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: tutanka shares a gift Co2 dissociation without electricity.. With wood pellet  (Read 4499 times)

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
from here
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/20821-co2-dissociation-without-electricity-wood-pellet.html?posted=1#post303798

tutanka
Quote

Hello to all ..

I want share my experience and experiments on new CO2 DISSOCIATION METHOD WITHOUT ELECTRICITY..

Three years ago I purchased an interested book made of Mr. Alexander Fridman an professor of Nexel University and Director of Drexel Plasma Institute.

Name of book : PLASMA CHEMISTRY..

After thousands of pages my eyes impacts on the page 309..

I have found an interested article: Gasdynamic Stimulation of CO2 dissociation in Supersonic Flow: "PLASMA CHEMISTRY WITHOUT ELECTRICITY".

I read this article some times .. and after has realized an prototype..

My prototype in fact is an new pellet burner but prove clearly that CO2 dissociation can be made without electricity.

The article 5.6.5 of Fridman book use CO2 to pressure and an nozzle for produce the supersonic flow and an microwave generator for produce vibrational heat.

My prototype use wood pellet as CO2 source (and heat), compressed air to low pressure (0.2/0.3 bar) and an multi nozzle tube that iniect air jets flow.

As my concept works...

In fact is very simple.. the CO2 is produced when wood pellet burn and at the same time produce the heat necessary for obtain the reaction.
The CO2 gas rise up impacting on multiple air jet flows generated from an little central tube (this is because you need compressed air and you can control the flow with an ball valve).. the reaction start when enough heat is present inside the burner .. ALWAYS ... and as result you obtain the energetic flames presents inside the burner.

The effect is impressive.. the air flow ignite completely and the wood pellet consumption is very low.

During the test the body of stainless steel burner with a thickness of 6 mm reach more than 800°C.. from videos you can see the great impact of plasma flames on metal.

THE VIDEOS IS GENUINE - NO BURNABLE GAS IS MIXED WITH AIR


Here you can watch the videos of my working prototype ..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1y1R-Q82dw&feature=youtu.be
 

This burner can be usable for new type of wood pellet stove or boiler.. and much more.
Attached FilesFile Type: pdf Plasma Chemistry.pdf

pomodoro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
There is no evidence of dissociation. Where is the black carbon. The guy is imagining whatever  he wants to see, like many tinkerers who don't know the real science behind the experiment.

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
A few months ago I would have strongly supported your impressions here, Now it seems this type of experiment needs a closer look.

To be clear I have no idea about this disassociation claim and the methods to qualify said claim ,[we have plenty who can help with that!

tutanka is a cool fellow ,even cooler for spending the time to study this work and share an experiment [open source]

finding out what's "on fire" [YELLOW FLAME} and at what cost [INPUT] vs. the output heat ?

and just how easy will it be to involve  other simple "fuel" sources ?

respectfully
Chet K




pomodoro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
I thought he was trying to burn the bricks in a clean way, so that CO2 would not be produced. In that case, if he is trying to get extra heat then I'm even more strongly against any OU occurring. CO2 dissosiating is very endothermic, it sucks energy. Spectacular nonsense.


Edit: To clarify , a flame, releases max heat just before dissociation of its products. From what I can see in the video, he just made a burner with jets of air supplying air for combustion in a swirling fashion.  The plasma paper has nothing to do with the burner, it simply states that under some conditions, CO2 can dissociate at low temps, by absorbing alternative energy rather than the usual thermal energy. Notice the very low conversion %. In any case, any endothermic process robs energy, you don't want it when producing heat.


The chap has no plasma at all in the burner, under atmospheric pressure you need either an electric arc or an rf coil with at least 1KW surrounding the flame and properly coupled. 800dg C is way toooo low to ionize molecules to produce plasma.



« Last Edit: August 19, 2017, 03:10:51 PM by pomodoro »

ramset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8073
Pomodoro
I was wondering why and how he applied the plasma/CO2 claim to this experiment ?
hopefully he will clarify ,maybe the amount of fuel he is adding for the amount of heat he is seeing ?

perhaps carbon monoxide is contributing to this ?

here is a plasma burning the air [300 watts??]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XRwlNCF1PU

a few of the fellows are working in these areas and are completely intrigued with what may be possible [Plasma arc experiments in atmosphere and also water]]

thank you for your comments and contributions, they are always appreciated and welcomed.

Chet K
« Last Edit: August 19, 2017, 07:20:37 PM by ramset »

pomodoro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
Thanks for your kind words.


I'm not a plasma expert, never will be. Its a very specialized field all based on mathematical models. But I've read enough to know something. There is nothing OU in plasma unless you start a fusion reaction or extract zero point energy from the vacuum as Chernetski and later Correra claimed to have done.
I'm slowly experimenting with hydrogenic arcs , looking at Chernetski as he was a real plasma scientist, with plenty of published journal articles.

h20power

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 641
I have had dealings with Tutanka before and had to prove him and Aaron wrong in the past. From the title of his video either he doesn't understand what it means to disassociate something or has no idea how to go about showing that he has done so. If you take CO2 apart you get two parts oxygen and one part carbon per molecule and the carbon would be at the atomic size which is something that is very sought after in the market place. For those of you I lost if he does as he is claiming to have done then he will be producing carbon at the size of a single atom. So, I personally don't think he understands just what the word "disassociate" means.


When I was over at the energetic forum he, along with Aaron, would toss science out the window if they got an idea stuck in their heads. A few of them tried to take over my teachings on Meyer's technology when they misunderstood something I had said about nitrogen. Tutanka ended up making a thread of his own pushing the lie that Meyer made use of Nitrogen as a fuel and not just hydrogen as Meyer himself said in many of his lecture videos and patents. So, I did the math and science show in the attachment to prove that it was impossible what they were saying but that didn't deter them one bit as Aaron went and wrote a book about it calling me a misinformation agent in the process. Tutanka later parted ways with Aaron and set out to make some sort of new fuel that he had then signed a NDA with some other people and was looking to patent it. Several times he told me that the patent was in the works but to this date nothing no patent was ever granted that I know of.


Now the reason why I am telling you all this is Tutanka loves to put on a great show from time to time to get attention and praises from those he thinks looks up to him or whom he wants to impress. So, I wouldn't put too much stock into these claims as from he has already shown there is no atom sized carbon being produced.

Grumage

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1113
Hi Chet.

Finally got here....

The title, without electricity, so what powers the magnetron then?

As I see it, it's nothing more than a modern form of Gasifier, old technology, rebooted.

There was a sawmill not too far from me that used the sawdust as a fuel to drive the entire plant. An old " town gas engine " had been converted to run on the controlled partial combustion of the " waste " in a retort. No electricity!! They were commonly known as suction gas producers and used many varieties of
" fuel stock " including refuse.

The gas is quite likely to be a combination of Carbon monoxide and Hydrogen IMO.

Cheers Graham.

tinman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5365
Pomodoro
I was wondering why and how he applied the plasma/CO2 claim to this experiment ?
hopefully he will clarify ,maybe the amount of fuel he is adding for the amount of heat he is seeing ?

perhaps carbon monoxide is contributing to this ?

here is a plasma burning the air [300 watts??]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XRwlNCF1PU

a few of the fellows are working in these areas and are completely intrigued with what may be possible [Plasma arc experiments in atmosphere and also water]]

thank you for your comments and contributions, they are always appreciated and welcomed.

Chet K

Plasma can occur in super heated gas
So,is the gas in the burner hot enough ?.


Brad