Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) 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:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE  (Read 1405509 times)

gotoluc

  • elite_member
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3096
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #570 on: July 07, 2008, 07:58:54 AM »
Very good point.  This is why my idea posted earlier about a water pump system would be much easier to prove real over-unity.  The water system could be totally closed loop.  Imagine a gravity tank - say 10 meters up a hill, with 50mm pipe running up and back.  The pressure vessel with check valves and sparkplug would provide timed surges of water up to the tank.  The water flowing down could drive a waterwheel/turbine generator - and if that could maintain charge for the spark, overunity is achieved.

I admire the enthusiasm of those converting engines.  I just hope that they don't cloud the issue with failures that will draw attention away from the real core energy source here. 

I think there are those struggling with the idea that this is about primarily about producing heat, or disassociating H & O.  I expect there will be an element of this - but if that is the main focus, it will soon be found that there is no overunity.  Very possibly there is some real MIB disinformation clouding this thread already - I have my suspicions about some posts that seem to be guiding the attention off the real issue. 

If we allow ourselves to get misdirected - we will find we are using too much current, and will never achieve overunity.  The circuits to follow are the ones that use the least amount of current - preferably in milliamps.

IMO - this is cold energy.  The Latent Heat of converting liquid water into water vapour.  This is regular physics - nothing metaphysical needs to be invoked.

Sorry if i've offended anyone.  (Bumfuzzled - you better put me on your ignore list, because I say what I think - it's nothing personal).

My 2 cents from somebody just sitting at a keyboard adding nothing to the discussion.

Hi greendoor, you are right!... lets not all work on the same thing!... like trying to use this circuit to make a engine work on water. Can others please start to do other tests with the circuit. I'm quite sure it's not just for water explosion!...it can do more. Today I saw a post by Aaron at the Energetic forum saying that he was going to move onto Tesla experiment with the circuit. So lets try other experiments with it. If you find something new,  post your findings here with a link to a new topic so we can all support your work.

Thanks for bringing our attention to this greendoor

Where are you allcanadian?.. can you please start a Tesla style topic using this circuit?


Luc

qiman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
keeping the perspective
« Reply #571 on: July 07, 2008, 09:53:15 AM »
This concept is too important to have the tower of babel fall on our heads so nobody knows what is going on.

The circuit is not overunity and never will be. You cannot have more than unity or more than everything that you have.

The distinction is this and it is NOT about semantics, it is about seeing very clearly things for what they are and keeping things in perspective.

Efficiency of a circuit is TOTAL INPUT compared to TOTAL OUTPUT. It will ALWAYS be 100% or less. Period!

COP (coefficient of performance) of a circuit or system is YOUR OWN PERSONAL INPUT compared to TOTAL OUTPUT. The total output CAN be more than your own personal input. Where does the extra come from? The environment and can only happen in open circuits or open systems that are explained very well by non-equilibrium open thermodynamics.

If you fly a kite...you spend maybe 10 parts energy to get it in the air...after that, the environmental input (wind) keeps it up...you only have to wiggle your finger supplying almost nothing compared to the wind. If you put in 10 parts or even 20 parts for an entire hour but the wind is supplying 980 parts of input...the TOTAL input is 1000 parts energy...there WILL be losses from gravity and whatever else. If the total work done by the kite in flying is 700 parts and 300 parts in energy losses...that is 1000-300=700 output...so 1000 in and 700 out...that is 70% efficient...TOTAL INPUT COMPARED TO TOTAL OUTPUT.

However....YOUR input is 20 parts for an hour and nature supplied 980 input over the same time. And there is 700 parts in flying work done (after losses)...you put in 20 and you got 700 out of the system. That is a COP of 35 or 3500% gain compared to what YOU put in...but that isn't overunity. That is simply a gain that doesn't violate open system thermodynamics.

Over time, the term overunity, like this website name, has picked up the meaning of more out than in and for a long time, it wasn't known very clearly what the distinctions are. So when someone says overunity, it implies more out than the operator inputs and not the TOTAL input that includes free input from the environment. Even though someone may use the term overunity these days, please keep in mind the distinction. Anyway, it is fairly accepted to use overunity to mean more out than we input, but at least know the real distinctions, please.

There is not over 100% efficiency in these systems but there is the possibility of over 1.0 COP.

1/2CVsquared...how many joules are you expending from the cap once charged and what work is done at the gap with OR without water.
Do that comparison and that will tell you the COP...how do you measure what is at the spark? Be creative and you'll find the ways. But since you spend energy to charge the cap...not over 100% efficient...there is no free energy as you invest some to get a bigger ROI.

Any investment that makes you money is over 1.0 COP....but an open system like an investment doesn't require that it gives you over 1.0 cop...you could lose money but you do have the opportunity to gain. What is the loss on the money system if you put money in an investment that gains? You spent energy to type a letter to your broker, walk to the bank or whatever...same thing.

Anyway, I hope that hones the focus.

The distinction of efficiency vs. COP is as misunderstood as people mistaking Back EMF for the inductive spike.

I agree everyone should work on different parts of this concept...but BE ON THE SAME PAGE AND STANDARDIZE YOUR LANGUAGE. What makes it so convoluted is that science by committee DOES NOT WORK, NEVER HAS WORKED AND NEVER WILL WORK. Do your own experiments and report your results.

Documentation beats Conversation :)....old marketing philosophy.

Please don't take me the wrong way...I am ecstatic about this work and see lots of good things but it can get flushed down the drain just as fast by politics, miscommunication and lack of focus. I honestly hope this helps because one small misunderstanding of what is happening could sets large groups of people down the wrong path...so be on guard and document everything.




send_to_nice

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #572 on: July 07, 2008, 10:41:31 AM »
More on this topic over at this thread http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,5103.new.html

I agree. Lets not get hung up trying to achieve overunity. Aren't the possibilities of this circuit exciting enough already? I'd love for people to be able to say "it took me 3 years, and I was able to develop a water powered ICE". However, what groundbreaking developments would emerge if someone said "it took me 3 years worth of research, but I was able to prove that overunity is indeed not possible with this circuit".

alan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #573 on: July 07, 2008, 12:25:46 PM »
Some words again from an armchair engineer :) :
Why not concentrating on finding out how much (explosive) energy a single spark contains or frees?
I posted a video earlier where someone does that with HHO, by testing how much distance a weight is lifted.

greendoor

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 98
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #574 on: July 07, 2008, 12:38:15 PM »
For fekksake - this forum is called "overunity".  I agree that the term has no meaning.  It's like "magic" - once we know how the trick is done, it's not magic anymore. 

I prefer the term free-energy - by my simple definition: I don't have to pay for it! 

Once understood - any "overunity" device will be seen as a COP >1 device that transforms an existing energy source, at less than 100% efficiency.  There is no point arguing about that.  Once the working principle is understood - it will be viewed with contempt, just like heatpumps.  Heatpumps are free energy by my definition - and there is absolutely nothing to stop us connecting the output back into the input for self sustaining operation.  The drinking bird, or Minto Wheel, is a self sustaing perpetual motion machine of the 2nd kind - and the over-unity prize should have been given out years ago.

Arguing semantics is useless.  What I do NOT want to see is a dozen failed frustrated attempts at getting an ICE motor to run on water, and this whole thread being declared a nonsense.  There is a principle here that blows my mind, and I want to build the best implementation of that idea.  I just don't believe that taking an existing ICE engine is the best way, but it's a "way" - and good luck to those trying.

Does anyone truely think that the powers that rule this planet will let this thread change the world?  Will we see trucks and trains and boats and planes running on water power alone - leaving a trail of pure energised water behind them in the near future?  I hope so - but I can't see the Bush Oil administration allowing that to happen without war breaking out.  So how do you think they will smear this sort of information?  I have no doubt it's already begun.

The working principle that I see uncovered here is the latent heat in water.  Which comes from ambient heat.  Which comes from solar.  This is a water planet - irradiated with energy from the sun 24/7.  It's all around us - and this is a huge breakthrough revelation for me.  Excuse me for getting excited about it.

So yes: it's not overunity.  The energy is already in the water - sustained by ambiant heat, which is Solar.  In that regard, it's not too different from heat pumps or heat engines. 

The questions is: can we get better than a COP >3?  Otherwise heatpumps are a better way to go.  But I suspect we can get much greater than COP 3.

Graneau have spelled it out for anyone to understand. 

Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #575 on: July 07, 2008, 01:17:01 PM »
Maybe capacitor70 removed them himself after posting?

As far as I know it is not possible to delete your posts after you have posted them...
It is possible to modify/edit them for a short period after you first posted the message,
but the window for that closes in something like an hour or so, and after that, as
far as I know, the only persons who can modify/edit the posts is the thread or forum moderator.

So if there are no posts by capacitor70 then there never were... or I am very mistaken. ;)
There's lots of YouTube posts by that name though... Is it perhaps someone who posted here
under a different name??


Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #576 on: July 07, 2008, 01:24:37 PM »
And what the HECK is going on here guys?!

Will those of you that feel the need to produce tons of text on the subjects of semantics,
the preferred interpretation of the term "over unity", and other bull,
please get their butts out of this thread?!

This thread was doing very nicely with Luc and Ossie and a handfull of others actively
experimenting and posting their findings and setups.
It was clear that a somewhat standardised version of the setup and its test results is what
"we" were working towards,
and after that the next step would be testing implementations of the circuit with actual
engines.

Please do not pollute the thread with arguments over what isand is not OU etc.
There's other threads for that discussion.
Thanks.

 

k4zep

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 650
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #577 on: July 07, 2008, 01:33:53 PM »
Burn these words into your brain (cut from the Graneau experiment pdf):

Note the big difference between 50 Joules and 10 kilo Joules (10,000 Joules).  Don't miss this point - because that is what the misdirectors want you to lose sight of.  If you are blowing up inverters and using mains AC for brute force - you are mistaken, or are intentionally trying to misdirect research.


Right on Greendoor,

What everyone is missing is that you have to place water IN the spark, not around it. The more I read and see, indicates that what is going on has very little to do with "burning" the water.  The engines that run via Carb. or direct dribbling of water into the intake are drowning in water, and by chance enough gets around or on the plug to obtain the effect.  I suspect that water around the spark is useless.  What is needed is a totally different spark plug/water holder to cause this type of reaction reliably!  To get a 50 J discharge requires 100VDC @ 10,000 mfd....give or take but that is to big an explosion as I don't think many pistons can hold up to a mechanical equivalent pulse of a 10,000 J pulse.....So a smaller pulse is needed, probably in the 5-10 J area.  So back up gang, put your thinking caps on!  It would appear we are NOT burning water as there is little if no heat, we are exploding water and releasing  energy from within as so ably discussed in several post lately!  This also suggest we don't need compression, just conversion from pressure to motion!!!!  Is all of this discussion what Stanley Meyer discovered?  Are we reinventing the wheel!?

Ben

Ben


AhuraMazda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #578 on: July 07, 2008, 02:03:56 PM »
Quite so.
If you think the spark is to start some kind of ignition, you are on the wrong track!.

callanan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 214
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #579 on: July 07, 2008, 02:16:11 PM »
Right on Greendoor,

What everyone is missing is that you have to place water IN the spark, not around it. The more I read and see, indicates that what is going on has very little to do with "burning" the water.  The engines that run via Carb. or direct dribbling of water into the intake are drowning in water, and by chance enough gets around or on the plug to obtain the effect.  I suspect that water around the spark is useless.  What is needed is a totally different spark plug/water holder to cause this type of reaction reliably!  To get a 50 J discharge requires 100VDC @ 10,000 mfd....give or take but that is to big an explosion as I don't think many pistons can hold up to a mechanical equivalent pulse of a 10,000 J pulse.....So a smaller pulse is needed, probably in the 5-10 J area.  So back up gang, put your thinking caps on!  It would appear we are NOT burning water as there is little if no heat, we are exploding water and releasing  energy from within as so ably discussed in several post lately!  This also suggest we don't need compression, just conversion from pressure to motion!!!!  Is all of this discussion what Stanley Meyer discovered?  Are we reinventing the wheel!?

Ben

Ben

Hi Ben and all,

You are 100% correct! I have just spent the last 2 days testing two different engines. A 2 stroke line trimmer engine and a 4 stroke 6.5 HP generator engine. The largest pressure blasts on the piston were observed only when the cylinder gets flooded with water by inserting a tube into the inlet manifold and allowing the water to basically trickle in. Air fuel mixture has very little use so the carbies were useless and required to be removed so I could be sure the liquid water was getting in. At least for the motors I was using. An ultrasonic cool mister was used and pressurised fog into the inlet manifold. This made no diffrence to the pressure power of the spark plug discharges. Only when flooding water was injected into the cylinder and made contact in and around the spark gap did the largest blasts occur. But not large enough to drive the flywheel with any decent power to run. Capacitor discharges of up to 500uf were used.

So much more work to do. Too many variables here, such as how the water may flow in the cylinder and how it winds up making contact with the spark plug. Where the spark plug is located. The orientation of the enigine, cylinder, inlet, outlet, spark plug.....?

Regards,

Ossie


Koen1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #580 on: July 07, 2008, 03:07:56 PM »
Sorry Ossie and greendoor et al,
I am almost sure I didn't quite get the point there,
so forgive me for posting another dumb question :)

But if it is impossible to ignite the water outside of the plasma discharge zone,
then how come people have managed to produce bursts of flame by just
spraying very fine water mist into the spark? The pics I see don't show
the flame only in the spark gap zone, they show large bursts of flame that seem
to follow the water mist spray...

And if it only works inside the plasma discharge zone, then it shouldn't be
possible to ignite water vapour outside it even if the vapour is contained in
an engine cylinder, so that should never work then...? Is that what you're saying?

I bet that's not exactly what you're saying, as both s1r9a9m9's posts spanning
2 years almost as well as Ossie's latest post here are clearly aimed at using
the setup to ignite a water mist inside a cylinder and thus drive the engines pistons.
So I must have misunderstood again... :(

Shiver

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 30
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #581 on: July 07, 2008, 03:25:59 PM »
I think they're saying it must originate within the zone, and from there it can cascade outwards untill all the energy is dissipated.  I think of it like pool or snooker balls.  It's not breaking the balls, but the energy will transfer from balls that fall within the plasma balls to any others in the locality that they hit, and disrupt the weak bond between individual H2O molecules (inter rather than intra).  If there's nothing in the plasma path to start with then there's a mis-cue, or mis-fire.

Shiver


resonanceman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1579
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #582 on: July 07, 2008, 04:01:40 PM »
I think they're saying it must originate within the zone, and from there it can cascade outwards untill all the energy is dissipated.  I think of it like pool or snooker balls.  It's not breaking the balls, but the energy will transfer from balls that fall within the plasma balls to any others in the locality that they hit, and disrupt the weak bond between individual H2O molecules (inter rather than intra).  If there's nothing in the plasma path to start with then there's a mis-cue, or mis-fire.

Shiver



Shiver

I agree
In my opinion the  plasma  effect is more than likely OU 

I see  no reason to believe that the  s1r9 engine  burns  the water . 
To me the s1r9 engine  is about  using  an arc  to inject heat into compressed  air
Then   collecting  power  from expansion  . 
The  water just makes the process LOTS more efficient .

gary

allcanadian

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1317
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #583 on: July 07, 2008, 04:54:46 PM »
@Gotoluc
Quote
Where are you allcanadian?.. can you please start a Tesla style topic using this circuit?
LOL, You must have read my mind, I was about to post an easier way to acheive the desired effects----Tesla style. ;D I built your original circuit last night and Qiman's, and it works very well but there are issues. Now consider what is happening in this circuit, an inverter raises a 12v batteries potential to 120v(losses) and is rectified to DC(losses) then charges a capacitor.This capacitor is discharged through the primary of an ignition coil ------ but what happens next? Qiman gave part of the answer ;) The moment the potential from the capacitor reaches the primary of the coil a larger potential is induced in the secondary HV coil. All of you see a spark across the gap but that is only the beginning, Qiman said this is all about "potential" and he is correct. The very moment the HV jumps the arc gap a higher potential appears at both the (-)negative terminal of the primary having an inductance or opposition to current flow and the negative side of the capacitor ;) As such an oscillitory series circuit is formed, the HV appearing behind the capacitor forces another impulse through the capacitor and primary thus the secondary raising potential incrementally. This "appears" to be a single arc across the gap only because the frequency of oscillation is extremely high as such the "qualities" of the arc discharge have changed from what we know. The variables we need be concerned with are potential and frequency of oscillation(wave period)---- this is not "alternating" current it is HV impulsive DC, the flow never reverses but does oscillate within itself, each oscillation raising the potential. You could call it unidirectional RF in which the radiative properties have been expanded. The oscillations produce resonant vibrations within the media and the potential difference tears it apart.
If you want to lose both the inverter and the rectifier to reduce resistance losses you need look no further than Tesla Patent 568177 Ozone generator, an economical and efficient means to charge a capacitor to high potential, the Primary/Secondary is your ignition coil.
Best Regards

geovel56

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: URGENT! WATER AS FUEL DISCOVERY FOR EVERYONE TO SHARE
« Reply #584 on: July 07, 2008, 05:14:59 PM »
Hi Everyone,

Can we PLEASE get off of the "water igniting/burning" or "disassociation of water into HHO" or any of that useless banter NOT RELATIVE TO THIS FORUM!  Does it really matter?  The goal here was to develop and improve a circuit to use as little input energy to drive a piston down using WATER instead of FOSSIL FUELS!

I am not an electrical circuit design person by any means and it is not my forte.  I am degreed in Physics and understand what is really happening here, not that it is really important anyway.  That and 50 cents gets you a bad cup of coffee from a vending machine.

If there was a disassociation of water into HHO and burned, then the "system" would be hot, just like burning fossil fuels or burning ANYTHING.  As evidenced by Luc AND Ossie, the spark plug is barely warm.  The reason is because NOTHING is being ignited or burned!

The reaction is just like thunder and lightening.  Ionized water droplets in the atmosphere are then hit by a strong static charge (Lightening).  The air molecules BETWEEN the water droplets are being accelerated at supersonic speeds and bumping into more water droplets, which bumps more air molecules... in a cascading effect.  The thunder we hear and feel is a sonic boom or concussion wave.

This concussion wave can do work by pushing down a piston.  To futher evidence this using Luc and Ossie's experiments, in air alone the plasma arc is notably smaller than when water mist is added.  Luc did get some nice "air only" plasma arcs one day, but then he also said it was raining at the time, which means a lot of humidity or water vapor in the air! 

The HV from the ignition coil instantaneously (or close to it) ionizes the water droplets and when hit with the higher amperage from the rectified AC/inverter part of the circut, is just like Lightening and the air molecules around the water droplet are accelerated at supersonic speeds, hence the loud bang.

Ossie and Luc and anyone else (including me who have done actual experiments) have noticed there are times when the plasma arc action is so great, the reaction quickly "blows out" the plasma "flame" until the next arc.  Again, this is evidence that both the air and water droplets are being pushed rapidly.  AND the spark plug is NOT HOT even after running the tests for 45 minutes or so, as Ossie did.  If you put water on your skin and blow on it, it feels cool because the effect is evaporation!  Are you changing the water into anything other than another form of water?  Are you changing the air you are blowing out?  The obvious answer is NO to both questions!

Bottom line...who cares!  Is this overunity?  No, but again, WHO CARES!  Is the COP > 1 ... WHO CARES!  The idea and FOCUS (let me say this again) FOCUS is to create a circuit that will allow us to REPLACE fossil fuels being burned in any motor/engine with WATER!

Now... can we please get back ON TOPIC, and back to work as a group to accomplish this and stop posting extraneous OFF TOPIC, disruptive and anti-focusing counterproductive points.  There are a million other forums out there to discuss these "other" valuable, but off topic ideas and discussions.

We need to all work together to make this method work in the most energy efficient way to get off of fossil fuels.  The sooner the better, not only for the immediate personal economic reasons for us all, but the far reaching aspects of saving our planet with a ZERO environmental polluting system!  Gasoline by me is at $4.29 per gallon and rising.

Regards,
Geo