Glyph

Just a quick question: what's the efficiency when you run electrolysis with straight DC current and what is the improvement when you run it on pulse?

chemelec

I'm Not Sure How you Plan to get that 10 Gallon Water Flow?

And Water Without any Additives is only Slightly Conductive. So with Plain Water you will have almost no current flow.

Most of these cells have a large amount of Potassium Hydroxide added to Decrease the Resistance of the cell to get Less than 2 Volts per cell for best Efficiency.

That Amount of Caustic, Potassium Hydroxide is Not Something I would want in my Vehicle, Never mind Pumping 10 Gallons of it.

As to an Inductor, that is an LRC circuit.
All Inductors Have Resistance and Capacitance without the need for any added, IN THIS Application.
And its NOT Unknown Territory, or at least not to me.

VERY POOR EFFENCY, Maybe 10% Either way.
Mostly the PWM Just Controls Current, Unless you Believe in the RESONANCE.
I have yet to really Find it or Any real Improvement with these resonant Circuits.

Using this Hydrogen Generation in a Moderate amount, it is Possible to Improve you MPG.
But you also need to Correct for the 02 Sensor on Newer Vehicles or you run your motor really lean.

__________________
I No Longer accept Private Messages on here.
All Emails to me Must Contain the Word \"Electronic\" in the \"Subject Line\"
or they go Directly to my Junk Mail Folder.
Email me at: chemelec@hotmail.com
Website: http://www3.telus.net/chemelec

Kirkg

Glyph; the reported efficiency of straight DC electrolysis, 1.4 V is reported to be about 62% best case. Stan Meyer, Andrija Puharich, and others have reported over 100% efficency. Puharich paid a lot of money to get his method certified by a reputable lab. For Chemelec; 10 gallons per minute water flow in a boat is a piece of cake, in a stationary generator likewise. In a car, no way. My cell, with good 316ss, spaced at .022", and properly sand-blasted pulls 30amps 12V with plain tap water. Throw out the modern stuff, use an old car (with a newly rebuilt engine), and get the Hydroxy to it, then restrict the petroleum, and see how far you can go on a gallon of gas. There are a lot of products on the market.

Kirkg

I printed that circuit. Now I need a parts list, and some dummy explanations!!! Old guys can learn new tricks.

Oznog

They lied about getting >100%, and there are endless products that people will sell you that will never work.

"Hydroxy" gas- "Brown's Gas"- has often been assigned many magical properties that have never been demonstrated in any real sense. Some claim it's made of monatomic hydrogen (H) instead of H2 which it isn't (H always links up into H2 immediately at room temp even if you did make it). Sometimes they like to act incredulous and say "the scientists said it would never do this, we don't know why, but it's doing it!" (no independent, qualified observer ever verifying this). In reality it's just H2 and O2 and can be burned to produce H2O again and produce heat, but there's large losses involved and far larger losses involved in getting that heat to turn into engine HP you can use.

With a huge generator, this might take 10KW of engine power that would have gone to the wheels, make chemical energy in the form of H2 and O2 at 60% efficiency for a rate of 6KW, and then adding that to the intake stream could be like 20% efficient at burning it to make engine output so you get an extra 1.2KW of engine torque out of the drive shaft. But the genny's loading down the engine at 10KW, so all this does is make a net loss of 8.8KW and a corresponding drop in MPG.

__________________
I thought what I'd do was I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes.

HarveyH42

What was the gas produced by the 'Joe Cell'. Maybe this is the same thing, just a different name. I didn't search back for the thread, remembered how long it ran, take too long to read all those post for a single word...

Kirkg

Oznog: You best do some research because you are wrong. I am not interested in Philosophy, it is the practical assembly and testing that is important. Pons and Fleischman were run out of the country, and now the U. S. is behind in important science, meantime 600 labs have replicated LENR (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions) and water electrolysis is closely related.

philba

Well, I swore I'd stay out of this but it's getting pretty far out there.

simple fact, you can't get >100% efficiency since that means you are creating energy. not going to happen. Now, they *may* have found a new source of energy in which case, it's still not >100% efficiency when you take into account the energy source. Color me skeptical, though.

600 labs have reproduced pons & flieschman?? point out some references. real ones, not blogs or stoernesque web sites. I truly want that to be real but, well, it does strain credibility, a might...

chemelec

First Off their is what is called: "OverUnity".
Based on THAT they Make Claims of over 100% Efficiency.
But That is No Where Near a True 100% or even 50%.

As to TAP Water, it is FULL OF Many Chemicals and no where near Pure Water. So Yes it Conducts, But still quite poorly.
Best Efficiency Occurs when your cell voltage is Less than 2 Volts. With the Tap Water, YOUR CELL IS NOT.

And from the Many Emails I Recieve from guys who have purchased these Devices.
Most of them DON'T WORK as Claimed. Definately NOT at All Efficiently and a RIP-OFF Prices.

BUT this is ALL A BUNCH OF "CRAP".
I Give Up, "Believe what you want".

__________________
I No Longer accept Private Messages on here.
All Emails to me Must Contain the Word \"Electronic\" in the \"Subject Line\"
or they go Directly to my Junk Mail Folder.
Email me at: chemelec@hotmail.com
Website: http://www3.telus.net/chemelec

Kirkg

There are 18 years worth of research into the question of "Cold Fusion," now known as Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR). Go to the Stanford University Engineering Library (or any other fine library) and study it. I did. There are THOUSANDS of academic references. But to get to the question of water and "Cold Fusion," read Tadahiko Mizuno and "Plasma Electrolysis of Water" from Hokkaido University. Or read, "The Rebirth of Cold Fusion," by Steven B. Krivit. Or read, "Excess Heat: Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed" (2nd Ed.) by Charles G. Beadette. To discard a well made observation is to violate modern scientific methodology. Just because Orthodox Science doesn't understand why there is excess heat doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Those electrons are oh so very important. Is there someone who wants to team up with this Industrial Engineer; and someone who really knows electronics, has the equipment, and will follow the scientific method?

philba

ok, I did some reading and frankly, it's not as simple as you imply. Fact is that while there have been some reproductions of the effect, there is very little understanding of the underlying science. You speak as if it's a foregone conclusion yet the scientific method you so greatly value is lacking in your analysis. There may well be something there but it's not at all understood.

Sorry, but I think you are a crackpot. have a nice day.

Kirkg

I would say that excess heat is the "something that is there." Quite an emotional outburst to call me a crackpot, when I am not guilty of any of the assumptions that Philba has made about me. I do not understand why. I can't replicate LENR. There are many that can. It is up to science to propose the theory and test it into the magazine "Nature." I just want help with basic electronics so that I can do my own testing. After all, this is an electronic forum is it not? The speed of Philba's answer tells me he didn't order and read the books, and didn't really have time to get into a good engineering library. The "Cold Fusion" mystery is one of contemporary Sciences' great unanswered questions. It deserves an in depth study. The fact remains that the something that is there is the "EXCESS HEAT."

HarveyH42

Just out of curiousity, how much 'Excess Heat' are we taking about?

Kirkg

The quick answer; not much. The important post on this site is for me (an electronic novice) to build a DC pulsing circuit for my water cell. The circuit by Skeeterb is interesting, and looks good. Comparing it to another circuit I have, the Skeeterb circuit does not have a 10V control for the control side of the circuit. Is that important? Also, the 555 timer chip, how to buy? On digikey they confuse me. What to order? Now....back to LENR, the output is not robust, and not 100% replicable. Hence the long long controversy. There are some labs announcing work on commercial devices, so who knows, maybe they are on the verge of something we can use. For now, "Cold Fusion" just drives Physicist crazy. But....I am not working on overunity, LENR, or a water powered car. What I am working on is an efficient electrolysis device. If it doesn't work, I will fess up.

philba

dude, you're nuts if you think I'm going to buy a bunch of books just to satisfy your claims. there's plenty on the internet telling both sides of the story and, frankly, even the pro-side doesn't paint a terribly rosy picture. To claim it as a fait-acompliss is stretching the bounds. I didn't dispute that there wasn't something there, I'm just saying you are making wild claims and arguing about things that are far from provable (e.g., greater than 100% efficiency). Crackpot.