited by an "inverted 7" bracket.
 
So by looking at the relative masses of the various tube sets, the
relative areas of overlap of the tube sets and the calculate d frequency of vibation of the tube sets, some informati on may
be obtained. By looking at the ratios of mass,overlap and
acoustic propertie s and assessing the amount of material removed by the notches and the effect on the area, mass, and acoustics it is hoped that a compariso n of these ratios with those
obtained form the Meyer Demonstra tion unit may give insight to
some of the physical processes  occuring in succesess ful replicati ons.  While obviously the PWM's and other electroni cs are
a critical part of the process of HHO generatio n, an investiga tion of the physical construct ion of the various replicati ons may provide insight into the processes occuring and methods by which HHO productio n may be increased .
 
Start of AMA analysis of Scott Cramton Cell
 
The basic sources of informati on for the Cramton analysis
are:
1 Patrick Kelly Free Energy Chapter 10
2 Scott Cramton's You Tube Channel
3 WC autism site
http://www.autismpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=WFC (http://www.autismpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=WFC)

4.Photos of Scott Cramton's Cell

5 courtiest own parts lists
 http://www.courtiestown.co.uk/ (http://www.courtiestown.co.uk/)
 
 
Scott Cramton Cell

This type of cell has the inner tube supported by a "Z" spring
with allows the inner tube some ability to oscillate in a vertical
direction . This is in contrast to the Meyer cell whose outer tube is
supported by an "inverted 7" bracket which may limit vertical oscillati on

The abilty of the inner tube of the Cramton cell to be vibrated is limited by the use of non conductiv e bolts which function as spacer to prevent the inner tube from touching the inner wall of the outer tube and causing an electrica l short across the capacitor . The tube is allowed to vibrate freely and  the amount of lateral vibration can be adjusted by turning the non conductiv e
bolts to allow more free space between the inner tube and end of the nonconduc tive bolt.
 
In the Meyer cell the spacing is maintaine d by a relativel y stiff
"inverted 7" bracket which allows for no spacers to be required  (spacer bars were used actually)but does
not allow for as much freedom of vertical oscillati on as in the
Cramton configura tion.

Cramton used 316L Stainless in his construct ion
 
Dimensions of Outside Tube

Length:              Average Fininshed Length  455 mm
Diameter:           0.75 inches
Wall thickness      0.065 16SWG is the gauge courtiest own is selling     
Slot Dimension s: 19mm by 13mm

Dimensions of Innertube
 
Length               18 inches
Diameter             0.50
Wall thickness      0.065 16SWG is the gauge being sold by courtiest own
hhoisepar ator cell
 
Dimensions of outer tube
 
Length of outer tube- TBD
wall thickness not given but 0.65 looks right based on source
 
Dimension of inner tube
Length
wall thickness 0.65
tube gap 3/32  "Various people have noted that with the Stan Meyer WFC the inner tubes are all of the same length, the outer tubes vary slightly in length, as does the depth of the slots.

The reasons are I believe as follows.  Given only a less than 4% differenc e in the capacitiv e surface areas, the inner tubes are all cut to the same length, the outer tubes are then cut to a length slightly greater than that which is required.  Thus the frequency of the outer tube will be less than resonance, but its surface area will be slightly greater.  From here on a certain amount of juggling of slot depth and tube length is required, so as to bring the tube simultane ously to resonant frequency and the same surface area
" from a posting on the old wouter site

Notches approxima tely 1 inch by 2 inches
 
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Crampton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 21, 2011, 18:37:38 pm
Sadly enough, nobody ever could replicate anything of Dr Cramton.
I even heard that he self came back on all statements of producing OU on HHO production.
So, not even higher then faraday law.

Steve
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Crampton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 07, 2011, 19:13:29 pm
Sadly enough, nobody ever could replicate anything of Dr Cramton.
I even heard that he self came back on all statements of producing OU on HHO production.
So, not even higher then faraday law.

Steve

I find your lack of information very distressing, and further, that information you are posting is completely incorrect.
First, several people have replicated my cell and have moved on to more efficient versions producing up to 3000 liters an hour that are currently being researched. Next if you would do a little searching you will find the National Hydrogen Foundation with full pictures and videos of my original cell in operation and information on current research, Including the first large bore engines in the world to use this technology and reduce HFO fuel consumption by 71%

Respectfully, if you are unable to follow simple instructions and take the time and effort to construct a OU device you should really choose another line of work
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Crampton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 07, 2011, 21:57:44 pm
Hello Dr crampton

In internet we read things here and there and many are false or wrong, please don't blame steve, i'm sure wasn't his intention to post wrong info about you.

i also build pll oscillator by my own, and with no results... well the only thing i got was almost 100% efficiency discarding dissipation in the coil and capacitors... (parallel resonance with cells in series in isolated buckets)

what kind of simple instruction you have?

I would like to know, how many liter per hour you get per watt? 

have you  developed a theory to explain and justify, what you are doing?

What voltage is required?

Sorry for so many questions, i'm a physics graduate student from Brazil.

Thanks
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Crampton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 07, 2011, 23:56:42 pm
Sadly enough, nobody ever could replicate anything of Dr Cramton.
I even heard that he self came back on all statements of producing OU on HHO production.
So, not even higher then faraday law.

Steve

I find your lack of information very distressing, and further, that information you are posting is completely incorrect.
First, several people have replicated my cell and have moved on to more efficient versions producing up to 3000 liters an hour that are currently being researched. Next if you would do a little searching you will find the National Hydrogen Foundation with full pictures and videos of my original cell in operation and information on current research, Including the first large bore engines in the world to use this technology and reduce HFO fuel consumption by 71%

Respectfully, if you are unable to follow simple instructions and take the time and effort to construct a OU device you should really choose another line of work

Do you have any published documentation of your experimental apparatus and test results you can refer me to directly?
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Crampton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 00:15:22 am
Dear Sir

I understand the problems of false or limited information on the Internet, it was one of the issues that my lab spent years separating fact from fiction. The first thing I would like to say is that researchers like Bob Boyce, George Wiseman, Stan Meyers and many others should be respected by these on-line communities for sharing any information what so ever on the net. In many cases these people make their living from this technology and what they do share should be considered a stepping stone to get you started.
This was definitely the situation in my case, when asked by my friend Patrick Kelly to share what I could with the general public. understand that many of us in real world labs are under very strict security requirements and contracts, so in many cases what we are able to give you, is something to get you started, but is also something you must complete on your own.

The directions I gave Patrick in his Free Energy Guide is just that , a simple system that anyone can build
And begin researching. All of you that are looking to achieve the magical over unity device will very possibly be looking for the rest of your life, you must broaden your thinking if you are to achieve success in creating a device that will be of benefit to our world.

Do not loose heart, systems that produce H2 efficiently do work and are being applied around the world, but in a controlled and secure manner
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Crampton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 00:19:58 am
Please goto http://www.nationalhydrogenfoundation.org
Read every page, all of the test results that can be published are there

Hint. Look at photo in center of first page
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Crampton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 04:12:59 am
I have Read:
http://www.nationalhydrogenfoundation.org/ER_Water_Torch.pdf
http://www.nationalhydrogenfoundation.org/ER_water_Torch_test_3.pdf
http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/D14.pdf

Looked at your pictures here:
http://s701.photobucket.com/albums/ww13/Dr_Scott_2009/

I find that in the first two documents linked above, you have no introduction, theory, procedure, discussion, or conclusion, as is standard in a report of experiments. Forgive me for saying, however this is not what I would expect from someone with a science degree.

In the third document, while offers more insight, the reliability is questionable because it is second hand information from someone who has not originally done the research. Is this really your story that you want to offer? would you offer some first hand clarification?

I'm happy to take a read of anything else you recommend.

Please note, I am being slightly more critical of the quality of the information because it appears you are trying to sound slightly more credible than the 'usual' on the internet.
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 15:01:46 pm
Hello dr Cramptom

I also took a detailed look at your papers, but could't understand well all those numbers... There wasn't an introduction, description, nor conclusion of your experimental approach... could you please explain to us?

I see you are using resonance cause there is a high reactive power, but what where the actual consumed watts going in to make all that gas? 30 amps 128 volts also seems like a low reactance in your system (about 4 ohms)... was it at 60hz? Was it operating on the alternator or solid state? The voltage and amp leakage on water?

I'm still interested in meyer approach, however i got my own project so far... It complies with more standards of safety cause it generates h2 separated from O2, with over efficiency 100x. It will be presented soon.

The only explanation so far is the same of the gauss gun, energy is coming from the electromagnetic fields, (space time).

thanks

Fabio



 
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 15:07:05 pm
For me, the only requirement was in the application, which now has more than eight thousand hours of continuous operation.
Or possibly the three U.S. Patents now obtained with this technology.

I wish you the best in your endeavors
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 15:14:48 pm
Fabio

I can appreciate the problem with the test results that were posted. That test was done at the request of George Wiseman to confirm the
power and gas production of his ER Water Torch, it was not intended as a scientific research paper, but merely a method for his customers to view the production capability of his technology.  Most people do not have access to the types of calibrated equipment used for the test performed on his machine. As stated, the results of that test were:

"During our test, the unit consumed 3214 watts of energy during a 1 hour test
providing 1636 liters of gas during that period."
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 15:32:33 pm
Ok, Thanks now its clearer.

From the max thermodynamic efficiency we got something like: 1,24V * 2975A = 3689watts... This if i'm not wrong would be the theoretical minimum energy require to split one liter of water into 1847 liters of hydrogen and oxygen gas at STP. 

so in terms of watts/liter of gas my picture is around max 1,99watts per liter of gas.

now 3214/1636 =  1,964 per liter of gas, with is OU but really small multiplication factor 1.016... If this gas was at STP

So far seems to me you got 101% efficiency is that correct?

Please correct me if i'm wrong.

My project would make 1 liter of gas with only 19miliwatts... 

Fabio

 
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 16:16:32 pm
Dear Fabio

Your calculations are correct, The ER water torch from our calculations achieved 101% efficiency, it did however improve with time.
The maximum efficiency we obtained after a 4 hour test was 106%

Now, like Stan Meyers, add a IR wave length between 2-14um and watch what happens !!
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 16:25:48 pm
I see. Thanks for quick answer.

So the energy gain you are getting from the direct excitation of the gas?

How much power the IR need to have for getting noticeable effect? Need to be tunable?  The energy gain is in the burning?

Are you forming any other kind of fuel like amonia or something like by this interaction with light, like our forum member Tutanka?

Is the IR injected during combustion or is a kind of pre-treatment? 

Thanks Again

Fabio
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 17:16:31 pm
The IR is applied to the liquid base (H2O) this allows the molecule to stretch, thus making it much easier to break.
Also maintain a temperature within the cell of 180 degrees F, applied correctly you will increase gas production by a factor of 3
For all of those that have concentrated in making the gas, please consider your application once you have achieved the necessary quantity.

In the form that you are working with, this gas has a very low energy content per volume. Consider other uses, such as carbon capture and what may be achieved by combining these technologies. (Liquid methanol is very possible), for those of you that are considering this for vehicles, consider a liquid nitrogen cooling system. (energy content is linear by density)
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 08, 2011, 22:08:34 pm
The IR is applied to the liquid base (H2O) this allows the molecule to stretch, thus making it much easier to break.
Also maintain a temperature within the cell of 180 degrees F, applied correctly you will increase gas production by a factor of 3
For all of those that have concentrated in making the gas, please consider your application once you have achieved the necessary quantity.

In the form that you are working with, this gas has a very low energy content per volume. Consider other uses, such as carbon capture and what may be achieved by combining these technologies. (Liquid methanol is very possible), for those of you that are considering this for vehicles, consider a liquid nitrogen cooling system. (energy content is linear by density)

Thank you for joining in here, mr. Crampton.
How much power of IR do we need? Are leds sufficient, or do we need a 100watt IR lamp on this?
The idea of using 180F is a known temp for having improved HHO production, but it doesnt mean you have higher production then Faraday law, meaning production at 25 degrees celcius.
Sofar i did a 150% efficiency compared to faraday.
For sure i would love to try your advice of using the IR waves for exiting the molecules.
And all credits to you, if we can get it to work here!

Best regards
Steve





Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 09, 2011, 21:21:41 pm
Hi Steve

All of our experiments in no shape form or manner attempt to violate the known laws that all researchers must adhere to.
This has never been our intention. Our goal is simply to use energy sources that at this point in time, may not be considered as such.
The 180 Deg F is a normal temperature that we try and maintain within any type cell we are working with, water vapor, for us is not considered when calculating gas output. We use a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer for analysis and discount any water vapor within the test sample.

Now for the IR. The only tests we have made to date in this area utilized a 100W IR lamp @ 4-14um, using a fixed voltage, and identical solutions of H2O and KOH, we applied the IR to one sample. (Both samples were brought to 180 Deg F). A two plate system 3" x 1" with 1/8" spacing was used with a 12 volt battery. With the control sample a small amount of gas was noticed, however when the plate was moved to the IR solution, the gas output was so large we discontinued the test until a method of containment could be constructed.

On a safety note, we have just received a test report on the contamination or residue that occurs when using plain tap water or
302SS plates. This residue is extremely toxic and users should use appropriate protection when cleaning their cells.
For any that do not understand this - The brown gunk that forms in your cells
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 09, 2011, 21:40:36 pm
that brown gunk - is it the chromium hex*** contaminant (cant remember the exact name at the moment).
on cells i have seen, when the voltage between the plates were at 2v or below and 316l plates used with a processed water doped with koh the contamination did not appear to occur.

for cleaning the 316l plates, we've used citric acid in water then using 12v car battery that can supply high amps for 10 - 20 seconds then reverse polarity for 2-3 seconds to the eye left the plates very clean.......
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 09, 2011, 21:49:59 pm
Please see test report
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 09, 2011, 21:55:15 pm
Hi Steve

All of our experiments in no shape form or manner attempt to violate the known laws that all researchers must adhere to.
This has never been our intention. Our goal is simply to use energy sources that at this point in time, may not be considered as such.
The 180 Deg F is a normal temperature that we try and maintain within any type cell we are working with, water vapor, for us is not considered when calculating gas output. We use a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer for analysis and discount any water vapor within the test sample.

Now for the IR. The only tests we have made to date in this area utilized a 100W IR lamp @ 4-14um, using a fixed voltage, and identical solutions of H2O and KOH, we applied the IR to one sample. (Both samples were brought to 180 Deg F). A two plate system 3" x 1" with 1/8" spacing was used with a 12 volt battery. With the control sample a small amount of gas was noticed, however when the plate was moved to the IR solution, the gas output was so large we discontinued the test until a method of containment could be constructed.

On a safety note, we have just received a test report on the contamination or residue that occurs when using plain tap water or
302SS plates. This residue is extremely toxic and users should use appropriate protection when cleaning their cells.
For any that do not understand this - The brown gunk that forms in your cells

Hi Scott,

I knew that the brown gunk leftover was nasty stuff, from my own experience. But not that it was toxic. I appreciate the warning.
I will go look for an IR lamp/device with the specs you shared here. I have this crave to learn as much as i can on this water as fuel subject.
The interesting part of your test results is that you achieved high gasproduction with very small electrodes.(Maybe even higher efficiency's)
100watts are a lot of amps. Taking two electrodes of a large size, use 25% KOH solution and tune it to use 50 amps. (or use more plates, but keep the math the same) Now the question. Which system produces more gas at the end? The basic electrolysis system or the device using excitation of IR waves?

Best regards
Steve








Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 10, 2011, 00:33:46 am
The wave length has been proven to effect the water molecule in a study from Purdue University.
An associate of mine, Dr. Albert Wey has constructed a ceramic that when heated emits a particular wave length that stretches the molecule. This was demonstrated using the Lanmar flame test.
Wa tested his ceramics in H2 cells to document the difference in production.

We used the 100W lamp as a control for the test as it was the only source of this wave length available at the time. His ceramics require no electrical power of any kind, so by varying the wattage of the lamp we were able to duplicate the effect at very low wattage levels. We did however find that anything above 63 watts ( if I remember correctly) had no further effect on gas production. This test was completed several years ago under a DOE grant.
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 10, 2011, 15:52:59 pm
Dr Wey's test results
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 11, 2011, 00:03:58 am
Dr Wey's test results

Thank you for this document. Very interesting!

Steve
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 12, 2011, 16:30:42 pm
Hi Steve

All of our experiments in no shape form or manner attempt to violate the known laws that all researchers must adhere to.
This has never been our intention. Our goal is simply to use energy sources that at this point in time, may not be considered as such.
The 180 Deg F is a normal temperature that we try and maintain within any type cell we are working with, water vapor, for us is not considered when calculating gas output. We use a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer for analysis and discount any water vapor within the test sample.

Now for the IR. The only tests we have made to date in this area utilized a 100W IR lamp @ 4-14um, using a fixed voltage, and identical solutions of H2O and KOH, we applied the IR to one sample. (Both samples were brought to 180 Deg F). A two plate system 3" x 1" with 1/8" spacing was used with a 12 volt battery. With the control sample a small amount of gas was noticed, however when the plate was moved to the IR solution, the gas output was so large we discontinued the test until a method of containment could be constructed.

On a safety note, we have just received a test report on the contamination or residue that occurs when using plain tap water or
302SS plates. This residue is extremely toxic and users should use appropriate protection when cleaning their cells.
For any that do not understand this - The brown gunk that forms in your cells


I did today a test as descriped above.
Not even an indication of an improved production.
Not sure what else to test on this.
Bulb is 100watts 3-8um ir
http://www.elstein.com/en/elstein-products/screw-heaters/iot-series/description/

Steve
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 13, 2011, 02:57:43 am
What does the IR do to the HHO? Why not test the idea of increasing the energy output of the HHO with the IR and a secondary set of dry voltage zones? If you increase the energy yield of the HHO, then there is no need for an increase in gas production by a more efficient method of electrolysis or otherwise.
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 13, 2011, 16:35:09 pm
Hello Ste,

Did you tried varying the lamp voltage? From what i understood it would emit a different specific wave length for a given different temperature... hotter shorter...

sebs
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 14, 2011, 10:33:28 am
Hello Ste,

Did you tried varying the lamp voltage? From what i understood it would emit a different specific wave length for a given different temperature... hotter shorter...

sebs

No, i havent tried that.
When i am back home, i will try it.

Steve
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 16, 2011, 19:42:40 pm
Wave length should be 2-14 um, also your cell should be insulated from ambient light. The photons emitted from the lamp must be contained within the cell only. Just as with Dr. Wey's paper, the photons will not penetrate any metal structure, rubber is the best material we have found to date, this does take time for the rubber to become saturated to sustain larger effects on gas production
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on November 16, 2011, 20:22:52 pm
Test lamps
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2012, 18:56:56 pm
For those of you that would like to continue this work.
1. Identify the wave length of absorption of liquid water
2. Calculate the Rife sub harmonic of the above frequency
3. Apply that sub harmonic frequency with your PWM
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 22, 2012, 22:19:26 pm
For those of you that would like to continue this work.
1. Identify the wave length of absorption of liquid water
2. Calculate the Rife sub harmonic of the above frequency
3. Apply that sub harmonic frequency with your PWM

Hi Scott,

I am still interested in this work  :)
Ill try to follow you and will write here what you try to tell.
Please correct me if i am wrong.

1. Water owes its intrinsic blueness to selective absorption in the red part of its visible spectrum. The absorbed photons promote transitions to high overtone and combination states of the nuclear motions of the molecule, i.e. to highly excited vibrations. To our knowledge the intrinsic blueness of water is the only example from nature in which color originates from vibrational transitions.
Frequency range between 600nm till 800nm. Probably 698nm.
2. 214751044,42 herz (214,8mhz) is the rife sub harmonic for 698nm...according to this website and attached files..
http://www.rifetechnologies.com/calcul.html
3. What should now happen if i apply this to a PWM? Can you please be more specific?
Appreciated!

Steve



Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on July 24, 2012, 17:08:16 pm
Steve

You are correct that the absorption of liquid water with photons of the correct wave length or combination thereof and energy level will promote transitions of the nuclear motions of the molecule. A colleague in Europe just attempted a replication of our experiment using a 2-8um bulb, but as you found saw very little difference in gas production. The bulb that we are using is 2-14um, so there may in fact be a difference.  Try the frequency's in the attached document with the Rife "Light" calculator
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 03, 2014, 22:17:46 pm
Hi Steve and Dr Cramton ,
with all that's been said here. I would like to know if its better to do simple constructions of the HHO cells with the plate design and apply Infrared 2-14um bulb and heat the water to 82Deg Celcius ? Or is it better to make a 316L Stainless steel tubes with a circuit and then apply the IR and heat ? I am looking to use this HHO gas to run my normal gas geysers and gas stove at home ? Is this possible ? Is it also possible to compress the HHO gas into a 19kg gas cylinder bottle and what pressures can it be compressed to before it explodes.
I would also like to know if I can use a 316L Stainless Tubes 20mm OD 2mm Wall thickness for outer tubes and inner tubes -14mm OD with a 2mm wall thickness .This will leave a 1mm gap between the inner and outer tubes . I want to cut them both to 450mm lengths . and put them in an acrylic pipe initially clear but I will have to block out surrounding light first before I apply the IR bulb (where can I buy a IR 2-24um bulb ).
I would like to use Dr Cramtons design of assembling the Cell except I cannot get the correct pipe diameters ie 19.05mm x 2mm Wall thickness and 12.75mm OD x 2mm wall thickness to give a 1.2mm gap between tubes .
Also I want to know if its possible to use my pipe dimensions with Dr Cramtons Cell contruction design but apply the Single phase circuit of Dave Lawton ?? Taken from the  http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapter10.pdf .
As I do not want to connect an alternator .
Am I missing something here ? Does the frequency output of the circuit somehow have to match the frequency of the SS seamless tubes ? If so ,How do I go about doing this ?
All your help and info would be highly appreciated .
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 05, 2014, 15:04:37 pm
Hi Antoine,

Please forget high pressure storage of HHO.
Its not save.
I tried different Infrared sources, but i didnt find any change in electrolysis proces.
But feel free to test it yrself. Maybe i missed something.....

Steve
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 05, 2014, 16:22:50 pm
I guess the infra red won't help electrolysis in any way... but it could help the resonant action...
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 05, 2014, 16:29:26 pm
magnetism helps
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 05, 2014, 17:45:31 pm
I guess the infra red won't help electrolysis in any way... but it could help the resonant action...

How?
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 06, 2014, 19:49:04 pm
there's a patent about this and infrared does help they're just not the frequencies you can get from lamps... photolysis is even better.. but that's in the UV region
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 06, 2014, 20:04:33 pm
From what i understood if you apply a magnetic field you change the frequency of most absorption of the molecules.
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 06, 2014, 23:33:45 pm
yes and with infrared you give energy to the chemical bondings.. and they can go to outer orbital easier I think something like that.
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 10, 2014, 18:18:53 pm
I guess the infra red won't help electrolysis in any way... but it could help the resonant action...
Hi Steve,What methods did you try .From what I read ,your container should be made of black rubber and closed off from all light source and be given time to be absorbed into the water in order to work . Maybe be given time to heat the water up to 82 degrees Celcius then work from there ? Did you try that method ? I think that would use too much power anyway to produce HHO.
Has anyone here made a successful Stainless steel 316L pipe or tube setup ? where you can use standard distilled water or rain water ?
What I would like to know ......If I use a circuit diagram of dave lawton (which has adjustable knobs) Would I be able to use Dr Cramptons tubular setup 450mm long with diffferent diameter piping and still be able to achieve the same end result ? Or is each circuit designed to resonate at the same frequency as what the piping resonates ?
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 10, 2014, 18:27:19 pm
Has anyone here successfully made a low amperage draw HHO cell ? Which can produce 6L per minute ? Can I use this HHO gas in my normal gas stove ? or in my normal gas geyser ?
The problem if we cant store HHO gas is that the volume of area it takes up is too big .So it has to produce enough gas to be consumed immediately. It will need to be hooked up to the gas line and only power the cell up when you want to start the shower geyser up as well .
I did see a video of a standard round speaker magnet where someone has applied a voltage in the centre and side of the magnet and it produces quiet alot of HHO gas . I dont want to go waste money on stainless piping if there is a better way to do it with stainless sheets using the same current draw .
 
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 10, 2014, 18:32:02 pm
Also after all this postings and no success stories yet .I was actually thinking of producing Hot water on your inline pipe coming into the shower with just magnets and aluminium .It operates like a water pump .Magnets on either side of an aluminium thin wheel that gets driven by the water when you turn it on .Inturn it spins the aluminium wheel like a turbo with magnets on either side ...it will heat up and give us free hot water if designed correctly .You might need 3 in a row to get the heat up to the temp you would want it .
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 10, 2014, 21:42:55 pm
they already use the pressure from the water supply system for generators... but that's not free energy and it works only when you draw water  :-\ 
Title: Re: AMA analysis of Cramton and Replication
Post by: Login to see usernames on April 10, 2014, 22:42:27 pm
Antoine,

The whole idea is to create hydrogen on demand.
No storage of it.
Just produce what you can consume.
Yes, 6 ltres is easy to make with a drycell type.
Use like 130 wats per litre.

For the infrared, i used 100watt resources.
Nothing extra ordinary happend.
But you might be right on heating water up.

Sadly i do not have so much time left anymore to try.