Cell Design, Discussion, suggestion box, Creation of a Designguide

Optimus

Cell Design, Discussion, suggestion box, Creation of a Designguide
« on November 24th, 2016, 12:25 PM »Last edited on November 25th, 2016, 11:43 AM
A friendly Hello to everybody, :)

1. General:

my name here is "Optimus", I’m coming from Germany and I’m an automotive engineer. At the moment I’m working as a designer in the field of special machine engineering.
At the very first I would like to say the following to you:
I started my search for an economically way to run combustion engines after I stumbled over Tom Ogle. Quickly after that, I found Stanley A. Meyer. For about a week I have been reading myself into the subject of HHO. At least I found ~Russ, rwgresearch.com, open-source-energy.org and all the other things that you have written here. At least I’m unbelievable impressed and I have no idea how I ever can say appropriate “thank you”. So for real: Thank you very much for sharing this great information with everybody. If we are able to change the world, the only way we could accomplish it, is: open source.


2. Cell Design Discussion:

There are different types of cells, for example dry cells out of plates or Stanley's pipe cell, etc. I would like to ask you which type of cell could be run with a VIC? For running a cell with a DC booster or pulsed DC, dry cells in a plate design a assumed to be most efficient: video

´But can these cells also be operated with a VIC and and still work more efficiently than in a pipe design?

Why did Stanley switched from pipes to a pipe/rod combination?

Is there a need for all the complex milling work and the shape of Stanley’s rods? I mean/think it’s only for getting the water in and out of the cell. If this is correct and the only reason, I think it is an unnecessary complex design. I tried to solve this problem a little bit different, like you may see in the pictures, with 4 in- and outlets integrated into the caps. What do you think?

3. Pipe Dry Cell Proposal:
 
As first impression to the construction:

I sketched my idea in Inventor 2016. To keep it easy and cheap I want to use either a rod/pipe or a pipe/pipe combination. At the pictures you see pipe/rod, first as a “try-out” single cell. It is only build out of the 1.4404 parts and two plastic caps, means 4 altogether. It’s very easy designed and it will be easy to copy it, if it works like expected. The push creativity and motivation, there are also pictures of an 18 cell block. The plastic parts are more or less complex. For a tryout the shown caps are easy to rotate and drill. The block caps needs to get milled.


Specs:
-   1.4404 rod, d=10mm, L=170mm
-   1.4404 pipe, D=18mm, t=2mm, L=150mm
-   H=180mm
-   2mm gap
-   2 plastic caps
-   Contacts with sharp screws

Specs:
-   18x cell
-   Overall: 190x100x180 [mm] (LxWxH)

4. Brainstorming:

1.) I have found the frequency analysis, described in the Chapter10.pdf and have talked to a former professor of mine for acoustics. He has convinced me that it makes no sense to carry out this analysis, like it’s described. Why? He claimed the following (to keep it short):
-   Analyzing the pipes separately is a different story to having them together, or even in the water, because of a drastically change in natural frequencies
-   The natural frequencies of pipes are defined by length, diameter, material, etc. (like described before) but also by a standing wave in the pipe and the form of the mentioned wave.
-   You can see different types here: Image
-   So if you put another pipe inside you change the form of wave inside both pipes
-   And another change is seen after putting them into the water
It could be very useful however, to shape the pipes after analyzing them in working conditions and furthermore to trim the natural frequency of the cell to a harmonic of the natural frequency of the water molecule. Sadly I’m not close to have such equipment for myself. So to all acoustic nerds out there: Try to analyze and form a cell that way!

2.) Did anybody bevor considered to use 1.4435 instead of 1.4404? According to the German Wikipedia:
“This material is very similar in composition to the 1.4404 and differs essentially by an increased molybdenum and nickel content. Due to the increased addition of austenite formers such as nickel, the formation of δ-ferrite in the microstructure is reduced or completely prevented. This has the advantage that this steel is not magnetizable. Due to the higher molybdenum content the resistance to pitting (pitting corrosion) is higher than at 1.4404”
Edelstahl
Pitting Corrosion
For me this sounds interesting.

2. My plans:

As a first step I want to build a Dry Cell in strong leaning on Stanley’s WFC. With the WFC I want to run a generator fully on water, like shown here: Chapter 10 . Therefore I need a working cuicit to produce HHO.  Because I am a designer and not an electrician, I do not have much experience with circuits. I have some basic knowledge and I can order and build a circuit, but I’m hard with creating more complex circuits like shown here. I have read the whole thread suggested by Lynx:
Quote from Lynx on November 24th, 2016, 09:13 PM
Hello Optimus and welcome :-)

You might want to take a closer look into this thread, http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=2785
And it realy helped me to get a better understanding for the VIC and the WFC.

But for the first step I'm fine with a working cicuit and I realy hope one of you has a suggestion  :)

A high goal for the futureis to run something like a Mercedes-Benz 500 SEL on HHO. :D
But we’ll go step by step. If it works, I can convince more people to work on it and include much more know how in the development.

I am looking forward to many suggestions from you and a good cooperation to change the world and proof that Stanley (Rest in Peace) was wright and we are able to run cars on water.

Greetings and a very big Thanks to all Stanley researchers.

~Optimus~

reverandkilljoy

Re: Stanley A. Meyer Replication and further Improvement?
« Reply #1, on November 24th, 2016, 12:34 PM »
Further improvements?

lets not kid ourselves here....

no one has shown a fully functioning "resonant" cell....

so mabye we shouldent focus on improving, when there isent even a functional unit....

unfortunatly the pipes arent tuning forks......

Lynx

Re: Stanley A. Meyer Replication and further Improvement?
« Reply #2, on November 24th, 2016, 09:13 PM »
Hello Optimus and welcome :-)

You might want to take a closer look into this thread, http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=2785

What's so important about that thread is that for the first time a truly working Stanley Meyer water fuel cell is being explained in detail (it's an ongoing process as we speak) for everyone to take part of and once people are able to replicate such a Meyer WFC and also help others to build these then there's no way but forward, away from everything fossil fuel powered as fossil fuels no longer would be needed.

Looking forward to see your progress here :thumbsup:

Optimus

Re: Cell Design, Discussion, suggestion box, Creation of a Designguide
« Reply #3, on November 25th, 2016, 11:52 AM »Last edited on November 25th, 2016, 12:08 PM
Quote from Lynx on November 24th, 2016, 09:13 PM
Hello Optimus and welcome :-)

You might want to take a closer look into this thread, http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=2785

What's so important about that thread is that for the first time a truly working Stanley Meyer water fuel cell is being explained in detail (it's an ongoing process as we speak) for everyone to take part of and once people are able to replicate such a Meyer WFC and also help others to build these then there's no way but forward, away from everything fossil fuel powered as fossil fuels no longer would be needed.

Looking forward to see your progress here :thumbsup:
Hello Lynx,

thank you for the welcome. I have met your suggestion and read the whole thread and I hope that gpssonar is also so experienced in the cell design as with the VIC. Hopefully he can help with the WFC aswell.
Furthermore I've edit my first thread a little bit. :)
One question is spinning in my mind after reading through the last month:
If the whole fracturing process is caused by the electrical field and not by the flow of electricity (bubbles appear in the middle), why not coat the complete steel parts, except of a small area to provide the needed amp leakage to start the process?

~Optimus~ 

Lynx

Re: Cell Design, Discussion, suggestion box, Creation of a Designguide
« Reply #4, on November 25th, 2016, 04:36 PM »
Quote from Optimus on November 25th, 2016, 11:52 AM
Hello Lynx,

thank you for the welcome. I have met your suggestion and read the whole thread and I hope that gpssonar is also so experienced in the cell design as with the VIC. Hopefully he can help with the WFC aswell.
Furthermore I've edit my first thread a little bit. :)
One question is spinning in my mind after reading through the last month:
If the whole fracturing process is caused by the electrical field and not by the flow of electricity (bubbles appear in the middle), why not coat the complete steel parts, except of a small area to provide the needed amp leakage to start the process?

~Optimus~
Probably because you would want to have uniform polarization of the water molecules all throughout the cell as opposed to having it confined to a limited little area in the cell, though you should really ask this very question in gpssonar's thread instead ;-)

Optimus

Re: Cell Design, Discussion, suggestion box, Creation of a Designguide
« Reply #5, on November 27th, 2016, 12:27 PM »
Hello guys,

i did some more research and found another interesssting material: 1.4571 / 316Ti.

And additionally some Cells out of it: 316Ti Cell's
For the english members i translated the text with a translator:
Quote
HHO TITAN GENERATOR 21 PLATES
Here an HHO generator dry cell with cathodes of pure titanium (minus plates) is sold.
The plates are made of pure titanium and this produces more orthohydrogen than parahydrogen, so that more reactive HHO gas is produced.
The titanium is not only much more resistant but also the production of the hydrogen of the titanium plates is about 2 times to 4 times more powerful than hydrogen from stainless steel plates. Due to the metal (not titanium) present in stainless steel plate electrolysis, the powerful orthohydrogen is changed to a weaker parahydrogen. Orthohydrogen is 2-4 times more reactive than parahydrogen. When the titanium plates are used, there is also no chromium or other ions that alter the reactive orthohydrogen.
In addition, chromium ions are very harmful to health and are highly carcinogenic, but also toxic and harmful to health.
 
 
 
The dry cells have a longer service life than conventional wet cells but are also much safer from their own experience because the wet cells require only a small spark to explode the container of the cell.


Dimensions and data:

12x13.5x5.6 cm. Weight 2,5 kg. 1 LPM at 12 Ampere, up to max. 75 Ampere 6 LPM possible. For best performance we recommend to operate the HHO generators with 55-60 A. With this generator can work with 12V -14V. For this, 3-5% potassium hydroxide (KOH) is required for 1L distilled water.


  Thus the circuit looks like: -NNNN + NNNN-NNNN + NNNN-


Plates: 21 plates; Of which 3 are made of pure titanium Material no. 3.7035 - 1mm. And 18 of 1.4571 (316Ti with titanium portion) - 1.0mm (better than VGA) stainless steel. The titanium plates were cut with a water jet and the stainless steel with a laser. EPDM seals are 2mm. Temperature range -40 ° C + 150 ° C. The angle screw-in connectors are made of a polyamide for a hose with the internal dimensions of 8mm.

The plates are specially chemically treated and thus have the long life as well as there is no longer brown discoloration in the
Electrolyte.
And guess what... I will receive 14 plates 165x165mm ot of this material this week <3
Im excited to try them out.

~Optimus~

HHO-Dan

Re: Cell Design, Discussion, suggestion box, Creation of a Designguide
« Reply #6, on November 27th, 2016, 08:12 PM »
Hi Optimus,
I think you need to keep the size of the cell small to match stans cell.
It looks like the VIC is impedance matched with the cell so a large cell might not work.
We will know more soon.

Most of us right now are not trying to make changes to the cell or VIC untill we get our own working prototype than we can try changes but I will be using flat plates 2" x 5" for my first cell untill I can get my tubes cut and fitted....Good luck.......

Optimus

Re: Cell Design, Discussion, suggestion box, Creation of a Designguide
« Reply #7, on November 28th, 2016, 05:03 AM »
Quote from HHO-Dan on November 27th, 2016, 08:12 PM
Hi Optimus,
I think you need to keep the size of the cell small to match stans cell.
It looks like the VIC is impedance matched with the cell so a large cell might not work.
We will know more soon.

Most of us right now are not trying to make changes to the cell or VIC untill we get our own working prototype than we can try changes but I will be using flat plates 2" x 5" for my first cell untill I can get my tubes cut and fitted....Good luck.......
Hello Dan,

With which circuit you will operate your 2" x 5" plate cell?

~Optimus~