Error in Stans Gas production
Started by unknown · · 68 posts · last reply 30 October 2012
-
#1 · date not recorded
I have been meaning to put this down,but keep forgetting with everything else going on.
Warp pointed this out a while back and I felt the same way and suggested a simple test.
Stan states that he was producing 7 psi a minute.And that for every one psi he gets one litre of gas in a one litre cavity space.
Wrong!!!
My friend and I did a test.We pressurized a one litre cavity to 15 psi,knowing that atmoshere pressure is 14.7.Then the pressurized one litre cavity was released into an inverted bottle water test.
It only filled the bottle once exactly.
So to make one litre a minute with a cavity of one litre volume,you will need to pressurize it to 14.5 psi.
So what does this mean?
Stan's demo cell was only producing @ 500 cc per minute!!!
This changes alot! But it still works out better than faraday,but not by much.We calculated 104% efficientcy.
Don -
#2 · date not recorded
Well I am gonna say this again , the only thing keeping this research alive for me is the fact that xogen seems to be doing it without any special ceramic , otherwise I would be tempted to believe that Meyers was somekind of Band-aid for the Puharich method . Now once I get absolute confirmation that xogen does it , I will be much more releaved . Who is Stephen Chambers , was he a relative of Meyers or an business partner ?
xogen.ca
I will refer to the discussion on waterfuelcell.org
http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1477&start=15
-
#3 · date not recorded
Hi Dankie,
My understanding is that Stephen Chambers is Stan and Stephen Meyer's brother-in-law. I can't cite an exact reference but I seem to have read it somewhere.
Dynodon, what you report has been confirmed by others. There are other problems in the Technical Brief as well like omitting the neutron in doing calculations with atomic weights. The neutron is relevant.
Regards,
Andy -
#4 · date not recorded
Hi Dankie,
My understanding is that Stephen Chambers is Stan and Stephen Meyer's brother-in-law. I can't cite an exact reference but I seem to have read it somewhere.
Dynodon, what you report has been confirmed by others. There are other problems in the Technical Brief as well like omitting the neutron in doing calculations with atomic weights. The neutron is relevant.
Regards,
Andy
Yes I also heard that , from forums and unofficial sources .
It would be an coincidence that both are unrelated .
From the Interview he made , he seems to has been too or lived in or is living in Canada . -
#5 · date not recorded
i think where stan really shows effeciency is when he combines a ressonant water cavity with a electrical particle generator... using the expanding gas to drive a turbine that drives a magnetic gas that drives the cell... a system like this stan claims runs until it runs out of fuel (water)... and u dont have to burn your fuel to produce the gas... -
#6 · date not recorded
icould see being off a few a few hundred cc but a few liter is hard to mistake the error are so significant stan had to know he was not being truthfull -
#7 · date not recorded
Psi is pounds per square inch that is different from BArs or atmospheres. If in one minute a space of 1 liter is compressed to 10 bar(145psi) you will have produced 9 liters of gas in one minute. Because the space was not in vacuum.
psi x 0.068948 = bar; 1 Psi = 0,06 bar
bar x 14.50368 = psi. 1 bar = 14,5 psi
-
#8 · date not recorded
I have been meaning to put this down,but keep forgetting with everything else going on.
Warp pointed this out a while back and I felt the same way and suggested a simple test.
Stan states that he was producing 7 psi a minute.And that for every one psi he gets one litre of gas in a one litre cavity space.
Wrong!!!
My friend and I did a test.We pressurized a one litre cavity to 15 psi,knowing that atmoshere pressure is 14.7.Then the pressurized one litre cavity was released into an inverted bottle water test.
It only filled the bottle once exactly.
So to make one litre a minute with a cavity of one litre volume,you will need to pressurize it to 14.5 psi.
So what does this mean?
Stan's demo cell was only producing @ 500 cc per minute!!!
This changes alot! But it still works out better than faraday,but not by much.We calculated 104% efficientcy.
Don
I don't recall where Stan said this(I'm not saying he didn't, I just don't remember where I heard or seen it). Was it on one of the videos or tech brief or ...
Was it clearly stated that the cell was completely sealed while producing that amount of gas, or was that while supplying gas?
-
#9 · date not recorded
I also never saw such statement. -
#10 · date not recorded
icould see being off a few a few hundred cc but a few liter is hard to mistake the error are so significant stan had to know he was not being truthfull
True , who made that report ?
Before I even continue wasting my time , I must know who is Stephen Chambers .
I cannot believe Stan was a fraud , if he was they did a better job with him than with 9/11 .
Dynodon , do you know people who witnessed the dead inanimate body of Stan Meyers @ his funeral ?
-
#11 · date not recorded
The gas measurements are taken from the internation independant evaluation report.Stan never said them in a video.
As for anyone seeing Stan at the funeral,Iv'e never looked into that.I'm pretty sure he is dead.
Don -
#12 ·
@Dynodon
I bet it would be popular if you made a video of the demo tube cell, with the alternator setup, and showed us how much gas it produces at maximum..
-
#13 ·
I thnk its safe to say that that the alternator will not work , it is basicly a regular non-modified alternator .
The 3 phase alternator setup has been tampered with .
I am now more interrested in confirming if Stephen is legit before I continue any further .
If he is than I will put aside all of Stan's previous designs as purely experimental work , as he said in the interview .
-
#14 · date not recorded
waytogo,the original alternator is not there.We're investigating that right now.It looks like one of the previous owners dammaged it and sent it to a repair shop,and got a stock rebuild back.Still following up on that story to confirm.If we can find the build specs,we'll make a new one,for demo-ing.We found pictures that will help,but need further detalis.Sorry can't post those pics.And there was two different boards for the alternator,not sure which one was used for the tube cell.
Don -
#15 · date not recorded
Dynodon is correct.
I did that same test, one liter cavity 7 PSI a minute = to about 0.5 LPM.
also you can re-view Stan's Videos showing the tube cell with a PSI meter, you can see the rate as the needle moves up, it does match 7 PSI a minute. His gauge is a PSI gauge not BAR.
Bottom line: Stan lied.
-
#16 · date not recorded
Its not looking good .
What I wanna know now is if theres an ounce of truth to special electrolysis without that Puharich ceramic .
And Who is Stephen Chambers .
Also , did that EPG work ? That would at least confirm his genius .
-
#17 · date not recorded
@Dynodon
Ok.. thank you for the answer. Stan could had used the alternator/redi-line generator as we today use a effective power inverter. You can drive a small car engine on HHO until the batteries is powerless. There is a big room for the batteryes in front of that buggy..
I am now working on my big cell, four gallon (ca.15 liter) water with 12 tubes 18 inches tall and will publish test data if it does perform well.
@electrojolt
Stan could had fooled himself... and then us...
-
#18 · date not recorded
QuoteMy friend and I did a test.We pressurized a one litre cavity to 15 psi,knowing that atmoshere pressure is 14.7.Then the pressurized one litre cavity was released into an inverted bottle water test.
It only filled the bottle once exactly.
So to make one litre a minute with a cavity of one litre volume,you will need to pressurize it to 14.5 psi.
So what does this mean?
Stan's demo cell was only producing @ 500 cc per minute!!!
dynodon i feel u may have the wrong perspective with this... u have to reach 15 psi to be able to reach the point to release a liter of gas into another container,, the 2 are balance capacitance between each other... when u release the gas and only filled the bottle once with 14 psi are u saying that there isnt another 7 pounds still left in the cell?..... the liter container u expel the gas into is it sealed or no? -
#19 · date not recorded
My friend and I did a test.We pressurized a one litre cavity to 15 psi,knowing that atmoshere pressure is 14.7.Then the pressurized one litre cavity was released into an inverted bottle water test.
I don't exactly know what you are saying.
It only filled the bottle once exactly.
So to make one litre a minute with a cavity of one litre volume,you will need to pressurize it to 14.5 psi.
So what does this mean?
Stan's demo cell was only producing @ 500 cc per minute!!!
You know that 14.7 psi is 1 atmosphere, if there was air in the cavity or something other than vacuum it had this 1 atm of pressure, so you pressurized it to 15 psi, a difference of roughly 0.3psi? This 0.3psi difference gave you 500cm³ with a bottle test?
so how do you know that stan's cell did produce 500cm³ / minute from that? also the bottle test equally distributes pressure between your bottle and the cavity and is not a very accurate way of measuring the volume of gas.
as you know from the gas equation p1*v1 = p2*v2. so if you have greater volume available (cavity + bottle) the pressure will sink, but how do you want to know how much gas you produced from this method?
or did you pressure it from 1 atm to 2 atm (14.7psi+15psi)? -
#20 · date not recorded
No,your not looking at this right.When you pressurize the 1 litre cavity above the water in the test cell to 14.7 psi,then release it into another 1 litre bottle,both bottles will be at zero pressure.If you have any pressure left,it will balance out between the two.Then that means you have more than 1 litre in each bottle.
When you start out with the air cavity space above the water,it is at 1 atmosphere.When you pressurize that cavity to 14.7 psi,now your at two atmospheres.Then when you release that pressure into another 1 litre cavity,you end up with 1 atmosphere in each bottle.
0 psi on a pressure gauge is equal to 1 atmosphere.
If you make 1 litre a minute, than that is equal to 1 atmosphere of pressure or 14.7 psi,in a 1 litre cavity.
Hope this helps
Don -
#21 · date not recorded
No,your not looking at this right.When you pressurize the 1 litre cavity above the water in the test cell to 14.7 psi,then release it into another 1 litre bottle,both bottles will be at zero pressure.If you have any pressure left,it will balance out between the two.Then that means you have more than 1 litre in each bottle.
yes indeed, thanks.
When you start out with the air cavity space above the water,it is at 1 atmosphere.When you pressurize that cavity to 14.7 psi,now your at two atmospheres.Then when you release that pressure into another 1 litre cavity,you end up with 1 atmosphere in each bottle.
0 psi on a pressure gauge is equal to 1 atmosphere.
If you make 1 litre a minute, than that is equal to 1 atmosphere of pressure or 14.7 psi,in a 1 litre cavity.
Hope this helps
Don -
#22 · date not recorded
I did this test with my cell months ago.
Cavity = 205.8 Cubic Centimeters (NOTE: I did not include the volume inside the pipes above the cell, because this volume is not accounted for the measurements will not be exact, but close enough for me at this stage of the game)
Salt Water: 5 psi in 16 seconds
Tap Water: 5 psi in 81 seconds
Rain Water: 5 psi in 113 seconds
5 psi @ 205.8 cc Cavity = 115 cc of gas produced
Salt Water = 431 cc/min
Tap Water = 85 cc/min
Rain Water = 61 cc/min
All tests performed with 10 volts on the Variac, no other electrical measurements taken.
This is with Four 3" Tubes and a Deregulated Delco Remy Alternator.
To those who have not done this test... DO IT!
If you do this test you will understand.
Everything starts with 1 atm = 14.7 psi = 0 psi on the gage
I only went to 5 psi because that's how high my gage goes.
I discharged the gas (while the cell contained 5 psi and production was off) into an inverted container, and measured the volume.
I lifted the inverted container *slightly* so it sucked water up just above the water line in the bucket. This ensures that the inverted container is not maintaining a positive pressure when I take the volume measurement.
I only performed this test once, and I don't know anything about the mineral content in any of the waters tested. So the results are mostly qualitative and minimally quantitative.
-
#23 · date not recorded
A few things I want confirmed .
1- Is is true that he screamed out of a restaurant had been poisoned and then his dead inanimate body was seen in a casket .
2- Is it true he received multi-million dollar funding and was about to build a research center . Nobody willing to spend a few million would risk that much without knowing for sure , no sense at all . -
#24 · date not recorded
isnt the rumor that he run out of the diner screaming the same day he signed that multi million dollar contract -
#25 · date not recorded
Well I dont know , its all internet rumors from 15 year old thing . I dont believe anything from google regarding this .
Wsnt he dinning with NATO troops ? I dont think NATO would have financed that ...
If he really died that would be good ... Sorry Stan ...
In the event of Stan s death , what would of happened with that money anyways ?
Here is a report , it seems like he did die and vomitted in a parking lot ... I would like to see that official certificate of death or get this confirmed by a witness .
I would be strange if he was never exumed and never had a burial for a christian ...
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg14099.html