Quote from Jeff Nading on September 14th, 2013, 02:11 PM

I can acquire a small amount of Titanium from work to test with, would be worth looking into.:cool:

Sorry Jeff, I misread Platinum with Titanium, my initial guess was that you also could use Platinum together with SS for the cell, so if you have Platinum at home go for it ;)
The problem is still though to get a diode action up and running in the cell itself, so some form of curing would be needed, so I'm guessing electropolishing the SS would be one way to go about it.......?

Ok, I'll try both and see what happens, thanks Lynx.:D

Quote from Lynx on September 14th, 2013, 01:52 PM

Well as I understand it the O2 forms on the anode and H2 on the cathode, so using it together with SS then, just to get a diode action going, I'm guessing it doesn't matter which is which in this case.
But why not try the Titanium as anode for starters.........?
As long as the diode forms, that's what I'd be aiming for anyway, the rest is still unwritten ;)

The trick with the WFC is to avoid having to feed any external current to the reaction. Normally, yes, you get O2 on one plate and H2 on the other, which also offers the possibility of splitting the gas flows.

However, with the WFC, the current flows withing the water itself!

Because the water (also a dielectric) breaks down, you get a "cold plasma" inside the water itself, "the glow", whereby the electrons just jump from one molecule to the other, which gives tiny sparks and hence "the glow".

And therefore, with the WFC you do NOT get the situation whereby O2 is formed at one plate and H2 at the other......

Quote from lamare on September 14th, 2013, 03:56 PM

And therefore, with the WFC you do NOT get the situation whereby O2 is formed at one plate and H2 at the other......

Dare take a guess at what you do get?

Fred Wells calls it Hydroxy Plasma -- H4O2

Quote from Dog-One on September 14th, 2013, 04:30 PM

Quote from lamare on September 14th, 2013, 03:56 PM

And therefore, with the WFC you do NOT get the situation whereby O2 is formed at one plate and H2 at the other......

Dare take a guess at what you do get?

Fred Wells calls it Hydroxy Plasma -- H4O2

HHO or Brown's gas, the more common name for this, has a crystallic structure and does NOT form a plasma. The water molecule is NOT ripped apart. I don't know exactly under what conditions it forms, but the process is mostly akin to the forming of ice. The major difference is that the H+ ions, or protons, that hold the crystal together in ice are not present in the liquid crystal structure. Thus the "bulk" of the water gets acid, while the crystal structure gets negatively charged. See Prof. Pollack on this, as discussed here:

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=1373&pid=17511#pid17511

It appears that, overall, a less strong electric field is needed to form this structure as is needed for splitting the water molecule.

Since the field caused by the polarized dielectric decreases over distance, it is conceivable that close to the dielectric we get H2 / O2 gas production, while further in between the plate we also get HHO gas.

It is also conceivable that this does not happen. We simply don't know enough about this to be able to predict this.

We will just have to find out experimentally, I guess.

If I had to make a bet now, I would bet that we would see mostly H2 / O2 gas, but I would estimate my winning chance to be no more than 51%....

I'll just rant a little more then.
So subjecting such a "diode" cell to enough HV when it's reverse biased would eventually lead to dielectric breakdown.
Forward biased the cell would act "normal", basically brute forcing the water into H and O, and would take a whole lot of current depending on how high a voltage you apply to it.
So using a bifilar wound choke prior to the cell would then restrict the current and you could subject it to a relatively high AC voltage, just below the dielectric breakdown knee for the intrinsic cell PN junction, which you then could tune the frequency on in order to find the sweet spot where loads of gas is formed, I.E when you find the correct resonant frequency for the whole thing.

If only.............

/rant

Started a project page and a thread for the electropolished WFC replication project:

http://www.tuks.nl/wiki/index.php/Main/MeyerWFCReplicationProject

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=1401

[more rant]
When the intrinsic cell diode is reverse biased, the, however small, parasitic capacitance it has would get charged to the VIC secondary peak voltage, which could be potentially very high, atleast up to the point where the diode is just about to break down.
During charging the current through the water would be near zero, as the diode is reverse biased.
The moment the secondary starts decreasing in voltage the intrinsic diode-capacitor would start discharging, from it's cathode through the secondary VIC coil(s) only to end up finding it's way back to the anode via the water.
During discharging the primary wouldn't take any current as the intrinsic-diode-capacitor would provide for all the juice dissipated into the water from this capacitor.
After that then the cycle starts all over again with the parasitic diode-cap being reverse-biased-charged once more.
And so on.
For every such discharge the voltage applied to the water would be ridicously high, albeit only for a few micro (nano?) seconds.

If only...........
[/rant]

One thing to keep in mind is that the wfc still leaks off the charge into the water during the gate off time so electrons are still getting to the water. Perhaps electron tunneling is occurring and slowly destroying the oxide barrier.

Thank you again Lamare for sharing your theories regarding all this, much appreciated
Abstractly speaking you have provided us with a completely new way of thinking regarding what Meyer's WFC could be all about.
Take away brute force, which "only" works using electrolytes anyway, and set fragmentation aside for a moment and ask yourself if there's another way of turning water into combustible gases, one that which uses electrons, electric fields maybe, intrinsic discharges in the dielectric of the water itself, perhaps even in the electropolished cell walls, all happening at a specific frequency where all the conditions are ripe for the highest possible exchange of gases, just the way Stanley Meyer once used to split water.
Thanks to Lamare we can now get a fresh start on the way to a completely new energy independent way of life.

Quote from Lynx on September 19th, 2013, 01:38 AM

Thank you again Lamare for sharing your theories regarding all this, much appreciated
Abstractly speaking you have provided us with a completely new way of thinking regarding what Meyer's WFC could be all about.
Take away brute force, which "only" works using electrolytes anyway, and set fragmentation aside for a moment and ask yourself if there's another way of turning water into combustible gases, one that which uses electrons, electric fields maybe, intrinsic discharges in the dielectric of the water itself, perhaps even in the electropolished cell walls, all happening at a specific frequency where all the conditions are ripe for the highest possible exchange of gases, just the way Stanley Meyer once used to split water.
Thanks to Lamare we can now get a fresh start on the way to a completely new energy independent way of life.

I must stress the importance of resonance in these experiments. Its not so much used to refresh the water, to get such motion in it. I don't think that a standing wave does much spooling, its more like creating a grit in witch the particles stay alinged. Plus get heavy shaking on the amplitude side of it.

So it is important to find the frequencies at witch the main process is acting. The one that releases the bondings. That sweet spot will reduce further the amount of used energy, and increase the production.

But to proof the concept of the importance of a dielectric layer, this side can wait for sure.

I agree EZ, there has to be a specific frequency, for the setup at hand, at which the really eyebrowsraising action takes place.
This frequency changes no doubt depending on for instance what kind of cell you're using in terms of dimensions, shape, spacing, thickness of the electropolished layers, what kind of water you're using etc etc.
Once the proof of concept has been found it's time to move on to include PLL in the circuitry so the resonance frequency is maintained at all times.
And then there's all the other practical matters, such as tweaking the motor to be used, building flame arrestors, all those practical things that which also will be needed to tend to when/if that time comes.

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 19th, 2013, 04:31 AM

I must stress the importance of resonance in these experiments. Its not so much used to refresh the water, to get such motion in it. I don't think that a standing wave does much spooling, its more like creating a grit in witch the particles stay alinged. Plus get heavy shaking on the amplitude side of it.

So it is important to find the frequencies at witch the main process is acting. The one that releases the bondings. That sweet spot will reduce further the amount of used energy, and increase the production.

But to proof the concept of the importance of a dielectric layer, this side can wait for sure.

Well, I will be using Dave Lawton's PLL circuit for my project, because that one is capable of automatically maintaining the resonance within the cell:




http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt10.html

Quote

Dave Lawton uses a different method as he has designed and built a Phase-Lock Loop ("PLL") circuit which does the same thing that Stan Meyer's automatic circuit did.

This circuit has been used very successfully by a number of people.

It works by using a so called "Phase Locked Loop" or PLL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase-locked_loop

Quote

A phase-locked loop or phase lock loop (PLL) is a control system that generates an output signal whose phase is related to the phase of an input signal. While there are several differing types, it is easy to initially visualize as an electronic circuit consisting of a variable frequency oscillator and a phase detector. The oscillator generates a periodic signal. The phase detector compares the phase of that signal with the phase of the input periodic signal and adjusts the oscillator to keep the phases matched. Bringing the output signal back toward the input signal for comparison is called a feedback loop since the output is 'fed back' toward the input forming a loop.

This circuit can be ordered in kit form from the UK:
http://www.courtiestown.co.uk/index.php/electrolysers/dave-lawton.html

So, this part of the project can be solved with an off-the-shelf kit. :)

Quote from lamare on September 19th, 2013, 04:48 AM

So, this part of the project can be solved with an off-the-shelf kit. :)

Yes, but also not totally. I don't think the own resonance of the pipes is the big number to follow. They should vibrate at a lower derivative of the real important frequency.

Say the main process frequency is 5.7 Mhz   (at a certain fieldstrength)

The tubes, when beaten give a sound of 8.4 KHz

Question: how much to shorten the inner tube to get it harmonic to the rest?

Divide the frequencies, go to the nearest whole number and adjust the tubes.

Preferably to a higher frequency, cause its easier to shorten then to lenghten. :)

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 19th, 2013, 05:14 AM

Quote from lamare on September 19th, 2013, 04:48 AM

So, this part of the project can be solved with an off-the-shelf kit. :)

Yes, but also not totally. I don't think the own resonance of the pipes is the big number to follow. They should vibrate at a lower derivative of the real important frequency.

Say the main process frequency is 5.7 Mhz

The tubes, when beaten give a sound of 8.4 KHz

Question: how much to shorten the inner tube to get it harmonic to the rest?

Divide the frequencies, go to the nearest whole number and adjust the tubes.

Preferably to a higher frequency, cause its easier to shorten then to lenghten. :)

I won't be shortening the pipes. I don't believe that is necessary, because it's the fluid which is supposed to vibrate and NOT the pipes themselves, just like it's the air that vibrates in an organ pipe or an oxen horn (the instrument I "play") and NOT the instrument itself.

And even when tuning of the pipes themselves would be helpful, the fact that Cramton's pipes are put into place holders after tuning, which restricts the tube's vibration and thus changes it's resonance frequency, would totally ruin the whole tuning effort.  

So, because Cramton's cell worked fine, even though he tuned the pipes "in the air" before mounting which would be totally useless because of the mounting of the pipes in place holders, I am pretty sure there is no need at all to do so.

Also consider this image, wherein you see this PLL circuit along with a test cell in the upper part of the picture:

http://www.free-energy-info.tuks.nl/Chapt10.html

Quote

The two air-core coils are wound separately rather than bi-filar wound, and some experimentation with different types will be undertaken to see the effect on overall gas production. This circuit is shown in the following video, driving a 2.6 inch long pair of electrodes with a 2 mm gap between them, sitting in a test cell. The electrodes have seams and are made of an unknown quality of stainless steel and can be seen at the top of the photograph above. This video shows considerable gas production with almost no current draw and the cell staying completely cool.

The video shows that it works just fine without any tuning of the pipes whatsoever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMizRAYdGwA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMizRAYdGwA


To me, that makes it pretty clear that the tuning method proposed by Kelly is most likely a total waste of time and effort.

Quote from lamare on September 19th, 2013, 05:30 AM

And even when tuning of the pipes themselves would be helpful, the fact that Cramton's pipes are put into place holders after tuning, which restricts the tube's vibration and thus changes it's resonance frequency, would totally ruin the whole tuning effort.  

So, because Cramton's cell worked fine, even though he tuned the pipes "in the air" before mounting which would be totally useless because of the mounting of the pipes in place holders, I am pretty sure there is no need at all to do so.

You could be right, i don't know what Cramton's production was, but looking at nature one can't deny that all has frequencies, vibrations at every level. And so when one uses the vibration at which the H2O splits, using the sweetspot as also called it, one gets more production..

I'm not asking to sway a dead chicken over it, i'm trying to extra tune whatever is being built.

And to me the pipes a secondary, the main frequency lies in the main process. So when adjusting the high voltages peaks towards that frequency, i think one is acting prudently..

[rant]
My 2C says that there's no need for a VIC per se as there's semiconductors available now that which weren't around at the time Meyer built his WFC, which are capable of switching very high voltages at very high frequencies.
That leaves the possibility to have a variable lab frequency generator controlling the gate to a high voltage solid state switch, capable of switching anything up to 10-20 KV at a few MHz.

http://www.behlke.com/pdf/151-02_3x.pdf

My point here is forget the VIC, forget the fully automated electronics with PLL, forget the bifilar wound chokes, instead concentrate on what's going on in the cell, or rather what's supposed to be happening in there.
I have also tried conditioning tubes with some white layer, sometimes even a black layer, only to end up with absolutely nothing, no change in performance whatsoever, regardless of how much I change the frequency operating the cell.
The only thing I ended up with was heating up the water to the point of boiling and I can use far more effective ways to achieve that.

What I'm getting at is that Lamare has opened up a whole new way of thinking for me with regards to what I need to concentrate on and I'm confident that the better part of the forum members who's also out to replicate Meyer's work would do good in shifting focus a little bit to what's the most important aspect here, namely the cell itself, all the other things can be built and adapted to the cell once the concept has been proven.

Food for thought.

[/rant]

Quote from Lynx on September 19th, 2013, 05:54 AM

[rant]

Food for thought.

[/rant]

Sure, that's where it all starts, has to start. Proof the dielectric layers importance.. (like i said in my original post..)

Vibration, resonance is an extra, something for later on.. after some proof of concept, or if the proof doesn't produce that much extra as needed.. :)

I'm almost sure one gets more production "Lamare's" way, but i still think after that, one should look into where some sweet spot may be, to get things really going.

But heck, what do you expect from someone who believes in resonance?

Max put together a good video talking about resonating frequencies:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stSpuwBljTI&feature=c4-overview&list=UUEGe7GasoADRNz6wfHM91sQ

Quote from firepinto on September 19th, 2013, 02:44 PM

Max put together a good video talking about resonating frequencies:

I have watched the video without sound and resonance certainly is an important ingredient in the whole system.

I noticed that on Stan's drawing, it says something like electrical waves, which bounce between the walls and propagate along the length direction of the horn-like structure. There is NO WAY that is correct, you are talking about a waveguide with a distance between the metal in the order of perhaps a few mm and a length of perhaps a few cm.  There is quite a lot of information about waveguides in my moonbounce thread over at the energetic forum:

http://www.energeticforum.com/eric-dollard-official-forum/9727-who-performs-first-longitudinal-moon-bounce-history-6.html#post230353

For a horn-like waveguide with a length in the order of about 10 cm, you are talking about resonance frequencies in the order of 750 MHz - 3 GHz! There would be NO WAY to do this without specialized VHF engineering.

So, the resonances which do take place can ONLY be acoustic resonances caused by sound waves propagating trough the fluid or air in the test setup and/or possibly trough the metal itself, which I consider to be pretty unlikely. There you are talking about resonance frequencies in the order of several kHz:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound

Quote

In common everyday speech, speed of sound refers to the speed of sound waves in air. However, the speed of sound varies from substance to substance. Sound travels faster in liquids and non-porous solids than it does in air. It travels about 4.3 times as fast in water (1,484 m/s), and nearly 15 times as fast in iron (5,120 m/s), than in air at 20 degrees Celsius. Sound waves in solids are composed of compression waves (just as in gases and liquids), but there is also a different type of sound wave called a shear wave, which occurs only in solids.

For a horn like structure with a length of about 10 cm, you would be talking about a resonance frequency in the order of 3 - 15 kHz.

So, those kinds of acoustic waves are well within the possibilities, while electrical or electromagnetic resonances are totally out of the question.

Quote from FaradayEZ on September 19th, 2013, 06:56 AM

Sure, that's where it all starts, has to start. Proof the dielectric layers importance.. (like i said in my original post..)

Vibration, resonance is an extra, something for later on.. after some proof of concept, or if the proof doesn't produce that much extra as needed.. :)

I'm almost sure one gets more production "Lamare's" way, but i still think after that, one should look into where some sweet spot may be, to get things really going.

But heck, what do you expect from someone who believes in resonance?

At some point in time Meyer simply had had to stumble across, most probably likely by mistake as it's merely only mistakes that brings us forward, some anomaly that which he decided to look a little deeper into.
So he must have started out using plates or tubes, just like we do, added the secret sauce (or not, Lamare could be right here in that Meyer actually didn't know anything about "different surface structures") and then hit that with some voltage and after adjusting the frequency getting what I would like to call the Meyer effect, giving either a completely new form of gas which is far more explosive compared to hydrogen, or that his cell in fact all the sudden started producing far more gas compared to any other frequency while at the same time observing the cell voltage  rise, the current fall and the water temperature drop, all along as the bubbles rose up to the surface.
I'd love to witness that with my own eyes.
Now we have to try to look beyond Meyer's patents, try out new ideas, think outside the box, make some mistakes so we learn what goes or not.
Hopefully one of us makes the right kind of mistake, the very one Meyer made (IMHO) and decides to share it to the rest of the World.
Thinking about thinking, maybe the gasflow from the cell should be subjected to an open flame now and then, just to check for differences in colour, perhaps even do soap bubbles test and set them on fire just to see (I.E hear) differences in the explosiveness.....?
As long as it's done in a controlled manner, using safety goggles, gloves, Peltor etc, I only see a lot of advantages in performing such tests.

Quote from Lynx on September 20th, 2013, 04:23 AM

(or not, Lamare could be right here in that Meyer actually didn't know anything about "different surface structures")

The problem I have with this theory is from the implementation standpoint, unless there was some more luck involved.  Here's why:

If you took a metal rod and hooked a wire to it, but nothing happened, wouldn't you suspect just for a minute you have a bad connection?  I would.  Then I'd probably sand or grind on the rod and check with the ohm meter to make sure I had that fixed.  At some point down the road you might think to yourself, "hmmm, I wonder what that coating was on the rod?"

I've had this exact same thing happen only the coating wasn't an oxide layer, it was a protective thin film to prevent oxidation.  As soon as you realize this, you get out your razor blade and check everything to make sure the film has been removed.

I can't for a moment think Stan didn't know this right away and it's something you wouldn't forget.  After fixing the bad connection on the first tube, surely he applied the same procedure to all the rest of them, unless you want to suppose for a minute none of the tubes had a direct connection to the input wires and it still managed to work that way.

Quote from Matt Watts on September 20th, 2013, 06:49 AM

Quote from Lynx on September 20th, 2013, 04:23 AM

(or not, Lamare could be right here in that Meyer actually didn't know anything about "different surface structures")

The problem I have with this theory is from the implementation standpoint, unless there was some more luck involved.  Here's why:

If you took a metal rod and hooked a wire to it, but nothing happened, wouldn't you suspect just for a minute you have a bad connection?  I would.  Then I'd probably sand or grind on the rod and check with the ohm meter to make sure I had that fixed.  At some point down the road you might think to yourself, "hmmm, I wonder what that coating was on the rod?"

I've had this exact same thing happen only the coating wasn't an oxide layer, it was a protective thin film to prevent oxidation.  As soon as you realize this, you get out your razor blade and check everything to make sure the film has been removed.

I can't for a moment think Stan didn't know this right away and it's something you wouldn't forget.  After fixing the bad connection on the first tube, surely he applied the same procedure to all the rest of them, unless you want to suppose for a minute none of the tubes had a direct connection to the input wires and it still managed to work that way.

Well, he DID have steel samples of two different diameters tested:

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Meyer/WFCreport.pdf
Page 46, IIRC.

Only to find that it's composition was just ordinary 304...


And, remember, this stuff works reasonably well without the electropolishing in the lab. The big difference is that without electropolishing / conditioning you are looking at a COP of max about 20. With it, you are talking like a COP of several 100s.

Quote from Matt Watts on September 20th, 2013, 06:49 AM

Quote from Lynx on September 20th, 2013, 04:23 AM

(or not, Lamare could be right here in that Meyer actually didn't know anything about "different surface structures")

The problem I have with this theory is from the implementation standpoint, unless there was some more luck involved.  Here's why:

If you took a metal rod and hooked a wire to it, but nothing happened, wouldn't you suspect just for a minute you have a bad connection?  I would.  Then I'd probably sand or grind on the rod and check with the ohm meter to make sure I had that fixed.  At some point down the road you might think to yourself, "hmmm, I wonder what that coating was on the rod?"

I've had this exact same thing happen only the coating wasn't an oxide layer, it was a protective thin film to prevent oxidation.  As soon as you realize this, you get out your razor blade and check everything to make sure the film has been removed.

I can't for a moment think Stan didn't know this right away and it's something you wouldn't forget.  After fixing the bad connection on the first tube, surely he applied the same procedure to all the rest of them, unless you want to suppose for a minute none of the tubes had a direct connection to the input wires and it still managed to work that way.

Fair enough.
Let's assume for a second that he tried out different types of electrolytes then using the same cell over and over again.
Perhaps he tried out phosphoric acid, propylene glycol, isopropanol, perhaps even dish soap...........? :angel:
And voila = a nice set of electropolished tubes.
Maybe he saw some interesting anomaly after that then, who knows?
I think that the old ideas has been more or less depleted, we need new ideas to kick this thing to fruition.

Fair enough.
Let's assume for a second that he tried out different types of electrolytes then using the same cell over and over again.
Perhaps he tried out phosphoric acid, propylene glycol, isopropanol, perhaps even dish soap...........? :angel:
And voila = a nice set of electropolished tubes.
Maybe he saw some interesting anomaly after that then, who knows?
I think that the old ideas has been more or less depleted, we need new ideas to kick this thing to fruition.[/quote]I think you have something there Lynx, that is a really good explanation or hypothesis :D