Hydrogen generation at resonance
firewater
Posts: 25
Can anyone explain and or duplicate whats going on in this video.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/udwtyt4z0fd/floatingcoil.mov
http://www.mediafire.com/file/udwtyt4z0fd/floatingcoil.mov
Comments
With the "floating" wire, your simply forming a Low-Pass filter... the coils of the winding form a capacitor to the other coils being used.
http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/circuits/lc_lowpassfilter/lc_lpf.php
If you look at the "pi-filter" above... you form a similar structure by using only one leg of the coil. The fact that it works better one way verses the other for the guy in the video is simply because he is "de-tuning" or changing the resonant frequency of the coil. If the frequency sweep is broadened, I'm sure he'll find another resonant frequency with the other coil configuration.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Beau Schwabe
IC Layout Engineer
Parallax, Inc.
There are tons of YouTube videos of homebrew systems. It sure would be great if this could get off the ground, and it is nice to see so many people working on it lately. Seems like some fun experimenting at the very least.
Isn't there a simple mathamatical calculation one can do to either prove or disprove the notion that this simply will or will not work? When you think of how precise a nucular scientist can tell you exactly how much energy one can get from splitting an atom of a certain atomic weight I doubt a backyard would be experimenter with a few batteries and copper wires is going to come up with anything useful. Imagine if these experimenters were playing with splitting atoms, If they knew how to split an atom I think I would have a little more faith in their ability to produce something worthwhile in the hydrogen department. I would think the top physicists in the world may have puttered about with this idea on their chalk boards.
Of course I want to experiment with it as a curiosity because I am one of those backyard experimenters and I don't have a clue how to do it on a chalk board so I am not speaking from any high horse, just what I think is common sense with a healthy dose of skepticism.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Think Inside the box first and if that doesn't work..
Re-arrange what's inside the box then...
Think outside the BOX!
·
About the only hydrogen experiments I have done were just to prove that it could be done, and for fun making a water cannon for vacation bible school.
·
When I see these topics about using hydrogen for you vehicle and such, I to am curious, but I haven't explored my curiosity.· One thought that I haven't had a chance to test would be to utilize the water as part of the resonant tank circuit.... everything that I have seen so far has used the water as the "load".· My thought was that if distilled water were truly an insulator to use that as the capacitor in the resonant tank.· The problem is that as soon as you expose the water to air, or for that matter "electrolysis", you contaminate it.· As a result it's no longer an insulator.· My thought, and this is only a thought would be to have two insulated metal plates in the water,· This negates whether or not the water is conductive or not, if it is, then it acts as a third "floating" plate.· Anyway at some resonant frequency to your coil (The coil and capacitor forming an LC tank circuit) you now have a tremendous voltage across the plates in your "water" capacitor.· Would it be enough to do anything to the water? I don't know... like I said... just a thought.
·
·
·
Here is an E-Mail that I sent to Parallax Staff towards the end of June regarding vacation bible school.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Beau Schwabe
IC Layout Engineer
Parallax, Inc.
Post Edited (Beau Schwabe (Parallax)) : 8/31/2008 5:04:29 AM GMT
The man with the hydrogen add on kit mentioned, and his lack of mention of it's benefit, really is not any evidence of anything. He may have been scammed, he may have installed it wrong, who knows. There is plenty of evidence to support hydrogen as a great fuel, or beneficial fuel additive.
The masses have their heads in the sand about the petro platform. Who knows if the guy that originally was claiming 'resonance' as the secret to breaking the H2O apart is true. The video is interesting. The point of the resonance I suppose is that you release the hydrogen much easier (less energy) than with straight wire to plates or coils, which requires a lot of amps to produce a high enough rate of release. If there were some trick to use a lessor amount of energy required to release the hydrogen, then you are approaching something viable. The alternator>battery of course being the first choice of energy(closed loop). Solar or battery charger is second, assuming the battery charger is getting it sources from nuclear or hydro sources. I would think that having multiple batteries that were easily swappable would be a habit we could adapt to. Swap out your battery after X hours of driving or every night, let the solar or grid charge it while another battery is in use with the car. Not a big deal really, just a new system needed to quickly connect and disconnect batteries, in a not so messy manner.
I have not seen anyone yet trying to harness the heat from the engine/exhaust as energy fed back into the battery, if there is even something worth trying to harness in the first place, but there seems to be a lot of waste in an internal combustion engine, heat being one of the wasted byproducts.
For those that have not looked at the hydrogen gadgets, YouTube has tons of people building them, very fascinating stuff, whether it comes to fruition or not who knows. One thing is for sure, something has to change with how we power cars.
Post Edited (Originator) : 8/31/2008 7:02:33 AM GMT
-phar
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Paul Baker
Propeller Applications Engineer
Parallax, Inc.
Post Edited (Paul Baker (Parallax)) : 8/31/2008 8:25:19 PM GMT
I would love to see the same diagram for the automotive engine. I would bet the biggest consumer of energy in a car is the exhaust pipe, followed by the heat in the radiator and engine oil. That would mean that less than a third of the KwH energy in gas is available to drive the wheels or spin the alternator to make hydrogen. So by using the cars electricity to make Hydrogen you only get a third of the energy from the hydrogen that you used in gas to create it. But now the RUB. Petrol (gas) engines are designed to burn petrol (gas) and hydrogen is even less efficient in these engines. You get even less than the third (of a third) of energy.
But the great Willie Messerschmitt found that injecting a small amount of water into his high performance aero engines made them more efficient and last little longer (just 40 hours on the ME109 Emile). He helped perpetuate the myth that you could run gas engines on water and that the Germans had developed technology during WW2. Remember that the byproduct of Hydrogen combustion is traces of water. Modern combustion improvers added to gas mean that this gain through adding water will be small.
I make two predictions…
- Hydrogen vehicles will NEVER become mainstream. Why use hydrogen to store energy when battery technology is so much more efficient. (Remember that hydrogen is only a storage medium, a battery so to speak. You still need some primary energy source like oil, coal, nuclear or hydro to create the energy)
- The Oil price will continue to drop, expect figures of under US$ 80.00 within 4 months. The bottom will be below US$ 60.00. With reserves of over a year’s gross consumption currently available in storage above ground, the price just has to FALL!!!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
There is also a LOT of wasted energy in braking. Not considering costs of implementation, harnessing the wasted energy in braking would reduce a lot of a typical city car's waste. One such method might be to connect simple generators to the braking system on all or 2 wheels, whereas the load of the generators both acted a a braking agent as well as a short burst of charge to a battery, disengage the generators in normal travel. Anything that would allow for less use of the alternator would result in some return. Like I said, there are costs that likely prohibit such a system.
Point being, there is significant waste in cars as was stated earlier, any hot rod builder knows that he has X horsepower at the flywheel, and Y at the pavement. The fact that we use up energy to move a 4000 lb car that often is only transporting a 125-200 lb object (driver) is part of the problem.
I propose new lanes for slower, smaller vehicles, for example maybe a lane for a maximum 1000lb car that travels at 30 MPH only, so the smaller efficient cards don't get squashed.
I have thought new lanes for slower, smaller vehicles was a good idea for a long time. I think there should be a lane for semi-trucks only. The number of deaths each year in the U.S. from accidents involving semi's and cars is terrible and will continue to rise as people drive more and more aggressivly and cars continue to get smaller. Also as semi's sit in traffic longer and longer the price of getting goods to market goes up and is passed on to consumers as higher prices for food, lumber, fuel and other areas.
John Bond, yes the infrastructure for the delivery, storage and transport of hydrogen is enormous but·as supplies of oil continue to shrink and enviromental damage continues to increase energy companies need to switch to another fuel they can continue to sell us at·ever inflated prices.·Vectrix electric motorcycles have·partnered with Italy and other countries·and·have set up free charging stations all around the country for people to recharge their motocycles but once the price of the bikes comes down and more people use them,·driving up the·demand for electricity, I'am shure they will start charging to use the stations.·If hydrogen could be created on demand and fed directly into the cumbustion chamber. There·would be·no need to store anything but water, therefore you wouldn't need to by gas or Diesel.·Oil companies·don't want that to happen.
Consider the drug Marinol which is used to treat·cancer and·AIDS·patients·to increase appetite and decrease nausea and in Gaucoma patients to reduce pressure within the eye. It's also used to treat·people with Multiple Sclerosis.·My aunt died of M.S and my father of Cancer. The main ingredient in Marinol·is tetrahydrocannabinol·which is·the main psychoactive substance found in·Cannabis. If Cannabis were legalized people could just raise·it themselves for free or buy it at a fraction of the price of Marinol, destroying the profits for the company who makes it. The average yearly dose is 4562.5 mg at $8,258.··Imagine Marinol replaced by Oil and that company replaced by Exxon, Shell, and BP, were talking a 10000 fold profit. Do you think they would want to stop that or continue to sell you overpriced oil ?
Post Edited (firewater) : 1/3/2009 7:40:59 AM GMT
Russ
Professorwiz, Roy McAlister of the American Hydrogen Association has been doing conversions of vechicles for years with no corrosion problems. Also in the book "Fuel from Water: Energy Independence with Hydrogen" by Michael A. Peavy
http://www.amazon.com/Fuel-Water-Energy-Independence-Hydrogen/dp/0945516045
he talks about a pipeline in Germany which has been in operation since the 1940's and was originally designed to carry natural gas and propane but has carried hydrogen with no hydrogen embrittlement but current internal combustion engines are not ideal for utilizing hydrogen but this this one is, the Larsen Radax engine:
I enquired about the engine to American Hydrogen Association but I didn't get a reply.
Post Edited (firewater) : 1/3/2009 7:37:23 AM GMT
It is simply not possible without breaking the laws of physics. Anyone who claims they have done so is the modern day equivalent of a snake oil salesman.
All that being said, I really, truly, do hope that someone finds a way around this problem. One thing I can say for certain is that sticking electrodes (of any design or shape) into a container of water and applying a current (of any size) will not be the answer.
I'm not taking up a contrary position because I want those investigating this technology to fail, but rather because everyone seems to be going about it the same way. That way (electrolysis) is proven to be far too inefficient to be of any real use. Quite simply, the amount of hydrogen produced can never provide enough energy to even make the device break even. There will always be a loss.
For some applications, say a car that drives a few hours a day here and there, rotating out an 'electrolysis battery' daily that is charged by solar power each day would be a method to power the plates/coils/tubes etc.
Question for the solar experts: How many amps can be stored on an average day where there is good sunlight? Can a 12v car battery be fully charged daily from solar power? How long does a lead acid battery last under charge>drain>charge conditions?
The point being, there are ways to get around using an alternator, not to mention the possibility of harnessing some the cars existing wasted energy as already discussed.
I see a lot of guys trying to hardness back emf for charging other batteries off line. Would back emf from a cars alternator that is applied to a battery add extra load to the alternator? Is there back emf energy from the spark plugs going to waste?
Rather than be concerned about what doesn't work, as in this case Mark is arguing that the alternator wont suffice, I suggest that people consider what options may work, using whatever alternatives there are.
Regardless of the youtube fantastic claims by meyers and the like, whether they are true or not, the real point is we need to be putting thought towards conservation, research of new sources of energy, or better use of current energy. I love seeing all the new hydrogen tinkerers, regardless of what the laws of conservation are, it's the spirit of trying to find a better solution that is more important.
Post Edited (Originator) : 9/5/2008 9:21:23 PM GMT
This one 3,970,070 Solar heating system (USA)
"A solar heating system comprising a lens collector arrangement, an insulation area, and a storage section positioned in an enclosing structure, and an associated utilization means. The collector lens is an array of light guide lenses having alternate high and low refractive surfaces. The array is contoured in a capping relationship over a focusing lens to provide an extremely high concentration of solar energy irrespective of the angle of the sun. The light guide lenses increase by several orders of magnitude the amount of solar energy striking the surface of the focusing lens. The focusing lens is a plurality of flat surface type of lenses stacked one over the other in spaced relationship and operable to concentrate the solar energy to a central region. Surrounding the perimeter of the plurality of focusing lenses in an array, in a "wall" configuration, of light guide lenses similar in construction to the aforesaid capping light guide lenses. The angle of the reflective surfaces of the capping lenses and the wall lenses is such to receive and direct to the focusing lenses the maximum amount of radiation at all times of the day and season. The insulation area is positioned between the collector lens and the storage section to provide a convective barrier for the storage area without inhibiting the passage of solar radiation. The storage section is of a high absorption material with an auxiliary conventional heat source."
Would it not be easier to say use a magnifying glass and focus the sunlight on a collector? Heck I burned ants on the picnic table with a magnifying glass when I was 8 years old it's ridiculous. Come to think of it, I have never seen a magnifying glass solar collector, is it because this guy has a patent on the "idea" so nobody can make use of it's great potential or is it that using a shiny piece of metal bent to reflect the sunlight to a concentrated point is a much better way to accomplish the same thing. I just think there are way to many patents that have no practical use, what is the point of having a patent if you don't manufacture or have manufactured a product that uses the technology that the patent is applied too? I guess the idea of throw a bunch of s**t on the wall and some will stick but gees it would be nice to read a patent that had some real practical use especially when it comes to energy and not a patent applied for and granted just because nobody has a patent on it even though for hundreds of years people have used magnifying glass to start a simple camp fire.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Think Inside the box first and if that doesn't work..
Re-arrange what's inside the box then...
Think outside the BOX!
Post Edited (metron9) : 9/6/2008 5:01:42 PM GMT
I am more deeply concern about sucessful patents for hydrogen shut off valves. There are very, very few sucessful ones. The gas leaks by nearly all seals.
I have pretty much resigned myself to the fact that this is the kind of undertaking that a major corporation should handle as the distribution network and bottling of the gas is critical to everyone using it safely.
If he is actually making the hydrogen inside the combustion chamber, he is going to need a very long extention cord to keep traveling.
I can see making backyard biodiesel from coconut oil, but DIY hydrogen fuel is a bit over the top.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
It's sunny and warm here. It is always sunny and warm here.... (unless a typhoon blows through).
Tropically, G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan
Post Edited (Kramer) : 9/6/2008 6:38:32 PM GMT
"Question for the solar experts: How many amps can be stored on an average day where there is good sunlight? Can a 12v car battery be fully charged daily from solar power? How long does a lead acid battery last under charge>drain>charge conditions?"
Considering I get at least 5 Hours of good sunlight a day, I can fully charge a single Car battery in 1 day with a panel rated for 70 Watts.
This assumes that the battery starts out at about 10.5V and doesn't fall below 10.5V during it's discharge cycle.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Beau Schwabe
IC Layout Engineer
Parallax, Inc.
That is interesting. So larger or multiple panels could easily be used to power electrolysis if someone wanted to swap out the fuel cell batteries as needed. With some new 'quick release' battery terminal system, dropping a battery or two in and out of a trunk on a daily basis is not a big deal.
I have no clue what I am talking about here, but just out of curiosity, on a car or truck that is driven in the city (especially her ion LA), there is a lot of bouncing and vibration energy that could be harnessed with some floating coil(s) system fed back to a battery. Another small source of wasted energy is sound vibrations from right out of the exhaust pipe, or even at the front of the exhaust. Granted these may not be worth the expense in but it was an idea. Just thinking out loud really.
Regarding Kramers comments, I agree that storage is not a good option. On demand seems like the best case if there is some free or cheap source to do it with, as sunlight>batteries etc.
The hydrogen Honda is described at:
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
The refueling station is described at:
http://www.ieahia.org/pdfs/honda.pdf
is a link to my blog. An interesting thing is using radio waves, to release and burn hydrogen from saltwater. More questions than answers, like energy input vs output, pollution of doing so, etc. 13.56 MHz radio waves. Maybe it will work better looking at it as cogeneration. No electrodes to corrode. How do you separate the hydrogen and o2? Should they be separate?
Like any method of energy collection or conversion, what was the 1st video energy input VS it's output? What about vs regular electrolysis? Here we have actual flow to be measured.
Then again is there an energy source we get a gain in energy?
Maybe we should look at energy/money in of the device and energy/money to maintain it vs it's output?
As a minor(trivial?) I thought of mini hydro turbines on the downspouts. If you ever have done the math of hydro sites, you'll know the very small energy possible in downspouts, ie almost not worth it. In high average rain fall areas it might be worth it.
Large, quickly replaceable batteries has been done before on EV's. See the new electric vehicles book, now out of print, for work they have done with formula one EV's.
Wiki:
"To kill cancer cells using Kanzius RF Therapy, cancer cells are first tagged with tiny objects known as nanoparticles, such as SWNTs and GNPs. When the RF (radio frequency) transmitter apparatus exposes the nanoparticles to the radio frequency signal they heat up, destroying the cancer cells, but do not damage healthy cells nearby.[noparse][[/noparse]6]"
"As of 2007-04-23, preliminary research using the Kanzius RF device at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston (by Dr. Steven A. Curley, Professor in Surgical Oncology[noparse][[/noparse]7][noparse][[/noparse]8]) and The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (by Dr. David A. Geller, co-director of the Liver Cancer Center[noparse][[/noparse]9]) has shown promising results. If federal approval is granted, testing on human patients would be the next step.[noparse][[/noparse]6] [noparse][[/noparse]10] "
"As of 1st November 2007, preliminary trials (University of Texas MD Anderson Rearch Center led by Stephen Curley, a professor of surgical oncology.) with rabbits have turned up a 100% success rate, with the tumors successfully eliminated and the rabbits remaining unharmed. " http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/110207_curley.pdf
Post Edited (firewater) : 1/3/2009 7:32:21 AM GMT
Shortly after hearing about that, I asked some people on another board in a physics forum about that method. It turns out that the resonant frequency of a water molecule is about 30GHz. To break the molecular bonds in great quantity, you'd have to meet or exceed that frequency. Not an easy task and it requires a lot of energy.
Direct conversion of electricity to mechanical motion is very efficient. This conversion of electricity to hydrogen and then burning the hydrogen for internal combustion is obviously more wasteful.
In sum, it is an interesting and exotic application. But one wonders why one would settle for worst mileage.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
It's sunny and warm here. It is always sunny and warm here.... (unless a typhoon blows through).
Tropically, G. Herzog [noparse][[/noparse] 黃鶴 ] in Taiwan