The Water Fuel Cell

[dcelectrolysis]

Hello!

I need a help...

It is more than a year when I first hear about Meyer WFC.
Then I found Dave Lawton replication pdf and I decide to make this.
I made electronic circuit, coils, a cell with one unit (two tubes) and tested it . Nothing hapened. OK the cell produce some gas but nothing special, nothing "bigger"

Then I got a special transformer with 1500V outpu, got special 2000V diodes.
And try to get some results. Nothing. The power supply protection simply protect to pu out so high current requestred by 1500V...

Then I bought an oscilloscope to precise measure the frequency and I saw that Dave Lawton device can not set frequencies very precise so I designed very precise analoque frequency generator in a range from 40000 to 44000Hz. I can precise set frequency to 1 to 2 Hz.
I tried many frequencies and always the same: power supply protection do not allow so big current...

What is wrong now?

Can somebody tell me what I did wrong?

Thank and regards!

[StansRevenge]

im going to go ahead and guess that it's your setup.

[dcelectrolysis]

I am sorry. I am not a native english speaker.
I can not understand your answer. What setup?

Thanks...

[eclipsed78]

Hi dcelectrolysis,

Welcome to WFC.org.....

The DL circuit is will not produce more potential chemical energy than the amount of Watts you use....the DL circuit/experiment does show the disassociation of water without electrolyte....which is the most important part of the experiment....

Quote dcelectrolysis:

"Then I got a special transformer with 1500V outpu, got special 2000V diodes.
And try to get some results. Nothing. The power supply protection simply protect to pu out so high current requestred by 1500V..."

End quote

I think that using only a stepup transformer will not achieve the conversion of complex power into potential chemical energy...if you start to understand what complex power is and what is required to have a completly reactive circuit, then you will fully understand the power of the (something something something) water fuel cell...and then it will take along time for you to (something something something) complete.....

Good luck and I suggest making your own LCR measurements at various frequencies...but if you dont have a $20K LCR meter laying around, I have posted LCR meter measurements of a water cell up to 1 MHZ on my projects page....

[dcelectrolysis]

hmm....

I hope that I clearly understany you...

In that moment I not want to make big system just to see if it is possible to break water molecule into a hydrogen and oxygen accordint to Stanley Meyer idea- with force prodicted with Voltage, not with electric current.

From that reason I looked documents/plans from:
- jnaudin (he make this with destilledwater)
- RAVI
-Dave Lawton
- Stanley Meyer patents
- Bob Boyce

If I read your lines I am now not shure what you mean.

What is then the main principle that Stanley Meyer idea/device will work?
- Frequency of impulses?
- High voltage?
- High voltage impulses at specific frequency?
- special design of cell?

I do not know now where to start repairing my device that finall I will get some positive results.

Thanks

[eclipsed78]

Hi dcelectrolysis,

Quote dcelectrolysis

"to see if it is possible to break water molecule into a hydrogen and oxygen accordint to Stanley Meyer idea- with force prodicted with Voltage, not with electric current."

End Quote

This statement would be the abstract concept of converting complex power into potential chemical energy but by defining the use of a conversion of complex power by overcoming the dielectric stregth of H2O, dielectric breakdown is the process by which the conversion takes place

If you need to replicate those who claim success, but simply lack the documentation, data, equations, and most importantly proof with exact replication "blueprints" and verification by an independent source.....it become a matter of a non scientific approach......Once all of the variables are understood, a more logical, scientific approach will become apparent and will be able to be tested for verification under as much as a controled condition as possible with a shoe string budget.....I have to admit that I am not an expert in electronics, and I have to give most of the credit to B2 spice....but the simulation that I need to prove in an experiment, is the exact question that everyone asks....

Quote dcelectrolysis

What is then the main principle that Stanley Meyer idea/device will work?

End quote

This is something you are going to have to figure out and test...and then decide what to do with results....because it will be the true test of anyone's moral/scientific values and I hope that I am strong enough to make the right decision.......because if I do prove the conversion of complex power into potential chemical energy, I am planning to simply publish in a journal first...... so that any positive results will at least be in public domain and allow some type of recognition to my research and all of those who have helped me, including meyer for documenting so much of his original research for others to even start to understand this very complex concept.....

I hope that makes sence...and I wish you good luck.....

[SeaMonkey]

As StansRevenge has pointed out in his thread:

[eclipsed78]

Hi SeaMonkey,

Im not going to start pointing out all of the incorrect statements that you and StansRevenge are making...and I am not sure if I can agree with most of what has been posted by you or StansRevenge.....but if you would like to share with either equation, data, or reference that specifically shows this term "proper capacitance" that you have quoted StansRevenge by as to why "High Voltage cannot be the answer" I will keep an open mind.....

But unfortunately, I think there is no electrical terminology of "proper capacitance", there is only dissipation factor (DF) that defines lousy and ideal capacitors.....DF = amount of energy lost / amount of energy stored....using a LCR meter, one can measure the resistance and capacitance in parallel of any capacitor (Rp and Cp) which then can be used to calculate the DF...DF = 1/(2*pi*F*Cp*Rp)....

Multidielectric capacitors have been part of my research....and I am still committed to measuring the dielectric strength of water using multidielectric capacitors, but I have decided to work in a new direction.....but it is taking along time to even setup the experiment....

Lastly, I simply do not want to hear anyone say tickle water anymore even if this was a term from Stan himself, it is simply unprofessional and it has no business in here.....but if you would like to share with either equation, data, or reference that specifically shows why this term "tickling water" should be used, I will keep an open mind....

But unfortunately, I think there is no electrical/chemical terminology of "tickling water"....In fact this is a complete fairy tail, water can not be physically tickled, as water does not have nerve endings....the electrical/chemical/physical terminology and definition to prove is:

"A conversion of complex power into potential chemical energy by means of dielectric breakdown.".....period...

And please, stop asking and answering your own questions....as if anyone needs to have someone point out obvious questions...and then answering them like they are a "sure thing"....this is science and it is never a "sure thing" unless someone can prove it....and so far, I am not aware of anyone proving that water is physically "tickled"

[SeaMonkey]

It is merely a "figure of speech" and not meant
to be taken "literally."

We simply exploit the 'beauty' of linguistic
expression to simplify a concept. Call it "Poetic
License" if you wish.

The first stage of "Tickling" the water is to
de-couple the many molecules which make
up the 'clusters' found in water.

Second is the 'stimulation' of the molecule
itself to 'split' into gaseous Hydrogen and
Oxygen.

These processes do not require any 'high voltage.'
In fact, high voltage hinders the process. The
conductivity of the water is essentially a 'short
circuit' to the high voltage.

Unfortunately, the research done in the realm
of low voltage 'electrolysis' has been largely
ignored. The work of Meyer, Boyce, Kanzius
and others has been greatly mis-understood
and mis-interpreted by the 'theorists.'

While there are 'high voltage' methods which
do produce results; the 'Low Voltage' methods
are far simpler and equally productive.

And yes, even "You" may re-produce the process
to attain good results.

"Di-Electric Breakdown" as an answer to the 'enigma'
is truly a "Red Herring." Dis-Information.

Is it a "sure thing" or not?

Feedback from the experimenters will settle the matter.

[eclipsed78]

Hi SeaMonkey,

Quote SeaMonkey

It is merely a "figure of speech" and not meant
to be taken "literally."

End Quote

Disinformation

Quote SeaMonkey

We simply exploit the 'beauty' of linguistic
expression to simplify a concept. Call it "Poetic
License" if you wish.

End Quote

Disinformation

Quote SeaMonkey

The first stage of "Tickling" the water is to
de-couple the many molecules which make
up the 'clusters' found in water.

End Quote

Disinformation

Quote SeaMonkey

Second is the 'stimulation' of the molecule
itself to 'split' into gaseous Hydrogen and
Oxygen.

End Quote

Disinformation

Quote SeaMonkey

These processes do not require any 'high voltage.'

End Quote

not proven

Quote SeaMonkey

In fact, high voltage hinders the process. The
conductivity of the water is essentially a 'short
circuit' to the high voltage.

End Quote

Disinformation

Quote SeaMonkey

Unfortunately, the research done in the realm
of low voltage 'electrolysis' has been largely
ignored. The work of Meyer, Boyce, Kanzius
and others has been greatly mis-understood
and mis-interpreted by the 'theorists.'

While there are 'high voltage' methods which
do produce results; the 'Low Voltage' methods
are far simpler and equally productive.

End Quote

Not proven

Quote SeaMonkey

And yes, even "You" may re-produce the process
to attain good results.

End Quote

Not proven

Quote SeaMonkey

"Di-Electric Breakdown" as an answer to the 'enigma'
is truly a "Red Herring." Dis-Information.

End Quote

Dielectric breakdown is simply a term by which a material starts to conduct from a potential field over a certain distance which breaks chemical bonds within the material and usually distroys the materal.....(example: PVDF has a dielectric breakdown strength of 1900 V/mil where "mil" = .001 inches) There has been alot of research pertaining to the dielectric strength of pure water at different frequencies from sandi national labs in NM...

On a side note, I am telling you straight to your face right now, "SeaMonkey, you are a disinformation agent, Prove me wrong...."

Quote SeaMonkey

Is it a "sure thing" or not?

Feedback from the experimenters will settle the matter.

End Quote

You have not provided any of the information that I have requested....although your imagination is interesting, you are not willing to adhere to professional terminology that reduces confussion between wfc researchers and those who are working within professional science and technology fields....that is the difinition of disinformation, and I hope others will understand that your answers are simply:

Quote SeaMonkey

It is merely a "figure of speech" and not meant
to be taken "literally."

End Quote

[SeaMonkey]

Hello to you eclipsed78,

It is always nice to chat with you.

Consider why Stan used the term 'tickle' to convey
what his process was all about. There is an interesting
analogy involved.

When a person is 'tickled' our bodies respond with
vigor and happiness so long as the 'tickling' is not
extreme. Tickling is a gentle application of stimulus
that produces a predictable result in the subject.

What Stan discovered is very similar; that water can
indeed be 'tickled' with a predictable result. What Stan
discovered was so 'simple' that he became very much
afraid that others would soon discover that 'simplicity.'
Hence, virtually all of the literature having to do with
Stan and his WFC is directed at leading people 'astray.'

What Stan discovered is the way to 'tickle' water to
make it, figuratively, 'laugh' itself into splitting apart.

There is no need to "SMACK" the water, or to "SPANK" the
water. Simply 'tickle' it.

Why SMACK or SPANK when all that is needed is a Tickle?


Stan revealed much in his written and spoken word that
was obscured by his diagrams, illustrations and schematics.
Stan was very much afraid (paranoia) that others would
stumble upon the utter simplicity of what he'd discovered
and therefore devoted much of his effort to make it appear
to be 'mysterious' or 'magical' or complicated. By encouraging
others to expend their resources following the 'high voltage'
misdirection, his 'secret' would be relatively safe.

Pick up the 'Feather' of Low Voltage Proper Frequency 'Tickling'
and enjoy the laughter!

Discover for yourself how little energy is truly required to
'tickle' water into a state of 'gas.'

The analogy is perfect!

The REAL purpose of the 'Voltage Intensifier Circuit' is not to
create a 'high voltage' but, rather, to create Low Voltage
impulses at the proper frequency.

When experimenters such as stansrevenge, or even yourself
eclipsed78, finally begin to see the 'light' they are to be
commended. And encouraged. And noticed.

Yes, you too will ultimately find success!

TICKLE!

P.S. Kanarev has done considerable research with
Low Voltage Electrolysis and has come to a very
similar conclusion. It would be good to review what
he's accomplished.

[eclipsed78]

Hi SeaMonkey

Quote SeaMonkey:

It is always nice to chat with you.

End Quote

I do respect that you are not being vulgar, belligerent, or rude;.and as I watched the daily show with the British guy, John Oliver, do a piece on racism in South Africa, our discussions reminded me of times of discussion within this forum before the vulgarity started.......when it was just simple disinformation that logic and proof could simply show that the disinformation is completely wrong....your disinformation is like what Oliver was talking about in South Africa, the only guy he could find in South Africa that was willing to speak publicly about racism was like a rare burgundy that has been properly aged........Although I do not condone either racism or disinformation, I simply just havent heard good old disinformation for some time now. thank you, I enjoyed it too......

Quote SeaMonkey:

Consider why Stan used the term 'tickle' to convey
what his process was all about. There is an interesting
analogy involved.

When a person is 'tickled' our bodies respond with
vigor and happiness so long as the 'tickling' is not
extreme. Tickling is a gentle application of stimulus
that produces a predictable result in the subject.

What Stan discovered is very similar; that water can
indeed be 'tickled' with a predictable result. What Stan
discovered was so 'simple' that he became very much
afraid that others would soon discover that 'simplicity.'
Hence, virtually all of the literature having to do with
Stan and his WFC is directed at leading people 'astray.'

What Stan discovered is the way to 'tickle' water to
make it, figuratively, 'laugh' itself into splitting apart.

There is no need to "SMACK" the water, or to "SPANK" the
water. Simply 'tickle' it.

Why SMACK or SPANK when all that is needed is a Tickle?


Stan revealed much in his written and spoken word that
was obscured by his diagrams, illustrations and schematics.
Stan was very much afraid (paranoia) that others would
stumble upon the utter simplicity of what he'd discovered
and therefore devoted much of his effort to make it appear
to be 'mysterious' or 'magical' or complicated. By encouraging
others to expend their resources following the 'high voltage'
misdirection, his 'secret' would be relatively safe.

Pick up the 'Feather' of Low Voltage Proper Frequency 'Tickling'
and enjoy the laughter!

Discover for yourself how little energy is truly required to
'tickle' water into a state of 'gas.'

The analogy is perfect!

End Quote

Im just curious about this disinformation's source, do you even have a reference of a quote from stan meyer saying this? If you do, please reference this quote.....because Im not sure if I have ever read or heard from any of stan's material of anything about tickling, spanking, or smacking....I think you might be mistaken for some other experimentation you might be doing....

Quote SeaMonkey:

The REAL purpose of the 'Voltage Intensifier Circuit' is not to
create a 'high voltage' but, rather, to create Low Voltage
impulses at the proper frequency.

End Quote

Not proven

Quote SeaMonkey

When experimenters such as stansrevenge, or even yourself
eclipsed78, finally begin to see the 'light' they are to be
commended. And encouraged. And noticed.

Yes, you too will ultimately find success!

TICKLE!

P.S. Kanarev has done considerable research with
Low Voltage Electrolysis and has come to a very
similar conclusion. It would be good to review what
he's accomplished.

End quote

SeaMonkey, do you have any research at all? I mean, you dont even have a projects page...if you have any research that you would like to show that can be independently verified, lets see it....until then, your opinion or direction has no weight and is of no consequence........any commendation, encouragement, or being "noticed" will not stop this from becoming open source information that anyone will be able to independently verify with the exact replicatable pcbs that will be forthcoming with my research of resonant cirucits after I have published any results within a scientific journal.....

I hope that all....of your experimenation goes well...and I hope that anyone reading this will not be turned away from doing any research regarding Low Voltage Electrolysis if you so choose....although I can not comment on Kanarev's research, I think its safe to say that I might be working in a different direction...which is:

The conversion of complex power into potential chemical energy by means of dielectric breakdown.

[SeaMonkey]

eclipsed78 and all,


The process of applying low voltage pulses to
a simply fabricated test cell is very simple and
straightforward. There is no requirement for any
special cell configuration. Two metal electrodes
immersed in a basic electrolyte solution are all
that is needed to perform the experiments and
to collect ones own data to build upon.

A variable low voltage power supply of about
2 Volts in conjunction with a pulsing circuit to
develop sharp and very brief pulses superimposed
upon the low voltage cell 'bias' will be needed.

A simplified and scaled down version of the Boyce
PWM-3 device would be very useful. You'll want
to be able to produce pulses over the frequency
range of about 4KHz to 45KHz. The value of the
Boyce approach is that his unit is capable of
generating 3 independent frequencies simultaneously
in variable amplitude and pulse width.

There is no need to purchase a Boyce PWM-3 unit;
create your own by improvisation.

The experimentation should be done on a small scale
with very little expenditure of resources for materials
in order to test the principles.

The monitored current flow through the cell should be
at all times less than 100 miliAmperes. Once 'tuned'
for peak bubbling the current flow may be reduced
to a very small value. Trial and error will demonstrate
the optimal magnitudes. Brute Force must be avoided.

Then, once the techniques are mastered, the cell may
be scaled up and enlarged for greater gas production.
Further experimentation will be required in order to
'tune' the larger cell with multiple plates.

There is no need to resort to the series plate configuration.
Parallel plates at low voltage is much simpler to fabricate and
much easier to maintain.

On the subject of dielectric breakdown - there is an application
in medicine which makes use of that phenomenon.
The Lithotripter is a remarkable device.

- - - - - - - - -

It seems the "Vancouver Gadgeteers" have re-discovered
the Low Voltage (AC Electrolysis) process that Stan Meyer
attempted to exploit. And they are attempting to exploit
it as well by 'selling' the details they are willing to disclose.

Shameful.

Press onward experimenters! You will find it as well!

[eclipsed78]

Hi SeaMonkey,

Quote SeaMonkey

The process of applying low voltage pulses to
a simply fabricated test cell is very simple and
straightforward. There is no requirement for any
special cell configuration. Two metal electrodes
immersed in a basic electrolyte solution are all
that is needed to perform the experiments and
to collect ones own data to build upon.

A variable low voltage power supply of about
2 Volts in conjunction with a pulsing circuit to
develop sharp and very brief pulses superimposed
upon the low voltage cell 'bias' will be needed.

A simplified and scaled down version of the Boyce
PWM-3 device would be very useful. You'll want
to be able to produce pulses over the frequency
range of about 4KHz to 45KHz. The value of the
Boyce approach is that his unit is capable of
generating 3 independent frequencies simultaneously
in variable amplitude and pulse width.

There is no need to purchase a Boyce PWM-3 unit;
create your own by improvisation.

The experimentation should be done on a small scale
with very little expenditure of resources for materials
in order to test the principles.

The monitored current flow through the cell should be
at all times less than 100 miliAmperes. Once 'tuned'
for peak bubbling the current flow may be reduced
to a very small value. Trial and error will demonstrate
the optimal magnitudes. Brute Force must be avoided.

Then, once the techniques are mastered, the cell may
be scaled up and enlarged for greater gas production.
Further experimentation will be required in order to
'tune' the larger cell with multiple plates.

There is no need to resort to the series plate configuration.
Parallel plates at low voltage is much simpler to fabricate and
much easier to maintain.

End quote

This sounds like an experiment that you could do and post the results.....have you done this experiment.....maybe you could show the results with proof.....eg. total watts vs total potential chemical energy...or simply do what stan did, run a car down the road with it.....

by the way, I have already had LCR meter measurements done on tap water and DI water (no electrolyte) using different voltage levels at the same frequencies.....different voltage levels do not change the DF of the cell at the same frequencies.....Im not sure if the electrolyte will decrease the DF though....although, it probably will increase the DF due to electrolyte is ment to increase the conductivity of the solution...

here is the post with the data:

Capacitance vs Voltage
http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=742&sid=bb60e9d0ffc05663d141c7ee86d81747

which points to

SS304 SBLSC Cell LCR meter measurements and graphs
http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=3392#3392


Quote SeaMonkey

It seems the "Vancouver Gadgeteers" have re-discovered
the Low Voltage (AC Electrolysis) process that Stan Meyer
attempted to exploit. And they are attempting to exploit
it as well by 'selling' the details they are willing to disclose.

End quote

I think that you would like to link the water fuel cell to electrolysis.....but Im my opinion, Stanley Meyer's WFC tech is nothing like electrolysis, first no electrolyte is needed and I think it would work better with pure water...... second it requires tuned resonant circuits......the fact is, I do not believe stan knew or could prove where the energy was coming from...as this would be very hard to prove due to the exact nature of the possibilities where the energy could be coming from...but the energy definity was not from the water, and it definitly was not electrolysis, becuase energy can not be created nor destroyed.....it simply requires understanding that there may be a possibility to convert a source of energy that normally is unusable into something usable...

Here is something that may shed some light on where the energy may be coming from:

The source charge problem...
http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=500&sid=25f8f0c97ad109d2701b309a75184e33

Quote SeaMonkey

On the subject of dielectric breakdown - there is an application
in medicine which makes use of that phenomenon.
The Lithotripter is a remarkable device.

End Quote

I think that a step up or step down transformer alone will not produce more potential chemical energy vs the amount of watts used......Although, I might be wrong, as Im not a electronics expert nor am I even close....