Okay, let's try this again.  I misfigured it in the previous post.

It should be like this..........

1800 rpm x 10 magnets = 18,000 pulses
18,000 x 9 coils = 162,000 magnet passes per minute
rectified sine means 2 positive pulses per coil pass so
162,000 x 2  = 324,000 positive pulses per minute
324,000 / 60 = 5400 Hz

So my DC current consists of actually 5400 Hz.  It's not coming from a battery.

NASA gets excited about alot of things.  My recent visit to Langley last year gave me a peak at the 'new and improved' FOAM insulation that will be EXPOSED on the main fuel tank for the shuttle.  I clearly stated above the noise of machinery "who's f**** stupid idea was it to have exposed FOAM on an aircraft that travels at those speeds?"  All I got was diverted eye contact and silence.

Makes you wonder about the other things they do.

Thank you Dinorben.  So maybe if all the second coil (#104) has to do is alter the magnetism, then it doesn't have to directly contact the water. (meaning direct metal-to-water contact, not submerged)  Just the fact that the coil is energized and creating a field in the water is enough to give those lil proton guys a different spin?

The whole trick is to end up with the type of hydrogen that burns better than it explodes.  This would be better for the type small engine being used, I think.

how in the world did you get the patent pic to come up??? It doesn't want to work on my browser..? rats...

Try it this way.  Go to:  http://www.uspto.gov/

then do Search, then Patent Number Search, then insert this number: 6,126,794

When you get the patent, at the top you will see some red link buttons and one says Images.  click that and it will prompt you to download the viewer if you don't already have it. 

You will be able to pull up the whole patent then, pics and all.

Thanks Ronald for the info....  THIS looks interesting!  I've always liked to play with 555's, but now it kinda like making a hobby pay for itself....   Keep your fingers crossed.   

Okay, here's the report on the orthohydrogen vs parahydrogen test.  It's rather unscientific but it's the best I can do in my position.

Same batch of water (no electrolyte), same equipment, same voltage across the 300 square inches of electrodes, same conditions, same (#16 x 1 1/2)  hypodermic needle for a torch tip, 5 pounds pressure.

With the parahydrogen coil turned OFF, all I ever got was detonations.  Blew the needle off the test bottle every time.

With the parahydrogen coil turned ON, it burned with a blue-white flame (a little orange on the tip) until the whole needle finally melted to nothing.

Conclusion:  The parahydrogen coil at 22 Hz did alter the state of the gas in some way. 

I will post this same message on egaspower group also.

My setup is basically the same as shown in Stephen Chambers patent photos (US Patent # 6,126,794).  The parahydrogen pulse coil is positioned directly over the main electrodes.  BTW, the patent also uses pulses to do the electrolysis also whereas I do not....so that's different.

The main electrolysis in my process uses 24 VDC, high amperage on 300 sq in of aluma-ti directly from the brushless generator.  The parahydrogen coil is separate; driven by the pulse driver shown in the pics a few replys back on this thread.  It is 12 vdc and is about 0.5 amps.  (basically 1 amp at 50% duty cycle).  Then the pulse generator is turned on, you can hear the coil "click, click, click" in the electrolyzer as it gets pulsed at 22 Hz. 

So to answer your question, the regular electrodes produce the hydroxy, and the parahydrogen coil conditions the hydrogen atoms (according to the patent) by making one proton spin differently thereby creating a particle that burns rather than detonates.  And from the testing I did, it appears to do exactly that to a degree.  Please note that there is no clear difinitive description of "HOW" to build the coil so what you see in the photos is my own conception of what I thought it should be.  I can't say that is the way Stephen Chambers did it, but nevertheless, it seems to do what it's supposed to do.

We'll see how it performs in the motor here soon, I hope.

Hi Ronald, well done.
A different test would be, to have one electrode inside the coil
and the otherr electrode outside the coil.
If you pulse the coil, that is also a difference voltage between
the inner and the outer side of the coil alone in water already !

Look here for a test I had done about this:

http://www.harti.com/waterled

Maybe this way you can also extract more oxyhydrogen.

Regards, Stefan.