Quote from FaradayEZ on November 17th, 2012, 12:08 AM

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on November 16th, 2012, 07:17 AM

thanks Axil. Things like this i just have a hard time doing so i will send the email. looks good. thanks you for taking the time and making the move.

~Russ

In Holland we say: "no we already have, yes we may get" So i see it as trying a chance an opportunity so we don't have to later on feel that we left changes walk by without acting on them.
If it stays no then we know we tried for it and will stay (more easily) in peace with ourselves.

Like the story of the drowning believer at sea... he prays for help to God, some ship comes by for rescue but he waves them off, God will rescue him he says.
Two more ships, same thing. After drowning and dying he talks to God.."why didn't you rescue me..i'm a true believer, i put my live in your hands.."

And what did God say? .....

How many times can people "not" see the forest for the trees, good one EZ.:D

Quote from Axil on November 18th, 2012, 12:21 AM

The Popper produces plasmoids, so I have been looking into this area of plasma physics. Ken shoulders has been doing research into plasmoids for some time now, and has make an observation that is valuable to us.  

Ken Shoulders' observations of the plasmoids support the conjecture that they are like vacuum energy pumps. As the plasmoid propagates down in a dielectric guide, it is constantly ionizing the dielectric surface, emitting electrons and emitting light. Yet the plasmoid does not decay. It yields the same pulse when it hits the anode regardless of the distance it travels in the guide. Also, when the high velocity plasmoid triggers a pulse on a surrounding coil, it likewise does not decay. Moreover, the output pulse from the coil exceeds the input pulse that originally launched the plasmoid. The plasmoid must keep moving to remain stable, and seems to "feed" from its environment, absorbing electrons preceding it and shedding electrons in its wake.

In our case, the plasmoid feeds on the electrons from the electrically neutral gas in front of it and  sheds electrons in its wake.

In our designs, it is important to neutralize the electrically ionized gas between spark discharges so that the plasmoid produced by the next spark discharge can feed properly in order to gain strength and speed.

So there's the answer for an EPG that could work. Instead of a whole ring with gas, a travelling FRC plasmoid that gives of electrons whatever length it travels.

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on July 29th, 2012, 10:14 PM

Let's build A "Popper" Noble Gas Engine AKA" Ppap Engine". Times Just Turned... Or Did It? We Will See!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSyASN_t-BQ

Please see below for more info.

here are the videos presented by sterling Allan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4e-8OE_vMo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkX69BA35_A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BOwmDZX5Zg

here is smartscarecrows live feed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDqc-SxKgoY

other info:

http://plasmerg.com/

 "ppap engine, noble gas drivers system"  A Must Watch!  Video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKm09vJQdqQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

i cant thank you all enough for the support! it is needed and appreciated.
 This project is fully-funded by ethos Pete. thank you Pete!!!! your a blessing and with you and everyone help we will succeed !!! I Believe!

there may also be more info you will want to see here:

http://iaec.forumco.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=699

~Russ

Hi Russ,
I have been following your progress, very interesting I'm impressed. Especially Update 11. Their seems to be a huge amount of force being developed. You got my interested. I am thinking of building your version of the Popper. Do you have a schematic with values for the spark gap and cap arrangement. I will order the parts this week and mill the piston and chamber soon.

Let the magic begin, Boots-2b1

Quote from Boots-2b1 on November 18th, 2012, 03:41 PM

Hi Russ,
I have been following your progress, very interesting I'm impressed. Especially Update 11. Their seems to be a huge amount of force being developed. You got my interested. I am thinking of building your version of the Popper. Do you have a schematic with values for the spark gap and cap arrangement. I will order the parts this week and mill the piston and chamber soon.

Let the magic begin, Boots-2b1

Big tip; try to get the gases individually, and the most expensive one's may even wait a while...

I'm sure there must be more tips.. but we haven't gathered them yet. A good thing for the future to stick those with the blue prints. As also the testsheets. And safety stuff. Maybe even some theories and links.

Oh and as bedtime reading the story of Kain and Abel



 

I would be inclined to see if Inteligentry produces a working engine on Dec 11th at Power-Gen.  If they do, why re-invent it?  If they don't then maybe it was a lie.  The time is nearly up.

Quote from Babble on November 18th, 2012, 07:43 PM

I would be inclined to see if Inteligentry produces a working engine on Dec 11th at Power-Gen.  If they do, why re-invent it?  If they don't then maybe it was a lie.  The time is nearly up.

That's the lazy road Babble..., i think we also then have to re-invent it, to open source it and to make it cheaper for the poorer customers!
And stronger, and smaller and with more functions, nicer colors..the whole bunch of marketing things that competition is made off?

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 19th, 2012, 12:25 AM

Quote from Babble on November 18th, 2012, 07:43 PM

I would be inclined to see if Inteligentry produces a working engine on Dec 11th at Power-Gen.  If they do, why re-invent it?  If they don't then maybe it was a lie.  The time is nearly up.

That's the lazy road Babble..., i think we also then have to re-invent it, to open source it and to make it cheaper for the poorer customers!
And stronger, and smaller and with more functions, nicer colors..the whole bunch of marketing things that competition is made off?

I would have to agree with you EZ, I would like to know what makes it tick, at least to know enough to run a two cylinder engine generator for our homes, to be off grid.:cool::D:P

Yeah Jeff, would be so good to be able to have a small Noble gas Engine powering both the heating and electricity in the house, go off grid.
Call the Power Company and explain where they can put their invoices.

Quote from woody0068 on November 19th, 2012, 10:56 AM

Yeah Jeff, would be so good to be able to have a small Noble gas Engine powering both the heating and electricity in the house, go off grid.
Call the Power Company and explain where they can put their invoices.

Home owner could charge the power company for the extra power produced that would be put into the grid, just think if we all could do that, power companies would have to pay us.:D

Quote from Babble on November 18th, 2012, 07:43 PM

I would be inclined to see if Inteligentry produces a working engine on Dec 11th at Power-Gen.  If they do, why re-invent it?  If they don't then maybe it was a lie.  The time is nearly up.

No one has been able to get the popper kit running. As I stated previously I believe the kit was an off the cuff deal to one up bob at the teslatech conference. No one has actually seen there version of the popper work. You would think that if it actually worked as advertised they would be showing it off. My prediction for december 11th they will come up with some excuse. Or they wont actually show up with some conspiracy theory. It is unfortunate cause russ has proven proof of concept you would think with all the money they have made licensing that they would at least have something WORKING to show for it. But alas this is nothing that hasnt already been said. I would hope that they actually get something running cause this tech is viable !

from here: http://www.inteligentry.com/report.html

Quote

I noticed on Russ's Video the other day, that since he has no interest in building a "non nuclear" project, that he has put his Popper Kit up for sale. He has also built a rudimentary "control" circuit for his "Capacitor Bank" system. Evidently, he needs all that power for a spark to jump the "Big Gap" used in the low efficiency Papp design,, see videos on the Video page of various High power inefficient systems like it and the PAPP, by people that spent 33 years trying.
     He has proven that it only takes a couple months to get the Process to work, debunking the 33 Years, and still nothing, guys. I love his videos and what he is doing. Maybe after the show I can help him make it proper. Till then I will cheer him on as my favorite "TROLL KILLER".. Thank you Russ!

 However, He did make one comment that is incorrect. He stated that anyone building the Popper was not supposed to say anything about it. But as you can see, and I have made no secret about it, I cheer him on. We set aside a whole page on the PlasmERG web site just to show what people were doing. The "license" that comes with the kit(s) is for "PERSONAL" "NON COMMERCIAL" USE. If someone comes up with a product all they need to do is get a OEM license, from us, at our current rate about $5k, and we will work with them. That will remain for any kit purchaser.

     I say that because, I am sure you all know, that, as of the Show, all of our licensing rates will change radically. But, The idea of providing kits is to allow those people that "tinker" an avenue to "discover" and "Grow". Over the next 12 months everything someone needs to know will be in kits. If you ask why, then consider that "Open" is "GOOD" if it is "controlled". Linux is "OPEN" but the technology of the "kernel" is controlled for release. We have patents pending, and many more coming, and many people working to make this technology a real world changer. I feel that to do that it must be "Grown" and "released".

     We have several offers to Create a pure research center to take this technology on further, and I can tell you that only the point of the needle has been seen so far, from my own research. So all, we are asking is that we be allowed to put new inventors into the same loop as the "group". You will find that we do NOT manufacture engines. We supply samples that manufacturers can make or change to their own designs. Saves everyone time as they also "share".

     We sell Electronics at 3% over cost so ALL will have access at the least cost, Electronics gets cheaper in Volume, and as we develop new things, or need to fix things, we can do so efficiently. No one in this company does not believe in "sharing the wealth". So, remember we have invested 4 years, and money, to create something all can profit from and the world can become better from. We have NOT spent Years scamming people and we have been very "Open". But, Like Linux "Open" needs to be looked over to maintain safety and usage for all.
     End of "Soap Box".

i will need to clear this "why" up... lol

for those here... the idea was to be open source and also i did not feel i got 350$ worth of parts...

it had nothing to do with anything else that was stated by johns post... lol
~Russ

ps hope to get back here asap... lol been WAY WAY to busy...

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM

Quote from simonderricutt on November 13th, 2012, 03:50 PM

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 03:20 PM

I don’t let disagreement bother me; it’s what makes for finding a good solution to problems.

What you say is true about the possibility of the contacts sticking, but the current should not be able to jump the electrode gap unless the HV is there to make a path. So turning off the HV should stop the process.

Just brainstorming.

The idea should be tested in a safe place to avoid danger and maybe start with low amp batteries also fuses or circuit breakers in the system.

element 119

It takes one HV spark (probably only really the leader) to get the low-impedance path that the capacitor current (or battery current) will then follow to get the pop. Although Russ has the HV sparks running quite hard, this is not actually necessary. With a battery of sufficient voltage, therefore, once the arc starts it will continue until the current is cut.

That is interesting!!!

Is it considered a fact that the d/c current will continue to flow across the gap, or is that just a possibility?

Is it possible the instant pop would break the current flow?

If the current does stop flowing when the HV is gone then there would be no need for a starter type relay. Just put a circuit breaker in line to stop excess current flow.

It just appears to me that there is an inherent flaw with using caps because of the charge up time. Even if one bank is charging while the other bank is firing wouldn’t there be a delay time with using a relay to switch them?

There must be some way to use direct battery current that is safe and would provide an instant supply of current.

How about limiting the current with resistors?

element 119

Quote from Jeff Nading on November 13th, 2012, 04:10 PM

Quote from simonderricutt on November 13th, 2012, 03:50 PM

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 03:20 PM

I don’t let disagreement bother me; it’s what makes for finding a good solution to problems.

What you say is true about the possibility of the contacts sticking, but the current should not be able to jump the electrode gap unless the HV is there to make a path. So turning off the HV should stop the process.

Just brainstorming.

The idea should be tested in a safe place to avoid danger and maybe start with low amp batteries also fuses or circuit breakers in the system.

element 119

It takes one HV spark (probably only really the leader) to get the low-impedance path that the capacitor current (or battery current) will then follow to get the pop. Although Russ has the HV sparks running quite hard, this is not actually necessary. With a battery of sufficient voltage, therefore, once the arc starts it will continue until the current is cut. Using a cap cuts it automatically. The arc will have almost zero resistance but will show a voltage drop, so will extinguish also if the voltage drops below that value - probably around 50V for Russ's gap size. He'd need 5 12V batteries in series to get a pop, but the current could be in excess of 500A. That's ballpark around 25kW in the popper, and if it's too long then the battery plates distort and kill the batteries, maybe explosively. It's just too risky.

The nice thing about the capacitor system is that it is limited in the amount of energy it can give. It can also be relatively small, so there are short wires (and fat ones) to reduce the losses.

Yes that is very true, very fast discharges of a battery could in fact cause an explosion,:angel: hydrogen gas is produced. I have had the caps pop off a auto battery before, it built up much pressure from a fast discharge, :huh: wouldn't want that happening to Russ.

Are you sure about that Jeff?

I’ve never heard a battery exploding from discharging to fast. Now if you drop a wrench across the terminals that could cause an explosion, but that is only because the spark is right there at the battery.

I know hydrogen is created when charging but I’m not sure it is created when discharging.

Also the amount of current should be limited to wire size or resistance in the circuit when shorted, so I don’t think there is any danger of the battery exploding. Unless!!! Current level is exceeded.

But I agree with keeping Russ safe. :D

element 119

I have only stated what I did from my own personal experience, so I am sure, but I am talking a dead short, + to - short, popped the caps completely off the battery, and would have exploded if I had not have disconnected the battery when I did. Also , I have a friend that the battery in his Suburban exploded as he was driving down the road, the alternator took it out, so yes it can and does happen.:D

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on November 19th, 2012, 02:30 PM

If you ask why, then consider that "Open" is "GOOD" if it is "controlled". Linux is "OPEN" but the technology of the "kernel" is controlled for release. We have patents pending, and many more coming, and many people working to make this technology a real world changer. I feel that to do that it must be "Grown" and "released".

We sell Electronics at 3% over cost so ALL will have access at the least cost, Electronics gets cheaper in Volume, and as we develop new things, or need to fix things, we can do so efficiently. No one in this company does not believe in "sharing the wealth". So, remember we have invested 4 years, and money, to create something all can profit from and the world can become better from. We have NOT spent Years scamming people and we have been very "Open". But, Like Linux "Open" needs to be looked over to maintain safety and usage for all.
     End of "Soap Box".

I dont think that john rohner really understands "open source" or linux because his model of open source in no way resembles any open source model least of the linux model. I dont really get his 3% over cost of electronics, the popper kit was proof of over priced electronic components . here are a couple of links to other kit owners I found on youtube I think charles bagwell was already mentioned here
/watch?v=Q-1ayLwDSvY
/watch?v=UWRwPdYpTBs&feature=channel&list=UL
I really really had hope for this kit and was going to purchase one myself ! I am so glad I decided to wait to see if others could replicate. Once again awesome work russ  

Quote from heero yueh on November 19th, 2012, 05:11 PM

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on November 19th, 2012, 02:30 PM

If you ask why, then consider that "Open" is "GOOD" if it is "controlled". Linux is "OPEN" but the technology of the "kernel" is controlled for release. We have patents pending, and many more coming, and many people working to make this technology a real world changer. I feel that to do that it must be "Grown" and "released".

We sell Electronics at 3% over cost so ALL will have access at the least cost, Electronics gets cheaper in Volume, and as we develop new things, or need to fix things, we can do so efficiently. No one in this company does not believe in "sharing the wealth". So, remember we have invested 4 years, and money, to create something all can profit from and the world can become better from. We have NOT spent Years scamming people and we have been very "Open". But, Like Linux "Open" needs to be looked over to maintain safety and usage for all.
     End of "Soap Box".

I dont think that john rohner really understands "open source" or linux because his model of open source in no way resembles any open source model least of the linux model. I dont really get his 3% over cost of electronics, the popper kit was proof of over priced electronic components . here are a couple of links to other kit owners I found on youtube I think charles bagwell was already mentioned here
/watch?v=Q-1ayLwDSvY
/watch?v=UWRwPdYpTBs&feature=channel&list=UL
I really really had hope for this kit and was going to purchase one myself ! I am so glad I decided to wait to see if others could replicate. Once again awesome work russ

Yes, I think we can all agree about the price of the kit, was way over priced.

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on November 19th, 2012, 02:30 PM

from here: http://www.inteligentry.com/report.html

Quote

Evidently, he needs all that power for a spark to jump the "Big Gap" used in the low efficiency Papp design,, see videos on the Video page of various High power inefficient systems like it and the PAPP, by people that spent 33 years trying.

Hmm the downside of having gone public with our testpopper...now they follow our ways and progress. And so the challenge becomes; are we as a forum smart enough to unlock more secrets etc?

Secondly he points (rightly) towards that we still use to much power, have no efficiency yet. The next two questions seem to be key in that: Where's the backcurrent? And what is a good ionizer?

Quote

However, He did make one comment that is incorrect. He stated that anyone building the Popper was not supposed to say anything about it. But as you can see, and I have made no secret about it, I cheer him on.

So we now may scan the documents and put it with the rest of the open info on the popper?

Quote

Over the next 12 months everything someone needs to know will be in kits.

Hmm so the next 12 months he will not give more info then already given..and that wasn't much to begin with... (or new kits?)

Quote

We sell Electronics at 3% over cost so ALL will have access at the least cost,

So they paid (350/103)*100= 340 dollars for their popperkit? And do we find any believers somewhere? If they pay so much for their electronics...then please can i be a supplier..that's reaching the highest COP (cost over profit) i've seen in years.
.    
.  
   

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM

It just appears to me that there is an inherent flaw with using caps because of the charge up time. Even if one bank is charging while the other bank is firing wouldn’t there be a delay time with using a relay to switch them?

I beg to differ. If Russ would have 10 sequential 1000 Joules capbanks, then the switchtime between those can be set as wanted.

Even discharging bank 2 when 1 is still discharging. I mean who says you have to wait till bank 1 is discharged? The switching is a separate circuit. That's the nice freedom in such a system.
If it interferes with each other then thats a problem for our electronic design engineer :)

That cap i still don't have, thats why i don't post on electronic circuitry.

Quote from Jeff Nading on November 19th, 2012, 12:47 PM

Quote from woody0068 on November 19th, 2012, 10:56 AM

Yeah Jeff, would be so good to be able to have a small Noble gas Engine powering both the heating and electricity in the house, go off grid.
Call the Power Company and explain where they can put their invoices.

Home owner could charge the power company for the extra power produced that would be put into the grid, just think if we all could do that, power companies would have to pay us.:D

That would be the live yeah, no more bosses to nag us but living of the grid and having all the tinkertime we want...hmm (hurry up Russ, free us..?)

Ok, that's too much pressure on one... maybe we could do work on the blue-prints? Is someone handy with googlesketch? If we are so close why not donate more? We need more harvesters and set our tentpoles wide...more builders and wider audience.

 

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 20th, 2012, 01:13 AM

Quote from Jeff Nading on November 19th, 2012, 12:47 PM

Quote from woody0068 on November 19th, 2012, 10:56 AM

Yeah Jeff, would be so good to be able to have a small Noble gas Engine powering both the heating and electricity in the house, go off grid.
Call the Power Company and explain where they can put their invoices.

Home owner could charge the power company for the extra power produced that would be put into the grid, just think if we all could do that, power companies would have to pay us.:D

That would be the live yeah, no more bosses to nag us but living of the grid and having all the tinkertime we want...hmm (hurry up Russ, free us..?)

Ok, that's too much pressure on one... maybe we could do work on the blue-prints? Is someone handy with googlesketch? If we are so close why not donate more? We need more harvesters and set our tentpoles wide...more builders and wider audience.

blue-prints are already maid. working with a guy on finishing them... patients. lol

also for Boots-2b1 and any one else looking for the schematic i posted here it is:

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=7658#pid7658

i still need to post the control box and i will post the 555 timmer circuit when i get it done.

PS. Kcd hows your progress? haven't taken the time to tell you fantastic job your doing over there where you are. the controller and motor are amazing. please post progress!! :)

~Russ

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 20th, 2012, 12:58 AM

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM

It just appears to me that there is an inherent flaw with using caps because of the charge up time. Even if one bank is charging while the other bank is firing wouldn’t there be a delay time with using a relay to switch them?

I beg to differ. If Russ would have 10 sequential 1000 Joules capbanks, then the switchtime between those can be set as wanted.

Even discharging bank 2 when 1 is still discharging. I mean who says you have to wait till bank 1 is discharged? The switching is a separate circuit. That's the nice freedom in such a system.
If it interferes with each other then thats a problem for our electronic design engineer :)

That cap i still don't have, thats why i don't post on electronic circuitry.

FaradayEz and Russ, I posted a potential circuit a while back that used a latching relay to switch between two cap banks.  One reason I think this project may be heading in the wrong direction is that it is using too much power for the high current discharge.   It is quite difficult to electronically control multiple cap banks with low cost semi devices, not to mention energy intensive.   You must isolate the bank being discharged from all the others which are being charged.  This seems to require a sync circuit or controller that would turn on devices, such as SCRs, to charge the waiting caps and keep the charging circuit off on the one being discharged.  The discharging cap must also be isolated so the other caps are not in the circuit.  SCRs essentially turn themselves off when current get below the holding current so some detection of this is needed or maybe use an IGBT.   Then you have the problem of peak current which is why this project should go toward reducing the cap value needed.

I mentioned waiting for inteligentry device because they don't seem to need high value cap discharge but that was considered lazy.  It might also be considered prudent but it doesn't mean all work needs to stop.   :rolleyes:

Quote from Babble on November 20th, 2012, 11:03 AM

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 20th, 2012, 12:58 AM

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM

It just appears to me that there is an inherent flaw with using caps because of the charge up time. Even if one bank is charging while the other bank is firing wouldn’t there be a delay time with using a relay to switch them?

I beg to differ. If Russ would have 10 sequential 1000 Joules capbanks, then the switchtime between those can be set as wanted.

Even discharging bank 2 when 1 is still discharging. I mean who says you have to wait till bank 1 is discharged? The switching is a separate circuit. That's the nice freedom in such a system.
If it interferes with each other then thats a problem for our electronic design engineer :)

That cap i still don't have, thats why i don't post on electronic circuitry.

FaradayEz and Russ, I posted a potential circuit a while back that used a latching relay to switch between two cap banks.  One reason I think this project may be heading in the wrong direction is that it is using too much power for the high current discharge.   It is quite difficult to electronically control multiple cap banks with low cost semi devices, not to mention energy intensive.   You must isolate the bank being discharged from all the others which are being charged.  This seems to require a sync circuit or controller that would turn on devices, such as SCRs, to charge the waiting caps and keep the charging circuit off on the one being discharged.  The discharging cap must also be isolated so the other caps are not in the circuit.  SCRs essentially turn themselves off when current get below the holding current so some detection of this is needed or maybe use an IGBT.   Then you have the problem of peak current which is why this project should go toward reducing the cap value needed.

I mentioned waiting for inteligentry device because they don't seem to need high value cap discharge but that was considered lazy.  It might also be considered prudent but it doesn't mean all work needs to stop.   :rolleyes:

Lazy was the wrong word to use, sorry Babble.:blush:

Quote from Babble on November 20th, 2012, 11:03 AM

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 20th, 2012, 12:58 AM

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM

It just appears to me that there is an inherent flaw with using caps because of the charge up time. Even if one bank is charging while the other bank is firing wouldn’t there be a delay time with using a relay to switch them?

I beg to differ. If Russ would have 10 sequential 1000 Joules capbanks, then the switchtime between those can be set as wanted.

Even discharging bank 2 when 1 is still discharging. I mean who says you have to wait till bank 1 is discharged? The switching is a separate circuit. That's the nice freedom in such a system.
If it interferes with each other then thats a problem for our electronic design engineer :)

That cap i still don't have, thats why i don't post on electronic circuitry.

FaradayEz and Russ, I posted a potential circuit a while back that used a latching relay to switch between two cap banks.  One reason I think this project may be heading in the wrong direction is that it is using too much power for the high current discharge.   It is quite difficult to electronically control multiple cap banks with low cost semi devices, not to mention energy intensive.   You must isolate the bank being discharged from all the others which are being charged.  This seems to require a sync circuit or controller that would turn on devices, such as SCRs, to charge the waiting caps and keep the charging circuit off on the one being discharged.  The discharging cap must also be isolated so the other caps are not in the circuit.  SCRs essentially turn themselves off when current get below the holding current so some detection of this is needed or maybe use an IGBT.   Then you have the problem of peak current which is why this project should go toward reducing the cap value needed.

I mentioned waiting for inteligentry device because they don't seem to need high value cap discharge but that was considered lazy.  It might also be considered prudent but it doesn't mean all work needs to stop.   :rolleyes:

Yes Babble, i was already thinking of making another reply where i shared your anticipation for 11 dec and that getting the secret for efficient running is needed.
I read to harshly into your post that all should stop. But again...Dr.Dr. is not the big sharing type... so if he runs an engine on 11 dec. i don't believe that that will give us the efficiency secret...

On the caps i'm also afraid that so much current is difficult/expensive to control all the way. But that it is discussed here is more cause Russ bought them cheap then that it is the shared believe that more power is the way forward...

Quote from Babble on November 20th, 2012, 11:03 AM

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 20th, 2012, 12:58 AM

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM

It just appears to me that there is an inherent flaw with using caps because of the charge up time. Even if one bank is charging while the other bank is firing wouldn’t there be a delay time with using a relay to switch them?

I beg to differ. If Russ would have 10 sequential 1000 Joules capbanks, then the switchtime between those can be set as wanted.

Even discharging bank 2 when 1 is still discharging. I mean who says you have to wait till bank 1 is discharged? The switching is a separate circuit. That's the nice freedom in such a system.
If it interferes with each other then thats a problem for our electronic design engineer :)

That cap i still don't have, thats why i don't post on electronic circuitry.

FaradayEz and Russ, I posted a potential circuit a while back that used a latching relay to switch between two cap banks.  One reason I think this project may be heading in the wrong direction is that it is using too much power for the high current discharge.   It is quite difficult to electronically control multiple cap banks with low cost semi devices, not to mention energy intensive.   You must isolate the bank being discharged from all the others which are being charged.  This seems to require a sync circuit or controller that would turn on devices, such as SCRs, to charge the waiting caps and keep the charging circuit off on the one being discharged.  The discharging cap must also be isolated so the other caps are not in the circuit.  SCRs essentially turn themselves off when current get below the holding current so some detection of this is needed or maybe use an IGBT.   Then you have the problem of peak current which is why this project should go toward reducing the cap value needed.

I mentioned waiting for inteligentry device because they don't seem to need high value cap discharge but that was considered lazy.  It might also be considered prudent but it doesn't mean all work needs to stop.   :rolleyes:

yes, i did see it and i have posted that the big cap bank is not the way to go in the end. BUT as we progress  we must work with what we have and know works... ( only need 10 caps but there were cheaper than dirt so i got some extra... not going to use all them on the popper... or at least not at full power !! lol )

this will bring forth some basic ideas and understanding where to go from here...

we all ready know we need some pree-ionization  and coils to make the most of it... but we also know we can go " brought force" and make it work...

the main goal is not speed or motor application. but rather the WHY and the understanding of how it is working and how to make it more efficient...

any how. thats my goal. understand a bit more so we can make better judgments on how to make it better...

trying to understand it completely is a waist of time as we don't have the equipment to do such tests... but we must understand it better than we do now.

any how more work to do but family first and it has been busy :)

Blessings!

~Russ

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on November 21st, 2012, 03:31 AM

Quote from Babble on November 20th, 2012, 11:03 AM

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 20th, 2012, 12:58 AM

Quote from element 119 on November 13th, 2012, 06:16 PM

It.....

I......

FaradayEz..........

yes.............any how more work to do but family first and it has been busy :)

Blessings!

~Russ

Correct you are Sir, you and your family indeed comes first ;)

Quote from Lynx on November 21st, 2012, 05:19 AM

Correct you are Sir, you and your family indeed comes first ;)

One could have interesting debates about this. I found an archieve with old movies;
http://archive.org/details/Horror_Express

and the mad scientists in those days where constantly in their labs ;)

Also the quest, the cause that we are on is of worldwide importance.. or is it not?

The bible says: look at the ants, how they work..  So i imagine that in those forums uh colonies, the other ants look out for the Russ ant, so he can devote his time on the important job. They bring him leaves or stuff, mamy russ gets an escort to the hairdresser and there is ample child daycare..?

So to put my actions where my mouth is i already made a package with a diverse selection of the best leaves from around here, its autumn so it was a relatively easy grab.

I hope this inspires others to also do their part; maybe they woo(ul)d-chip in?


(its humor and a message)

Quote from FaradayEZ on November 21st, 2012, 11:24 AM

Quote from Lynx on November 21st, 2012, 05:19 AM

Correct you are Sir, you and your family indeed comes first ;)

One could have interesting debates about this. I found an archieve with old movies;
http://archive.org/details/Horror_Express

and the mad scientists in those days where constantly in their labs ;)

Also the quest, the cause that we are on is of worldwide importance.. or is it not?

The bible says: look at the ants, how they work..  So i imagine that in those forums uh colonies, the other ants look out for the Russ ant, so he can devote his time on the important job. They bring him leaves or stuff, mamy russ gets an escort to the hairdresser and there is ample child daycare..?

So to put my actions where my mouth is i already made a package with a diverse selection of the best leaves from around here, its autumn so it was a relatively easy grab.

I hope this inspires others to also do their part; maybe they woo(ul)d-chip in?


(its humor and a message)

The message being: Balancing family and community depends on the time, the era you live in, it depends on how mad you are, and on the importance of the work that needs to be done.
But also it depends on your surrounding, the group you are a part off, how many people can help and see the importance.

Where the humor is? Ow ok, you'r funny!  :P