Hydrogen Fuel Cell

Thread Starter

weirdbeard

Joined Jun 25, 2013
10
If I understand the papers, you want this to be a nearly square wave, which means you really need components capable of ~500MHz, or else the edges won't square off.
That is correct. Give me some time and I will dig up my notes, video and photos to post. Thank you again for the responses.
 

Papabravo

Joined Feb 24, 2006
21,159
The design of this kind of circuit at these power levels is not for the faint of heart. It requires design tools and test equipment that cost as much as a small house. It is extremely unlikely that you can breadboard such a design. Last it is quite illegal to build a device that will interfere with users of that portion of the RF spectrum. A visit from the FCC could land you in jail with substantial fines. You may not like the tone and the content of the advice, but it is not offered with any malicious intent. It is to make you aware of the obstacles that you need to overcome in order to get where you want to go. If any of this stuff was easy it would have been discovered and developed long ago. That is why they call it research. The last point is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary levels of proof and explanation. You have offered none of this. You have only whined loudly that we are not sensitive to your tender feelings. It is what it is.
 

BillO

Joined Nov 24, 2008
999
He may be looking at articles like this one. Or this one. There are many others. Another.

I'm not saying I believe all of it, just that there is a lot of chatter out there.
Thanks for digging those up wayneh. They make interesting reading. However, from these four the first and fourth read out as pure bunk. They go into some detail about the known theory of hydrolysis, but get real weak when they look at their 'new' theory, then get all excited about the equipment used, the experimental setup and, of course, the results do not agree. You'd think if there was some merit to this there would be some agreement in the methods and results, no?

The 2nd one had the funding pulled before real results or a conclusion could be made (typical military, if indeed it is not an out and out hoax).

The conclusion of the 3rd one was "...the results demonstrated that the nonpulsed dc operation required the least electrical power." and quite nicely supports currently accepted and verifiable theory.

And you are right, there a dozens of 'papers' and sites dedicated to this. The 3rd paper you presented notwithstanding, none of them agree, and none of them have any real or sound theory around why this would happen. Looking at true scientific papers, especially those that hope to present game changing new theories and results, one will see that the huge preponderance of the effort is in the details of presenting and explaining the theory. Not like in these papers which gloss over the 'new earth shattering theory' in a few hand-waving lines of sometimes meaningless and unrelated at worse, or speculative at best, text with little or no meaningful math.

Okay, I'm done. Mr. weirdbeard, it's your time to waste. Who am I to say otherwise.
 

Thread Starter

weirdbeard

Joined Jun 25, 2013
10
The design of this kind of circuit at these power levels is not for the faint of heart. It requires design tools and test equipment that cost as much as a small house. It is extremely unlikely that you can breadboard such a design. Last it is quite illegal to build a device that will interfere with users of that portion of the RF spectrum. A visit from the FCC could land you in jail with substantial fines. You may not like the tone and the content of the advice, but it is not offered with any malicious intent. It is to make you aware of the obstacles that you need to overcome in order to get where you want to go. If any of this stuff was easy it would have been discovered and developed long ago. That is why they call it research. The last point is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary levels of proof and explanation. You have offered none of this. You have only whined loudly that we are not sensitive to your tender feelings. It is what it is.
Honestly generating the pulse itself with GPIO on the RPi is trivial, however I do not have the knowledge to integrate the 3.3V GPIO into what I'm trying to accomplish.

Any thoughts on that?
 

Thread Starter

weirdbeard

Joined Jun 25, 2013
10
Good then.

Just so you are aware, there is absolutely no theory or verifiable experiment that demonstrates that any frequency of the electrolyzing current can be used to increase the efficiency of the electrolysis of water.
So if it hasn't been done before, don't try it - got it.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
Oh, you'll be hard pressed to find an experiment that hasn't been tried. ;)

I suspect one devil lurking in the details is that, as the frequency goes up, it gets increasingly difficult to accurately measure and calculate power.
 

Kermit2

Joined Feb 5, 2010
4,162
Why MEGA hertz?

The FIRST paper I came across in a quick search for data on this process gives freqs of 600Hz or so, and mentions 12KHz, and 43.something KHz as well.

Nothing about megahertz. OH, and you'll need some 'orgone' energy too! :rolleyes:

http://merlib.org/node/5249
 

BillO

Joined Nov 24, 2008
999
So if it hasn't been done before, don't try it - got it.
No, but you have to have a place new and well defined that you are going. I know that an awful lot of today's most cherished scientific results and discoveries were come about 'accidentally', but the scientists that made the discoveries were not looking blindly. They had real, and well explained goals in mind to begin with and knew enough about what they discovered to not only recognize it, but also to be able to explain it and understand why it came about from the activities they were pursuing. As Pasteur once said, "Chance favors the prepared mind". Something I do not see in the 'Pulsed electrolysis' papers and blogs I've seen.

So, can you give us a run down to the theory?
Why do you feel you need 250 watts of 50mHz at 12V DC?
Will you be using an electrolyte?
Or/and a catalyst of some kind like iridium or platinum electrodes?
How does the required voltage of 12V work into the reaction equations?
Can you show us the math that predicts that 50mHz will significantly reduce the dissociation energy and how it accomplishes that?
Would any of this be affected by the use of catalysts, electrolytes or contamination in the water?
Is the pulse width important? Why?
Why does it have to be a square wave?
Are you attempting to shake the molecule apart?
Would a reverse sawtooth be better?
Why or why not?
Have you looked at the possibility of inductance, reactance and capacitance in the experimental set-up causing negative voltage swings which might cause reversal of polarity?
How will you cope with the resultant contamination of the hydrogen?
Is electrode configuration and geometry a consideration and what effects does it have?

The molecular resonant frequency of H is around 42MHz.
Not in water it's not. More like 2.4gHz. H in free space has an emission frequency of about 1.4gHz. Can you give a reference for the 42mHz? Are we talking H2? What mode of resonance are you talking about? How does this affect the dissociation potential?
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,415
Here is my take on what I've read so far from a moderators point of view.

Generating H2 is not illegal on AAC, only overunity and perpetual motion is (same thing). So this thread is safe.

The OP want help with hardware, but he is not sure what hardware he wants. The exact specs of the hardware needed is up to the OP to come up with, if we knew how to split H2 more efficiently we would have done it.

The first thought that occurred to me about resonant frequency of H2 is a laser, or more specifically a maser.

So I google Hydrogen maser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_maser

Very esoteric equipment indeed. Not conducive as an electric current, though not impossible.

Good luck.
 

Papabravo

Joined Feb 24, 2006
21,159
Here is my take on what I've read so far from a moderators point of view.

Generating H2 is not illegal on AAC, only overunity and perpetual motion is (same thing). So this thread is safe.

The OP want help with hardware, but he is not sure what hardware he wants. The exact specs of the hardware needed is up to the OP to come up with, if we knew how to split H2 more efficiently we would have done it.

The first thought that occurred to me about resonant frequency of H2 is a laser, or more specifically a maser.

So I google Hydrogen maser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_maser

Very esoteric equipment indeed. Not conducive as an electric current, though not impossible.

Good luck.
I also found that article and the 1420 MHz. was just one of a dozen supposed resonant frequencies associated with H, H2, and H2O. In fact most of what is on the net reads like a huge steaming pile of pseudo-babble for the purpose of selling things that you can experiment with, but don't actually work.
 

LDC3

Joined Apr 27, 2013
924
The molecular resonant frequency of H is around 42MHz.
H is not a molecule, H2 is. But since you are interested in water, I expect that the resonant frequency for the hydrogen in water to be different than H2.
Microwave ovens generate energy that makes water vibrate faster so the frequency they use would probably be the frequency that you want.
 

Kermit2

Joined Feb 5, 2010
4,162
ENERGY input is what is required to break the bond between hydrogen and oxygen. It can be done with heat energy, electric energy, or light(laser) energy, and other energies I may not have listed because I do not know of them.

Whatever energy you decide to use, the AMOUNT is what will be the deciding factor in your success or failure. Modern science and many many many experimenters have come to the conclusion that the amount of energy required is excessive when compared to the potential energy content of the hydrogen produced.

Other sources(hydrocarbon containing petrochemicals) are used as a source for hydrogen gas production BECAUSE it requires much less energy to break the hydrogen free from its bonds in those compounds.

End.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
ENERGY input is what is required to break the bond between hydrogen and oxygen.
The OP is not suggesting otherwise. But the currently ****-poor efficiency of electrolysis opens the possibility for improvement, not to over 100%, but from 40% to 80% for instance, while still being well within the laws of thermodynamics.

Pulsing DC appears to be a possible route to increased electrolytic efficiency. If the OP wants to experiment in that murky area, let's help as we can.

I have no idea how to work at these frequencies and my only advice is to always be aware of how well you "know" what you think you know. For instance if you want to claim a 10% efficiency increase at frequency X, figure out what your experimental error is at that frequency. I'm not sure how you would even do that, but to my mind it's the crux of it.

The earlier comments about RF and local laws are relevant; 250W at 1GHz looks like a big radio transmitter.
 

Thread Starter

weirdbeard

Joined Jun 25, 2013
10
The OP is not suggesting otherwise. But the currently ****-poor efficiency of electrolysis opens the possibility for improvement, not to over 100%, but from 40% to 80% for instance, while still being well within the laws of thermodynamics.

Pulsing DC appears to be a possible route to increased electrolytic efficiency. If the OP wants to experiment in that murky area, let's help as we can.

I have no idea how to work at these frequencies and my only advice is to always be aware of how well you "know" what you think you know. For instance if you want to claim a 10% efficiency increase at frequency X, figure out what your experimental error is at that frequency. I'm not sure how you would even do that, but to my mind it's the crux of it.

The earlier comments about RF and local laws are relevant; 250W at 1GHz looks like a big radio transmitter.
Greyfaces abound on this board! Thank you for not being pink and completely jumping my **** along with the rest of the senior members.

As I said in earlier posts, I have a theory and I would like to experiment with it and was merely looking for advice as to the best way to go about building the circuit.

I'm aware that HHO gets a bad rap from conventional science because there have been plenty of hucksters out there trying to sell over-unity. I am not one of them. The evidence IS there that pulsed DC yields higher efficiency over non-pulsed, and I would like to investigate, as a hobbyist, in my spare time.

Let's just say that I'll work my way up to 42MHz, and start with coding the RPi to oscillate a low / high pin over it's 3.3V GPIO.. what would be required to pulse said 12VDC @ 250 watts?
 
Last edited:

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,415
Until you define the circuit we can not draw anything. I like designing stuff, but I gotta tell you, anything over 1Mhz get increasingly difficult as frequency goes up. 500Mhz is a stone cold female dog to do as a sine wave, let alone as a square wave. It is something I would hesitate to tackle, and I am an experienced tech.

If you radiate anything as a radio signal you could face some serious fines. The FCC kinda frowns on that sort of thing.
 
Top