Electrolysis optimization via arbitrary wave forms - open source project - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: systemsplanet
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 27, 2016, 08:44:26 pm
content: Saw this videohttps://youtu.be/YSmxliLwhT8and was considering building a rig that would generate random wave forms and apply them to the circuit shown in the video measuring the light bulb current until it finds optimum wave forms that split H2O with minimal power.I want to build, run, and feed the results into a software neural network that can suggest better waveforms than random.Once the waves are identified, I'd hire an engineer to build the cheapest circuit possible, and publish for everyone to copy.I'm a crusty software engineer (EE wannabee), so creating the software to generate the waveforms/and send to a function generator is not an issue.I have a Rigol DP832 PSU, MSO2072A scope.I have very limited electronics knowledge, other than basic stuff I learned in Physics classes and what I learned wiring my house for solar.I'm open to any suggestions and plan to open souce all my work.My questions are:- what programable waveform generator to buy under $2k. I just ordered this cheap unit based on a forum post:MHS-5225A High Precision Digital Dual-channel DDS Signal Generator Arbitrary waveform generator Frequency meter 200MSa/s 25MHz- is the current the best proxy for HHO output or should I buy an Hydrogen meter?- What parts should I order to build the circuit- any other suggestions? Has this been done before?- should I consider using an electron gun or light as part of the equation?

author: Codebird
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2016, 09:44:29 am
content: What exactly is this trying to achieve? It looks rather bizarre. The coil is just weird. The video says the cell is distilled water, but you can't split distilled water without a silly amount of voltage and the process is horribly inefficient. I also saw the name "Stanley Meyer" which immediately set of some warnings - he pushed some very dubious science. I'm not sure if it was intentional fraud or just wishful thinking, but he pushed some ideas that really did not agree with the laws of physics.Trying to fiddle with waveforms isn't going to work very well, as I can already tell you basic on simple physics what the ideal waveform is: Plain DC if you want to get the hydrogen and oxygen separately, or a low-frequency square wave (ie, just keep switching polarity) for the gas mix. A gas mix, I note, which I am not going to go anywhere near in quantities greater than 100ml. I've detonated that stuff in a balloon before, left me deaf for a short time.What do you want these for anyway? There's a lot of woo surrounding hydrogen/oxygen production in this manner, and magic-like properties attributed to the resulting gas. A lot of people believe that adding oxyhydrogen into an internal combustion engine will boost efficiency, but I tried to find research a while ago to support this claim and I got nothing - except a Popular Mechanics article with a very un-scientific tinkerer's study. Which showed it didn't work. I can't think of any uses for it other than insanely dangerous steampunk toys or recreational explosions. Everyone likes blowing stuff up.Word of warning: Are you using stainless steel electrodes? Good choice, but beware of chromium leeching. You can get some nastily toxic byproducts if things go wrong.

author: Echo88
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2016, 01:52:52 pm
content: I was actually interested in Free Energy when i was younger and came to the conclusion that no functioning device with overunity properties was ever shown,while thousands of people research such devices in their free time. I know the Stanley Meyer-device and thought about that too for a while and it seems logical that it could function, but thermodynamics forbids such dreams. And if this guy:http://jnaudin.free.fr/wfc/is not capable of achieving more than 100% efficiency with his prototype then i doubt that you will, fancy neural nets will do nothing about this. Spend your money and time on something worthwhile.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2016, 02:34:49 pm
content: the automated search sounds interesting.maybe a way to determine how much gas is generated is by using an optical setup to count the bubbles.dont be put off by people talking about so-called laws.these are being re-written almost daily since the discovery of nano-materials,they were all based on theory before anybody had the ability to actually test them.one thing i seem to remember bout what your doing,it's a pulsed waveform,in other words, a waveform gated by a second waveform.and it's high voltage, rather than high current.

author: Echo88
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2017, 03:29:01 pm
content: Name me one nanomaterial that broke thermodynamics. They allow for superconductors, metamaterials and better solar cells, but certainly not for miracles.Go build a Stargate with your nanomaterials and place one in the vicinity of the sun and one on earth, so we can power gargantuan Stirling-engines.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2017, 04:30:40 pm
content: nice try.go look at nano-filters that can seperate gasses from each other.

author: Kleinstein
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2017, 02:42:19 pm
content: The laws of thermodynamics are now about 150 years old. Not much was added in the last 100 years. Many people have tried to test them to the extremes - all have failed. They even include free energy - but this is Gibb's free energy as a fundamental concept in thermodynamics - not free in the sense of free beer.There are kind of nono scale filters to separate gases, but these still follow the laws of thermodynamics, as one needs to overcome the osmotic pressure and thus apply a lot of pressure.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2017, 04:19:44 pm
content: I need to tune my keyword filter: I thought a title like "electrolysis" would be about real electrochemistry, not con-artist "HHO gas" projects.Quote from: systemsplanetSo didn't Scott Brusaw, but it never stopped him!

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2017, 07:19:33 am
content: Stanley Meyer was a well known charlatan, his projects has been analysed by experts and the court found Meyer had committed "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered him to repay the two investors their $25,000.No way to make an electrolysis with over unity efficiency !http://touqeershaikh.weebly.com/uploads/1/4/1/7/14178384/faraday_laws_of_electrolysis.pdf

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2017, 09:06:39 pm
content: Could one get more heat from electrolysis than simply powering an electric element? Ex: you have an electrolysis system, which in itself produces heat because of the power dissipation, but then the hydrogen is also setup to be burned as it is produced, to produce more heat. You just need to keep feeding it water and electrolyte. Could that potentially create a heater that is more efficient than a standard electric heater? I can't see why not, but at the same time I feel that also violates the laws of physics.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2017, 11:31:00 pm
content: the laws of physics are miss-applied here.you arent converting energy, your releasing pre-stored energy.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2017, 12:39:01 am
content: Quote from: Red Squirrel on January 18, 2017, 09:06:39 pmThe electrolyte is not consumed in the process: it is only a catalyst to increase conductivity.The heat released by the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen to form water is exactly equal to the heat (energy) taken to form the hydrogen and oxygen. This isHess's Law. The heating of the water itself is above and in addition to the chemical energy required to split the water, because the voltage across the electrodes exceeds the reduction potential of 1.2V. Electrolysis is not exothermic! This water heating is not useful, because it just evaporates more moisture into the air—you wouldn't heat a house with a teakettle.You can burn the gases in a torch, which can reach a very hightemperature; but theheatreleased will be less than the electrical energy input (because of heating of the water and the electrodes).QuoteIt depends what you mean by efficient. It could create a higher temperature than an electric heater, simply because the resistance wire would melt before getting that hot. It cannot produce more heat per ampere than an electric heater, since the heat flux of both electrolysis and combustion together is zero.

author: systemsplanet
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 19, 2017, 07:22:54 am
content: Thank you all for your feedback!My purpose for electrolysis research is primarily for self sufficiency.What good is an efficient technology like Tesla Power Wallif you can't get the parts to fix it after a financial crisis?I have a solar array that runs a well pump, socan easily create hydrogen gas from well water.Gasoline and storage batteries go bad over time. Hydrogen stores forever.Hydrogen stored inside a metal hydride is less dangerous than gasoline.https://youtu.be/Ua8ajHhDZfUMost cars will run on pure hydrogen with minor modifications.As for pseudo science...I'm dumb enough to know that I canlearn something from the dumbest guy in the room,and dumb enough to believe Earth science is in its enfancy.Plutonium wasn't even discovered until 1940.The smart guy who helped formulate thefirst and second laws of thermodynamics, famously saidin 1895 that x-rays were a hoax, andin 1896 that "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible."I bet we don't own anti-gravity hoverboardsbecause scientists refuse to even investigate the latestperpetual motion machines, UFOs, or other "unclean topics"

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2017, 05:21:32 pm
content: Internet and you tube are full of pseudo-sciences (and pseudo-researchers) and Dave has already demonstrated that this forum is not the ideal place for this kind of fantasies.Comparing things that are not comparable is one of their favorite tactics.Comparing a situation of 1895 with that of today is intellectual dishonesty, if not imbecility.Yes, science will undoubtedly evolve still in certain areas (nuclear physics, medicine, electronics, computer science, ...) but the fundamental laws of physics and chemistry will no longer change, that is a certainty.No, hydrogen will not replace fossil fuels, because hydrogen must be produced and for that it requires energy.That's where the problem lies!Where to find this energy?If we succeeded in controlling nuclear fusion, the problem would be solved.But we are far from achieving this.So there is only one solution: drastically reducing our energy consumption.The automobile, as is currently conceived, is inefficiency in terms of energy.Interesting ideas can come out of the Shell Eco Marathon ...

author: Codebird
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2017, 08:58:45 am
content: There may yet be a niche for hydrogen. Not for producing energy via electro-magic, but just as an energy storage medium, if certain very difficult engineering problems can be solved.That said, what is the quickest way to end this ridiculous time-waster of a thread?

author: systemsplanet
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 20, 2017, 11:18:41 pm
content: Anyone who sees the value that electrolysis-to-produce-hydrogenbrings as one of the only ways ordinary people can be self-sufficient,produce and store their own energy, please comment on my approachor other things to consider that may makeelectrolysis / hydrogen storage more efficient.I want to limit the approach to using easily available/inexpensive materialsso the solution is available to the masses. I saw one report whereChicken feathers could be heated then used to store hydrogen.That sounds really cheap.https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.highlight/abstract/9002/report/FThis topic is not about free energy, or over unity, or physics, or futurepromising technologies. It's about practical self-reliance for the masses today.Anyone with a cheap solar panel can create hydrogen gasthat can be used to power cars, heat homes,cook, dry cloths, etc, for free ...as in don't spend another dime onfossil fuel, and don't pollute the environment.If you just want to be negative, feel free to start your own threadinstead of cluttering this one. If you continue to post negative commentsI'll ask the admin to remove your posts.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 03:21:40 am
content: you may find some interesting stuff like electrode materials here:http://jnaudin.free.fr/index.htm

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 08:41:44 am
content: Do not be surprised to have negative reactions with a topic like this on a serious forum and where there are many high-level participants.To illustrate your fantasy theory, you present a video about Stanley Meyer, a charlatan condemned by the justice ...Congratulations on your references!What will be your next topic? The earth is flat?Plague yourself with Dave if you want ..... If there is one thing Dave has never hesitated to do is to call a bullshit a bullshit.And your electrolysis optimization via arbitrary wave forms, it is bullshit.NB:QuoteSpeaking of complaint to administrators, threatening those who do not agree with your topic to have their answers removed is an unfair behavior that is not compatible with the netetic and the rules of this forum.For a new one on this forum who has only 3 posts, you should be less arrogant.

author: RIS
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 01:10:38 pm
content: Quote from: oldway on January 21, 2017, 08:41:44 am

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 02:47:52 pm
content: Faraday's Law: (electrolysis of water)165A (direct current) during one hour produces in a cell 100L Brown's gas (at air pressure) (Brown's gas = mixture of oxygen / hydrogen with 0.5 part oxygen to 1 part hydrogen)Efficiency of industrial electrolysis cells varies between 70 and 85%.Theorical's voltage difference of a cell with 100% output is 1,481V / cell.In practice, the voltage of industrial cells is between 1,7 and 2,1V.For hobbyist, difficult to achieve better than 2.5V / cell.Consumption of electrical energy is between 4 and 6 KWh / Nm3 of hydrogen.http://www.hydrogenics.com/hydrogen-products-solutions/industrial-hydrogen-generators-by-electrolysis/indoor-installation/hylyzer-1-or-2/http://angstromadvancedinc.com/Jtechnology.aspIndustrial Installations use DC ... and only DC ! No pulsating current BECAUSE IT DOES NOT WORK ... (it only produce the same amount of gas that the average DC value of the pulsating current would produce.)Some recommend in order to make an hobbyist electrolysis cell for HHO (Brown's gas) production:- Current per cm2: less than 0.1A / cm²- Electrolyte: distilled water with 15 to 25% KOH (NaOH is also useful but KOH s better)- Distance from the plates: the more near the better but that can cause problem with gaz output. Thus, better not less than 5mm- Plates: stainless steel.Multicell is better, with neutral plates.

author: Seekonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 04:13:07 pm
content: While HHO is hokum, some waveforms could possibly produce more gas and less heat for the energy put in. I remember a GE R&D publication in the late 70's with a micro small fast battery charger (at least for those days) that periodically reversed polarity on the battery to collapse bubbles. I think any HHO benefits more from steam generated than anything else. Water injection has been used since at least WWII as a performance enhancer. Trouble is it's water and water tank has to be half the size of the fuel tank.

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 05:05:06 pm
content: QuoteIt is absolutely impossible for two reasons:1) this fantasy of resonance of water molecules is a farce ... that does not exist.2) every electrolyser has an internal resistance: according to the Faraday law, the gas production is proportional to the number of electrons passing through the electrolyte, and therefore to the average current.The heat loss in the electrolyser is Rint x (Irms)² ... so the lower thermal loss is obtained for the lower RMS current for the same average current.It is the direct current which has the highest average current value for the lowest RMS current because for the direct current, average and RMS values are the same as the DC value.NB:QuoteWater injection in WWII plane motors ( as P47 Thunderbolt) has nothing to do with electrolyser....

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 07:01:53 pm
content: Quote from: oldway on January 21, 2017, 05:05:06 pm

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 07:30:21 pm
content: Quote from: stj on January 21, 2017, 07:01:53 pmYou should do the same because a microwave oven never break H²O molecules and never has produced hydrogen....

author: Ian.M
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 07:46:58 pm
content: Microwave ovens don't split water molecules into Hydrogen and Oxygen. Also they work by dielectric heating, not molecular resonance. Seehttp://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_vibrational_spectrum.htmlfor water's absorption spectrum. In its liquid phase, all molecular resonances are damped almost out of existence by random interactions with neighbouring molecules, and in its vapour phase the lowest resonance frequency of 22.235GHz, is an order of magnitude higher than the 2.45GHz frequency typically used for Microwave ovens,and many orders of magnitude higher than anything that can be generated by any of the so-called 'resonant' electrolysis circuits that have been published on the web.It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that periodic brief polarity reversals may aid stripping the gas molecules formed at the electrodes from the electrode surface, thus maximising the effective electrode area and minimising the area current density, which would reduce the over-potential required to maintain a particular current, and thus the wasted energy due to Joule heating of the electrolyte, but at the end of the day, electrolysis of water is just a Hydrogen/Oxygen fuel cell driven backwards, and like any other rechargeable battery, you get less energy out than you put in.

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 08:08:35 pm
content: QuoteI would like to know how a periodic brief polarity reversal would help stripping the gas molecules formed at the electrodes ? In my opinion, that's impossible.The solutions are to recirculate the electrolyte (The movement of the electrolyte detaches the gas bubbles) and to reduce current density.I wrote that:Some recommend in order to make an hobbyist electrolysis cell for HHO (Brown's gas) production:- Current per cm2: less than 0.1A / cm²- Electrolyte: distilled water with 15 to 25% KOH (NaOH is also useful but KOH s better)- Distance from the plates: the more near the better but that can cause problem with gaz output. Thus, better not less than 5mm- Plates: stainless steel.Multicell is better, with neutral plates.

author: Ian.M
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 08:28:32 pm
content: I agree that flowing electrolyte is a far more effective method of detaching the bubbles.However, it would take a lot of detailed experimental work to conclude that pulsing the current has NO effect on their adhesion.

author: RIS
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 08:58:35 pm
content: you know that the water is slightly polar molecule and by-product of that is capacitor and by-product of that is sensitivity to any frequency you want.

author: oldway
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2017, 09:17:40 pm
content: Quote from: Ian.M on January 21, 2017, 08:28:32 pmPulsing current has a high RMS value therefore increases power losses in the electrolyte and reduces efficiency.In every case, it is not an acceptable solution.It may also affect the purity of hydrogen....industrial electrolyser need an Hydrogen Purity >99.998%

author: dmills
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2017, 12:42:59 am
content: I worked on a hydrogen powered car project at one time professionally, the stuff is not a good road fuel....Firstly you have the storage problem, it actually has an amazingly low volumetric energy density as a gas at any pressure you might care to use, so big tanks or 5,000 psi your choice. The other two options also have issues, cryogenic slush has horrible overall efficiency due to the energy you have to expend on liquification, and metal hydrides add weight to the volume problem.Then you get into the fun of hydrogen embrittlement of steels....Hydrogen is the fuel of choice only when you need a low molecular weight exhaust and can engineer your way around all of the pain (Hydrogen embrittlement of metals, highly mobile gas, possible cryogenics), basically high Isp rockets if you are government funded.Now there are other, probably better options, sewage sludge into an anaerobic environment (a big tank) will give off methane as the microbiology feeds, and that is a useful fuel gas, wood and coal gas, water gas (H2/CO mix from a endothermic redox reaction between steam and carbon) if you have a good source of heat to start with. In fact a diesel engine will often run quite happily on vegetable oil if you heat it a bit (run the engine cooling water thru a heat exchanger).Incidentally the cheap way to make H2 is that water gas reaction, steam + natural gas + carefully metered air, the natural gas plus air begets more steam plus CO, the heat drives the redox reaction between the steam and the natural gas getting you H2 + CO, separate the CO and burn it with more air to add heat, exhaust the CO2, cool and compress the H2 for storage.Long term of course cars make little sense without some pretty major infrastructure support, you need lube oil and hydraulic fluids apart from anything else, give me a couple of heavy horses and a few ox in a preppers wet dream situation any day, self replicating transport that can pull a plough.To the OP, first learn the differences between Heat and Temperature, Power and Energy and what 'power factor' means in AC circuits, understanding these things will equip you to understand a lot of the utter bollocks on youtube.Regards, Dan.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2017, 04:23:35 pm
content: Quote from: dmills on January 22, 2017, 12:42:59 amRockets can solve that, big tanks, insulate the crap out of it and keep filling with the slush till just before launch when you stop refilling and removing the boiled off gas for safe burning really far away. The embrittlement is easy, just use it once and throw it away, or crack test the crap out of it and have a competition to find the best welders to weld up all those cracks, closing them and also boiling off the gas inside. Both things done by NASA, though the second option was a lot more expensive and took a lot of time.Quote from: dmills on January 22, 2017, 12:42:59 amThe good old days of town gas, that was made from coking coal, but which was later replaced ( at some cost) by the availability of plentiful natural gas from oil fields. The only advantage of LNG is that it is not a silent killer like the old town gas, but storage is hard, you need really large gas reservoirs and water seals to keep a constant low pressure, as the 2 components have such a wide variation in boiling point.