Quote from securesupplies on January 8th, 2013, 09:15 AM

Hi Please Like my Post .

Special Shout to RUSS, Very good
knowledge coming from your work. to help get the world involved.
Never stop we all struggle to assist.

members
better pop link here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE&list=FLLuDKTNDFfat7iO7KGE7fQA

info link
http://cdn.coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Lightning-harnessed-Infinite-Magazine-2003-copy.pdf

Note Stan may have keep simplifying until he was ionizing air and banging it.
his last step may have been removing water.

Note 2 - EPG may have been  the stator on it milking the expansion.
gas lattice may be valid to control movement. and should be remembered for inside cylinders also(test it ) ion argon gas in popper. better magnetic control?

Remember

1. "it's very hard work to keep things simple"
the above highlights that to us all in this forum.

2.share.

Quote

Note Stan may have keep simplifying until he was ionizing air and banging it.

his last step may have been removing water.

The use of non-noble gases to carry the reaction in a Papp engine including water and hydrogen will lead to serious limitations in the lifetime of the structural materials used to fabricate the Papp engine.

The cylinders will become increasingly contaminated with the breakdown products of its structural materials until this contamination results in piston failure.
This issue is the reason behind my opinion that that Papp changed his design to use only noble gas in this last design starting in the 1980’s timeframe.

Noble gases will not affect the structural material inside the cylinder and will support an extended engine service lifetime.
 








Regarding post

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=11604#pid11604

For all those builders who have not achieved piston movement from the discharge of their spark, I suggest testing their spark in a test rig as shown in the referenced post.

  For more info,  see this video as follows:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4nIeW1z374

I see much discussion on the "buckets".  My feeling is that if you are using the RF to ionize, then the buckets do not play an integral part in the energy release. I wonder more if then you could use the buckets to gather excess EMF from the plasma gap. I watched the videos, but don't recall seeing the RF being added to the purchased gas mixture. My worry being that whatever you send the EMF to can not be grounded to the same point as the "igniters". Very interested in this project. Excellent work this far.

Quote from simonderricutt on January 8th, 2013, 03:23 AM

Russ - chemically Deuterium is the same as Hydrogen, just around twice the density. It'll burn in air just the same as Hydrogen, and has the same dangers. If you were going to try it, though, it might be best to add it in a few cc's at a time, in case you do get any fusion in the ignition, with a back-fill of an inert gas. I haven't checked on prices of gas, but I suspect Argon would be the cheapest gas to use to dilute things and may have some other advantages too.

I was thinking the same thing, with one modification.  Simply dope a hydrogen run with Deuterium to potentially enhance the effect already observed.  This way there are no confounding variables (ie. other gas effects).  

Roughly speaking, in 1 liter of hydrogen there will be 0.2 milliliter of deuterium.  Add about two milliliter of deuterium per 1 Liter of hydrogen to the vessel.  If I remember correctly, Russ actually used 4x60 ml total hydrogen fill.  Therefore, use about 0.5 ml of deuterium (ie scale to the volume necessary).  Anyway, run a series of experiments where you gradually increase deuterium concentration, just to be on the safe side.

Quote from Chan on January 8th, 2013, 05:01 AM

Russ,
"This section of the patent states that Papp uses multiple
sparks per cylinder firing cycle. question... Deuterium gas
is flammable... is it explosive? or dose it need an oxidizer?"
1.  D waste of time.
2.  Burns like H.
3.  Less prone toward super molecules (D ice cube sinks).
4.  Again I point toward Toroid chamber shape.
5.  Multiple sparks sequenced to form plasma shape,
rotational motion within Toroid chamber and ability to
electromagnetically confine same.  
6.  Piston movement caused by quasi expansion of pressure
caused by increase of distinct members occupying plasma
cloud. (H2,H,H+,H-,-) and plasma temperature.
7. Vacuum caused by drain of magnetic field usually via coil
and dissipation of plasma. (A ball of lightening is never
permanent).
8.  Suggest stick with your astonishing discovery of H2
popper and establish ground work for additional patent
claims to benefit your family and provide possible financial
independence to work full time on inventive genius God has
gifted you.
Chan

Chan, the deuterium is not to test for combustion.  Rather, the deuterium experiment probes the question about nuclear fusion.  Deuterium is better nuclear fuel than hydrogen (by many orders of magnitude).  If fusion is your power source, presumably more deuterium will enhance the effect.

Hello Everyone.

Just wanted to share some results of my popper test setup and something unexpected that happens.

See the attached image for my setup.

Basically it is a 3-air gap setup. Each of the HV electrodes jump an air gap to the 2 central electrodes that carry the DC cap voltage this also allows the HV to jump the central DC electrodes air gap. I tried a one-air gap setup where all 4 electrodes came together at a central point but spotty results at best. This setup worked best for me and got a pop every time tried.    

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.  

I did not expect this build up and draining of the capacitor cycle and not sure if this is common knowledge so I just wanted to share the info.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my electric setup I made a multi-vibrator box much like in the old days say on a Model T Ford they had a bi-filer coil wrapped around an iron rod. One end of inner coil went to battery plus and the other end of the inner coil went to a set of contact points for the negative side. When battery voltage is applied the coil became an Electro magnet and pulled open the contact point and breaking the circuit, resulting in a repeated self open and closed cycle. Only difference on mine I used a standard Automotive coil for the high voltage out.

My test Popper setup is the end cap for a 2-inch PVC pipe as the part that holds the electrodes. Small popping results so far but more testing planned. Gonna see if any air pressure is achieved with a completely non-metal chamber.

element 119

Quote from element 119 on January 8th, 2013, 04:24 PM

Hello Everyone.

Just wanted to share some results of my popper test setup and something unexpected that happens.

See the attached image for my setup.

Basically it is a 3-air gap setup. Each of the HV electrodes jump an air gap to the 2 central electrodes that carry the DC cap voltage this also allows the HV to jump the central DC electrodes air gap. I tried a one-air gap setup where all 4 electrodes came together at a central point but spotty results at best. This setup worked best for me and got a pop every time tried.    

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.  

I did not expect this build up and draining of the capacitor cycle and not sure if this is common knowledge so I just wanted to share the info.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my electric setup I made a multi-vibrator box much like in the old days say on a Model T Ford they had a bi-filer coil wrapped around an iron rod. One end of inner coil went to battery plus and the other end of the inner coil went to a set of contact points for the negative side. When battery voltage is applied the coil became an Electro magnet and pulled open the contact point and breaking the circuit, resulting in a repeated self open and closed cycle. Only difference on mine I used a standard Automotive coil for the high voltage out.

My test Popper setup is the end cap for a 2-inch PVC pipe as the part that holds the electrodes. Small popping results so far but more testing planned. Gonna see if any air pressure is achieved with a completely non-metal chamber.

element 119

Like your setup, very cool element 119.:cool::D:P

Quote

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.

This is exciting work.

I wonder if you are seeing a feedback current flow back through the cap circuit?  

By leaving  high voltage on, you may be polarizing the cathode and anode in the cap circuit so that the charge from the air surrounding the electrodes are collected and returned back to the caps.

Why do you have three air gaps. Connect the anode of the cap circuit directly to the anode of the high voltage circuit.

See

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CEwQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1022%26context%3Delecengwilliams&ei=R_PIUN_YCOTD0AGMroDYBg&usg=AFQjCNEs1s7LOYnRaKBY4XIihziFcWZAEg&sig2=KhJ0T3Lkdd_I_ol5YZEcAw

Also

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UYrv7VPHQA

Quote from Axil on January 8th, 2013, 05:18 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UYrv7VPHQA

Looks familiar:

When a large packet of charged particles traveling at relativistic speeds in the shape of a roiling ring(aka plasmoid) hits a surface made of any type of material, the charge of the packet will push against or repel the surface regardless of what kind of material the surface is made from.

This new research finding is directly applicable to the work being conducted in this thread.

See the following for more background information:

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-metal-surface-repel-electric.html

Quote from Jeff Nading on January 8th, 2013, 05:15 PM

Quote from element 119 on January 8th, 2013, 04:24 PM

Hello Everyone.

Just wanted to share some results of my popper test setup and something unexpected that happens.

See the attached image for my setup.

Basically it is a 3-air gap setup. Each of the HV electrodes jump an air gap to the 2 central electrodes that carry the DC cap voltage this also allows the HV to jump the central DC electrodes air gap. I tried a one-air gap setup where all 4 electrodes came together at a central point but spotty results at best. This setup worked best for me and got a pop every time tried.    

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.  

I did not expect this build up and draining of the capacitor cycle and not sure if this is common knowledge so I just wanted to share the info.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my electric setup I made a multi-vibrator box much like in the old days say on a Model T Ford they had a bi-filer coil wrapped around an iron rod. One end of inner coil went to battery plus and the other end of the inner coil went to a set of contact points for the negative side. When battery voltage is applied the coil became an Electro magnet and pulled open the contact point and breaking the circuit, resulting in a repeated self open and closed cycle. Only difference on mine I used a standard Automotive coil for the high voltage out.

My test Popper setup is the end cap for a 2-inch PVC pipe as the part that holds the electrodes. Small popping results so far but more testing planned. Gonna see if any air pressure is achieved with a completely non-metal chamber.

element 119

Like your setup, very cool element 119.:cool::D:P

Thanks Jeff!  :D

Quote from Axil on January 8th, 2013, 05:18 PM

Quote

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.

This is exciting work.

I wonder if you are seeing a feedback current flow back through the cap circuit?  

By leaving  high voltage on, you may be polarizing the cathode and anode in the cap circuit so that the charge from the air surrounding the electrodes are collected and returned back to the caps.

Why do you have three air gaps. Connect the anode of the cap circuit directly to the anode of the high voltage circuit.

See

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CEwQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1022%26context%3Delecengwilliams&ei=R_PIUN_YCOTD0AGMroDYBg&usg=AFQjCNEs1s7LOYnRaKBY4XIihziFcWZAEg&sig2=KhJ0T3Lkdd_I_ol5YZEcAw

Also

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UYrv7VPHQA

I just finished building the chamber today so more testing is going to happen.

I originally was going to try the 4-electrode setup because I wanted to use 2 separate 12 v batteries. This I thought would help eliminate any cross contamination of the 2 systems. When as I said I didn’t get good results with the central 1 gap system I noticed that if I adjusted things just right one side of HV would spark over to one DC electrode and the other HV would spark to other DC electrode. In turn both would then jump the DC electrodes and when that happed then bang.

So I just took it another step and moved the HV’s over to the sides of the DC electrodes. Then I got a pop every time I applied the HV. So I have not tried a 2-gap setup like you suggest, but maybe I will try in the future. For now I want to keep the 2-battery systems separated. But thanks for the 2-gap idea I never thought of that.  ;)

It would be interesting if Russ would duplicate this setup with his more powerful spark and caps. He should get the same cyclic charging and discharging of the caps from the HV supply.

element 119

On air contamination:

Papp turned the seals around on his engine. He was more worried of air coming into the chamber then he was of mix leaving the chamber.

We have no video about how Papp filled his chambers. We do now he had a treatment container to fill his buckets without being afraid that they would be contaminated with air.

We do know he made a lot of strange effort to turn the normal cylinder/piston setup into on where the cylinder worked as a piston.

Maybe this was for filling the cylinders in his treatment container, with mix, without the risk of having air in the mix?

================

If we have a russ-popper with volume of 250 cc and we suck it empty to 30 psi. Can we then calculate how much air is still inside?

We observe that this popper has a volume increase after some popps. Russ has to extra push down on the cylinder and eventually doesn't get it totally down anymore. Thus, the volume has increased.
What is the explanation for this increase, what reactions have taken place that some elements get more volume? And is this volume increase due to the mix or due to the air residue that was still left after the 30 psi sucking?

================

If we use Helium rinsing (suck till 30 psi, put 100 cc helium in and suck again (from the bottom) for 30 psi) before a series of popps, should we then see that the volume doesn't increase? And if so, then we know that the volume increase came from the air residu, and then we can make a reactionscheme on that.

If i take my other statements above along, i would predict that the popp that the russ-popper with rinsing would give, would also be much stronger then previous. Maybe even it would need less input electricity.

Cause what else would be the reason that Papp made such an effort to keep the outside air away?

In his mind it must have been critical to success....

And success is being able to pop with less input and more power.

Quote from securesupplies on January 8th, 2013, 09:15 AM

Hi Please Like my Post .

Special Shout to RUSS, Very good
knowledge coming from your work. to help get the world involved.
Never stop we all struggle to assist.

members
better pop link here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNSAXbZfnbE&list=FLLuDKTNDFfat7iO7KGE7fQA

info link
http://cdn.coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Lightning-harnessed-Infinite-Magazine-2003-copy.pdf

Note Stan may have keep simplifying until he was ionizing air and banging it.
his last step may have been removing water.

Note 2 - EPG may have been  the stator on it milking the expansion.
gas lattice may be valid to control movement. and should be remembered for inside cylinders also(test it ) ion argon gas in popper. better magnetic control?

Remember

1. "it's very hard work to keep things simple"
the above highlights that to us all in this forum.

2.share.

thanks dan. we all learn together. and a shout out to all here and else where that continues to support and help "ME" (us) achieve what we we have... thanks! ~Russ

Quote from Axil on January 8th, 2013, 11:03 AM

The use of non-noble gases to carry the reaction in a Papp engine including water and hydrogen will lead to serious limitations in the lifetime of the structural materials used to fabricate the Papp engine.

The cylinders will become increasingly contaminated with the breakdown products of its structural materials until this contamination results in piston failure.
This issue is the reason behind my opinion that that Papp changed his design to use only noble gas in this last design starting in the 1980’s timeframe.

Noble gases will not affect the structural material inside the cylinder and will support an extended engine service lifetime.

Heinz is using air. "there are far less problems with using air and you will never get the gasses to stay in there..." A quote from memory...

but i still agree with Axil. even if we use just one type of gas. find the one that worked the best. and will protect the electrodes/stuff in the motor..

weather there is a mix of gasses that works over and above as single gas. who knows at this point...

none the less. more testing is needed and im really trying to get out and "play" but its just too cold... there is other stuff to work on ( circuit ECT) so i'm doing those now...

~Russ

On his secrets

Papp used to say that he made sure that he was needed to get and keep the engines going. The day he would give his secret was the day he wouldn't get paid anymore.

This mindset of his is a garantee that he held back or mislead on his patents.

If we were to perfectly copy his patents we wouldn't have a working engine, for sure.

So the question becomes: in what corner of his invention did he keep his secrets?

Not in the material engine parts
Not in the electronics
Not in the amount of volts and amps used
Not in the buckets

So what did he do without the eyes of the Rohners on it?

The gas treatment? The filling of the chambers?

Where he stayed secretly, we have to go and test some options.

====add====
The above also concludes that Bob has not have these secrets. If we watch him on his video where he shows the double cylinder engine, the heavy sparks fly
of from the entrance on the outside of the chambers. He may get the engine running, but he has no over unity, so in a way it is useless, not a real invention as it used to be. Its more like two poppers using more energy then gain.

And Bob knows that John hasn't got the secret, that's why he is so interested in how John's Radio Frequency side can have an impact on things.

Also Klosterman uses way too much energy.

Conclusion: We are still in the race.

Quote from element 119 on January 8th, 2013, 04:24 PM

Hello Everyone.

Just wanted to share some results of my popper test setup and something unexpected that happens.

See the attached image for my setup.

Basically it is a 3-air gap setup. Each of the HV electrodes jump an air gap to the 2 central electrodes that carry the DC cap voltage this also allows the HV to jump the central DC electrodes air gap. I tried a one-air gap setup where all 4 electrodes came together at a central point but spotty results at best. This setup worked best for me and got a pop every time tried.    

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.  

I did not expect this build up and draining of the capacitor cycle and not sure if this is common knowledge so I just wanted to share the info.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my electric setup I made a multi-vibrator box much like in the old days say on a Model T Ford they had a bi-filer coil wrapped around an iron rod. One end of inner coil went to battery plus and the other end of the inner coil went to a set of contact points for the negative side. When battery voltage is applied the coil became an Electro magnet and pulled open the contact point and breaking the circuit, resulting in a repeated self open and closed cycle. Only difference on mine I used a standard Automotive coil for the high voltage out.

My test Popper setup is the end cap for a 2-inch PVC pipe as the part that holds the electrodes. Small popping results so far but more testing planned. Gonna see if any air pressure is achieved with a completely non-metal chamber.

element 119

nice work element.. i can see the caps charging like you have it. but be careful. your running an in to a dc cap... it may pop!!!!!!

cover up those caps with something to protect your self.

keep going! thanks for sharing!!! ~Russ

Does the air mixture absolutely need to be in a vac?  Is the plasma effect not just creating a rapid energy/heat burst?  Does this equate to how the stirling cycle works?  Are there any good ionization informationals on the web?  How long does it take to ionize a gas, wether it be hydrogen, helium, or air?  Can anyone test without vac?  So many questions, never enough time or resources. :)

Tim

Quote from element 119 on January 8th, 2013, 06:57 PM

Quote from Jeff Nading on January 8th, 2013, 05:15 PM

Quote from element 119 on January 8th, 2013, 04:24 PM

Hello Everyone.

Just wanted to share some results of my popper test setup and something unexpected that happens.

See the attached image for my setup.

Basically it is a 3-air gap setup. Each of the HV electrodes jump an air gap to the 2 central electrodes that carry the DC cap voltage this also allows the HV to jump the central DC electrodes air gap. I tried a one-air gap setup where all 4 electrodes came together at a central point but spotty results at best. This setup worked best for me and got a pop every time tried.    

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.  

I did not expect this build up and draining of the capacitor cycle and not sure if this is common knowledge so I just wanted to share the info.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In my electric setup I made a multi-vibrator box much like in the old days say on a Model T Ford they had a bi-filer coil wrapped around an iron rod. One end of inner coil went to battery plus and the other end of the inner coil went to a set of contact points for the negative side. When battery voltage is applied the coil became an Electro magnet and pulled open the contact point and breaking the circuit, resulting in a repeated self open and closed cycle. Only difference on mine I used a standard Automotive coil for the high voltage out.

My test Popper setup is the end cap for a 2-inch PVC pipe as the part that holds the electrodes. Small popping results so far but more testing planned. Gonna see if any air pressure is achieved with a completely non-metal chamber.

element 119

Like your setup, very cool element 119.:cool::D:P

Thanks Jeff!  :D

Quote from Axil on January 8th, 2013, 05:18 PM

Quote

Once popped a strange thing would happen. By leaving the high voltage on it would charge up the capacitor to a certain amount of voltage, once built up enough then a small pop would happen. This would drain the cap a little and then the cycle would start all over again.

This is exciting work.

I wonder if you are seeing a feedback current flow back through the cap circuit?  

By leaving  high voltage on, you may be polarizing the cathode and anode in the cap circuit so that the charge from the air surrounding the electrodes are collected and returned back to the caps.

Why do you have three air gaps. Connect the anode of the cap circuit directly to the anode of the high voltage circuit.

See

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CEwQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1022%26context%3Delecengwilliams&ei=R_PIUN_YCOTD0AGMroDYBg&usg=AFQjCNEs1s7LOYnRaKBY4XIihziFcWZAEg&sig2=KhJ0T3Lkdd_I_ol5YZEcAw

Also

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UYrv7VPHQA

I just finished building the chamber today so more testing is going to happen.

I originally was going to try the 4-electrode setup because I wanted to use 2 separate 12 v batteries. This I thought would help eliminate any cross contamination of the 2 systems. When as I said I didn’t get good results with the central 1 gap system I noticed that if I adjusted things just right one side of HV would spark over to one DC electrode and the other HV would spark to other DC electrode. In turn both would then jump the DC electrodes and when that happed then bang.

So I just took it another step and moved the HV’s over to the sides of the DC electrodes. Then I got a pop every time I applied the HV. So I have not tried a 2-gap setup like you suggest, but maybe I will try in the future. For now I want to keep the 2-battery systems separated. But thanks for the 2-gap idea I never thought of that.  ;)

It would be interesting if Russ would duplicate this setup with his more powerful spark and caps. He should get the same cyclic charging and discharging of the caps from the HV supply.

element 119

element.

go in the direction I was headed ( and still am) just use the HV to arc 90 degrees from the low voltage discharge electrodes. if the voltage is high enough in the caps it will discharge.  

this what i will be implementing in my next set up. no HV on the caps at all. just 2 sets of electrodes... ( 4 electrodes)

so just like you have but don't let the arc hit the cap electrodes...

FYI to ALL. i will be re doing my timer circuit to account for the charging circuit... (nothing major)  i have some other ideas i need to try... basically just as i described in this post. the first test for the circuit will be the big cap bank... more as i get it done...

~Russ

ps. element, also note that this configuration will not work if the caps voltage it too low... I'm thinking below 100v or so...

Quote from FaradayEZ on January 9th, 2013, 12:47 AM

On air contamination:

Papp turned the seals around on his engine. He was more worried of air coming into the chamber then he was of mix leaving the chamber.

We have no video about how Papp filled his chambers. We do now he had a treatment container to fill his buckets without being afraid that they would be contaminated with air.

We do know he made a lot of strange effort to turn the normal cylinder/piston setup into on where the cylinder worked as a piston.

Maybe this was for filling the cylinders in his treatment container, with mix, without the risk of having air in the mix?

================

If we have a russ-popper with volume of 250 cc and we suck it empty to 30 psi. Can we then calculate how much air is still inside?

We observe that this popper has a volume increase after some popps. Russ has to extra push down on the cylinder and eventually doesn't get it totally down anymore. Thus, the volume has increased.
What is the explanation for this increase, what reactions have taken place that some elements get more volume? And is this volume increase due to the mix or due to the air residue that was still left after the 30 psi sucking?

================

If we use Helium rinsing (suck till 30 psi, put 100 cc helium in and suck again (from the bottom) for 30 psi) before a series of popps, should we then see that the volume doesn't increase? And if so, then we know that the volume increase came from the air residu, and then we can make a reactionscheme on that.

If i take my other statements above along, i would predict that the popp that the russ-popper with rinsing would give, would also be much stronger then previous. Maybe even it would need less input electricity.

Cause what else would be the reason that Papp made such an effort to keep the outside air away?

In his mind it must have been critical to success....

And success is being able to pop with less input and more power.

EZ - good thinking again. There is a video of Papp filling the engine on Bob's site. As far as I can tell, he just vacuums each cylinder out and then puts the gas in. No second vacuuming-out after the first fill. Papp mixed the gases in secret and filled the engine in secret, though he did video the filling for some strange reason - maybe private video not meant to be seen.

The volume increase after pops is, as far as I can tell, just the gas heating up. There is a bit of heat put into the gases, and at hand-hot (40°C or so) the pressure (or volume at atmospheric pressure) will have increased by around 13%.

Air in the noble gas mix would likely reduce the output, since I've seen elsewhere that Nitrogen can have a kill effect on the plasma generation at small percentages (1% or less) so your double-fill idea would be a useful check.

On gas treatment

Papp did something to his gasmix, treated it so that it reacted on less input electricity. Treated it so it changed and hold that change for a long time.

What can we change in a noble gas mixture that stays a long time?

Not ionization, not electrically changes.

We can't change anything continiously in a noble gas mixture without putting in an extra element.

So Papp's gas treatment involved putting something extra in his mix. An extra substance. Because that's the only thing that will last over time, staying present and doing the job it was put in for.

If it was something of chloor or water remains the question. It also could be something new, because Papp didn't want to reveal his secret, then why should he mention chloor and water anywhere. His real secret he wouldn't give away as a clue somewhere.

The only thing deduction tells us is that this extra element is much easier reacting to less electrical energy. It has to be the trigger to the rest of the noble mix to go into plasma mode.

It may also be depleting over time, one or two atoms per stroke. And when that is the case, then also it has to be in abundance enough, which places it more likely in a fluid form. So it must also be soluble.

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on January 9th, 2013, 01:31 AM

Heinz is using air. "there are far less problems with using air and you will never get the gasses to stay in there..." A quote from memory...

~Russ

As Axil mentioned, using air will form other compounds, but Heinz says 'go for it!'  So what to do??  Conduct experiments and see:)  But I will add one thing that I have learned from both making ozone for a swimming pool (corona discharge method) and from operating a plasma cutter, if you do use air, use DRY air.  Get a desiccant air dryer (Grainger item) and draw the air used for testing through the dryer.  You can 'recharge' the silica gel in your home oven - directions on the net (do not exceed max temp, it renders the gel useless)

The moisture in the air will combine with the NOx compounds forming acids, and it will chew up brass, copper, aluminum, etc.  Also, ozone will chew up seals and plastics. Teflon and Kynar are very resilient.

kcd

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on January 9th, 2013, 01:49 AM

element.

go in the direction I was headed ( and still am) just use the HV to arc 90 degrees from the low voltage discharge electrodes. if the voltage is high enough in the caps it will discharge.  

this what i will be implementing in my next set up. no HV on the caps at all. just 2 sets of electrodes... ( 4 electrodes)

so just like you have but don't let the arc hit the cap electrodes...

FYI to ALL. i will be re doing my timer circuit to account for the charging circuit... (nothing major)  i have some other ideas i need to try... basically just as i described in this post. the first test for the circuit will be the big cap bank... more as i get it done...

~Russ

ps. element, also note that this configuration will not work if the caps voltage it too low... I'm thinking below 100v or so...

Cool stuff!

I think I understand what you mean by 4 electrodes at 90 degrees! See left side of attached picture.

If not well I’m not much of a word visionary so would need to see your setup.

The problem I had was the HV (see right side of attached picture) would jump around in different arrangements when I tried to get the DC cap electrodes close enough to pop the gap. Now this all may be a problem with my setup, bad construction, HV is to low in power, or using very pointed electrode tips. Not sure?

Due to these problems sometimes the DC would not jump or at times I needed to leave the HV on longer to get a pop and this delay would not be good in a working engine.

For the DC caps I use a 12-v inverter to get 110 v then rectify to DC and end up with about 150 v DC. So far I disconnect the inverter before popping test but plan to try leaving the inverter on during popping once I get a more safe arrangement setup. Don’t want this thing or the cap blowing up in my face!!! :blush:

All in all I think you will have better luck with your setup so look forward to seeing you video.

The snow is melting!!! Yeah 50 + temps for a while!!!

element 119

Quote from FaradayEZ on January 9th, 2013, 02:46 AM

On gas treatment

Papp did something to his gasmix, treated it so that it reacted on less input electricity. Treated it so it changed and hold that change for a long time.

What can we change in a noble gas mixture that stays a long time?

Not ionization, not electrically changes.

We can't change anything continiously in a noble gas mixture without putting in an extra element.

So Papp's gas treatment involved putting something extra in his mix. An extra substance. Because that's the only thing that will last over time, staying present and doing the job it was put in for.

If it was something of chloor or water remains the question. It also could be something new, because Papp didn't want to reveal his secret, then why should he mention chloor and water anywhere. His real secret he wouldn't give away as a clue somewhere.

The only thing deduction tells us is that this extra element is much easier reacting to less electrical energy. It has to be the trigger to the rest of the noble mix to go into plasma mode.

It may also be depleting over time, one or two atoms per stroke. And when that is the case, then also it has to be in abundance enough, which places it more likely in a fluid form. So it must also be soluble.

Papp was obsessed with the purity of the noble gases that he used.

He says that they cannot combine with other elements but this is a false assumption; on the contrary, these gases can combine with all sorts of other elements.

See the subjects: Compounds and Other compounds in this Wiki about Xenon

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

Quote

Xenon and the other noble gases were for a long time considered to be completely chemically inert and not able to form compounds. However, while teaching at the University of British Columbia, Neil Bartlett discovered that the gas platinum hexafluoride (PtF6) was a powerful oxidizing agent that could oxidize oxygen gas (O2) to form dioxygenyl hexafluoroplatinate (O2+[PtF6]–). Since O2 and xenon have almost the same first ionization potential, Bartlett realized that platinum hexafluoride might also be able to oxidize xenon. On March 23, 1962, he mixed the two gases and produced the first known compound of a noble gas, xenon hexafluoroplatinate. Bartlett thought its composition to be Xe+[PtF6]–, although later work has revealed that it was probably a mixture of various xenon-containing salts. Since then, many other xenon compounds have been discovered, along with some compounds of the noble gases argon, krypton, and radon, including argon fluorohydride (HArF), krypton difluoride (KrF2), and radon fluoride. By 1971, more than 80 xenon compounds were known.

Furthermore, these five Papp noble gases will combine in all sorts of ways among and between themselves to form huge super-atomic clusters.

These clusters can contain any permutation and combination of these five gases starting from just two noble gas element sets all the way to include all five types of noble gases.

If you are interested in details, these various noble gas cluster combinations are listed in this document as follows:

http://www.nist.gov/data/PDFfiles/jpcrd245.pdf

Ionization enhances this noble gas cluster formation process.

It is also probable that by controlling the percentage mix of the noble gases, Papp could control what cluster mix would be formed in his cylinder.

I suspect that it may be the interaction between and among these ionized clusters that make the Papp reaction go.

Non-noble element/noble gas contaminations will reduce the vigor of this special cluster formation process.

As an experimentalist, Papp found out over many years of hard won experience that contamination of his noble gases killed his reaction over time. So he came up with a homemade noble gas purification system.  

He describes this purification system in his 1984 patent as follows:

Quote

The mixer extracts filters and neutralizes the non-inert gases and other contaminants which may be found in the gas mixture. It also increases the potential capacity of gas atoms, discharges the krypton and xenon gases, polarizes the argon gases, ionizes the gases in a manner such that the ionization is maintained until the gas has been utilized and otherwise prepares them for use as a fuel in engine 11. In particular, the mixer makes the gases easier to excite during operation of the engine. Mixing does not mean an atomic or molecular combination or unification of gases because inert gases cannot chemically combine, in general, due to the completeness of the outer shell of electrons. During mixing, the various gases form a homogeneous mixture. The mixing of the five inert gases in apparatus 201 is somewhat analogous to preparing a five part liquid chemical mixture by titration. In such a mixture, the proportions of the different chemicals are accurately determined by visually observing the end point of each reaction during titration.

Please don’t concern yourselves about building this Papp purification system. In this modern age, there is an easier way to do this job.

Today, commercial off the shelf (COTS) noble gas purification systems can be obtained from many venders on the open market.

For example, see
http://www.nupure.com/Pages/ultrapure.htm

Quote from Axil on January 9th, 2013, 01:17 PM

Quote from FaradayEZ on January 9th, 2013, 02:46 AM

On gas treatment

Papp did something to his gasmix, treated it so that it reacted on less input electricity. Treated it so it changed and hold that change for a long time.

What can we change in a noble gas mixture that stays a long time?

Not ionization, not electrically changes.

We can't change anything continiously in a noble gas mixture without putting in an extra element.

So Papp's gas treatment involved putting something extra in his mix. An extra substance. Because that's the only thing that will last over time, staying present and doing the job it was put in for.

If it was something of chloor or water remains the question. It also could be something new, because Papp didn't want to reveal his secret, then why should he mention chloor and water anywhere. His real secret he wouldn't give away as a clue somewhere.

The only thing deduction tells us is that this extra element is much easier reacting to less electrical energy. It has to be the trigger to the rest of the noble mix to go into plasma mode.

It may also be depleting over time, one or two atoms per stroke. And when that is the case, then also it has to be in abundance enough, which places it more likely in a fluid form. So it must also be soluble.

Papp was obsessed with the purity of the noble gases that he used.

He says that they cannot combine with other elements but this is a false assumption; on the contrary, these gases can combine with all sorts of other elements.

See the subjects: Compounds and Other compounds in this Wiki about Xenon

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

Quote

Xenon and the other noble gases were for a long time considered to be completely chemically inert and not able to form compounds. However, while teaching at the University of British Columbia, Neil Bartlett discovered that the gas platinum hexafluoride (PtF6) was a powerful oxidizing agent that could oxidize oxygen gas (O2) to form dioxygenyl hexafluoroplatinate (O2+[PtF6]–). Since O2 and xenon have almost the same first ionization potential, Bartlett realized that platinum hexafluoride might also be able to oxidize xenon. On March 23, 1962, he mixed the two gases and produced the first known compound of a noble gas, xenon hexafluoroplatinate. Bartlett thought its composition to be Xe+[PtF6]–, although later work has revealed that it was probably a mixture of various xenon-containing salts. Since then, many other xenon compounds have been discovered, along with some compounds of the noble gases argon, krypton, and radon, including argon fluorohydride (HArF), krypton difluoride (KrF2), and radon fluoride. By 1971, more than 80 xenon compounds were known.

Furthermore, these five Papp noble gases will combine in all sorts of ways among and between themselves to form huge super-atomic clusters.

These clusters can contain any permutation and combination of these five gases starting from just two noble gas element sets all the way to include all five types of noble gases.

If you are interested in details, these various noble gas cluster combinations are listed in this document as follows:

http://www.nist.gov/data/PDFfiles/jpcrd245.pdf

Ionization enhances this noble gas cluster formation process.

It is also probable that by controlling the percentage mix of the noble gases, Papp could control what cluster mix would be formed in his cylinder.

I suspect that it may be the interaction between and among these ionized clusters that make the Papp reaction go.

Non-noble element/noble gas contaminations will reduce the vigor of this special cluster formation process.

As an experimentalist, Papp found out over many years of hard won experience that contamination of his noble gases killed his reaction over time. So he came up with a homemade noble gas purification system.  

He describes this purification system in his 1984 patent as follows:

Quote

The mixer extracts filters and neutralizes the non-inert gases and other contaminants which may be found in the gas mixture. It also increases the potential capacity of gas atoms, discharges the krypton and xenon gases, polarizes the argon gases, ionizes the gases in a manner such that the ionization is maintained until the gas has been utilized and otherwise prepares them for use as a fuel in engine 11. In particular, the mixer makes the gases easier to excite during operation of the engine. Mixing does not mean an atomic or molecular combination or unification of gases because inert gases cannot chemically combine, in general, due to the completeness of the outer shell of electrons. During mixing, the various gases form a homogeneous mixture. The mixing of the five inert gases in apparatus 201 is somewhat analogous to preparing a five part liquid chemical mixture by titration. In such a mixture, the proportions of the different chemicals are accurately determined by visually observing the end point of each reaction during titration.

Please don’t concern yourselves about building this Papp purification system. In this modern age, there is an easier way to do this job.

Today, commercial off the shelf (COTS) noble gas purification systems can be obtained from many venders on the open market.

For example, see
http://www.nupure.com/Pages/ultrapure.htm

So Axil with this purifier, think it could be used to purify Helium used for filling party balloons ?:idea:
I just answered my own question here
http://www.nupure.com/Pages/eliminatorCA.htm

Quote from Axil on January 9th, 2013, 01:17 PM

Furthermore, these five Papp noble gases will combine in all sorts of ways among and between themselves to form huge super-atomic clusters.

These clusters can contain any permutation and combination of these five gases starting from just two noble gas element sets all the way to include all five types of noble gases.

If you are interested in details, these various noble gas cluster combinations are listed in this document as follows:

http://www.nist.gov/data/PDFfiles/jpcrd245.pdf

Ionization enhances this noble gas cluster formation process.

It is also probable that by controlling the percentage mix of the noble gases, Papp could control what cluster mix would be formed in his cylinder.

I suspect that it may be the interaction between and among these ionized clusters that make the Papp reaction go.

Non-noble element/noble gas contaminations will reduce the vigor of this special cluster formation process.

As an experimentalist, Papp found out over many years of hard won experience that contamination of his noble gases killed his reaction over time. So he came up with a homemade noble gas purification system.  

He describes this purification system in his 1984 patent as follows:

Quote

The mixer extracts filters and neutralizes the non-inert gases and other contaminants which may be found in the gas mixture. It also increases the potential capacity of gas atoms, discharges the krypton and xenon gases, polarizes the argon gases, ionizes the gases in a manner such that the ionization is maintained until the gas has been utilized and otherwise prepares them for use as a fuel in engine 11. In particular, the mixer makes the gases easier to excite during operation of the engine. Mixing does not mean an atomic or molecular combination or unification of gases because inert gases cannot chemically combine, in general, due to the completeness of the outer shell of electrons. During mixing, the various gases form a homogeneous mixture. The mixing of the five inert gases in apparatus 201 is somewhat analogous to preparing a five part liquid chemical mixture by titration. In such a mixture, the proportions of the different chemicals are accurately determined by visually observing the end point of each reaction during titration.

Please don’t concern yourselves about building this Papp purification system. In this modern age, there is an easier way to do this job.

Today, commercial off the shelf (COTS) noble gas purification systems can be obtained from many venders on the open market.

For example, see
http://www.nupure.com/Pages/ultrapure.htm

So Axil,

Are you saying that you are onboard with the idea that Papp's secret is the combination and formation of super-atom clusters as I floated out to the group in this post?

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=659&pid=10936#pid10936

If we all have enough imagination to believe that the Papp engine is real for some mysterious reason, then why can't we go ahead and believe in a mysterious gas process that would cluster the gas atoms together to substantially reduce the gas mixture volume (lets say 100 to 1, plus or minus 50).  It is this pre-processed, pre-shrunk - clustered, whatever gas that is put in the cylinders at 1 atmosphere and ignited.  If that gas expands 100 times, to produce 100 atmospheres of pressure for the down stoke, then now we are beginning to talk about a system that will produce the type of torque the dyno tested engine did.

I think our scammer boy JR has, unknowingly, created this gas shrinking process.

Again, here is the link: LINK REPAIRED

http://dimensionalbliss.com/2011/08/06/plasmergs-anomaly-defies-scientific-explanation/

Of course JR's powers of observation are so poor, that this is what he said about the event when cross examined by a spectator:

Unknown - Is your fuel all gone?

Rohner - The fuel is all gone it sucks the balloon into the tube.

Unknown - When you open it up, there is no more fuel in that chamber?

Rohner - Consider for a moment what has to happen for the balloon to get pulled into the tube. It has to become a vacuum. It is all gone.

K C Dias: "It is all gone"  Really???  Perhaps it just contracted by a factor of 100.

Come on folks, this is the missing part of the puzzle!

kcd

I found this document on the Rohner website. I have not read it completly  but a quick scan of it looks like it may contain info I have not seen before.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&ved=0CG8QxQEwCA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fviewer%3Fa%3Dv%26q%3Dcache%3A3NR0FacSevMJ%3Awww.rohnermachine.com%2FFiles%2FCEITechnicalStrategy.doc%2B%26hl%3Den%26gl%3Dus%26pid%3Dbl%26srcid%3DADGEESgtzLeSprjZYInkVewDCdPRBNw349BpVprHnWBWhHxhRvTnmviHNicOnNtDruN8Ux9CiL5gQVo5UqFSRxYRgUIiTaG7hhFbAg43aZpqJqW-Mm8R4CnvP3nqbJWdlRDXpB7CeuSF%26sig%3DAHIEtbRjDUiZvEeqfkwZjKjxs3ohefhRjg&ei=Zh_uUJK1BZOP0QGazIG4DQ&usg=AFQjCNGhSG5kYd0IsCOx_3V4fHQ-8LK9xQ&sig2=HpzReI5f2IATngJ7E9tgZw


I may be smart to download a copy before it is removed.

Some interesting snipits from the document follow:

Quote

Bill says Bob deliberately left out video sections of Papp at the glovebox where the buckets were seen to be smoking.

The smoking is indicative of metallic rubidium use in the buckets.

Walter Bachmann, a former National Semiconductor forensics technician, says metallic rubidium forms an amalgam with aluminum.  The buckets are made of aluminum.  Rubidium has an isotope that is an alpha emitter with a 10 billion year half life like thorium.

Metallic rubidium can migrate to the surface of the buckets, presenting alpha emission directly to the gas mixture.

Bill thinks the buckets form a soft x-ray parametric amplifier, where alpha emissions from thorium or rubidium excite the sulfur or phosphorous atoms into fluorescence in the 2 keV range, which then emit those x-rays through the aluminum bucket walls into the plasma to further ionize the plasma discharge.

In summary, lacking a gas lab, the working fluids in the engine of air, argon, or the patent mixture specified in patent #4,428,193 did not produce P2T events with thorium oxide in mineral oil or metallic rubidium in the buckets.  Testing in single-event, clear test cylinders was done also, including 27 MHz RF, and capacitive discharge as an exceptional method merely for exploratory purposes.

attached a copy... read this a while back... ~russ

To start out, noble gas clusters including Xenon clusters are formed when these noble gases are pre-ionized by RF radiation.

The main design goal in the Papp reaction is to produce UV and X-rays.

To do this, Papp used enhanced isotopic nuclear radiation to produce X-rays catalyzed by a high voltage spark discharge; however his spark was relatively weak in terms of current.

But a strong enough high current spark discharge can generate this level and kind of EMF.

It has been recently discovered that noble gas clusters will explode when exposed to high intensity EMF in the UV and X-ray range.

Xenon clusters that range in size up to about 14 000-atoms will explode yielding extremely energetic ions with energies up to 1 MeV.

By contrast, a chemical explosion involves chemical transition energies of only some tens of electron volts.

An explosion of noble gases can far surpass in power of what a chemical explosive can deliver.

The explosion of noble gas clusters including xenon clusters initiated by strong emf in the ultraviolet and the X-ray range provides an explanation of where all that power and all those electrons produced by the Papp engine come from.

See for background the following:

http://phys.org/news/2012-11-ionization-x-ray-laser-shells-electron.html

and

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDcQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ph.utexas.edu%2F~tditmire%2Fpapers%2FTD52.pdf&ei=LE_uUNugKKSO0QHmioD4BA&usg=AFQjCNFrmkiKaJ9p1moAlkahUj93xAt8lg&sig2=tpV_wTT2bWLGsM7NQjMA_Q&bvm=bv.1357700187,d.dmQ




How do we make x-rays in the Papp reaction?

A theory of the magnetic field diffusion is developed in order to explain high-energy x-ray emission observed in vacuum spark plasmas. The acceleration mechanism is based on the intense induced electric field due to an abrupt inductance change when the plasma column expands from its pinch radius to a large radius. According to this magnetic field diffusion model, high-energy electrons are well collimated at the axis. In addition, the electron energy in this collimated flux can be easily more than 20 times the electrode voltage, which generates high-energy x-ray radiation by interaction with the dense plasma.


A 1-kJ vacuum-spark device has been developed as a pulsed X-ray source for applications in the field of microlithography, microscopy, flash radiography, etc.

The optimization works for the pulsed soft-X-ray emission are presented. The optimization was made in two steps: 1) X-ray emission maximization and 2) X-ray emission reproducibility. For the X-ray emission maximization, the changed parameters were the main capacitor energy, the anode-cathode geometry, the anode material, and the trigger pulse amplitude.

The best combination is 1 kJ for the main capacitor energy, a conical shape for the anode, 6-12 mm anode-cathode separation, iron for the anode material, and 14-15 kV for the trigger pulse amplitude. In these conditions, energies of up to 10 J per pulse are obtained in the 3-40 keV range for the X-ray pulses. In order to have a good reproducibility, a high-power, very fast, high-voltage trigger pulse is required. To fulfill these conditions, a pulse transformer and an air spark gap were added to the initial triggering device (a magnetic pulse compression circuit). With the new trigger pulse (20 J per pulse, 50-ns rise-time, 22-kV amplitude in an open circuit), an acceptable X-ray emission reproducibility was obtained


The take away: success is all in the way you all build your spark.