Have you heard about the used oil furnace from 1950's that ran
on water? Patent was issued to army service men in Texas THAT SAID, adding the initial
water line to T fitting for used oil burner on used jeep engine oil, to get 50%
increase in efficiency.
That was NOT, what was written in their application for
Patent. SS coil tubing in brick highly insulated firepot of oil burner hooked to input
common water line. Oil furnace started. Temperature gauge monitored for temp up to
1500 degrees F. Then valve opened so as superheated ONLY steam is allowed in T fitting
with oil to tiny nozzle. Nice burn flame runs constant. Then oil line was quickly shut
off. Furnace still runs.
Shock wave from 90 lbs pressure to zero AMBIENT in
fire-pot forms Hydrogen and Oxygen torch flame that also heats heat ex changer.
Normally water molecules separate at about 3000-6000 degrees which is too much energy.
The vibration shock wave allows for disassociation at lower temperature. Electric
motor with dual shafts ran 2 oil pumps at 90lbs. If input water shut off, and cooled
down, then furnace has to be restarted on oil.
A much smaller unit in crate was
shown to a US senator in Washington building underground parking, as an open trunk
display. This was somewhat similar to the propane operated camping stove with circular
pores, vertical round fire brick insulated chimney, and interior SS tubing of initial
water. When steam introduced to T fitting, the fuel used was shut down leaving burning
circular torch flames. It probably used minerals free distilled water so as nozzle
would not clog.
(US Patent office not allow for over unity for public.- Free
Energy is eliminated in issued US Patents. US- 1958,
Jackson USP 2,863,499 - Fuel Burners. The water furnace did not have water or
steam mixed with fuel oil. The heat ex-changer in brick highly insulated fire pot, was
brought up to =/> 1500 degrees F. Oil removed when steam valve was opened. This was a
new science phenomena when the shock wave broke up the H20 molecule at the unusual
lowered temperature. Read paragraph again. The US Patent issued was NOT what was asked
for in the complete application manuscript in 1950. Patent said steam mixed with fuel
oil.
Oil Furnace Ran On Water In 1950
Toby! In a past post you mentioned Stanley Meyers, HHO production in his engines!
When you read this doc. and go to summary at bottom you will see how it was done.
In a cylinder (under compression) high temperature and pressure with water present is
easily split via the ultra high voltage spark discharge which provides the "Z pinch"
ultra high gauss" magnetic flux as demonstrated by Peter Graneau and duplicated my
many researchers. Peter Graneau calculated that an "over pressure" is created of over
400,000PSI.
I have spent some time studying the decomposition of water in
intense magnetic fields. The magnetic flux needed is easily achieved via the
capacitive discharge and "Z pinch" effect. A 100 Tesla pulse is simple to produce!
The "T-crit / "P-crit" of water is around 703 degrees F. and pressure of around 3000
PSI.
Think about this a little!
Direct Thermomagnetic Splitting of Water - Norman Wootan
Hi Hermes,
The link to "hydrogen.pdf" on your site doesn't work. I thus can't read what Wootan
said.
However, bear in mind that a MRI machine runs at around 1-2 Tesla
magnetic field, and that you are cautioned to remove all magnetic items before going
close. Making 100 Tesla is _not_ easy, and is quite dangerous if you don't get the
conditions correct. Calculate the current needed yourself and how you would achieve it.
If however you manage to achieve the conditions specified, you'll find that
the mechanical energy you get out is somewhat less than the electrical energy you have
to put in. Though the "water explosion" is useful since it can produce very high
explosive pressures a lot more cheaply and easily than C4 (and has thus been used for
explosive forming of things like denture plates) it's not OU. For Graneau, there's
maybe some slight energy excess left over by the change in the lengths of the Hydrogen
bonds in the droplets of the fog, though whether that is enough to counter the energy
you need to put in to produce that much more surface area in the fog is a moot point.
At some specific range of fog size it might be actually gainful, but I haven't worked
that out. The gain won't be worthwhile having, though, since you'll be outputting a
load of fog and this will need sunlight to dissipate it.
You can achieve a pretty high pressure with popping water even without the other
conditions, but you'll need to fill the cylinder entirely with water to get the high
pressure and it will likely blow up the motor in the process unless you've built a
really strong one. Try it if you want to, but take precautions such as using a
remote-control and setting up in a disused quarry. Graneau basically had an open-top,
and the dental-forming systems were very heavily built. However, it isn't OU.
Where would the extra energy come from?
Water-as-fuel has been proposed many times. No-one has actually managed it in that way,
though of course if you want to extract the Deuterium from a glass of water and fuse
it to Helium you can get energy produced from that. The problem though is that at the
moment the reactor consumes more energy than it generates, so you need to plug it in
to a power source to run it. Stan Meyer fooled people with his dune buggy and actually
used a normal fuel rather than water. Russ Gries did an excellent replication of
Meyer's kit and it just didn't work. HHO is useful, but also not overunity.
Ask George Wiseman, who is a real expert on that.
Best regards, Simon
Stanley Meyer - Stephen Barrie Chambers
The Stanley Meyer Patented hydrogen generator cell was the best method for generating
usable hydrogen gas fuel from plain water ever invented. Efficiency % was in the
thousands. (that means overunity) The several Patents have run out and are in public
domain. This means you can study/ build cells. Don't listen to naysayers. Read/study
the tech data for yourself. (no electrolysis at all) Small units for use or for blast
furnaces of industry. There were 3 levels of this. Books - Birth of new technology +
water fuel cell company manual. See what others have done as bench tested. A coined
common expression had been given for this as -- Voltrolysis. Go!
Stan Meyer's
helper technician Chambers fled to Canada and started his own company called Xogen and
filed Patent for his version , since he knew about previous work. The small unit
written up as construction manual was called HYDROSTAR. He had purposely left out the
pertinent details about the coil flyback high volts generated in both Patent and the
released manual.I have the original paper printed manual. Ebay sells disc for this,
but no details on high volts. Most Patents don't divulge exact every small detail
required , except for the Horvath Patents.
Others have requested, in the past,
on how the original Hydrostar Hydrogen Generator had the pulses divided down to get
20Htz from 20,000 htz main oscillator. That was for going to the toroid coil for
magnetic field pulses into the rising ions of solution. The IC CD4059AE can be used
for that, as well as a divider for 1000 cycles down to 1 per second, for a flashing
LED, so as verification that the main oscillator is in working state for your other
circuits. Ic available on Internet Ebay. The full manual is available on disc. The
ferrite toroid core wire coil is too much trouble to make, but can be purchased
completed, or a 2 piece ferrite UU core set could be used, so as getting a closed flux
core, and WAY easier wire winding. The Hydrostar circuit was an offshute of the Meyer
resonance cell by Chambers . He used to work as tech engineer for Meyer in Ohio. He
fled to Canada and filed Patent for HIS version of the circuit. The Patent omits
notation of flyback coil high voltage connected to the Main electrode pipes water
capacitance cell. He says the magnetic field circuit increases energy content of fuel
gases emitted, by spinning the ions in different direction. Hydrostar was purposely
then JUST A MODIFIED circuit to only increase car gasoline mileage by introducing
Hydrogen and oxygen for about 25% increase in gas mileage.
The divider IC
circuit itself does work. I use it to verify my Dr. Clark Zapper has the oscillator
working as led flash per second from 1000 cycles.
- russwr
Hi Simon,
What do you think about hydrogen ion trapped nitrogen?
http://www.rexresearch.com/hyfuel/garrett/garrett.htm
http://gratisenergi.se/carl_cella.pdf
Best Wishes, Hermes
P.S for
more water fuel, see:
http://gratisenergi.se/hhowater.htm
Hi Hermes,
The only mention of Nitrogen is at the end of the
Carl Cella file, with no details. Note that a compound of H N and O is HNO3, or Nitric
acid.
There are various claims for HHO being able to produce more energy when
burnt than it takes to produce it. Tests (from Mark Dansie, so I trust the accuracy)
show that isn't true - for thermodynamic reasons you'd need at least 3x the energy out
than in to allow the engine to work at all. When you add some HHO to the air supply,
though, running the electrolyser from a generator that's driven by the engine, you can
get around 10% savings on fuel - it still needs the hydrocarbon fuel, just a bit less
of it. Given the problems of Hydrogen embrittlement, might need to change the
materials the engine is made of, especially the poppet valves.
AFAIK no-one has
shown a water-powered car running without fraud being involved (that is, it won't run
and the "inventor" knows for sure it doesn't really work).
Of course, many
people have claimed to be able to run on water as a fuel. It might even be possible if
you could extract the Deuterium from the water and use nuclear fusion, since the
nuclear energy available would be significant and about 1 in 6000 Hydrogen atoms are
Deuterium. Unless you're doing that, it probably won't work.
Best regards,
Simon
Hi Simon,
I wish you a Happy New Year - 2025 and may you and I discover a
practical free energy method. Now I want to have your opinion about this Hydrogen
method.
https://www.h2innovativelab.com/the-science
Best Wishes, Hermes
Hi Hermes,
Happy New Year to you, too.
That explanation of how to
produce Hydrogen is definitely trying hard to keep secret exactly what they are doing.
Looks to be using some metal like Magnesium or Zinc to oxidise and thus deliver
Hydrogen with a fairly small additional electrical input. They are insistent that this
doesn't violate CoE, and since it doesn't appear to have any asymmetry in the
interactions I'd think they are right on this.
Thus the "galvanic metal" turns
into its oxide, and you get Hydrogen out, and the energy balance is maintained, though
this may end up cheaper than other methods of electrolysis. There is a problem with
the energy use in normal electrolysis, in that H and O are produced as atoms, and then
combine to H2 and O2 which produces heat, and this heat is unwanted and a waste of the
input energy. In fact wastes about 24% of the input energy.
So yep, if the
system runs cool it would indicate that they likely get around 1/3 more Hydrogen per
kWh than a standard electrolyser. To make a cycle you'd need to recycle the galvanic
metal oxide back to galvanic metal, which process probably uses Carbon and produces
CO2, but you're not supposed to notice that. That is where the hidden energy is put
into the process, and where the main energy to produce the Hydrogen comes from.
Net here is that it probably does what they say it does. Reminds me of another
three-electrode system for electrolysis where at the moment I can't remember the name
of the inventor. That one used scrap Iron as the other electrode, which is pretty
cheap, with the output being oxides of Iron that can be fed into a blast furnace to
recycle back to Iron. I think he had a patent, and this device probably infringes that
patent.
Main question therefore is whether you want to use Hydrogen as a fuel.
This might make Hydrogen a bit cheaper than the standard electrolysis method, though
it will still be cheaper to reform Methane if you can accept a small admixture of
Carbon Monoxide in the gas. Still ends up that it's going to be more expensive than
burning the Methane if you want heat, or using standard thermodynamics method to use
that heat if you want electricity. It remains that fuel-cells are only around 60%
efficient with the other 40% going into heat. OK if you want heat and electricity,
otherwise that heat is wasted. Personally, I don't see Hydrogen as being a cheap
option for anything - you'd choose it for other reasons than cost.
As regards a
practical Free Energy method, that's available now at a low level, since the various
"reactionless" thrusters will create energy if allowed to move fast enough. Thus you
need to develop the actual thrust available from the few mN currently shown to newtons
or more of thrust. Helpful if you can improve the thrust per watt, but it's actually
workable at the current thrust of around 50mN per watt. Might get a Casimir gap based
thruster needing no power. This class of systems obviously has an asymmetry between
action and reaction, thus violates CoM, and thus also allows violation of CoE. Looks
like there should be other ways to produce an asymmetry and thus violate CoE without
needing to first generate a thrust. Not so much therefore discovering a method to
produce Free Energy, but of figuring out how to make it economically and in
large-enough quantity to be useful.
Best regards, Simon
back to linkpage
suggestion
read and sign my guestbook
