Quote from Axil on February 3rd, 2013, 02:33 PM

Quote from woody0068 on February 3rd, 2013, 02:23 PM

In JR's defence ,as he is saying ,there is no RF or current in the coils to ionize the gas.
I beleive that te whole concept is to ionize and exite the gases in order to get a powerful reaction.
And the idea to dump massive amounts of low voltage current over the plasma as we've seen in lots of replication attempts i beleive is not the way to go, it just "spends" to much energy to be efficient.
Lets give JR the benefit of a doubt and let him explain this in the 2 upcoming videos.
Atleast thats what im gonna do.
Lets see if grandma can grow some teeth :)
/Janne Ström

No, No, No

JR is not producing a plasmoid.

When Russ put continuous high voltage into the cylinder, nothing happened, no piston movement. But when Russ created a plasmoid, the piston moved forcefully.

Russ had no coil or RF when his piston moved vigorously.

Russ does his demos to debunk videos like JR's

If you believe JR, if you place your faith and hope in JR, you are in for heartbreak.
 

oh man... so Janne, i would say give the man 2 more videos to see what he shows...

but also Axil is wright. "If you believe JR, if you place your faith and hope in JR, you are in for heartbreak."

not to " pick sides" but its been too long. JR has broke to Manny promises and overall still has no proof of concept for this work...

oh well...

back to what we were doing... :)

Axil. on the cap in my video. im still not convinced that there was not a failure of other types. but we just wont know.  in my video you can see the pressure stabilizes after a bit then i turn it off and it gose back down... but it takes a sec... so he may just be in that upper range.

although i can see it " holding a charge" and it makes sense.  

any how...

i do have one major concern.

X rays...

lets start a safety meeting....

how Manny x rays are safe.
what are the minimum levels needed in the papp motor to make it work.
what are ways to shield the x rays.
whats the bast way to detect x rays at extremely short intervals ( like in a popper)
whats the bast way of doing safe tests with a popper that creates x rays.

i mean thank abut it. i do not want to stand in a room that runs off of x rays!!!!!!!

RADIATION=DEATH... ( if over exposed)

lets start with a way to make a "safe" working papp test platform...

~Russ

http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q3588.html

X-ray rooms are shielded as necessary to make sure that radiation doses to persons outside the room do not exceed state limits for radiation workers or members of the public, based on who has access to the areas next to the x-ray room. Typically, the rooms are shielded with sheets of lead. When lead is used, it usually is glued on the backside of the sheets of drywall that make the room walls (the lead sheets overlap to prevent gaps in the shielding). For doors, the lead is usually "sandwiched" on both sides by wood. In addition, small pieces of lead are placed behind outlet boxes and over screws that hold the drywall up. It is usually difficult to tell if a room is shielded just by looking at it. The best place to see it is along the door edges if the door contains a sheet of lead.

Lead is not the only choice for x-ray room shielding, but it is the most commonly used due to cost and minimal thickness to achieve the amount of shielding desired. Some facilities use concrete or cinder block. Mammography facilities usually only require two sheets of drywall, for example, not lead, due to the low penetration ability of the x rays.

Ken "Duke" Lovins, CHP



A solid concrete wall 8 inches think between you and the x-ray source will do the job.


From

CEI Technical Strategy
Based Upon Factual Evidence

Quote

Mark Hugo obtained bright flashes that moved the spring-loaded piston using only pure argon or argon and helium.  He does not have gas treatment capability.

Gas treatment might not be necessary.  Mark’s discharges have not been proven to be “over-unity,” entraining another energy source than used to excite the plasma.  If Mark’s displays are OU and gas treatment does do something, gas treatment might merely boost the process by increasing the rate or extent of reaction.

Mark told Ken on the phone in 2004 while on CEI payroll that if you try everything in the first patent, something will work.  Mark was sharing information but being deliberately secretive.

The first patent refers to mesothorium as a substitute for thorium.  Mesothorium is radium.  Joe says in The Fastest Submarine that he buried a jar of his magic material in a field outside of his garage/workshop in Quebec for safety.  (Health safety or merely security/secrecy?) Mark does his experiments in an alcove of his basement, with the test apparatus closely surrounded on 3 sides by cinderblock walls (see the photo in Infinite Energy Issue #51), and he and operates the experiments remotely.

X-rays should not be able to penetrate the steel walls of the popper cylinder but the intensity of the x-rays should be measured to be on the safe side, we don't want any supprises.

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on February 3rd, 2013, 05:41 PM

Quote from Axil on February 3rd, 2013, 02:33 PM

Quote from woody0068 on February 3rd, 2013, 02:23 PM

In JR's defence ,as he is saying ,there is no RF or current in the coils to ionize the gas.
I beleive that te whole concept is to ionize and exite the gases in order to get a powerful reaction.
And the idea to dump massive amounts of low voltage current over the plasma as we've seen in lots of replication attempts i beleive is not the way to go, it just "spends" to much energy to be efficient.
Lets give JR the benefit of a doubt and let him explain this in the 2 upcoming videos.
Atleast thats what im gonna do.
Lets see if grandma can grow some teeth :)
/Janne Ström

No, No, No

JR is not producing a plasmoid.

When Russ put continuous high voltage into the cylinder, nothing happened, no piston movement. But when Russ created a plasmoid, the piston moved forcefully.

Russ had no coil or RF when his piston moved vigorously.

Russ does his demos to debunk videos like JR's

If you believe JR, if you place your faith and hope in JR, you are in for heartbreak.
 

oh man... so Janne, i would say give the man 2 more videos to see what he shows...

but also Axil is wright. "If you believe JR, if you place your faith and hope in JR, you are in for heartbreak."

not to " pick sides" but its been too long. JR has broke to Manny promises and overall still has no proof of concept for this work...

oh well...

back to what we were doing... :)

Axil. on the cap in my video. im still not convinced that there was not a failure of other types. but we just wont know.  in my video you can see the pressure stabilizes after a bit then i turn it off and it gose back down... but it takes a sec... so he may just be in that upper range.

although i can see it " holding a charge" and it makes sense.  

any how...

i do have one major concern.

X rays...

lets start a safety meeting....

how Manny x rays are safe.
what are the minimum levels needed in the papp motor to make it work.
what are ways to shield the x rays.
whats the bast way to detect x rays at extremely short intervals ( like in a popper)
whats the bast way of doing safe tests with a popper that creates x rays.

i mean thank abut it. i do not want to stand in a room that runs off of x rays!!!!!!!

RADIATION=DEATH... ( if over exposed)

lets start with a way to make a "safe" working papp test platform...

~Russ

So we are moving forward then?  No neutrons, but we have X-rays?  So now we need Pb?  Or do solar panels absorb xrays?  Do we need a Geiger counter?  I think what the small generator accomplishes is great, but I don't think we can ignore what mechanical energy this process is creating.
Are we putting in enough energy for fusion?  Or is this a near fusion event?  Or once plasma exists fusion is inevitable and therefore xrays?  Or are the X-rays a combination of fusing H and Boron?  If we are using Ionized He will we get the same resultants of a short half-lifed element that decays back to helium as has been previously suggested?

Quote from Slickhanz on February 3rd, 2013, 06:34 PM

So we are moving forward then?


  No neutrons, but we have X-rays?

no, just asking question with this theory...

im going to set up the tests first then get the neutron detectors. ( they don't last forever and i want to get the most use out of them... ) so I'm making sure everything is in place before i order them.

just talking theory now...

but its interesting and if its the way to peruse then we must think about all the things in my last post.  

~Russ[/quote]

Its quit difficult to proof neutrons coming from the plasmoid process.

Look at this doc from horizon:

http://youtu.be/5FErksas4U0   48min

The scientist uses sound to create light in a bubble and presumes there are temperatures above a million degrees.

With the detector Russ will get, he will need two..one as a normal background detector and 1 nearby the popper. Then by putting light through it one can say if the one near the popper lets through less light then the background norm for his lab by comparing it with the other.

But don't expect fusion and don't expect that you can detect it in a way that science will accept it. Cause that takes a bigger measuring device and exact timing as to when a neutron is to be formed and detected.

As to x-rays..did Papp use x-rays with his cannon setup? Can't we postpone using this, by first checking the 5 separate gas mix input and the input with chloor and or water?

----------
As to the JR video... it looks more like an old video, of someone who just started with the whole papp stuff. He is not showing anything, makes me wonder if he puts it up there so he then can read our comments to what he is doing wrong. Lets not do his work for him. He will try to put everybody to pull in front of his cart.

FYI

This paper explains how noble gases convert alpha radiation into UV/x-rays

PHOTON INTERMEDIATE DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION USING THE ALPHA EMITTER POLONIUM-210
 
[attachment=3197]

Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on February 3rd, 2013, 05:41 PM

Quote from Axil on February 3rd, 2013, 02:33 PM

Quote from woody0068 on February 3rd, 2013, 02:23 PM

In JR's defence ,as he is saying ,there is no RF or current in the coils to ionize the gas.
I beleive that te whole concept is to ionize and exite the gases in order to get a powerful reaction.
And the idea to dump massive amounts of low voltage current over the plasma as we've seen in lots of replication attempts i beleive is not the way to go, it just "spends" to much energy to be efficient.
Lets give JR the benefit of a doubt and let him explain this in the 2 upcoming videos.
Atleast thats what im gonna do.
Lets see if grandma can grow some teeth :)
/Janne Ström

No, No, No

JR is not producing a plasmoid.

When Russ put continuous high voltage into the cylinder, nothing happened, no piston movement. But when Russ created a plasmoid, the piston moved forcefully.

Russ had no coil or RF when his piston moved vigorously.

Russ does his demos to debunk videos like JR's

If you believe JR, if you place your faith and hope in JR, you are in for heartbreak.
 

oh man... so Janne, i would say give the man 2 more videos to see what he shows...

but also Axil is wright. "If you believe JR, if you place your faith and hope in JR, you are in for heartbreak."

not to " pick sides" but its been too long. JR has broke to Manny promises and overall still has no proof of concept for this work...

oh well...

back to what we were doing... :)

Axil. on the cap in my video. im still not convinced that there was not a failure of other types. but we just wont know.  in my video you can see the pressure stabilizes after a bit then i turn it off and it gose back down... but it takes a sec... so he may just be in that upper range.

although i can see it " holding a charge" and it makes sense.  

any how...

i do have one major concern.

X rays...

lets start a safety meeting....

how Manny x rays are safe.
what are the minimum levels needed in the papp motor to make it work.
what are ways to shield the x rays.
whats the bast way to detect x rays at extremely short intervals ( like in a popper)
whats the bast way of doing safe tests with a popper that creates x rays.

i mean thank abut it. i do not want to stand in a room that runs off of x rays!!!!!!!

RADIATION=DEATH... ( if over exposed)

lets start with a way to make a "safe" working papp test platform...

~Russ

Since he was attempting to produce free-floating air-stable plasmoids, Koloc built a below-ground-level extension onto his garage (actually a large one with high ceiling serving as a place to round conduit/wires and mount equipment) so that it was accessible both from inside the garage and from an outside door.  Properly designed, such a below-ground-level extension can serve as a temperature-controlled "root cellar" when you are done with your experiments.

Always agree with safety Russ.  Can't be causing ourselves extra health issues.

Not sure if this has been posted, but seemed relevant.  

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/how_l2/xray_generation.html

If we eliminate the ionization of the working gas, do we eliminate a possibility of creating X-rays?  According to that document I could see ionization causing X-rays in the Papp process.  But, per that document it mentions carbon being the smallest atom capable of creating an X-ray atomically with an electron collision?  An x-ray shouldn't be causing this motion can it?  Based on the info in these docs, its highly possible for what Russ is doing creating X-rays of some wave-length. Just the number of electrons being dumped into the spark gap appears to pose as a producer of X-rays, but possibly the cylinder coils are able to remove those electrons so they are not available to be free range electrons.  Just a theory based on the link.

Tim

Aluminium is pretty transparent to X-rays, but a good lump of steel is opaque. Using a thick non-magnetic Stainless (316L?) cylinder would seem to be a safer option than Aluminium, or alternatively running it with the coil around it would reduce the X-ray emission. It seems like if it isn't producing X-rays then it's not going to work, so we just need to shield it. Better to shield at source rather than wear lead underpants.

X-rays should be detectable by the Geiger counter - it detects any ionising radiation (that's how it works, by the radiation ionising the working gas and thus reducing its insulating qualities) so having it working while popping would be a good idea. I suspect it will also respond to EMP as well, though, so may over-read.

If the Geiger counter responds during the pop, though, then that does mean that there's something happening that needs shielding against, whatever it is. I have a suspicion that EMPs can be harmful, but I doubt if anyone has run any scientific tests on this. People who work with a lot of EMP around do seem to have gone a little crazy.

Where did the requirement for the RF frequency to be 25MhZ come from: John Rohner?

In his patents, Papp has never mentioned the use RF in his designs.

Have we ever seen the use of RF increase the performance of the Papp reaction?

Quote from Axil on February 5th, 2013, 10:23 AM

Where did the requirement for the RF frequency to be 25MhZ come from: John Rohner?

In his patents, Papp has never mentioned the use RF in his designs.

Have we ever seen the use of RF increase the performance of the Papp reaction?

IMHO I thought the RF was substituted as a course of active ionization that the radioactive elements in the buckets were doing. Very possible this came from JR patents. As they also use the "antenna" in the cylinder head. It seems to me that russ would create an abundance of electrons within the cylinder with every plasma burst.  

Maybe I don't understand ionization well enough, but isn't ionization just adding extra electrons to an atom. This makes a very loose bond as there is not equal +/- forces between nucleus and electrons, but because electron rings still exist around an atom, although not populated there is still a small amount of nucleus energy to hold them to the atom.  The atom would be more negative with each added electron?  As the energy is injected the electrons jump rings and produce photons and we see a very intense light?  It seems that the collective answer is that the ionization electrons are shed at this point, then require re-ionization.  

I saw a statement earlier in the thread that said we were using 1.5J of energy to create the plasmoid, is this true or is it 1.5kJ?  I'm guessing Russ's setup is closer to 1.5kJ.  1A/sec=1 coulomb.  1 coulomb=6,241,509,629,152,650,000 electrons.  Do we know how many He atoms are in the chamber?  That's a lot of free radicals just bouncing around and hopefully being drawn out by the coils. This device seems to have some fly-back transformer qualities. Especially with the helium filled core.  

Tim

Quote from Axil on February 5th, 2013, 10:23 AM

Where did the requirement for the RF frequency to be 25MhZ come from: John Rohner?

In his patents, Papp has never mentioned the use RF in his designs.

Have we ever seen the use of RF increase the performance of the Papp reaction?

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

The circuitry of FIG. 13A also includes a high frequency voltage source or oscillator 95 for supplying rapidly varying voltage through two electronic current regulators 97A, 97B (see FIG. 13B for regulator 97B) to the anode and cathode electrodes of each cylinder, and a high voltage distributor 99 for distributing 40,000 volt pulses to the cylinders.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Referring back to FIG. 13A, for engines of more than 1000 hp a high frequency source 95 could be used to control engine RPM. The output frequency is controlled by a foot pedal similar to an accelerator pedal in a conventional automobile. The output frequency varies through a range of from approximately 2.057 MHz to approximately 27.120 MHz with an output current of approximately 8.4 amps. The speed of engine 11 is controlled by the output frequency of source 95. The high frequency current, as described infra, is directed to each cylinder in turn by circuitry described infra. For engines producing from 300 to 1000 hp (not shown), a high frequency source having a constant output of 27.120 MHz with a constant current of 3.4 amps which is continually supplied to all cylinders could be used.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;)

Quote from element 119 on February 5th, 2013, 01:07 PM

Quote from Axil on February 5th, 2013, 10:23 AM

Where did the requirement for the RF frequency to be 25MhZ come from: John Rohner?

In his patents, Papp has never mentioned the use RF in his designs.

Have we ever seen the use of RF increase the performance of the Papp reaction?

It's interesting that the first CO2 laser used "RF discharge excitation" at 27MHz in 1964. See http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/40159/InTech-Longitudinally_excited_co2_laser.pdf

I also came across a paper that presented a low power x-ray pre-exciter that used RF, but can't seem to find it again... will try dig it up.

--Glen

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

The circuitry of FIG. 13A also includes a high frequency voltage source or oscillator 95 for supplying rapidly varying voltage through two electronic current regulators 97A, 97B (see FIG. 13B for regulator 97B) to the anode and cathode electrodes of each cylinder, and a high voltage distributor 99 for distributing 40,000 volt pulses to the cylinders.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Referring back to FIG. 13A, for engines of more than 1000 hp a high frequency source 95 could be used to control engine RPM. The output frequency is controlled by a foot pedal similar to an accelerator pedal in a conventional automobile. The output frequency varies through a range of from approximately 2.057 MHz to approximately 27.120 MHz with an output current of approximately 8.4 amps. The speed of engine 11 is controlled by the output frequency of source 95. The high frequency current, as described infra, is directed to each cylinder in turn by circuitry described infra. For engines producing from 300 to 1000 hp (not shown), a high frequency source having a constant output of 27.120 MHz with a constant current of 3.4 amps which is continually supplied to all cylinders could be used.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;)

To Russ and the group,

In the Nobel gas engines there are 4 Patents to review.

They are:
3,670,494
3,977,191
4,428,193
7,076,950

When one looks at the simularitys and differences of these one can see that the Papp engine may be a combination of a Sterling engine and an AEROPS Engine.
The latter Engine drops two of the nobel gasses and includes mercury vapor such as is used in murcury vapour rectifier tubes. It uses only helium kripton and xenon of the nobel gasses. The description is much clearer and more concise than any of the other patents. One can build it right from the patent with no quaums of how to do it. It relies on instantanious changes of the gas pressure due to photon bombardment.
In the others (except the last one) Focus coils are used to layer the nobel gasses in  cylinder shaped blankets with the heaviest in the outer cylinder and the lightest in the inner cylinder within the center may be Hydrogen gas. The reason I call these Focus coils is because I have worked in television all my employed life. The focus coil brings the cathode ray electrons to a small spot on the florescent screen. In the Papp engine the focus coil trains the current in the plasma to a fine point on the center of the piston. The madjour heat in the gasses comes from the ion bombardment of the piston and the spark points.  These metal areas become incandesent under operation. If the gasses are heated on average to 1,450 Celcius, the gas pressure would be five times that at atmospheric pressure. As photon bombardment provides some of the pressure change the tempratuer would not have to be this great to get a 5 times volume increase. By the Ideal Gas Law 5 times volume at the same pressure is equivalent to 5 times pressure if the volume is not changed. As soon as the gas is ionized the The 100 watt RF source is turned on maintaning ionization of the gasses and the spark is turned off. When power has dropped to 50% the current in one of the focus coils is reveresed and the RF is turned off. The effect of this is to allow all gasses to return to a homodunus mix. When this occures the cylinder walls cool the gas to ambient temperature and the piston is allowed to fall back. At top dead center it is again at atmospheric pressure. Thus the closed chamber runs very similar to a Sterling engine.
As we all know Argon is a good insulator and it is used in windows to keep the heat in and cold out. In the Sterling engine a displacer shifts the air alternately to the hot end and then the cold end with the changes in pressure turning the crankshaft. The nobel gases act like the displacer in the Papp engine allowing the gas to be heated when insulated from and then cooled by the cylinder walls when the insulating blanket is disabled.
I hope this description helps you to understand the working of the Papp engine.

Best regards,

Willard Elliott
PS:
IF you do a google search for Renzo Mondeini you will see how ionic bombardment at 350 volts causes metals to be heated to incandesance.                                                                                  

Quote from Willard Elliott on February 5th, 2013, 08:05 PM

To Russ and the group,

In the Nobel gas engines there are 4 Patents to review.

They are:
3,670,494
3,977,191
4,428,193
7,076,950

When one looks at the simularitys and differences of these one can see that the Papp engine may be a combination of a Sterling engine and an AEROPS Engine.
The latter Engine drops two of the nobel gasses and includes mercury vapor such as is used in murcury vapour rectifier tubes. It uses only helium kripton and xenon of the nobel gasses. The description is much clearer and more concise than any of the other patents. One can build it right from the patent with no quaums of how to do it. It relies on instantanious changes of the gas pressure due to photon bombardment.
In the others (except the last one) Focus coils are used to layer the nobel gasses in  cylinder shaped blankets with the heaviest in the outer cylinder and the lightest in the inner cylinder within the center may be Hydrogen gas. The reason I call these Focus coils is because I have worked in television all my employed life. The focus coil brings the cathode ray electrons to a small spot on the florescent screen. In the Papp engine the focus coil trains the current in the plasma to a fine point on the center of the piston. The madjour heat in the gasses comes from the ion bombardment of the piston and the spark points.  These metal areas become incandesent under operation. If the gasses are heated on average to 1,450 Celcius, the gas pressure would be five times that at atmospheric pressure. As photon bombardment provides some of the pressure change the tempratuer would not have to be this great to get a 5 times volume increase. By the Ideal Gas Law 5 times volume at the same pressure is equivalent to 5 times pressure if the volume is not changed. As soon as the gas is ionized the The 100 watt RF source is turned on maintaning ionization of the gasses and the spark is turned off. When power has dropped to 50% the current in one of the focus coils is reveresed and the RF is turned off. The effect of this is to allow all gasses to return to a homodunus mix. When this occures the cylinder walls cool the gas to ambient temperature and the piston is allowed to fall back. At top dead center it is again at atmospheric pressure. Thus the closed chamber runs very similar to a Sterling engine.
As we all know Argon is a good insulator and it is used in windows to keep the heat in and cold out. In the Sterling engine a displacer shifts the air alternately to the hot end and then the cold end with the changes in pressure turning the crankshaft. The nobel gases act like the displacer in the Papp engine allowing the gas to be heated when insulated from and then cooled by the cylinder walls when the insulating blanket is disabled.
I hope this description helps you to understand the working of the Papp engine.

Best regards,

Willard Elliott
PS:
IF you do a google search for Renzo Mondeini you will see how ionic bombardment at 350 volts causes metals to be heated to incandesance.

Thanks Will, I check it out.:cool::D:P

Quote from Jeff Nading on February 5th, 2013, 08:45 PM

Quote from Willard Elliott on February 5th, 2013, 08:05 PM

To Russ and the group,

In the Nobel gas engines there are 4 Patents to review.

They are:
3,670,494
3,977,191
4,428,193
7,076,950

When one looks at the simularitys and differences of these one can see that the Papp engine may be a combination of a Sterling engine and an AEROPS Engine.
The latter Engine drops two of the nobel gasses and includes mercury vapor such as is used in murcury vapour rectifier tubes. It uses only helium kripton and xenon of the nobel gasses. The description is much clearer and more concise than any of the other patents. One can build it right from the patent with no quaums of how to do it. It relies on instantanious changes of the gas pressure due to photon bombardment.
In the others (except the last one) Focus coils are used to layer the nobel gasses in  cylinder shaped blankets with the heaviest in the outer cylinder and the lightest in the inner cylinder within the center may be Hydrogen gas. The reason I call these Focus coils is because I have worked in television all my employed life. The focus coil brings the cathode ray electrons to a small spot on the florescent screen. In the Papp engine the focus coil trains the current in the plasma to a fine point on the center of the piston. The madjour heat in the gasses comes from the ion bombardment of the piston and the spark points.  These metal areas become incandesent under operation. If the gasses are heated on average to 1,450 Celcius, the gas pressure would be five times that at atmospheric pressure. As photon bombardment provides some of the pressure change the tempratuer would not have to be this great to get a 5 times volume increase. By the Ideal Gas Law 5 times volume at the same pressure is equivalent to 5 times pressure if the volume is not changed. As soon as the gas is ionized the The 100 watt RF source is turned on maintaning ionization of the gasses and the spark is turned off. When power has dropped to 50% the current in one of the focus coils is reveresed and the RF is turned off. The effect of this is to allow all gasses to return to a homodunus mix. When this occures the cylinder walls cool the gas to ambient temperature and the piston is allowed to fall back. At top dead center it is again at atmospheric pressure. Thus the closed chamber runs very similar to a Sterling engine.
As we all know Argon is a good insulator and it is used in windows to keep the heat in and cold out. In the Sterling engine a displacer shifts the air alternately to the hot end and then the cold end with the changes in pressure turning the crankshaft. The nobel gases act like the displacer in the Papp engine allowing the gas to be heated when insulated from and then cooled by the cylinder walls when the insulating blanket is disabled.
I hope this description helps you to understand the working of the Papp engine.

Best regards,

Willard Elliott
PS:
IF you do a google search for Renzo Mondeini you will see how ionic bombardment at 350 volts causes metals to be heated to incandesance.

Thanks Will, I check it out.:cool::D:P

This is most interesting.
/watch?v=TEceEHgaXoU

http://www.ndt-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/RadiationSafety/theory/activity.htm

A lot of info in this that seemed pertinent.

Quote from Willard Elliott on February 5th, 2013, 08:05 PM

The nobel gases act like the displacer in the Papp engine allowing the gas to be heated when insulated from and then cooled by the cylinder walls when the insulating blanket is disabled.
I hope this description helps you to understand the working of the Papp engine.

There are a few things with the Papp engine that don't seem to run along with the idea of expanding gases by heat only.

First there is ample to none temperature increase on the cylinders.
Secondly there is a plasmoid like fireball and explosive combustion.
Thirdly there is a violent collapse stroke, faster then a cooling down effect.
Fourthly there is a feedback current of excess electrons.

Also the horsepower output is greatly more then under a Sterling engine. Plus the inside resistance is so much no man could turn the crankshaft by hand. As where a sterling engine is done with almost zero resistance for it to turn/work

Sure there could be some of your observations also going on in the engine, but it doesn't seem to explain the main forces in play in a Papp engine.

Look for instance at the dyno video where some horsepowers are created without heat.

Attached is a file "NGE P_HP.xls"  It shows the torque and HP for a given size engine and number of cylinders as a function of 'combustion' pressure (p).  The spreadsheet is just a tool to get a feel for the kinds of pressures needed to produce power.  There are two worksheets, one that calculates the torque and HP from the Pressure-Volume (PV) curve, and the second calculates the torque using crank angle.  I present both types of calculations so that you can see how they interrelate.

The values currently in the file for #of cylinders, bore, stroke, and head space (dead volume) have been provided by Bob Rohner.  The RPM, torque, and HP are the numbers from the dyno test.  The pressure collapse point was chosen, quite arbitrarily, at 135 degrees after TDC.  The pressure of 2820 is the pressure required to make the torque number work out properly, assuming a single pressure pulse, and also assuming the pressure is nearly instantaneous.

The JPR PTP "patented plasmic transition contraption" claims a x5 pressure.  In psia that would be 75psia.  Mess with the numbers, see what you get.  You will be quickly convinced that PTP is a hoax.  Making power with any sort of short duration pulse is also highly questionable.  Its the area under the P-V curve that counts.  If you can make a short pulse with a high enough pressure (area) with out blacking out the Eastern Seaboard, then you may have something. :P

Papp used 3 or 4 pulses (3 stated in patent) (Bob says 4) so the 2820 figure will come down a bit, averaged out over 4 P_V pulses.  The single point pulse calculation is good for those claiming to have an engine running as such.

Enjoy.

kcd

Quote from k c dias on February 6th, 2013, 11:17 AM

Attached is a file "NGE P_HP.xls"  It shows the torque and HP for a given size engine and number of cylinders as a function of 'combustion' pressure (p).  The spreadsheet is just a tool to get a feel for the kinds of pressures needed to produce power.  There are two worksheets, one that calculates the torque and HP from the Pressure-Volume (PV) curve, and the second calculates the torque using crank angle.  I present both types of calculations so that you can see how they interrelate.

The values currently in the file for #of cylinders, bore, stroke, and head space (dead volume) have been provided by Bob Rohner.  The RPM, torque, and HP are the numbers from the dyno test.  The pressure collapse point was chosen, quite arbitrarily, at 135 degrees after TDC.  The pressure of 2820 is the pressure required to make the torque number work out properly, assuming a single pressure pulse, and also assuming the pressure is nearly instantaneous.

The JPR PTP "patented plasmic transition contraption" claims a x5 pressure.  In psia that would be 75psia.  Mess with the numbers, see what you get.  You will be quickly convinced that PTP is a hoax.  Making power with any sort of short duration pulse is also highly questionable.  Its the area under the P-V curve that counts.  If you can make a short pulse with a high enough pressure (area) with out blacking out the Eastern Seaboard, then you may have something. :P

Papp used 3 or 4 pulses (3 stated in patent) (Bob says 4) so the 2820 figure will come down a bit, averaged out over 4 P_V pulses.  The single point pulse calculation is good for those claiming to have an engine running as such.

Enjoy.

kcd

(Although seen earlier) Nice info and backcalculating KCD! Here we see the power involved in the papp engine, its explosive, more then heating up and cooling down gas.

Shouldn't the pressure column go into minus after the 135 degrees? The backstroke is halve the force..?
And or how to time the backstroke for optimum efficiency?
That would determine the amount and force of the electric pulses, not?

And where is your own testing stuck now? Or are you making some progress?

Would be nice if we could make a 360 picture of the pressures, but how to find the individual influences per pulse? Could only be done by testing i think.
And then to put in a column with the voltages and amps. (could also be that the 3th pulse needs more voltage and less amps as its further away from the plasmoid?)

And also test how coils or other can maximize the return force.

Juppp..much testing still to be done.

Quote from FaradayEZ on February 6th, 2013, 03:22 PM

Quote from k c dias on February 6th, 2013, 11:17 AM

Attached is a file "NGE P_HP.xls"  It shows the torque and HP for a given size engine and number of cylinders as a function of 'combustion' pressure (p).  The spreadsheet is just a tool to get a feel for the kinds of pressures needed to produce power.  There are two worksheets, one that calculates the torque and HP from the Pressure-Volume (PV) curve, and the second calculates the torque using crank angle.  I present both types of calculations so that you can see how they interrelate.

The values currently in the file for #of cylinders, bore, stroke, and head space (dead volume) have been provided by Bob Rohner.  The RPM, torque, and HP are the numbers from the dyno test.  The pressure collapse point was chosen, quite arbitrarily, at 135 degrees after TDC.  The pressure of 2820 is the pressure required to make the torque number work out properly, assuming a single pressure pulse, and also assuming the pressure is nearly instantaneous.

The JPR PTP "patented plasmic transition contraption" claims a x5 pressure.  In psia that would be 75psia.  Mess with the numbers, see what you get.  You will be quickly convinced that PTP is a hoax.  Making power with any sort of short duration pulse is also highly questionable.  Its the area under the P-V curve that counts.  If you can make a short pulse with a high enough pressure (area) with out blacking out the Eastern Seaboard, then you may have something. :P

Papp used 3 or 4 pulses (3 stated in patent) (Bob says 4) so the 2820 figure will come down a bit, averaged out over 4 P_V pulses.  The single point pulse calculation is good for those claiming to have an engine running as such.

Enjoy.

kcd

(Although seen earlier) Nice info and backcalculating KCD! Here we see the power involved in the papp engine, its explosive, more then heating up and cooling down gas.

Shouldn't the pressure column go into minus after the 135 degrees? The backstroke is halve the force..?
And or how to time the backstroke for optimum efficiency?
That would determine the amount and force of the electric pulses, not?

And where is your own testing stuck now? Or are you making some progress?

Would be nice if we could make a 360 picture of the pressures, but how to find the individual influences per pulse? Could only be done by testing i think.
And then to put in a column with the voltages and amps

And also test how coils or other can maximize the return force.

I like the XLs file. Lots of good info I feel.

Is your R constant for a conglomerate of the working gases?  I thought heliums constant was 1.6?  The other thing with the rohner and Papp engines is that you're getting 3-4 fires per stroke. Can we then divide overall torque and pressure by 3-4?  If you were capable of firing an ICE 3-4x a downstroke would that not also increase the torque?  Or like using single phase vs polyphase ac?  And what happens if the R Value is not so constant after plasma introduction?  What if the constant doubles or triples?  That should bring the temp value down as well. Or if the physical size of the working gas atoms change in the plasma state?  

Tim

Quote from Willard Elliott on February 5th, 2013, 08:05 PM

To Russ and the group,

In the Nobel gas engines there are 4 Patents to review.

They are:
3,670,494
3,977,191
4,428,193
7,076,950

When one looks at the simularitys and differences of these one can see that the Papp engine may be a combination of a Sterling engine and an AEROPS Engine.
The latter Engine drops two of the nobel gasses and includes mercury vapor such as is used in murcury vapour rectifier tubes. It uses only helium kripton and xenon of the nobel gasses. The description is much clearer and more concise than any of the other patents. One can build it right from the patent with no quaums of how to do it. It relies on instantanious changes of the gas pressure due to photon bombardment.
In the others (except the last one) Focus coils are used to layer the nobel gasses in  cylinder shaped blankets with the heaviest in the outer cylinder and the lightest in the inner cylinder within the center may be Hydrogen gas. The reason I call these Focus coils is because I have worked in television all my employed life. The focus coil brings the cathode ray electrons to a small spot on the florescent screen. In the Papp engine the focus coil trains the current in the plasma to a fine point on the center of the piston. The madjour heat in the gasses comes from the ion bombardment of the piston and the spark points.  These metal areas become incandesent under operation. If the gasses are heated on average to 1,450 Celcius, the gas pressure would be five times that at atmospheric pressure. As photon bombardment provides some of the pressure change the tempratuer would not have to be this great to get a 5 times volume increase. By the Ideal Gas Law 5 times volume at the same pressure is equivalent to 5 times pressure if the volume is not changed. As soon as the gas is ionized the The 100 watt RF source is turned on maintaning ionization of the gasses and the spark is turned off. When power has dropped to 50% the current in one of the focus coils is reveresed and the RF is turned off. The effect of this is to allow all gasses to return to a homodunus mix. When this occures the cylinder walls cool the gas to ambient temperature and the piston is allowed to fall back. At top dead center it is again at atmospheric pressure. Thus the closed chamber runs very similar to a Sterling engine.
As we all know Argon is a good insulator and it is used in windows to keep the heat in and cold out. In the Sterling engine a displacer shifts the air alternately to the hot end and then the cold end with the changes in pressure turning the crankshaft. The nobel gases act like the displacer in the Papp engine allowing the gas to be heated when insulated from and then cooled by the cylinder walls when the insulating blanket is disabled.
I hope this description helps you to understand the working of the Papp engine.

Best regards,

Willard Elliott
PS:
IF you do a google search for Renzo Mondeini you will see how ionic bombardment at 350 volts causes metals to be heated to incandesance.

@Willard Elliott
Welcome to the forum. Your introduction of the AEROPs engine to this discussion is great.

In systems engineering, having two systems to compare is very valuable.

One big difference between the Papp and the AEROPS engine is the energy level that the photons run at.

In the Papp engine, x-rays are predominant and in the AEROPS engine UV is predominant.

The polished surface of the pressure chamber will reflect UV but not x-rays.

However, the thin tubes will carry x-rays because they act as wave guides.
The Papp engine design would be well served to add x-ray reflectors to its walls, but that is very hard to do

see

http://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=741

The AEROPS engine uses the trigatron switch as we have discussed earlier on in this tread and the AEROPS use of this trigger lends credence to the validity to using that  concept to fire the high current spark.

The AEROPS pressure chamber should take the shape of a parabolic reflector with the spark at the focus. This will direct the UV rays parallel down the transfer tubes.

The heat generated by the AEROPS engine is a puzzle because such heat is not produced by the Papp engine.

This might be caused by the lack of attention in draining the feedback current. This current may be causing electrical resistance heating.

The firing circuit may be important to look at in the AEROPS engine but I am not competent to do so. Maybe a circuit expert may find it interesting to look at the circuit to see if it has any advantages over what we have been considering for the Papp engine.

The AEROPS patent is found as follows:

Using gas pressure transfer between mated cylinders is an interesting concept to control the throttle. I wonder if it actually works.

The AEROPS patent is found as follows:


https://docs.google.com/a/google.com/viewer?url=www.google.com/patents/US3977191.pdf

Quote from FaradayEZ on February 6th, 2013, 03:22 PM

(Although seen earlier) Nice info and backcalculating KCD! Here we see the power involved in the papp engine, its explosive, more then heating up and cooling down gas.

Shouldn't the pressure column go into minus after the 135 degrees? The backstroke is halve the force..?
And or how to time the backstroke for optimum efficiency?
That would determine the amount and force of the electric pulses, not?

I didn't bother with the low pressure side of the cycle, for 776 Ft# of torque (a rather large number)  I just zeroed out the pressure numbers (close enough), where 0 psia = -1 atm.

Quote from FaradayEZ on February 6th, 2013, 03:22 PM

And where is your own testing stuck now? Or are you making some progress?

I am working on shrinking some gas aka forming gas clusters.  (I think) it is working, but it is too early to start bragging :D

Quote from FaradayEZ on February 6th, 2013, 03:22 PM

Would be nice if we could make a 360 picture of the pressures, but how to find the individual influences per pulse? Could only be done by testing i think.
And then to put in a column with the voltages and amps. (could also be that the 3th pulse needs more voltage and less amps as its further away from the plasmoid?)

No 'plasma' needed.  At least not a huge fireball.  If my gas cluster idea is correct, we only need the bright UV flash from a small cap discharge to activate the gas clusters, possibly several spaced apart during the power stroke.[/quote]

Quote from FaradayEZ on February 6th, 2013, 03:22 PM

And also test how coils or other can maximize the return force.

Juppp..much testing still to be done.

Yes, much work to be done...

kcd

Quote from Slickhanz on February 6th, 2013, 04:09 PM

Is your R constant for a conglomerate of the working gases?  I thought heliums constant was 1.6?  The other thing with the rohner and Papp engines is that you're getting 3-4 fires per stroke. Can we then divide overall torque and pressure by 3-4?  If you were capable of firing an ICE 3-4x a downstroke would that not also increase the torque?  Or like using single phase vs polyphase ac?  And what happens if the R Value is not so constant after plasma introduction?  What if the constant doubles or triples?  That should bring the temp value down as well. Or if the physical size of the working gas atoms change in the plasma state?  

Tim

Are you referring to 'ni' = 1.4?  That is the polytropic index.  I used a value of 1.4 as an estimate for an isentropic expansion.  The main thing to remember is the torque is proportional to the area under the curve.  And, I don't believe that plasma is the driving force in the Papp engine - sorry. :(

kcd

Quote from k c dias on February 7th, 2013, 10:00 AM

I am working on shrinking some gas aka forming gas clusters.  It is working, but it is too early to start bragging :D

Well well, the incredible shrinking man process beam whatjemecallit.. and already he doesn't need the plasma anymore...found a new love ay? ;)

Don't get too smittenth, science can be a harsh lady, can't be easy to maintain the clusters and or get them back the same after combustion.

But its bold/good to do some elemental research, are you using coils for it? :D

FYI

I ran across a table of Excimer efficiencies you might be interested in.

[attachment=3214]