Arduino to oscillator. Help me pulse elect/magn/photo/acoust into H2O!

[system]

Hello my fellow techs,

I come to you today seeking project guidance for my latest endeavor. Many of the processes involved with this project I have never coded for or assembled, so your help will be crucial in my understanding of the circuit design.

It would be tremendously helpful if for each of the components I find I must use I can be given some help as to what size resistors, capacitors, and the like to use to add them to circuit, so I can write a parts list and order everything in one go.

I wish to pulse water with high frequency electricity, magnetic energy, light energy, and acoustic energy for a college science project. I understand an oscillator chip can help me reach the higher frequencies that a PWM output of an arduino cannot. I also understand these chips, like for instance the LTC6904 or LTC6905, will change to particular frequencies in steps, or duty-cycles. This means that if your split is 50, 150, 350, 700KHz, and you wish to reach 60Khz, you may not be able to until you reprogram the chip to bump up or lower the step frequencies correct?

This is something I have no knowledge of. Will a timing oscillator like the aforementioned interface with an Arduino for programmable changing of the frequency?

In my mind I visualize this particular process like so:

Arduino --> Oscillator (Low Voltage - ~5v) --> High Voltage Gate(?is this what you call this?)

The Arduino programs the oscillator, which will run through the frequency spectrum from 1Khz to 68Mhz outputting low voltage, that will in turn control a high voltage gate that opens and closes allowing millions of volts of electricity to shock the water via electrodes. What do you think?

I suppose I will use a similar set-up/circuit to pulse the electromagnets, and the leds/or lasers. The acoustic chamber will be easy enough to set up with a speaker and a digital tone generator.

So, if you think you can lend a lip or finger pulse or two on the ol' keyboard, I could certainly use your help. As you can see this isn't overly complex, I am simply overly uneducated on these matters for I have never used oscillators before. Anywho, thank you very much in advance for even reading this far and considering assisting me, and expect many more thank you's in the future!

-Blake

[MarkT]

Blake92:
In my mind I visualize this particular process like so:

Arduino --> Oscillator (Low Voltage - ~5v) --> High Voltage Gate(?is this what you call this?)

The Arduino programs the oscillator, which will run through the frequency spectrum from 1Khz to 68Mhz outputting low voltage, that will in turn control a high voltage gate that opens and closes allowing millions of volts of electricity to shock the water via electrodes. What do you think?

Millions of volts at 1kHz -- 68MHz? Not a bat's chance in hell!

The only way you'll get anything like that voltage at RF frequencies is with a
high-Q resonant system, so only one frequency. Its also mind boggling expensive technology
(not to say lethal). That sort of RF power level ionises the surrounding air (think massive
ball-lightning)

What are you actually trying to do? Water decomposes by electrolysis with a few volts,
why are you wanting ultra-high voltage?

[system]

Blake92:
I wish to pulse water with high frequency electricity, magnetic energy, light energy, and acoustic energy

You need to explain what frequency (or frequency range) and amplitude (or amplitude range) you want to cover in each case. Vague terms such as 'high frequency' don't give us any idea what you have in mind.

[system]

MarkT:

Blake92:
In my mind I visualize this particular process like so:

Arduino --> Oscillator (Low Voltage - ~5v) --> High Voltage Gate(?is this what you call this?)

The Arduino programs the oscillator, which will run through the frequency spectrum from 1Khz to 68Mhz outputting low voltage, that will in turn control a high voltage gate that opens and closes allowing millions of volts of electricity to shock the water via electrodes. What do you think?

Millions of volts at 1kHz -- 68MHz? Not a bat's chance in hell!

The only way you'll get anything like that voltage at RF frequencies is with a
high-Q resonant system, so only one frequency. Its also mind boggling expensive technology
(not to say lethal). That sort of RF power level ionises the surrounding air (think massive
ball-lightning)

What are you actually trying to do? Water decomposes by electrolysis with a few volts,
why are you wanting ultra-high voltage?

My apologies for leaving out crucial information. For the electrodes I was planning on using a readily-available stun gun (like this one, yet at the same time nothing like it at all, lol http://www.amazon.com/14-000-Stun-Gun-Flashlight/dp/B007Z3MWH4/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1381089991&sr=8-4&keywords=Stun+Gun), which outputs at 1,000,000-14,000,000 volts. I thought if I could rig it to send a direct steady pulse without turning on and off, I could trigger the on-off states using the voltage gate connected to the low-voltage oscillator. Hence firing it on and off from 1,000 times per second to as high as it will go before blending together into a solid HIGH state.

I have initiated electrolysis in water before with 55v - 120v with amps ranging from .5 to hundreds. I've found that the reaction works best with high voltage and low amps as opposed to low voltage high amperage. The test involves using the highest voltage possible and flicking it on/off at various frequencies. There is a sweet-spot that allows the reaction to take place at a much higher rate and I have found it before years ago, but since then all of my documentation was destroyed in a house fire.

When I find the right frequency and Volt/Amp combination I plan on purchasing static oscillator chips that are pre-programmed with the correct value for the beta version of my experiment.

If getting a high-voltage stun gun to oscillate at high frequencies will be problematic, then perhaps I will only hit a few Khz as opposed to a few Mhz.

---

"You need to explain what frequency (or frequency range) and amplitude (or amplitude range) you want to cover in each case. Vague terms such as 'high frequency' don't give us any idea what you have in mind."

As for this, I have the faintest clue which specific range is correct for any one method. I only know that when I find the correct approximate frequency I will notice a much higher rate of hydrogen synthesis. This experiment aims to find the correct frequencies by means of a gas sensor or gas flow meter.

So for now, let's say I buy an oscillator chip that is programmable from 1Khz to 68MHz, and let's also say we are primarily focusing on the electricity/electrodes aspect of the experiment. Perhaps I will only be able to get between 1 - 20 Khz, and that values above this will cause the electricity to enter an always on state (?), but this is okay. I will simply use lower voltages to test the higher frequencies. I have seen this method being used before at 2,000-5,000 volts and know that this for instance, is certainly possible.

Thanks again for taking a look at the early working of my project gentlemen (and ladies), I really appreciate your input.

---

EDIT: Millions of volts may instantly boil the water, heh, so if this preliminary round is a failure I will ditch the $20 dollar stun-gun and switch to ~1000Volts at .5Amps.

EDIT 2: Pardon my ignorance, but apparently these "1,000,000 Volt" stun-guns are actually outputting about 4,000 volts and are nothing but over-hyped. This puts me closer to the voltage range I actually want to be in.

[MarkT]

That stun gun does not generate anything remotely like 14MV, that's impossible, its the
realm of lightning discharges.

I think you need to talk to a physicist about what you are trying to achieve, it sounds
way off in left-field to me.

[system]

I dont see you having any 'all in one full range set up' (something that provides even 1 KV at DC to 68Mhz) for anything less than a kings ransom. heck 1KV from 50Mhz to 60Mhz would be somewhat expensive. Adding the capacity to slow all the way down to DC complicates things significantly.

That stun gun is likely oscillating at a resonant freq in order to achieve that advertised voltage, change its freq and I am certain the voltage will drop as you take it out of its voltage multipliers inherent resonance.

You'd need multiple (parallel?) tuned voltage multipliers and....

but... Hey, I am available for adoption and I am a very warm person seeking new, richer parents - how bout it? No? well those tuned parallel voltage multipliers would be expensive.

Also, how much of this is 'for learning', and learning what precisely?
For instance, I may be a little looser on those purse strings if the experience is worth it.

But given its for testing - Id sweep through what ever range a particular V multiplier is capable of, measure results, test other freq range, (change to appropriate V multiplier), measure results - etc, to find that 'sweet spot' again.

I cant imagine myself having lost even the range (somewhere in the XX Hz range. DC to 68MHz is like admitting to myself of a total mental obstruction. lol)

Hope that helped, and good luck - Dad?

Can you blame me for trying in this economy?

[system]

Is it possible that 'sweet spot' found was actually the Fr (resonant freq) of what ever V multiplier you were using at that time.

Given how you posed the Q - I suspect this is the case.

Why? that sweet spot would provide the highest voltage possible with that circuits components, wire lengths, etc. (RF can be tricky even in 100's of Khx)

Edit:
in which case greatly elevates your beta projects tech requirements - as it probably wont need to cover a very wide range of freqs.
And it may alter your testing needs as well - if all you need is just the highest voltage. An arduino driving a transitor in the KHz range and a tuned V multiplier may very well be all you need to recreate what you thought you witnessed. ??

I question the veracity that you tested actual HV AC output - vs (as I am suspecting you actually did) HF to drive a cap/diode V multiplier which rectifies to DC And this sweet spot whs that particular V multiplier. But I have been wrong before.

[MarkT]

Every TV transmitter and Tesla coil can generate multi-kV RF signals, that's not too
outre, but not necessarily outside a hobbyists budget. But some more details about
this hydrogen synthesis might be useful - if its electrolysis then a volt or two is possibly
all that's needed? Or is it actually a radio wave that's needed? For that you need a
radio frequency generator and RF linear amplifier. Is this some sort of ESR (electron
spin resonance) effect?

[system]

Electrolysis - in my experiments - one side emitted O the other H - thus required DC. Perhaps its different with RF.?? My attempts with AC was never even in the 100 Khz range. I do remember RF meaning 'Really freakey' as in; its like laws of physics change some how. So perhaps there is something new for me to learn.

But the challenge isnt the voltage, its the part of being HV from DC to 68Mhz. As if Fr was something we can program around.

[system]

Blake92:
As for this, I have the faintest clue which specific range is correct for any one method. I only know that when I find the correct approximate frequency I will notice a much higher rate of hydrogen synthesis. This experiment aims to find the correct frequencies by means of a gas sensor or gas flow meter.

This all sounds extremely speculative to me. Really, you expect that flashing lights are going to make any difference to the speed or energy efficiency of electrolysis? Or sound? Or magnetism? It's vaguely possible that RF could make some difference since it's absorbed by water, but in order to make a measurable difference you'd have to be working with potentially lethal intensities. Comments about applying megavolts to water strike me as similarly unrealistic and lacking in appreciation of the physics involved. You don't give any indication that you know what units the requirements should be expressed in let alone have any quantitative requirements or any real idea what effect you're trying to measure - other than hoping that one of these factors will somehow make a difference.

If you're serious about this project and know what you're doing - which is far from clear at the moment - what you need is access to a well equipped science lab, rather than an Arduino.

[system]

This sounds strikingly similar to someone elses work in attempting to burn water in a hydrogen (or Browns gas) powered vehicle.
The description of the project reminds me of exactly that process which was patented
But, it was never reproduced after the original inventor died.
You will not maintain megavolts in water without a fairly massive power supply to do it.
It will begin arcing between electrodes & cause a very low impedance.
Thus to maintain this energy state you'll need a supply capable of that current.
Also, you'll need a way to carefully monitor & closely regulate the electrolysis so that it doesn't blow up in your face.
The original concept as claimed / patented is interesting.
Wear protective clothing & eye protection if you attempt this.
It would certainly be in your best interests to make a "kill switch" & keep an extinguisher & "burn kit" very handy.
I could lend a technical hand in this but I can't in good conscience provide you with more than I have.
As yet, I feel you do not fully appreciate the safety ramifications involved.

[system]

PeterH:

Blake92:
As for this, I have the faintest clue which specific range is correct for any one method. I only know that when I find the correct approximate frequency I will notice a much higher rate of hydrogen synthesis. This experiment aims to find the correct frequencies by means of a gas sensor or gas flow meter.

This all sounds extremely speculative to me. Really, you expect that flashing lights are going to make any difference to the speed or energy efficiency of electrolysis? Or sound? Or magnetism? It's vaguely possible that RF could make some difference since it's absorbed by water, but in order to make a measurable difference you'd have to be working with potentially lethal intensities. Comments about applying megavolts to water strike me as similarly unrealistic and lacking in appreciation of the physics involved. You don't give any indication that you know what units the requirements should be expressed in let alone have any quantitative requirements or any real idea what effect you're trying to measure - other than hoping that one of these factors will somehow make a difference.

If you're serious about this project and know what you're doing - which is far from clear at the moment - what you need is access to a well equipped science lab, rather than an Arduino.

I'm sorry I don't have a chance at the moment to respond to everyone, but I assure you in due time I shall try my very best. It is unfortunate, but I do not have an unlimited budget, and as such must work odd ends during the week, but I had enough time here today to glimpse the thread and possibly give this gentleman an answer.

To begin, I am not a physicist... not by any means. I am far from an excellent mathematician, and just as so a great programmer. Sometimes I lack the vocabulary to express my ideas properly, but I do possess the knowledge to pursue an idea to finish. From the fringes of my at times abstract and strange mind I am able to create something tangible.

To me, this is not about money, fame, or respect from my colleagues, professors, and peers... this is about expressing my soul through electrical engineering, and... should it enter the equation, advanced physics. With this said, and with the fact that I do not know precisely what I am doing yet, I do know where to plant my first foot before me. I don't mind deconstructive criticism, for I certainly owe you all a far richer explanation then I have provided thus far. Let me assure you, you shall have just that as my project takes hold and I begin to take on speed.

As for the aforementioned gentleman above. Speculative? Sure, it is. The project Idea actually came from a book written by Stanley Meyers, who like me, had no degree; but he did have a lot of heart, and many Mega-watts of engineering knowledge gained through reading, helpful people like yourselves, and experience. The book in question actually strikes me as some form of misinformation, as many pieces are missing and he is anything but thorough, but most of the principles involved have been confirmed in my independent studies and will absolutely work-- at least to some degree.

It seems preposterous, flashing "lights" to increase the efficiency of hydrolysis, at least to the uninformed mind. The High-Intensity LED array and or Laser array will not actually be firing photons into water at all. Instead it will be hitting the hydrogen gas as it is shuttled away from the main chamber. This photon bombardment excites the particles and makes them more readily available to burn. An increased yield in power from the gas, means an increased efficiency in the entire system, considering the excess harvested outweighs that little power that must be given to it. I hope this appeals to your mind, and makes at least a shutter of sense. If you are more interested, there is information to be found across the internet, and I may be inclined to scan a few pages out of this book for you as well.

As for the electromagnetism- The idea is that this will assist in pulling the molecules apart, in that it will either fracture the water itself, or make it much easier for the electricity to do it's part. The same can actually be had with the acoustic tank.

Now which of these three assistant processes (well two if you consider pre-gaseous state) is the most effective in rendering aid to the electrolysis process, is the aim of my experiment. It is unlikely all will be used together in the same system as this seems to be overkill in my opinion, but this is why us modern men and women like to put cold hard observations to our hypothesis rather than club each other over the heads with mullion, or, and in my opinion this is TRULY the worst, dismissing it as a silly idea that would never work and hence committing to never pursuing the truth, even turning a blind eye to it for the comforts of ignorance.

With love,
-Blake

[system]

After thinking about this a bit more...

I am convinced what was used before was HF pulsed DC - which is different than AC - in that there is never a swing below Gnd with pulsed DC - a higher freq(>68Mhz depending on desired pulsewidths) used to generate the oscillators that drive voltage multipliers and then modulated at a lower frequency (0Hz to 68Mhz).

That is - short of a custom HV High speed genset that could be used to generate both positive and negative swings, offering 'true' AC (again as opposed to 'pulsed DC')

Perhaps the swing below ground is significant? Tho I suspect not.

As I stated before , my experience was using DC , one polarity would emit Oxygen, the other Hydrogen, this makes Pulsed DC a more logical probability - as the polarity doesn't change - but the 'pulsing' action may very well help separate the elements.. sorta like an impact wrench that uses pulsed (albeit mechanical) bursts to break rusted bolts loose... I speculate of course. In an electronics perspective you can achieve a 2x higher joule/second if the pulse is 1/2 as long but still releases same # of joules. (ie capacitive discharged spark gap devices).

Is there a gain in efficiency by waiting (as a for instance) say a few ms for a cap to charge to a voltage that speeds up the process by some percentage?.. I guess these are the types of questions the OP may be seeking definitive answers to..

[system]

Post 1 of 2

I found a moment to address a few more of you from my office at the lovely Dixieland Dairy in Falcon, Missouri.

Hrendor66:
Electrolysis - in my experiments - one side emitted O the other H - thus required DC. Perhaps its different with RF.?? My attempts with AC was never even in the 100 Khz range. I do remember RF meaning 'Really freakey' as in; its like laws of physics change some how. So perhaps there is something new for me to learn.

But the challenge isnt the voltage, its the part of being HV from DC to 68Mhz. As if Fr was something we can program around.

Precisely. I know the voltages can be safely reached, but timing them just right at higher frequencies can be problematic. For this, I would suggest to you (and yes I shall heed my own advice) attempting to use lower voltages until you can pin down the right frequency. From this step perhaps it will be less troublesome at higher voltage because we will have a precise goal and aim in sight.

UserNotLoggedIn:
This sounds strikingly similar to someone elses work in attempting to burn water in a hydrogen (or Browns gas) powered vehicle.
The description of the project reminds me of exactly that process which was patented
But, it was never reproduced after the original inventor died.
You will not maintain megavolts in water without a fairly massive power supply to do it.
It will begin arcing between electrodes & cause a very low impedance.
Thus to maintain this energy state you'll need a supply capable of that current.
Also, you'll need a way to carefully monitor & closely regulate the electrolysis so that it doesn't blow up in your face.
The original concept as claimed / patented is interesting.
Wear protective clothing & eye protection if you attempt this.
It would certainly be in your best interests to make a "kill switch" & keep an extinguisher & "burn kit" very handy.
I could lend a technical hand in this but I can't in good conscience provide you with more than I have.
As yet, I feel you do not fully appreciate the safety ramifications involved.

I want to thank you dearly for the time you have given me in writing your reply. What you have said above is incredibly helpful and helps me understand just what I can be expecting. At this point I believe it may be a good time for me to introduce you and the others to the various safety mechanics my team and I have in place, so as to better inform others who may be trying to do the same.

Anyone who wishes to look upon our work in our makeshift lab is strongly urged (and if I am present, required) to wear rubber boots for insulation or more specifically what those in the electrical field call "Dielectric" footwear. For uniform, we wear either an "arc-flash" bib or coveralls, and insulated gloves are worn at all times. We have two face-shields that were given to us by the same local electrician who provided the clothing, as well as protective safety goggles and glasses, depending on what we are doing at the given time. Recently, while working on our second prototype of a simple hydrolysis unit we had an issue with our Bunsen-burner igniting a gas line that instantly caused a combustion in our 2 ft x 4 inch x 2 inch electrolysis chamber and suffice to say after the incident I fabricated a ballistic shield similar to those seen on Mythbusters out of Lexan (not Plexi!) glass. As for the circuit itself, we use a fuse-box as well as a safety kill-switch located a distance away from the unit itself, always accessible from our testing positions. To get the final obvious bits out of the way, the shed we are working out of is well sealed so as not to allow weather of any form disturb our work, but as an additional safe-gaurd we never work in the rain or when we feel mother nature is offering to great a hazard to our research.

I have personally attended an electrical safety class (and advise anyone who knows they will be working on projects like these to do the same) and my associate has over ten years of electrical experience... unfortunately, however, with household electrical systems and no background whatsoever with micro-controllers or the smaller (funner!) circuits.

Lastly, I am unaware of a better method to monitor the electrolysis chamber for early-warnings, however- we do maintain visual of the system at all times that it is running (from behind the shield), and due to it's distance from us, we decided it best to set-up an HD web-cam to get a more detailed look. So far we have learned that one is to immediately kill the system should signs of rapid boiling appear, as moments later the scalding hot water will be ejected from the system, and in most cases, allow a nifty electrical arc to develop across the now bare electrodes. (Fun-factoid of the day)

Everyone is urged to be as safe as possible should they attempt to follow any of the ideas expressed in this thread collaboration.

[system]

Post 2 of 2.

Every TV transmitter and Tesla coil can generate multi-kV RF signals, that's not too
outre, but not necessarily outside a hobbyists budget. But some more details about
this hydrogen synthesis might be useful - if its electrolysis then a volt or two is possibly
all that's needed? Or is it actually a radio wave that's needed? For that you need a
radio frequency generator and RF linear amplifier. Is this some sort of ESR (electron
spin resonance) effect?

I shall try my best to aid you despite my paperwork being a few miles down the road. Low voltage (1-2) does indeed work. When we first began experimenting about with these sort of things, we were trying to decide whether the best approach was low voltages and mid to high amps, or the opposite. What I found is that electrolysis works best with a more ample supply of voltage and very low amperage, something like .5 - 1 amp and 50 to 55 volts, which can be scaled almost anywhere from there (with a slight impact on the efficiency). The process is entirely possible though with anything from 9 volts down to about 4 or 5. Anything lower then that and you might as well be powering a flea colony I've found, that or have a very large chamber with many electrodes.

As for the radio wave requirement- I have heard that use of radio frequencies is very effective in the electrolysis project, but as I have yet to actually test a transmitter in the system myself I really can't say anything more than that as I do not know. Thank you kindly, though, for giving me a few more ideas as well as a short equipment list.

Now lastly, I am not entirely sure if the electromagnetic setup will be taking advantage of the ESR effect, but from what I recall it is discussed in the main piece of material we are reading to design our project. I will try to look into this for you later when I get home and return with details of what I have found. This is exciting. ^^

That stun gun does not generate anything remotely like 14MV, that's impossible, its the
realm of lightning discharges.

I think you need to talk to a physicist about what you are trying to achieve, it sounds
way off in left-field to me.

Indeed I really do believe I should. I think I will mosey my way on over to the OTC (Ozark Technical College) sometime this week and speak with someone with far more experience than I. That was a silly mistake of mine to buy into the advertised voltages on the stun-guns so quickly like that with so little research into the truth of the matter. But alas, I am far from flawless.

Luckily a professor teaches a class on one of the campuses in which he converted a V6 Jeep Wrangler into a hydrogen-only car in which he generated the hydrogen on the fly as opposed to using a far more dangerous (and overly researched) fuel-cell.

I dont see you having any 'all in one full range set up' (something that provides even 1 KV at DC to 68Mhz) for anything less than a kings ransom. heck 1KV from 50Mhz to 60Mhz would be somewhat expensive. Adding the capacity to slow all the way down to DC complicates things significantly.

That stun gun is likely oscillating at a resonant freq in order to achieve that advertised voltage, change its freq and I am certain the voltage will drop as you take it out of its voltage multipliers inherent resonance.

You'd need multiple (parallel?) tuned voltage multipliers and....

but... Hey, I am available for adoption and I am a very warm person seeking new, richer parents - how bout it? No? well those tuned parallel voltage multipliers would be expensive. smiley-wink

Also, how much of this is 'for learning', and learning what precisely?
For instance, I may be a little looser on those purse strings if the experience is worth it.

But given its for testing - Id sweep through what ever range a particular V multiplier is capable of, measure results, test other freq range, (change to appropriate V multiplier), measure results - etc, to find that 'sweet spot' again.

I cant imagine myself having lost even the range (somewhere in the XX Hz range. DC to 68MHz is like admitting to myself of a total mental obstruction. lol)

Hope that helped, and good luck - Dad?

Can you blame me for trying in this economy?

No I certainly could not! I would love to adopt a son with such an intelligence of electrical wizardry about him, but unfortunately you and I are in the same boat as far as finances are concerned. I do have $5-10k saved up but would like to only splurge if I am sure I am on to something, hehe. Helpful stuff there though with the voltage multipliers. I looked into this myself before we began and well, it almost certainly will be a direction we will need to take. I can get 240 volts out of our main, but stepping up from there is going to take some magic or Tesla-esque experimenting. Luckily I have since decided to begin working with what I have, at much lower voltages (yet still high enough to pose a grave safety hazard).

As for how much of this is for learning. It is entirely for learning! Though I might add if my research was to allow me to set up a few hydrogen-gas generators to provide a cheaper form of energy for my various projects and house-hold electrical needs I don't think I would be entirely opposed to it! As the late Stanley Meyer put it, before he was likely assassinated, water molecules store enough atomic energy in them to not only power our entire world and electrical greed, but, and this was in his opinion based on his own research, power our trucks, cars, airplanes/helicopters, and even * puts on shades 8)* rockets.

I will try to nail down the exact quote, but it is something along the lines of 1 gallon to a barrel of H20 has the equivalent atomic energy of 13 million barrels of oil. Obviously my aims and goals are to be FAR sloppier with the energy conversion, probably losing 12.99 million of those "packets of energy", but hey- water is far more prevalent than fossil fuels, and I would be incredibly happy to run a car again someday on the wonderful stuff.

And I think it's worth mentioning that a lot of people get this sort of thing confused with "Free Energy" or "Zero-Point Energy" which it absolutely is NOT. The energy must come from somewhere, and in this case that is a steady supply of Hydrogen and Oxygen pulled from water, which is indeed finite.

Thanks for reading you guys, I think that is all the time I have at the moment to address some of your questions and concerns but I shall be back.

Warmest Regards,
-B

[system]

Going back to that Professor who turned his Jeep into a Hydrogen only burner that produced this amount of hydrogen on the fly, I would like to see this in action & reproduce his achievements for myself.

I see it as possible IF, one can produce the amount of hydrogen gas required to produce a viable horsepower that quickly.
The other half of the equation is of course, making more energy than it costs to produce.
Kinda' like perpetual motion isn't it?

[system]

Hrendor66:
After thinking about this a bit more...

I am convinced what was used before was HF pulsed DC - which is different than AC - in that there is never a swing below Gnd with pulsed DC - a higher freq(>68Mhz depending on desired pulsewidths) used to generate the oscillators that drive voltage multipliers and then modulated at a lower frequency (0Hz to 68Mhz).

That is - short of a custom HV High speed genset that could be used to generate both positive and negative swings, offering 'true' AC (again as opposed to 'pulsed DC')

Perhaps the swing below ground is significant? Tho I suspect not.

As I stated before , my experience was using DC , one polarity would emit Oxygen, the other Hydrogen, this makes Pulsed DC a more logical probability - as the polarity doesn't change - but the 'pulsing' action may very well help separate the elements.. sorta like an impact wrench that uses pulsed (albeit mechanical) bursts to break rusted bolts loose... I speculate of course. In an electronics perspective you can achieve a 2x higher joule/second if the pulse is 1/2 as long but still releases same # of joules. (ie capacitive discharged spark gap devices).

Is there a gain in efficiency by waiting (as a for instance) say a few ms for a cap to charge to a voltage that speeds up the process by some percentage?.. I guess these are the types of questions the OP may be seeking definitive answers to..

You ask a good question. I am unaware if a 2ms delay will increase the efficiency or rate of the process, but this is something I would like to test myself. I have already added it to my experiment's plans and will get back to you on this.

UserNotLoggedIn:
Going back to that Professor who turned his Jeep into a Hydrogen only burner that produced this amount of hydrogen on the fly, I would like to see this in action & reproduce his achievements for myself.

I see it as possible IF, one can produce the amount of hydrogen gas required to produce a viable horsepower that quickly.
The other half of the equation is of course, making more energy than it costs to produce.
Kinda' like perpetual motion isn't it?

Well, hydrogen burns at a much higher rate than gasoline. The idea is that once you have achieved an ample supply of it (with a scaled up system) you mix the gas with inert gases to achieve a steady burn-rate identical or close to that of gasoline. The hydrogen mixture itself is usually applied directly to the air intake on the engine.

As for the rate at which this process takes place, and our ability to sustain the reaction with energy drain, I can tell you this- He used 4 to 6 car batteries in his unit which I assume could last you a few days to a week. The main thing I have noticed (and again the aim of this experiment is not to produce a hydrogen system for a vehicle but I can help you where I may) is that most systems share one thing in common. They cannot continue to produce hydrogen at a rate steady enough with an energy draw low enough to sustain the system for days on end. It is my belief, however, that the missing key to this entire reaction is that the water needs to be assisted via either radio frequency pulsation or the other methods discussed above. I am not hush hush about any of my information as I believe we are truly working on something here that can change lives and assist others, but I must tell you that were you to successfully create such a system for your vehicle that was more than a simple mpg booster, you should keep it quiet and not brag about it to anyone you don't know well. It seems that oil cartels as I call them do not turn a blind eye to projects like these, as they are heavily invested in our current fossil fuel infrastructure and would stop at nothing to silence anyone who threatened their way of life.

Now, as for perpetual motion- I mentioned something along these lines above, but this is certainly not perpetual, or free-energy. The system requires a steady supply of water, and as such you can think of it more as an alternative fuel source. Think gas tank to water tank with many similarities.

This should be very neat as the project develops. I am glad that my team allowed me to take a more open-source approach, because many of you can certainly offer us great aid in our research endeavours. At the same time, I hope that the information gleamed from these results can assist others in either lowering their monthly bills, or simply freeing themselves from the bondages of bills.

Not to sound paranoid, but should anyone not like the things we are working on in this thread, I would certainly hope you would try to contact one of the members of my band to discuss your concerns. Hehe. I did, however, speak with an attorney in California yesterday and she told me that my ideas didn't seem to raise any red flags with her, at least as far as the legality is concerned. Again though, this is a completely non-profit experiment I would like to discuss at a science fair, not some business idea I hope to propel my life through and by.

Interesting discussion thus far, gentlmen(&gentleladies), I look forward to reading more of your insights, and of course assisting where I can when I am able to.

Sincerely yours,
-Blake

[polymorph]

Now, as for perpetual motion- I mentioned something along these lines above, but this is certainly not perpetual, or free-energy. The system requires a steady supply of water, and as such you can think of it more as an alternative fuel source. Think gas tank to water tank with many similarities.

I don't think the water is an issue, rather the energy that you put in to break water apart is going to be more than the energy you get when you recombine it.

Even if you reach an efficiency of 100%, it is still no more than what you've put in.

I'm not telling you not to do this. By all means, do! Maybe you will discover something new. So far, though, all the successes seem to be anecdotal "that guy is dead now" stories.