Final Electrolyzer Notes:
Due to the design, I can run each cell as true series by lowering the water level to tube height, or raise the water level to about 30mm above the tubes but then loose efficiency. Current increases by 1A with 5 - 10 ºC more heat.
The best results in this raw unconditioned stage with very weak approx 2% NaOh electrolyte are:
0.5Lpm at 7A with12.22V across the 3 pack cells. temp about 60ºC.
Some trivia regarding the initial startup stage.
1. test @ 15:10
- 13.06 V
- 5 Amps
- 0.3 Lpm
- 32ºC
- voltage across cells was 4.28V 4.26V 4.26V
2. test @ 15:25
- 12.73 V
- 6 Amps
- 0.375 Lpm
- 38ºC
- voltage across cells was 4.25V 4.23V 4.23V
3. test @15:45
- 12.4 V
- 7 Amps
- 0.42 Lpm
- 48ºC
- voltage across cells was 4.15V 4.12V 4.13V
4. test @16:15
- 12.09 V
- 8 Amps
- 0.47 Lpm
- 65ºC
- voltage across cells was 4.04V 4.01V 4.02V
5.test @18:00
- 12.10 V
- 7.25Amps
- 0.45 Lpm
- 63ºC
- voltage across cells was 4.02V 4.04V 4.02V
Description of images uploaded below:
1. Just an overview of tubes washer/nut array and I tossed in the brake hone for good measure 
2. a screenshot of the cad design planning stages
3. The flame polished perspex top with bottom. Top is closest with standard 0.25 inch BSP hosetail compressor fitting thread for the gas outlet. Bottom has 2 grooves for the outer and inner SS tubes, while the top has only a groove for the outer tube.
4. cutting the inner spacer(prolly the lousiest job) which needs to be very accurate to prevent shorting inside the unit when its full of explosive gas 
The last pic of the spacer's shrink wrapped nuts was hopefully the last change/mod. I thought that perhaps there was too much current loss between the anode and cathode which might become a prob at higher electrolyte concentrations.
Very nice!
I have high hopes for your design. I like it a lot.
finishing touches
It failed the leak test....sigh
I guess my cutting skills on the perspex were more like a 3mm O-ring and not the 2mm ones that I bought.
Kinda disappointing but easily sorted out tomorrow.
Your design is awesome! It
Your design is awesome! It looks great! Can't wait to see how well it works,which from the looks of the design itself,should work splendidly.
I am curious though as to what kind of O-rings you are using? I'm building a Gen that's very similar in design (with the bottom and top caps like yours) and will be using Nitrile "Square" O-rings as opposed to "Round" O-rings. Square O-rings look like Piston Rings and are designed for butt mounting/sealing between two pressurized components. A round O-ring will just deform under pressure and leak if it was used in the same application.
There is a quick fix tho for your leaking problem and that is to use non reactive (O2 Sensor Safe) RTV Silicone if you can find it. Problem with RTV is if you need to take the unit apart it becomes a real pain in the butt to remove. The reason why it needs to be non-reactive is that regular Silicone will react with the electrolyte and it also out-gases and will Foul an O2 Sensor. I've been meaning to tell people who are using "Marine Goop" like in a smacks or Fossil Fuel Design to be aware of what it will do to their O2 Sensors down the road. Since a Gen is not subjected to the same amount of heat a an Engine Gasket surface,it may take a while,but it will Foul an O2 sensor at some point in time. What happens is the gases go thru the combustion chamber and when burned turns into a composite that coats the Pre-CAT O2 Sensors,causing them to send misinformation to the ECU/ECM,which in turn causes a DTC/Check engine light.
O rings
thanks for the kind comments.
Im using round nitrile o-rings, but now the 3mm thick ones. Previously the 2mm ones didnt seal the entire groove properly. Also I attempted to cut a 3mm deep groove which eventually ended up as closer to 5mm.
I was tempted to use some silicone sealant but I wanted to keep my options open for opening up for mods or what-have-you, so it wasnt really an option.
Anyhow all's well pressure test passed
On with the conditioning.
Milking Machine
It looks good, but for some odd reason, it reminds me of those milking clusters they stick on cow's udders...LOL
...I think there are four in a milking cluster though...maybe next version, eh?
re milking machine
Ha ha, you crack me up
I though it looked more like a hospital nebuliser or summin
I had to change the name just in case I got to a version 4, I would have gone with the ABC and then figured v4 would be a Tri-StoneD...not too clever with teenagers, they dont need any subliminal suggestions down that road.
Did I say...
...milking machine? What I meant was a Trident...ummm...yeah...that's the ticket...Pete's Trident:
Nice..
..recovery
It would seem that you have a large collection of clip art around
I'll stick with "newb" for the meantime, even though its not as easy to slap together as your one, so its probably not really "newb" per se.
So how is this project
So how is this project progressing? I'm really anxious to know as I'm building something very similar in design. I like the shrink wrap Idea on the spacer nuts too!
re project progress
Progress is good, finished with the cleansing period and it still needs 3 days conditioning time.
I've just bought some small rubber doorstops for feet while Im bench testing, and some rubber bolt caps for when its installed into the car.
Probably do the + power with the bolt caps too, or else the shrinkwrap again...just to be safe
This might mean that I will be needing a PWM
On another side I havent done an auto water fill because it doesnt use enough over a 2hr period to warrant it. Bearing in mind I drive for about 10min a day, max trip is 30min, then it doesnt seem worth the hassle....yet
Interesting. Do you mind if
Interesting. Do you mind if I ask what the height of your tubes and washer stacks are? I didn't see it in the specs.
re Do you mind
not at all.. the outside tube is 200mm, the neutral one is 125mm and the washer stack is 120mm high(3 sets of 20 washers)
mmm maybe I should put that info in there somewhere
Washer Spacing
I have seen greater effeciency (less amps & less heat) with less spacing between washers. I have gone from nuts to lock washers to shim washers. I am going to try zero spacers between washers today and see how that works out. I'm thinking it will take about 50 washers for a 3.5" (89 mm) stack. I'll let you know how it pans out.
EDIT (1:00 pm): I tried removing all spacers between washers and with 1.5 tblspoos/per gallon of Sodium Hydroxide as an electrolyte, the initial amp draw was low (about 5 amps) for a single cell @ 13.8 volts, but it heated up pretty quickly and blew a 30 amp fuse within 30 minutes. For some reason I don't understand yet the washer stack/tube configuration seems to prefer vinegar as an electrolyte.
re washer spacing
I rather optimistically thought I'd need the space for the bubbles to escape from between the washers.
I did see them slide out from between the washers, looking underneath, so I felt vindicated in a way.
I think by adding more washers you increase the producing surface closer to the tube, which quite possibly adds to greater current draw.
Maybe the vinegar isnt such a good conductor of current like naoh is, causing the naoh amp suck.
Of course you will get heat and current issues with 13.8V across a single cell, from what I understand anything above 2V will lead to problems.
This is why I started from scatch with 6 series cells, 7 would just not have fitted into the design.
Perhaps a PWM will be the order of the day if my tubes start sucking current like crazy once its in the car @ 13.8V
I'm sure you're right
From everything I've read, all cells using more than 2.2v will eventually go into a runaway amp draw situation regardless of which electrolyte is used or how concentrated it is. Of course, when the electrolyte is cooling, due to whatever reason, fast enough to balance out against the heating effects of electrolysis, we have reached the optimum combination of factors.
Personally, I subscribe to the Bob Boyce school of thought that says fewer volts and higher concentrations of electrolyte is the way to go for maximum production, but I haven't confirmed that for myself yet.
The thing I find odd about using vinegar as an electrolyte, is the videos I've seen of people with various electrolyzer configurations who get zero production when using vinegar, but decent production when using something else. I get fair production with vinegar and it never heats up too much or draws more than 15 amps even with a straight, "brute force", DC connection.
We definitely need more comprehensive data to understand exactly what is going on.
nice set up!! when do you
nice set up!!
when do you want me to bring my jeep over???? lol
I hope it works better than my hotsabi and smacks that I have in my cars
Semper Fi
ITA
You and me both, hoping that
You and me both, hoping that is, but thanks all the same
the cleaning took long so I guess conditioning will take about a week too.
After that its anybody's guess but so far its doing 600ml per minute, which is ok but I was expecting more at this stage.
hey peter how's the setup
hey peter
how's the setup going??
re the setup
A bit slower than I expected, lots of black flakes at the bottom which is the carbon leaching out of the SS tubes no doubt.
last nite was another flush n filter during the conditioning stage.I tested it at about 750ml flow and 6.34MMW with the cell hot and just a tad under 10A after 2hrs.
however I think that it is time to let it just chug along in the car till its finished its thing, so Im also conceptulising the installation at this time.
Have you had a chance to
Have you had a chance to test an individual cell by itself yet? I'm just curious...
yeah me too---
yeah me too---
Individual test
I would never even have thought of an individual test if you hadn't posed the question.
I would need a 4V supply, mmm tricky.
What did you have in mind?
The only other curiosity i had was knowing the voltage drops across the tube, so I slid a brazing rod down the inside while it was on, just to measure.
Across the pos washer stack and neutral inner tube was 3V and 1V from neutral to neg outer tube.
From this I deduced that the outer gap (neutral to neg tube) could have been larger. At the moment its 2.8mm for the inner gap and 3.6mm for the outer.
I was wondering if you had
I was wondering if you had tried to reach a target of .5 amp per square inch of electrode surface area for maximum MMW. I couldn't see the numbers very well, but it looks like you'll need to get up to about 50 amps before you hit peak MMW. That's one of the reasons I cut my tube down to just over three inches tall. I reach peak MMW at around 10 amps. My MMW efficiency drops off significantly both above and below that. I just thought it would be easier to test one of your cells individually to find your "sweet spot" for amps.
over target
I tested one tube and got 6.57MMW which is the highest I've had so far. This was at 0.52A in², however when I was running the full 3 tubes I regularly saw 9.9A which equates to 0.572A in².
I was just getting into my stride testing all 3 tubes individually when my 5V ATX power supply popped, so I guess it ends that line of testing.
My figures regarding max amps are based on the smallest area which is the inner surface of the inner tube at 111.57cm²
Sounds like you're on the
Sounds like you're on the right track. I'm not sure which surface area is the correct one to use or if we are supposed to use the total of all wetted surfaces. I have no reason to think you're anything but right. So much of this stuff just isn't clearly documented.
I guess you didn't get a chance to switch the polarity so the washer stack was the negative electrode (producing hydrogen)? I wonder how that might affect things.
For info
Bob Boyce on the hydroxy forum was the one with all the current per sq in figures. In a flat plate series cell you take the wetted area of one plate side seeing as the same current must travel through all the series plates, any other method will exceed the current density per plate with its consequences, heat, plate erosion etc.
It follows that in a tube design that you consider the wetted area of the smallest surface or risk excess current density again. Bob's rule of 0.5A per sq in equates to 0.0775A per sq cm, however I have seen folk on youtube using 0.1A for 304SS and 0.15A for 316SS.
On another note, once you have conditioned a cell its not wise to reverse the polarities, it apparently destroys the conditioning and means you have to start all over again, not something I want to risk.
Info regarding different electrode sizes
Heres an extract from the hydroxy forum, Bob's reply to a question regarding neg plates on the outside or inside of the Smack stack, and whether having a larger neg electrode would generate more h2 or not....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--- In Hydroxy@yahoogroups.com, bobboyceh2o wrote:
It does not matter one bit, as both electrodes play an EXACTLY EQUAL ROLE in the production of BOTH gases. You CAN NOT get any more or, any less, of either hydrogen, OR oxygen, by having more surface area for EITHER of the electrodes! In fact, if there is uneven surface area of either polarity electrode, it creates an ionic bottleneck that reduces efficiency of the entire system.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This would explain why my baby series cell hit 8.23MMW while this tube design is only at 6.53MMW
So, bearing this in mind perhaps the tube versions aren't the best way to go
Although it does look the dogs bollocks sitting there in the engine bay.
I know that Bob has achieved
I know that Bob has achieved nearly god like status in some peoples eyes. I have great respect for all the innovations and contributions he has made as well as his open source approach to this area of endeavor, but, I don't think when Bob renders his opinion it, by necessity, is the final discussion ending word on the matter. If I remember correctly, a certain fella by the name of Stanley Meyer had pretty good efficiency results with his little tube type design which does, by necessity, require electrodes with surface areas of unequal size. We shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water.
Holy Grail of Knowlwedge Not One Person
Nick_Stone
I am recently new to your forum and to this technology but I will have to agree with you ----everything is open for discussion/improvement and or corrections---no one man is omnipotent. I have built studied and practically lived this technology since my indoctrination three months ago which was sketchy at best. Web & forum surfing have been my guidelines in the absence of a “tech manual” to build/test experiment with Hydrogen On Demand units.
I plan on testing that hypothesis of different size electrodes making a difference as to hydroxyl production when weather permits—heat/humid takes toll on old bones.
Different size electrodes but lets not forget the part of the equation--- the elusive creature known as “resonance frequency”. I haven’t progressed as far as that but have most of electronic gear necessary if need be—got to dust the cob webs off the gear as well as my mind to use it! Thirty years is ancient when it comes to the world of electronic test gear. Come to think about it I haven't seen ANYONE that has replicated Bob's or Meyers devices on the other forums? There are about 3 main forums I monitor-OUPower.com; HHOINFO.com and mpgsolutions.org.
Empirical investigation with posted stats is the only way to post. YTube has fell short with my expectations due to lack of stats and a lot of hype.
The new pdf file suggested by Peter seems promising –but reserve any further comments until I have read it cover to cover.
Agreed
I do agree that everything is open to discussion and that no one person holds the "holy grail" so as to speak, but I do give Bob kudos for his pioneering work in this field, as well a "long service award"
I like to learn from others mistakes instead of making my own which is why I consider most of what Bob has to say regarding hydroxy. Most of these legends in the hydroxy field are way ahead of me in terms of design and build, so I dont want to be punting tubes as the way to go when they have an inherent design flaw. ( unequal surface area )
Tubes are easier to build than the resonant pulsing systems, but I dont want to give the impression that they're last word in gas generators. True, Stanley Meyer did use them and very well too, however there seem to be quite a few missing pieces of that puzzle, and until such time that the full picture becomes available I will most likely be biased in favor of flat plate versions.
Thats pretty much it for my waffle, cept that when I first heard of "browns gas" in 2005 the only folk around with sparse info were Eagle-Research, so leapfrog up to 2007 and whats on the scene nowdays is pretty much due to Bob and Chris@Oupower , well at least that's the path that I've traveled.
Consider this:
I certainly don't want to give anyone the impression that I am, in any way, belittling the value of the experience, knowledge or accomplishments of Bob Boyce or any of the other great pioneers. It's just that this area of investigation is so convoluted and dynamically interconnected that there is no way any one person or group of people could possibly fully comprehend the big picture.
This statement, for instance, assumes that tube style builds will always, inherently have electrodes with unequal surface areas, but that is not necessarily the case. By using a washer stack made with materials ranging from solid surfaces to perforated surfaces with up to 60% open area, one could construct a core electrode with a surface area that matches the surface area of the tube to a very high degree of precision. The only inherent design flaws exist because we haven't yet imagined the solutions.
I didn't take it that way,
I didn't take it that way, but I didn't want to give the impression of being starry eyed in a blindly following way.
I didn't think of your design, but rather my own with more than 1 tube, as I guess do most when confronted by the multi tube designs, like the joe cell, wouter cell etc.
I agree that with your design it would be very possible to design the center stack to match the tube exactly.
Sorry about that I guess I was on another page.
Construction techniques
Why did you opt for ss304 instead of 316L-that's what caused the excessive amount of brown particulates to accumulate maybe? Did you use a router or a compass saw to cut concentric groves in plexiglass? Variable power supplies are relative inexpensive and have a range of loads/voltages for testing cells-surplus supplies,etc,
re construction
The 304 is way cheaper down my side of the globe (South Africa) and the "L" versions arent easily found either
It seems as if everything is imported with prices in accordance with the prevailing currency rate ie x7 x9 x14.
I used a tank cutter with a modified bit in a hand brace to do the perspex, yep the hard way.
I documented the entire build here.. http://www.instructables.com/id/Hydroxy-Gas-Generator/
RE: I didn't take it that way...
That's cool because sometimes I'm just too blunt which comes off as being a jackass. My wife assures me of this on a regular basis. Oh well, that's the bane of internet forum conversations...It's far too easy to misconstrue the intent of peoples remarks without long winded explanations.
In any event, I'm glad we had this conversation because it forced me to perform some long overdue calculations. From that, I've discovered that I should only be using one 1.5" solid washer per inch of 2" ID tube or two 1.5" screen disks that are 50% open. The spacers either need to be made of non conductive material or properly insulated. My current configuration is WAY out of balance. I think the way you went about constructing your washer stack is a whole lot closer to the way it should be done.
I think I'll go with the two screen disks per inch. I think that would help with bubble overpotential.
Oh well, if I ever get to the point where I don't have to tinker with it any longer, I'm gonna be bored as hell, but I want to find the time to build one of your "baby cells" anyway...
tripple newb tube
Hey folks,
I found a site where the man claims that another person replicated Stan's machine.
It is 224 pages long, very detailed and wayyyy over my head.
If anyone is interested, I can see if I can relocate the link or send you a copy of what I found.
You may even find that I misread the papers.
My email is,
whizwheel@gmail.com
I am new to this forum and am not sure how to navigate it.
how to navigate it
Most of the Stan Meyer stuff goes over my interest level when they start about VIC (voltage intensifier circuit) and UV irradiation, about the only stage I felt comfortable with was the modified alternator part.
At the risk of being a Smart-Alec navigating this site is as easy as using a mouse and the eye, relax you cant delete anything.
However dont go posting your email addy around unless you want plenty of spam mail, theres bots created specially for that purpose.
Target LPM vs. Heat vs. LPM
Routing could be accomplished much easier IF you had access to a good bench/standing drill press that you could lower the speed of arbor to about 275 RPM. Alignment of cut by vertical/horizon plane accomplished at base of adjustment with machinist vise to hold plastic—cuts could be made with accuracy with a tolerance of -+.05mm with this arrangement.
You are aware of the heat/temp relationship as to the number of cells required to lower voltages down to 2 VDC per cell—hence simply solution add 3 more cells-problem solved! That should give you about an output of almost 1 LPM with the current configuration—ample enough for a 2.5 liter ICE---my experience as well as my thoughts.
Now locate this somewhere its exposed to air movement outside of engine compartment like in front of raditor or A/C condenser coil and you got a winner for small engine applications applications- as well as related bubblers, check valves and other gear for operational control.
Great ideal using brake cylinder hone to crosshatch inter of tube. I would use RTV sealant so as to not cause the O2 sensors any distress-Marine Goop has chemicals that change the voltages of O2 sensor despite use of anti-spark foulers that may be used with O 2 sensors.
Stan Meyer “resonance frequency”.
I am new to this forum and have researched mainly Stan Meyer's work, however I see it mentioned all too often that the tubes have different surface areas. If have read and noticed on the Ytube videos that Stan's tubes do have the same surface area. If you notice on his designs, the inner tube is slightly longer than the outer tube and the outer tube has a notch machined on the top. This is done (or so it is said) so that they may be tuned to the same “resonance frequency”, which is the key components to production.
re Stan's tubes
you are correct on both points, however Im sure you can appreciate the construction difficulties involved with my design if Ihad to make the outer tube 2cm shorter than the inner tube to compensate for area differences.
Tubes would be more suitable for a parallel design common bath, whereas series designs are more efficient, unless of course you do a Nick Stone design with a customised center washer stack and no neutral tubes, that would work too, as Nick has so ably shown with his newb tube.