Just found this photo of Stan's Dune Buggy engine, it's all labeled
[attachment=4234]

Quote from Jeff Nading on September 17th, 2013, 07:46 PM

Just found this photo of Stan's Dune Buggy engine, it's all labeled

I think the key parts to the water injector system were always removed when the buggy was left unattended.  In the picture Jeff posted, you can see that the distributor is removed.  If you look behind the wires for the "ambient air, ionized gasses, and exhaust gasses" valves, you can see where the DB9 cable from the distributor was plugged in.  I believe the distributor that was installed before the buggy was prepped for selling was the one for the 11 cell version with the original VW cap and rotor on top.  The distributor that is intended for the water injectors does not have the VW distributor cap and has two cables with DB9 ends on it.  You can also see two other DB9 cables attached to the junction box, one for the valves mentioned above and the other for the water inlet valves for cylinders 1 and 2.  The other DB9, and two other DB15 sockets have white protective covers.  The covered DB9 socket is for the second water injector style laser distributor cable.

The two other DB15 sockets are for two Multi-Spool VIC Coils.  When I figured out dimensions for most of the aluminum case in Sketchup, the top wire hole fits a DB15 connector perfectly.  The right side of the buggy has the same junction box, with covers over the extra DB9 sockets, and also the DB15 sockets for the other two VIC coils.

The aluminum panels mounted on the buggy frame to the rear of the water valves are where I think the VIC Coil aluminum boxes where mounted.  This would give the shortest cable length possible from the coils to the water injectors.

The question I keep wondering is .. Why a 15 pin connector to the VIC coil?  Maybe pins where just soldered together to carry more current?  

Quote from Jeff Nading on September 17th, 2013, 07:46 PM

Just found this photo of Stan's Dune Buggy engine, it's all labeled

Good pic!

This (last) version of buggy surprisingly seems to be simple (in compare to the previous versions).

It is to see, that the exhaust gases, were cooled down by the small condenser. Maybe to transform the steam/fog to H2O partially.

Maybe he did not need the distributor, because of the electronic control board to fire the valves and injektors in the right order/sequence.
Theoretical, he did not need the distributor with high voltage to get the right timing to fire. Only the low voltage signal from the UDC sensor is needed.  
I think the cable which is going to the place of the taken away distributor.

Quote from lamare on September 11th, 2013, 01:16 PM

Hi all,

I have spent some time looking at video's with Stan's dune buggy actually running or at least the engine running. Now I must say that I have no sound on this computer, so perhaps I overlooked one, but so far I have only been able to find ONE single video wherein the buggy is actually running:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFIlXaABU54

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFIlXaABU54

In this 1992 video, I can't see the engine running, for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXTzBuIrVj0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXTzBuIrVj0


This raises a number of questions, but the most important one is: Why can't I find any footage showing a running dune buggy except this single one?

I also took a look at some of his patents. The resonant cavity one dates from 1982 (priority date, date of first filing). The pictures in the dealership manual are all dated between 1981 and 1983:

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Meyer/Stan%20Meyer%20Dealership%20Sales%20Manual%201986%20OCR%20CONVERTED.pdf

There is a "hydrogen gas injector" patent with a priority date of 1982, but that one is not the all-in-one injector intended to replace a spark plug, but appears to be a system to inject the gas into the air intake system of the engine:
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Meyer/Hydrogen%20gas%20injector%20system%20for%20internal%20combustion%20engine%20-%20EP0086439A1.pdf

That what we know as the injector, though, has a priority date of 1991:
http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Meyer/Water%20Fuel%20Injection%20System%20-%20WO9222679A1.pdf


So, it appears to me we are looking at a working dune buggy somewhere around 1980 - 1985, while I can find no evidence whatsoever that the car ever ran after that time frame.

This begs the question: did the injector system ever work?

If it did, why can we find videos of Meyer explaining and showing the car, but not a single one wherein the car is actually running? Why would he not show the car running, unless it was uncapable of doing so?  

Take this video, for example, a documentary aired by the BBC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE6AkSE2JCk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE6AkSE2JCk


This has been aired in 1994 (http://www.hho4free.com/stan_myers.htm ).

I mean, come on!  You get the BBC visiting you for a documentary, THE chance of a lifetime, and all you can do is push your car out of your garage? Yes, the car is shown running in there, BUT that is OLD footage from the Ohio TV program, which probably aired somewhere around 1981 - 1985.

So, how come Stan had a running car somewhere around 1981 - 1985 and never ever got it running on water again? Cause, that's what you reasonably have to conclude, given the footage we got.

Of course, one can also conclude that the whole thing was a scam, but I don't believe that, given the replications of a/o Ravi, Lawton and Cramton. And of course, I have a decent theory which explains exactly why these replications were successful:

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=1168

My basic conclusion is that the system won't work as specified, unless he would have used electropolished stainless:

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=1372

I also received some private messages at the energetic forum:

Quote

the stainless tubes were of differing gauges and likely purchased or obtained as scrap. (See magnifiied images and photogrammetry at ionizationx)

A common place to get scrap metal at the time was the Joyce Ave Scrap Co. located in Columbus
 
In fact look at p 40 of the IITER report and he used a company called Materials Joining Company Col-x locacted at 901 East Hudson which is just a couple miles from the scrap yard the characteristics of the samples stan provided are listed

According to Charlie Hughes when Stan was running the tractor at the farm, it had about 50 exciter tubes (listen to phone interview)

Googling for that name, I find another dated photograph:

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2007/07/08/hydroman.ART_ART_07-08-07_A1_4V77MOK.html

Quote

Stanley Meyer during a test of his dune buggy, about 1980. This screen shot was taken from a DVD sent to The Dispatch by his twin brother, Stephen Meyer.

I can't seem to find the interview mentioned. Perhaps one of you has it?

When we add all this together, I think we can reasonably conclude that Stan got his car running ONLY during the early 80's and that it is likely that he used scrap components. So, it is entirely possible and even likely that he just happened to get his hands on a set of scrap electropolished stainless tubes, whatever the source of these might have been.

Why, oh why, is there a chemical analysis of the stainless he used dated december 22, 1982?

http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Patents/Meyer/WFCreport.pdf
(page 46)

Why did he also let them test his water sources?

Because he got a set of working tubes, but was unable to repeat his results with other tubes, that's why! And he had no idea what the heck was so special about these working tubes.

But we know almost certain why. This special set he had analysed for it's chemical composition happened to have been electropolished and thus contained a thicker layer of Cr2O3 as usual. A tiny little detail which would not show up with chemical analysis....


Therefore, I am tempted to conclude that he only got ONE single set of tubes working due to a "lucky shot" and that the injector system never actually worked. And I actually think it will never work either, because the surface area with the dielectric which does all the magic is much, much smaller than in an electrolyser system.

To Lamare,
I also have wondered about the injector being possible. How can you hydraulic (inject) both gas and water in through the same line, unless the gasses are in saturated solution. I have built a Ravi model stainless/s tube gas generator without much success, but note that back in09 someone here said that the unit did not need to be immersed in water, but high humidity could give easier water splitting because of the fine droplet size.(reduced bonding)
I wonder about the s/s tubes being above the water, with a nebuliser atomizer (TDK.co.jp) in the water producing a volume of fine mist guided upward between the tubes.
If the air/gas flow that carried the mist upward between the tubes came from the exhaust, I would expect the field between the tubes to ionise the air/gas at the same time as producing HHO. The produce from the top of the tubes should be
1. mist. 2. NH3 3. all other by product gas etc.
ammonia has a great attraction to water and imediately saturates.
Has anyone sprayed ammonia water onto an operational sparkplug on the bench ?
changing concentration to get a preferred flame would tell what the water needs to contain, and work backwards from there.
I do not understand electronics, so if my thinking about non-conbustable gas/air carrying a water mist between the tubes is not practical, please tell me.
blacksmith.

Quote from lamare on September 15th, 2013, 11:37 PM

Pollack experimented with water when subjected to hydrophobic materials. What happens then is that the water comes in a state which is believed to be somewhat in between liquid water anc ice.

What it does, is form a honeycomb crystal, very similar to the crystal structure it forms when freezing. However, in frozen state, the crystal is rigid because layers of these crystals are bound to one another by hydrogen atoms. These bridges between the layers make that these cannot move with respect to one another and thus the structure as a whole gets rigid.

In the state which Pollack call s "EZ", for exclusion zone, microspheres and other contaminations are pushed away into the bulk water, which suggests a connection to ice crystals. They observed the thickness of this EZ layer to grow when infrared light is radiated on to the test material and they found a specific wavelength which works best:

Can't the EZ zone be used to de-sallinate seawater? Ergo rehydrate africa?

Irondmax was kind enough to point me to another video showing the first prototype running:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/537725649598815/permalink/590648280973218/

/watch?v=eKbXn9Zy_LU
/watch?v=eKbXn9Zy_LU

I made a still shot:




This looks an awful lot like a FIRST prototype of the WFC made with off the shelf stainless steel tubes, which have likely been purchased as a batch of scrap parts.

In the video, it is said that the injectors were not yet working.

So, yet another video supporting my thesis that ONLY the FIRST prototype, made from scrap parts actually ran in the sense that it could actually be cruised with.

Thanks for sharing Lamare, all original videos of Meyer's buggy are priceless

Going back to the question if Stan's injector could ever work...

I say : "Yes it could."

Why do i say this?

see

We all have seen this video once before.

I want to put your attention to 8 min and 55 seconds into the video.

There you may see an EZ layer learning the water how to be a fuel. Using the water memory as Matt suggested, using a lattice like Brillouin, using an EZ layer like Pollack says, it all revolves around the same.

It looks like a self charging capacitor that rearranges the water molecules. The smallest change we know about that goes towards Browns gas is the change in angles between the H and the O.  ( From H \ O / H  to  H-O-H  )

So if Stan was able to condition the water to act like a fuel before or in his injector system.. then he should have been able to drive his buggy with it like this guy drives his bike on it.

So yes, Stan could have had a working injector system.

Because we see that a sideway inventor has succeeded in doing similar.

If Stan really did it, then becomes a lesser question, someone has done about the same in his own way.

If we can do it in Stan's way remains an open question.
But if we would understand what this Auckland guy does, then we could see if Stan's system is near to it or not.







 

Found the logo at least, but not much else.

http://www.mail-archive.com/interact%40listserv.capital-master.com/msg00047.html

Interesting his little fuel making box has two wires with no battery.  I would have to think that box took an absolute boatload of energy to make.  The energy had to come from somewhere didn't it?
[attachment=4459]

Anyway, good find EZ.  Definitely something to think about, hoax or not.

Quote from Matt Watts on October 19th, 2013, 05:28 AM

Found the logo at least, but not much else.

http://www.mail-archive.com/interact%40listserv.capital-master.com/msg00047.html

Interesting his little fuel making box has two wires with no battery.  I would have to think that box took an absolute boatload of energy to make.  The energy had to come from somewhere didn't it?


Anyway, good find EZ.  Definitely something to think about, hoax or not.

There's a copy of the website at archive.org:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090323214201/http://www.biosmeanslife.com/home.html

Quote from lamare on October 19th, 2013, 10:38 AM

There's a copy of the website at archive.org:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090323214201/http://www.biosmeanslife.com/home.html

Cool thanks lamare.


I have to wonder though, if there really is such a thing as "water that burns", does that water freeze?  If it does, at what temperature?  If it does freeze, after it melts, does it still burn?

Quote from Matt Watts on October 19th, 2013, 11:31 AM

Quote from lamare on October 19th, 2013, 10:38 AM

There's a copy of the website at archive.org:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090323214201/http://www.biosmeanslife.com/home.html

Cool thanks lamare.


I have to wonder though, if there really is such a thing as "water that burns", does that water freeze?  If it does, at what temperature?  If it does freeze, after it melts, does it still burn?

So through web archive we can find his website, but is he (the inventor) still in the land of the living? (And if not, shouldn't we start a hall of fame..for these warriors for the good?)

I think when that impregnated water gets some other rough treatment, that it will return more and more to the state we know. But that's only my imagination saying so.

Again, if we had a microscope to see all the parts in details...