Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

movieclipsfree

movie clips free

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 482289
  • *Total Topics: 14218
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 11
  • *Guests: 203
  • *Total: 214

Facebook

Author Topic: Meyer's WFC concept analysed  (Read 63023 times)

Offline neukin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2007, 03:30:49 AM »
I tested on a open unit as the arc scared me.. didnt know if it would arc at anytime but it didnt. That tig welder can be looked at here http://www.millerwelds.com/products/tig/ they do cost alot but when you use one sitting around after hours at a shop its nice to use ::)   Iv tried 60v 3a and it was really rocking in a open unit, the pulse i cant remember right now but iv messed around and didnt notice any major increase with frequency changing...

The oxide on the plates is interesting, ill have to try on my test unit and see how gas goes. I have a lpm meter on the way so i can better test gas produced rather then looks off mass bubbles  ;D

I use 12v about 12amp with a battery charger and it works good but not near the rate needed. i use 36v and maybe 20amp? for fast production for torch use. I have had my tank produce up to 40psi  :o in about 1 min at 32.2C a good temp as it seems when its warm i make more hho. I turned off at that point as things can get dangerous and i like my body parts.  I have a permanent magnet  perm132 motor that makes about 30v and not sure of the amp right now (need more dc tools here) but i can spin the motor with a belt on a car and make plenty of power. I spun the motor with a Edrill and read that 30v etc... the motor is from http://www.perm-motor.de/index_e.html  If you look at the generators they sell they make alot more power. i cant afford a generator from them yet. You only have to spin at like 2000rpm for the 30v


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #15 on: November 02, 2007, 03:30:49 AM »

Offline aussepom

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #16 on: November 02, 2007, 01:36:31 PM »
Hi guys stumble across this, I am talking at a forum on some of theses cells yes old Stan did not make much sense I will be pulling it all apart in a very similar way.
His circuits do not make sense when you redraw them and analyse them.
These cells are just big very 'leaky capacitors' well that how I refer to them none of these types of circuit can use resonance, you can only have resonance in an 'AC circuit'
The 'transformers' and chokes' all on the same piece of ion well that ok if you were trying  to build a 'mag amp'  well done nice reading.
aussepom

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #17 on: November 02, 2007, 04:03:51 PM »
The 'eureka' moment really is the oxide on the plates which is in essence the dielectric.  Don't take this too lightly as this really is crucial to the operation of the cell as a capacitor.

I had heated arguments with Bob Boyce regarding his cell and the fact that he insisted that his cells worked better when his plates sealed his container, thereby effectively having each cell in its own electrolyte. Bob said it stopped the current bypassing the plates. But this made no sense to me as charged ions would not readily bypass the plates and go the long way around to a more distant plate, they would always be drawn to the nearest plate of opposite charge.

This had me puzzled. Now however, I see now that Bob conditions his electrodes, and whether he realises it or not, what he is doing is creating the dielectric oxide layer.

Now it makes more sense. By sealing each cell, he has in fact a lot of capacitors (oxidised electrodes) and a resistors (electrolyte) in series. If the plates were not sealed he would effectively have another low value resistor in parallel with the series RC cells, which would drastically lower the overall impeadance of his wfc, and hence, greatly affecting the value of any resonant frequencies.

You will not that a Joe cell requires similar conditioning before they allegedly work.  Basically then, you have to create your capacitor!

Hairbear, I had a look at that patent link. Yes Meyer does state an actual diode, but this is about the only thing that it would be hard to get wrong.  As long as it is a high power rectifier diode capable of handling a few amps and decent reverse voltage, then just about anything will do.  I think the 1N1198 can withstand a reverse voltage of around 600V before it would disintegrate. Notice however, that the more complicated circuits, ie pulse generator, etc, are just a labelled box.

The Buz350, mentioned earlier with reference to Lawtons pulse circuit design can handle a maximum continuous current drain of 22 amps, handle voltages up to 200V and dissipate 125 Watts of power. A fairly meaty little beast, but there are many similar power transistors and mosfets that will do the job. The thing is to know what parameters are important in your design. I daresay a lower voltage and current handling device would be ok in most cases, afterall 22 amps is a lot of juice.  It may just be that Lawton had this particular component to hand and so utilised it.

Farrah Day
« Last Edit: November 02, 2007, 06:36:51 PM by Farrah Day »

Offline aussepom

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #18 on: November 02, 2007, 08:27:08 PM »
Hi yes you make sense but I do differ on the so called coating, electrolysis is an 'oxidising process' any way so in MY opinion by 'roughing up the surface' with sand paper etc' will only expose the ion particles to the electrolyte, SS has a unique quality it will 'self seal' its surface, some grade more than others this is well know in the foundry industry when you are 'casting SS'.
There will be a build up of that 'red stuff' as part of the oxidising process; this will react with any impurities in you 'electrolyte mixture' and this will tend to coat the SS.
I used titanium in my water treatment process that is based on electrolysis.
Archie Blue  had the right approach but is different to my set up as I use different plates one titanium and one titanium coated, all the positives are connected to each other and the same for the negatives as per AB he used a vertical cell I used a horizontal cell, one extra negative plate just like a battery.
AB used all the same material.
Because of my set up for wastewater treatment my electrolyte was 'raw sewage'
With out any power I would get a 0.5volt across one positive and one negative just like a battery.
Using dissimilar metals so the one has a more positive galvo metric electrical charge than the other, and a highly negative galvo metric electrolyte to me helps.
Every metal has a 'charge'.
Oh dear I did go on a bit well I hope that helps .
STANDARD ELECTRODE POTENTIALS
Half-Reaction                                E V
         
Li+ + e-  Li                                            -3.04
K+ + e-  K                                              -2.92
Ba2+ + 2e-  Ba                                      -2.90
Ca2+ + 2e-  Ca                                       -2.87
Na+ + e-  Na                                           -2.71
Mg2+ + 2e-  Mg                                      -2.37
Al3+ + 3e-  Al                                       -1.66
Mn2+ + 2e-  Mn                                     -1.18
2H2O + 2e-  H2 (g) + 2 OH-                     -0.83
Zn2+ + 2e-  Zn                                       -0.76
Cr2+ + 2e-  Cr                                        -0.74
Fe2+ + 2e-  Fe                                      -0.44
Cr3+ + 3e-  Cr                                        -0.41
Cd2+ + 2e-  Cd                                       -0.40
Co2+ + 2e-  Co                                        -0.28
Ni2+ + 2e-  Ni                                            -0.25
Sn2+ + 2e-  Sn                                        -0.14
Pb2+ + 2e-  Pb                                        -0.13
Fe3+ + 3e-  Fe                                        -0.04
2H+ + 2e-  H2 (g)                                   0.00
S + 2H+ + 2e-  H2S (g)                           0.14
Sn4+ + 2e-  Sn2+                                   0.15
Cu2+ + e-  Cu+                                       0.16
SO42+ + 4H+ + 2e-  SO2 (g) + 2H2O    0.17
Cu2+ + 2e-  Cu                                     0.34
2H2O + O2 + 4e-  4OH-                         0.40
Cu+ + e-  Cu                                          0.52
I2 + 2e-  2I-                                            0.54
O2 (g) + 2H+ + 2e-  H2O2                      0.68
Fe3+ + e-  Fe2+                                    0.77
NO3- + 2H+ + e-  NO2 (g) + H2O          0.78
Hg2+ + 2e-  Hg (l)                                0.78
Ag+ + e-  Ag                                       0.80
NO3- + 4H+ +3 e-  NO (g) + 2H2O      0.96
Br2 + 2e-  2Br-                                   1.06
O2 (g) + 4H+ + 4e-  2H2O                  1.23
MnO2 + 4H+ + 2e-  Mn2+ + 2H2O        1.28
Cr2O72- + 14H+ + 6e-  2Cr3+ + 7H2O  1.33
Cl2 + 2e-  2Cl-                                      1.36
Au3+ + 3e-  Au                                        1.50
MnO4- + 8H+ + 5e-  Mn2+ + 4H2O          1.52
Co3+ + e-  Co2+                                  1.82
F2 + 2e-  2F-                                         2.87
          there are some for SS  use the biggest difference depending on your process to get maximum reaction 
 but this will depend on what you are trying to achieve                             

aussepom


Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #19 on: November 02, 2007, 09:38:04 PM »


So, what if the tap water is not the dielectric - and here comes something important. Ever heard of wet electrolyte capacitors?  They are very uncommon nowadays, an old fashioned capacitor from a 100 years ago, but they are basically electrodes submerged in a liquid (electrolyte) - ring any bells?  Yes, like Meyers wfc, but... and heres the key thing, the electrodes have a layer of oxide on them!

Might be some pennies starting to drop now.  Yes! An oxide layer on the electrodes is actually the dielectric, not the tap water, this is why many people say that the cells need to be conditioned first - they need to produce oxidation on the surface of the electrodes. However, this conditioning is not commonly understood and many people simply think that this helps the bubbles not stick to the electrodes and hence produce more gas. When in fact, the conditioning actually creates the capacitor.  So in effect the wfc is a capacitor (the oxide) in series with a resistor (the water).

Things now start to make a little more sense... don't they!

Farrah Day


G'day Farrah and all,

Excellent post, thank you.

I remember the old wet electrolytics quite well. We were still using them in the 1950's in valve circuits. They were interesting things who had a tendency to leak. Some of the older ones used actually sulfuric acid as the electrolyte. They were usually made from aluminium though copper was not unknown either. The dielectric (oxide) was formed using an electrolytic process.

Which brings me to my point. If the watercells rely on that oxide layer (conditioning layer) stainless steel seems to be a poor choice for cell construction because it is difficult to oxidise. After all stainless steel is specifically designed to resist this.

Maybe we should experiment with aluminium or copper instead. Food for thought.

Hans von Lieven




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #19 on: November 02, 2007, 09:38:04 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline paulshroom

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #20 on: November 02, 2007, 11:03:05 PM »

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2007, 12:27:02 AM »
I think that the stainless steel is just fine as electrodes, as it's as 'unreactive' as we need it to be, easy to get hold of and not too expensive. I guess we would all be using titanium if it didn't cost an 'arm and a leg'.

The important thing is that SS won't itself play a chemically active part in the electrolysis, unlike other metals where electrodes can quickly decompose.  Most metals do actually oxidise to some degree after time in oxygen, but unlike the aggressive nature of rust on metals with high iron content, metals like copper, aluminium, silver, zinc and stainless steel, etc, only develop a thin oxide layer which then effectively protects the metal underneath - that tarnished look.

However, this would probably explain why some SS is better than others. I'm not sure SS is particularly difficult to oxidise, a couple of hours in a standard electrolyser configuration is likely all it takes - maybe only minutes under heavy current.  I recall someone playing with a Joe cell and talking about conditioning - but not knowing why it worked - saying that this was achieved by drawing a heavy current through the cell one way, then reversing the terminals and doing the other way. Well this would mean that both the sides of the electrodes that face each other would be oxidised, doubling the electrical capacity of the cell.

Aussepom, isn't that SS self healing effect you talk about actually oxidation - just like the way zinc self heals on a galvanized mop bucket?

There are only a couple of reasons I see to roughing up the electrodes. One is to clean any unwanted crap (grease, oil contaminants) off the surface prior to conditioning and the other is to vastly increase the surface area of the electrodes. At a microscopic level, even a light sandpaper will create enormous mountains and valleys on the electrode surface.

I can see that using dissimilar metals to take advantage of their natural electropositive or electronegative charges might help in standard electrolysis and electroplating, but I don't see a place for it in trying to replicate Meyers wfc. After all we don't want a battery, we wan't as little current flowing as possible.

Locked-in, I had a look at that patent you listed. In my opinion it's just the same old dribble as everything else he put down on paper - basically incoherent twaddle. In fact, give me an cartload of scientific patents and documents and I would be able to pick out the ones Stan had produced just by skimming through them - Stans would be the ones spouting all the technical jargon but actually saying very little and explaining even less! There's a report online somewhere by a scientist who went to see a Meyer cell in action. His comment was 'the demonstartion of Meyers working cell was far more impressive than the pseudo-technical jargon that he used to explain it', or words to that effect. And that really summed up Meyer for me. No, the circuits, though more elaborate, again do not give any detail whatsover on component values. Ask yourself, 'why would he draw the circuit out, but leave out the crucial component values?'  Better still, try to construct one.  No... really, don't waste your time there.

Farrah Day
« Last Edit: November 04, 2007, 10:10:00 AM by Farrah Day »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2007, 12:27:02 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline HeairBear

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 440
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2007, 12:41:03 AM »
This guy has a lot of good info...http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5124443346685900742&q=qiman13&total=11&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4
In Stan's earlier designs before the use of the VIC, he utilized a resistive material sandwiched between two plates and a variable resistor in series after that. Think of a set of three tubes with the gap of the inner and middle tubes filled with resistive material. This may have been used before he discovered the coating or it could be that a coating will never happen if there is no current or at most, very little current.

As far as trying different electrode materials, just about anything will work as long as it wont corrode or add a lot of impurities and gunk in the water. A  durable plastic would even work. All we need to do is just get the high voltage potential around and in the plates. As easy as it sounds, at first I thought, why not use a Van DeGraph device? It doesn't work because the water acts like a ground. It basically is ground, so the charge would never hold or rise. So now we have a big leaky capacitor, that acts as ground. Until the coating shows up. Then things start to change. Why are we calling it a capacitor? It is a capacitor, not a good one but still a capacitor. It's also a resonant cavity which is the main process doing the work. Our microwave ovens use resonant cavities much in the same way,

If we can easily figure out a suitable diode then all thats left to figure out is the torroid and the chokes. That last patent I posted stated these parameters.

In th Example of a fuel cell circuit of FIG. 1, a water capacitor is included. The step-up coil is formed on a conventional torroidal core formed of a compressed ferromagnetic powdered material that will not itself become permanently magnetized, such as the trademarked "ferramic 06# "Permag" powder as described in Siemens Ferrites Catalog, CG-2000-002-121, No. F626-1205. The core is 1.5 inch in diameter and 0.25 inch in thickness. A primary coil of 200 turns of 24 gauge copper wire is provided and a coil of 600 turns of 36 gauge wire comprises the secondary winding.

In the circuit of FIG. 1, the diode is a 1N1198 diode which acts as a blocking diode and an electric switch that allows voltage flow in one direction only. Thus the capacitor is never subjected to a pulse of reverse polarity.

The primary coil of the torroid is subject to a 50% duty cycle pulse. The torroidal pulsing coil provides a voltage step-up from the pulse generator in excess of five times, although the relative amount of step-up is determined by pre-selected criteria for a particular application. As the stepped-up pulse enters the first inductor (formed from 100 turns of 24 gauge wire 1 inch in diameter), an electromagnetic field is formed around the inductor, voltage is switched off when the pulse ends, and the field collapses and produces another pulse of the same polarity; i.e., another positive pusle is formed where the 50% duty cycle was terminated. Thus a double pulse frequency is produced; however, in a pulse train of unipolar pulses, there is a breif time when pulses are not present.

In an example of the circuit of FIG. 1 (in which other circuit element specifications are provided above), two concentric cylinders 4 inches long formed the water capacitor of the fuel cell in the volume of water. The outside cylinder was 0.75 inch OD; the inner cylinder was 0.5 inch OD. Spacing from the outside of the inner cylinder to the inner surface of the outer cylinder was 0.0625 inch. Resonance in the circuit was achieved at a 26 volt applied pulse to the primary coil of the torroid at 0KHz, and the water molecules disassociated into elemental hydrogen and oxygen...

That 0KHz must be an OCR error. but at least we know there is a zero in the number. Basically, here is a starting point to his device. Build it and add a Lawton device to the primary and you are set. It almost seems to easy doesn't it?

Gotta jet! cya!

Offline aussepom

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2007, 04:27:35 AM »
Hi just a quick one  it's my understanding that the square looking core in SM's fig one IT WAS CONSTRUCTED USING A STANDARD 'O' CORE TRANSFORMER MATERIAL AND NOT AS SOME WOULD ASSUME A TORIODAL CORE.
  In my opinion he was trying to use the 'mag amp' theory but got it wrong. he also states that ALL THE WINDINGS WE WOUND IN THE SAME DIRECTION. I will not go into any further debate over this as every one has a different opinion but some basic electrical and and electronic principals can not be ignored.
aussepom 
 

Offline hansvonlieven

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2558
    • Keelytech
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2007, 06:04:15 AM »
Sorry Farrah,

I don't agree with your take on electrodes. If, and I say if, you are after a condenser effect then the underlying metal is of no importance since the oxide layer makes it inert to electrolysis.

In this case you will not have a current running through the water but you are relying on resonance with the electric field instead. Perhaps you could have a look at Keely, he supposedly crated the same effects without electricity and used sonic vibrations instead.

There is good reason to believe that Stan was aware of Keely and tried to use an electric field instead for his introductory impulses. His use of compound frequencies is typically Keely.

Hans von Lieven

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2007, 06:04:15 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2007, 10:32:45 AM »
Hi Hans, feel free to use whatever metals you want as electrodes, but bear in mind that metals like aluminium and copper are very electrically conductive in the first place and have a lot of floating electrons just dying to make a run for it when dipped in a conductive electrolyte.  It is in effect the very thin coat (tarnish) on aluminium that protects the metal underneath. Why complicate matters when stainless steel would appear to have the properties we require.  The last thing we want, surely, is a 'battery'.

I know many of you are simply unwilling to let go and dismiss the Meyer patents, but unless you can get past this you will find it hard to progress.  Meyer had no background in science, that is why his electonic and atomic theories are laughable.  In Meyer's 'Hydrogen Fracturing Process' he states clearly that the dielectric constant of water of 78.54 @ 25C is why his wfc is a water capacitor works and bases the principle of operation around this (later incidentally he gives this figure as 78.54 @ 20C).  And yes he would have an extremely good capacitor if this was the case. But, we've all seen his Dune Buggy video, where he clearly states that just about any source of water is ok. Come on, think, why is it so dangerous to use a mains hair dryer whilst sitting in a bath tub of water? Because of the impurities, everyday water is a very, very good conductor even with an applied voltage of just tens of volts. Meyer was saying that many thousands of volts were going across his wfc, whilst almost no current was flowing. It simply does not make sense. Furthermore, I can find no mention of him conditioning his plates.

So Meyer introduces, what he calls his 'amp consuming device'. Problem now is that any highly resistive device, though reducing the current, would also cause the voltage to drop across itself, and not across the wfc where we want it!

Meyer might have planted the seed in your heads, and that's good. But now its time to move on and investigate the wfc in it's own right and forget Meyer's uneducated, contradictory and misguided inerpretations of what was happening.  Forget trying to recreate Meyer's circuits and simply use a known working circuit that will achieve the same thing. Modern components are better and easily available. It is very easy and practical to recreate Meyer's pulses and wave forms with modern circuits. Dave Lawton's circuit is there for everyone - I don't see a problem.

As I see it, the only thing Meyer has got going for him is the fact (if indeed it was a 'fact') that he did actually run a car on a home built wfc.  Meyers jargon and circuits are just an elaborate variation of Puharich's work.

Moving on, then. Another thing occured to me and that is, if we are simply using high intensity static fields to pull apart the water molecule, then in theory at least, the electrodes wouldn't even need to be indirect contact with the electrolyte. Like a Leyden Jar.

Eg. A glass jar filled with electrolyte (water in our case), with an electrode immersed in the electrolyte in the jar, but with the other electrode on the outside of the jar. So the outer electrode could simply be a metal foil wrapped around the jar. We would then have glass as an insulator between the two electrodes. Due to the insulation properties of glass this would surely make for a relatively low loss capacitor. But then I have never seen this tried, so maybe there is a need for both electrodes to be in the electrolyte. Hence, the science is not quite as straight forward or obvious as many people would like to think.

More food for thought.

Farrah Day

Offline mrgalleria

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #26 on: November 04, 2007, 10:48:18 AM »
Aloha,
I happened to be observing the Meyers videos and saw something very interesting. The new video of Meyers, in what may be the first video of the buggy running on water, is a rear view. In clear view is a very large alternator on the left side of the motor (belt driven) while the stock generator sits in it's original position above the motor. And the news video of Meyer running the table top demonstration distinctly and openly shows Meyer first switching on an electric motor which spins an alternator by belt drive. No one has mentioned this anywhere that I have seen, though HeairBear did touch on the advantages and versatility of using an alternator.
Bill


Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #27 on: November 04, 2007, 12:24:55 PM »
That link that Hairbear put up above somewhere, showing the guy who has coated his cathodes with an oxide is a very good illustration of what we need to form a capacitor. If you haven't seen it, then check it out.  It does look a hefty coating though and probably unnecessarily thick. Also, I'm not sure it is the cathode that should have the coating, as surely the in the initial oxide formation during electrolysis would have the hydrogen ions going to the cathode and the oxidation occuring at the anode. 

As I mentioned, this oxide layer on the electrodes is key. 

OK, so what in effect we would have then is a SS anode, coated in an insulating dielectric, sitting in highly conductive tap water that is effectively electrically connected to the anode.

I put it to you all now then, that the cathode is actually the water itself, the SS plate (without the oxide coating) acts merely as the electrical connection to the water.

It might all sound a little strange, but it really is all starting to fall into place as far as the workings of cell itself is concerned.

The dielectric on the anode is an oxide only microns thick. Now here is some interesting points:

Some oxides have extremely high dielectric constants, and can infact handle many thousands of volts per square cm, before dielectric breakdown occurs. Very nice.

Add to this the fact that the thinner the dielectric between the anode and cathode, the greater the capacitance (capacitance is inversely proportional to the thickness of the dielectric, ie. the distance between the electrodes) and again things start to make sense. If the cathode was the uncoated SS plate, the capacity of the cell would be very low, because the physical distance between the two SS electrodes is (even at 1.5 mm) relatively great.

But, if the cathode is simply providing electrical connection to the water, (water being the real cathode), then the distance between the the two is only the microns thickness of the oxide. And we now have a capacitor capable of holding a really decent charge.

Capacity is also proportional to the surface area of the electrodes, and hence doubling the surface area of the coated anode will double the the capacitance of the cell. The great thing now is that with the water being the cathode, the size of the connecting SS plate (old cathode), becomes uniportant as far as area is concerned. This can really just be a SS rod.  As the water will naturally immerse the anode, we can concentrate on making the surface area of the anode as great as possible, and be quite happy that our old cathode only needs to be a physically electrical connection to the water.

Without knowing the exact nature of the oxide (and it will no doubt depend on the electrolyte and/or impurities in the water used to create it), its dielectric constant can only be guessed at, which makes calculating the actual capacitance of the cell difficult. However, electronic equipment might well be able to give this figure.

So we have a real electrolytic water capacitor. Now the thing about electrolytic capacitors is that they have a polarity (hence my concern that the guy in the video was connecting his cells up wrong way around) and can be damaged if wired the wrong way around, so this is most likely why only positive pulses are depicted being applied to the wfc.  Though the dielectric oxide layer can be damaged by reverse polarity, the advantage of a wet electrolytic capacitor is that it should be capable of self-healing once the voltage polarity is corrected.

Pieces of the puzzle falling into place a bit at a time.

You might note that I am ignoring the fact that some people think that there is some kind of cavity resonance occuring between the SS electrodes, which my new design of wfc would not be very conducive to. However, a lot has been theorised without any conclusive facts forthcoming, so, taking one step at a time, I'll come to that bridge if or when it needs crossing. Just to say, I'm not convinced by cavity resonance at this point.

Incidentally, I've just ordered the components I need from Maplins in order to build a Dave Lawton pulse circuit. Less than ?30 for everything.  If your serious about this stuff then build Daves cct. I'm used to having to design the veroboard layout myself, from schematics, but Dave has even done this for us. It doesn't get any more detailed or easy than this.

Does Dave Lawton ever look in this forum, or has anyone got an email/contact address for this guy?

Regards
Farrah Day





 
« Last Edit: November 04, 2007, 02:13:06 PM by Farrah Day »

Offline neukin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #28 on: November 06, 2007, 01:11:06 AM »
I thought that was how anyone would use and make the system... with a generator or alternator type unit pumping the power into the hho cell. I just tested a good perm mag motor called the perm132.. its just a motor and it pumps out alot of power. I dont have the money to buy one of their generators but im sure its more efficient. I mounted the perm 132 on a honda motor in the car and ran at given rpms to build a chart. I started at about 1500 and upped 500rpm until 4k. The unit was putting out more then enough power for my cell. I was looking at high powered alternators but they usually supply less volts and more amps.

I plan on putting the complete system on the car soon, so ill let you know how it goes. We have a fully programable ECU so ill be messing with fuel and timing making sure to take full advantage of the hho gas being produced. It will be variable by controlling the power to the cell via the TPS sensor which also makes for a more efficient hho system on a automobile. thus supply more gas for more throttle etc, extra power will be sent to a 48v battery pack so power can be used as needed.
(http://www.alterhonda.com/images/perm132generator_zcca.jpg)

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #29 on: November 06, 2007, 09:48:02 AM »
Mr G

Are you saying that the Meyer video shows an additional small petrol driven generator to drive his WFC?

Can you provide a link to this video, as I don't think I've seen that.

Mind you, even if he was using a small generator or a lawnmower/moped engine of sorts, it could still be a very efficient system as many of those 50cc engines will do upward of 200 mpg.  Thinking logically, even if Meyers gas production was super efficient, there must come a point at which it can not keep up with the demands of a car engine unless extra power (more than can be supplied by the onboard alternator) is available.

I've read that many of the Meyer patents expired in June this year and so are now available to the public, but I can't say that I've seen anything that hasn't been around for years.

Farrah Day

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's WFC concept analysed
« Reply #29 on: November 06, 2007, 09:48:02 AM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: