Hi all,

As someone who has been researching OU systems for a few years, I have relatively recently started work on HHO systems and have built a variety of test cells and circuits, including a PLL auto-tuning system which Dave Lawton originally designed.

I'm now at the stage of examining the optimum HV signal at the electrodes. To that end, I reckon it makes sense to consider what waveform is best to see at the electrode end of the chain and then work backwards to what kit and circuitry is required to deliver it.

In the attached image I have assembled five suggestions for waveforms based on the work of others.

Option 1 is based around the Bob Boyce approach with a ‘resonant’ selection of frequencies superimposed on a full-wave rectified waveform of peak 155V.

Options 2 is the Ed Mitchell approach to Meyer’s system. However, using full ac means that the electrodes are changing polarity with each half cycle so I’m wondering if that is an efficient use of energy. Also, the usual inclusion of a ‘blocking diode’ will surely block the negative half of the cycle anyway.

Options 3 and 4 are non-gated and gated versions of a 50Hz half-wave rectified and stepped up voltage waveforms.

Option 5 is a typical output from feeding a square wave into a transformer, and which only responds well to the rising and falling edges of the input, resulting in more of a spike than mirroring the square waveform. Again this can be stepped up in voltage to a higher level.

There will be of course other waveforms that members believe are ideal to deliver optimum HHO, watergas etc, and depending on whether one is using more conventional electrolysis or the ‘capacitive discharge’ type with distilled water, where the dielectric breaks down, requiring much higher voltages than the conventional type.

So to summarise my question, what do members think is the optimum waveform to exceed Faradaic limits?

Thanks

Jules

Option 1  is based around the Bob Boyce approach with a ‘resonant’ selection of frequencies superimposed on a full-wave rectified waveform of peak 155V.  option 1 is not a option it is well an truly outdated and well known  mis information based on outdated methods

Options 2 is the Ed Mitchell approach to Meyer’s system. However, using full ac means that the electrodes are changing polarity with each half cycle so I’m wondering if that is an efficient use of energy. Also, the usual inclusion of a ‘blocking diode’ will surely block the negative half of the cycle anyway.  Option 2 is not making gas with ac and ac prevent gtnt being made  option 2 is a waste of study time ac as is the thinking of using  just high voltage, it is about the phase angle  so option 2 is wrong and will never make gas unless the phase angle is learnt through long study

Options 3 and 4 are non-gated and gated versions of a 50Hz half-wave rectified and stepped up voltage waveforms.
option 3 and 4 having no gate is wrong ,  Stanley Meyers  works fine gated dc 5 khz with overlayed 5 khz gate

Option 5 is a typical output from feeding a square wave into a transformer,
and which only responds well to the rising and falling edges of the input, resulting in more of a spike than mirroring the square waveform.
Again this can be stepped up in voltage to a higher level. Option 5 is causing a bounce  ac in system and causing dead short no go
as it prevent gtnt being made

Stan Had over 11 version you need to start at 1 and learn them all do not waste time with anything else

There will be of course other waveforms that members
believe are ideal to deliver optimum HHO, watergas etc, Only Stan Meyers is worth learning it is not about wave form it is only one part  the gate is the key , there are articles on forum detail why tau is vital to know  the major effort to avoid ac and loosing the dc charge is why stans is different from others.

HHo is not correct We want GTNT Learn what it is and how to make it sustain it than you will know why ac , boyce  and others  have it wrong.
 and depending on whether one is using more conventional electrolysis  = no one here is using electrolysis

WE USE VOLTROLYSIS

or the ‘capacitive discharge’
no one is using capacitance discharge  we use capacitance compounding= dbd barrier

type with distilled water,  = double distilled
where the dielectric breaks down, we do not want dielectric break down better learn that one thoroughly
requiring much higher voltages than the conventional type. this is a mis statement  also conventional is wrong word,  you mean the outdated electrolysis dead short methods consume higher voltage stans does not consume voltage as it holds and extracts  voltage

 not written right the voltage break down is rather low it is the
compounding of  gated Voltage and extract electron voltage which maintain dbd barrier and energized state there is
no amp draw as dead short / di electric breakdown is avoided by gate and lack of salts thus is avoided.

 causing a magnetism and cold state , and dbd barrier making gas during off time

IN short every one is busy you can study here  you will find every thing you need to make version 1 through to version 11 of stan meyers

No free fish only  free fishing lessons

Your Scope shots are all wrong options

Here is version 6 to 11 Stanley Meyer

Can you see the difference

the moment you dead short is the moment you have lost effect
it is not all positive
it is perfect  compounding balance with tau rest
with near zero amps
many other points to mention

 all can be studied in this forum

 

understanding the dc phase angle is vital or voltage goes through cell with no effect

Thanks for all the info. Plenty to consider :)