Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Custom Search

[callanan]

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]

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]

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]

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]

@Gotoluc

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. 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]

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

[allcanadian]

@geovel56

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.

This has been covered, the effect is produced even when the inverter/rectifier is disconnected from the circuit hence there is no "high amperage" required.

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.

There is also an electrostatic standing wave produced preceeding the sonic boom this standing wave extending hundreds of miles past where the thunder could be heard. Which raises the question as to whether the "boom" is produced by electrostatic forces or a pressure wave or both.
We are hear to learn and seek understanding, I think everyones opinion and perspective should be heard, that is a part of the learning process the professionals of science have yet to understand.

[broli]

@geovel56:

Aren't you a being a bit arrogant. Your posted sounded more like "you people need to do what I like, so stop talking about things I don't like" Anyone who contributed both on the circuit or engine experiments is as valuable. You need to respect that and not get mad just because you don't like it.

[ramset]

this thread gets better and better ALL CANADIAN  can you post the more efficient circuit? Chet

[Lakes]

I`m just an armchair reader here, it seems to me rather than trying to get this to work with a normal ICE, which can difficult to adjust, some sort of simple piston arrangement, that would be easy to construct out of readily available parts  (maybe made of transparent materials?) would be better, so that the pressure wave could be measured and adjustments made to maximize it.

A flywheel or spring for the return stroke could be added later.

[LarryC]

This has been covered, the effect is produced even when the inverter/rectifier is disconnected from the circuit hence there is no "high amperage" required.

In the circuit where the inverter/rectifier is disconnected, the LV from the cap and the HV from the Ignition coil was passed at the same time.

Even with my large cap at 690MFD using 190V, when there is no LV all you get is a thin spark.

With the LV, HV and no water, it gets a half inch white/blue plasma ball.

With the LV, HV and water, it gets a 3/4 inch white/blue/orange plasma ball.

Regards, Larry

[nightlife]

 

We are hear to learn and seek understanding, I think everyones opinion and perspective should be heard, that is a part of the learning process the professionals of science have yet to understand.

 allcanadian, I think a different thread should be used to learn what the professionals of science already know.

 Please let these guys finish what they started this thread for. It was started as a way to simplify a circuit they have been designing to produce the intense spark needed to create the effect that is needed to use water to run fuel based motors on. They have already created the effect with circuits, now let them finish simplifying it.
 
This thread was not set up to find out why or how it creates the effect, it was set up to simplify a circuit they have already created that creates a effect they have already created.

[kenbo0422]

I haven't been on here for over two years.  Glad to see it hasn't gotten stagnant.  Anyway...

I have skimmed the topic and came to the last page to discover what I thought was going on... no ignition.  That's perfectly OK.  It still works.

On another line, has anyone thought of using the Krupa design in the plug part?  It's supposed to spread the plasma much better, which may be all you need to gain the pressure output on the piston to make it move with some authority.

 

[hydrocontrol]

A simple suggestion for those trying to get a motor to run. What if you remove the spark plug ground tab and just use the piston as the 'ground tab'. I would think that this would create an increasing electric arc size as the piston goes down from TDC and would help the water 'ignite, burn, turn to steam, whatever'  to push the piston down. Why confine the electrical arc to a small predetermined gap. I know when I arc weld I have to get the arc started by being very close to the item to be welded but once I get an arc started I can draw the arc back a fair amount. Seems the same idea would hold for a piston engine electrical arc. If the piston can withstand a gas explosion then a electrical arc should not effect it. Now you may have to use a slightly longer plug just as long as it does not touch the piston top but I think that this may be very effective in always getting a great electrical arc.

[Shiver]

I have to defer to the guys that understand electronics here, but however I look at it, more important than the circuit is working out what is going on here?  If we put in 100w electrical, do we get out something more than 100w chemical/kinetic/potential?  If not, then what is the purpose of the thread?  Making fireworks which are fun but of no real value?  I admit I'm sitting back waiting for the electronics guys to establish how to isolate the HV/HC circuits in order that I get get on with what I can do which is building something that can use this circuit.  I'm not going to be using any 2 or 4 stroke engines either, it will be a static chamber with a couple of one way valves and the recipient will be a tesla turbine.  Maybe that's no good for running a conventional car, but it will increase understanding substantially.

More important than the circuit is understanding what the process is. From there we can go backwards and design a circuit, and forwards and design a recipient of the energy released.  If that's not clear to one and all then we're in a whirlpool.

Shiver