Hydrogen gas gun
Started by unknown · · 34 posts · last reply 9 June 2012
-
#1 · date not recorded
I'm gathering up some equipment to process Hho in varies ways. I've been having a problem finding out what LEDs Stan was using in the gas gun. Does anyone know what the wavelength was? Or The wavelength absorbed by oxygen?
-
#2 · date not recorded
-
#3 · date not recorded
Thanks Steve, I just read through the thread.
Can you give me a further description of your results? -
#4 · date not recorded
I talked to my roommates chem professor today. Apparently 200nm to 240nm is what is absorbed by oxygen. Now the problem with that is I have no idea where to find something like that. Does anyone have any ideas? -
#5 · date not recorded
I talked to my roommates chem professor today. Apparently 200nm to 240nm is what is absorbed by oxygen. Now the problem with that is I have no idea where to find something like that. Does anyone have any ideas?
It was nice to play with, but non indication of any change in gas behaviour.
Try this one
http://www.maxmax.com/aflash254uv4watt.htm
-
#6 · date not recorded
Awesome! Thanks Steve, that really close -
#7 · date not recorded
Well, it looks like 253 is probably at the end of the curve which means it won't work well if at all. But I'll take into it further to make sure. What we really need is a Deuterium light bulb -
#8 · date not recorded
Just understand that the range is much wider then just the 253 nm with such devices.
They just peak at 253 nm..... -
#9 · date not recorded
If 253 is the peak that means all other values are of a lower frequency and higher wavelength. Is that right?
Or do you think it is capable of higher frequency as well? -
#10 · date not recorded
I've looked into it and it looks like that uv light can produce ozone so it seems like the best thing to go with. Thanks again Steve.
Another thing thats been on my mind is the parts that Stan used to build the gas gun. It looks like he used tubes similar to his cells but with slots cut in for the light. The problem i see here is that ionizers like sharp points such as nail tips or pins. Do you guys thinks stans inner electrode was something like this? Sharp points or many sharp points? -
#11 · date not recorded
Hi Dave,
Well, thats one of the things that is odd about Meyers design.
About the source for the 250 waves, well, that depends on the source. Some have a wide frequency ange from below 200nm till whatever.
For sure, Stans patents and pictures show nothing usable, except for the idea it self. Red LEDS doing what? Much to low on power to be able to do something usefull!
Tubes doing ionizing air? In which century?
Google on ionizers and you find what you need...
-
#12 · date not recorded
Didn't Stan use some kind of lens to "cohere" the diffused light of the high powered 5V LED's? He would often use the term "Laser" signifying a focused beam or something along those lines. -
#13 ·
Bubz, I've read about Stans lens. I don't think a lens would really do anything special. I mean it would just concentrate the light to a point? not increase the frequency. -
#14 ·
Steve I agree with you, the theory seems possible but Stans built seems to have a lot of flaws. The only positive thing about using a tube instead of a point is extracting electrons with the EEC. Would it not be easier with a bigger surface? I don't know?
I pretty much have all the parts laying around for how I want to build the gas gun, except for the photon energy. I'm not going to follow Stan's design but focus on how I think it should be built using Stan's theory. I have also redesigned the circuit so the EEC is much simplier. I'm in school for two more weeks but after that I'll start a thread in my project section. -
#15 ·
Dave,
How are you going to test what you gonna build?
How does your ideal test setup look like?
Steve -
#16 · date not recorded
Well I'm still working on that. So far I came up with this.
I'll start with 2" clear tube ( not sure how long yet) this tube will be at the center and house the lights. Next I'll use a 4" glass tube with the clear tube placed inside it. The 4" glass tube will have foil wrapped aroundthe out side for the ground. Now the positive electrode is placed between the inner clear tube and the outer glass tube. I haven't decided how I'm going to make that yet. I was thinking of using a a strip of nail some how. Or a bunch of nails or puns soldered onto a bar.
The positive potential will be suppled by a tv flyback transformer. I'll be pulsing a dpst relay to power the transformer. When the relay switches the transformer off it will switch on the extraction circuit.
Hopefully I explained everything so you can understand, it's not one of my strong points haha
What do you guys think? Any input is welcome -
#17 · date not recorded
Well I'm still working on that. So far I came up with this.
If you are going to use a UV light source the glass will need to be quartz or some other material that will not filter UV.
I'll start with 2" clear tube ( not sure how long yet) this tube will be at the center and house the lights. -
#18 · date not recorded
Thanks, I didn't think about that. I was planning on using acrylic for the inner tube but I could use the case the light comes in If I us uv which I probaly will -
#19 ·
Well it looks like a quartz tube won't be to hard to get a hold of so I'll go with that.
I forgot to mention but I'm sure you guys got it without me telling you. The gass I'm trying to ionize is between the inner and outer tube in contact with the positive electrode -
#20 ·
Dave,
Again, how are you gonna test the effect of the setup?
Steve -
#21 · date not recorded
Sorry I guess I misunderstood, I'll test the gas by displacement. Did you see Russ Gries's burn rate testing?. I plan on using a similar setup. If it works I'll try to test heat as well.
-
#22 ·
Ok.
How about the possible reaction of electrons with the metal of an engine?
How about the re-combination time of h and o ?
I mean, listening to a bang is not very specific and takes time, etc.
If you understand what i mean.
If you want to run an engine with help of an ionizer, i think you should first run an engine without one.
Steve -
#23 · date not recorded
There would be a lot of things to do before running an engine with the ionized gas if I can produce it. First I need to test how powerful the gas is by displacement, not listening to the bang. Also, I'm going to have to test how much ambient air I need to mix in to produce a responsible temp.
But yes, I'll be testing with just hho in the engine to learn what I can.
As far as the effect of these ions on the engine. I don't really know. I think its important to burn the ionized gas before it starts to lose the light energy it has picked up. I don't know how long positive ions will last in an engine.
I ordered a quartz tube and I am thinking about using a bulb designed to kill algae in pools and ponds. I'm also thinking about trying xenon bulbs. -
#24 ·
Hi dave,
I didnt want to play the bad guy here. I just wanted to push you in the right direction.
The other reason for testing an ionizer on an engine is the vacuum thats produced and in which the ionizing proces works better.
In my tests without the engine running, i didn't see any improvements.
But maybe your proces is a better one
So, go on! Looking forward to read more of you in this matter.
Steve -
#25 ·
Hi Steve,
whenever you feel the need to play the bad guy, go ahead and do it
I'm here to learn and get advice. And of course help with what I can.
Your a very knowledgeable guy and i value your input!
The vacuum seems to have more than one benefit.
1) better ionization!
2) less chance of explosion!
3) Hho going from pressure to vacuum increases kinetic energy!
So, this is getting more complex haha, I'll put it under vacuum using an old compressor from something
I just picked up xenon and another uv light for testing