Electrolyzer v6 Project Page 1

To keep things simple, the following are some terms that I'll be using throughout this project

Plate Assembly: The system of alternating + / - plates that I came up with several years ago and the specific way in which I have assembled them. It allows for clean and even distribution of power throughout the assembly. In this project there are 8 plates in each assembly measuring 1.5 x 6 inches each. Some of my older projects had 12 plates. These 8 give me a total of 4 (+) plates and 4 (-) plates.
Parallel Plates : This is explained quite well in the Electrolysis Basics guide found at:
http://oupower.com/index.php?dir=_My_Projects/_Over_Unity_Related_Projects/Electrolysis/Electrolysis%20Basics
In short it just refers to the fact that all of the plates are fed power in parallel with each other rather then passing the current through the plates in a series format.
Submerged Cells: This refers to the fact that my cells have their plate assemblies completely submerged. This is one of the nice advantages of Parallel Plate designs. There is nothing at all from my reactive area that remains above the water line. In fact if the water should ever get so low as to reach the top of the reactive area, it would mean that I'm seriously neglecting the unit. With this design one would always want to ensure that their plate arrays were entirely submerged.
Reactive Area: This is the total surface area of each cell that can react to produce an electrolytic effect. It is NOT just a sum of surface area in the cell. That would be 144 sq. inches (1.5 x 6 x 16) in my case which is wrong. Your reactive area has to account for the outside of your 2 end plates since they really don't react with much. That subtracts 18 square inches there. Then the remaining area has to be divided by 2 since reactive area is comprised of a PAIR of surfaces. The (-) and the (+) surface together make a reactive area. So 63 sq. inches ((144-18 )/2) is my total Reactive Area per cell in this case.
Electrolyzer Array: This is the total number of individual electrolyzer cells (not plates) working together in series to produce gas. Each of my tubes (except the bubbler) in this case is a complete electrolyzer cell.

Please note that this unit was the very first prototype of its kind. I only had 5 plate assemblies since I had to sheer the plates and drill them by hand. The production units will have at least 6 cells (maybe 7) and 1 bubbler for a total of 7 or 8 tubes. That gap will not be there in the production units

People got mad at me last year saying things to the effect of: "WTF Chris... why are you changing designs so fast when you haven't even fully tested this one? How efficient is this design?" Well I changed designs without even bothering to test efficiency because I realized there was a better way to design the unit. Performing efficiency tests was just going to be a waste of time since efficiency would be the same no matter what the container was.

I am always building my designs with several things in mind:
1. Efficiency (maximum gas output with minimum wattage)
2. Safety (obvious need when dealing with a highly combustible gas)
3. Feasibility (how well will the unit work in various applications such as cars, trucks, stationary generators)
4. Reproducibility (how easily can others duplicate what I’ve done and achieve similar results)

I'm trying to score HIGH in all of these categories, so if I change as soon as I start building something... it's because I immediately see that the design is lacking in one or more of these areas. Often it's in the Safety or Feasibility categories.

Efficiency is easy for the most part. I have said for years now that when you're talking about Brute Force Electrolysis, your efficiency is going to be similar no matter what your container is. If you have two identical electrode assemblies (plates or pipes) sitting in a 55 gallon drum or in a custom made polycarbonate box... it's not going to matter much at all for efficiency. The electrode assembly is determining your efficiency for the most part. The container does however play a HUGE role in the Safety, Feasibility & Reproducibility of a design. But when it comes to the efficiency of Brute Force Electrolysis all that the container can really do is help with heat transfer and electrolyte circulation.

You may recall my projects long ago switched to my alternating plate assembly in fully submerged cells. It's because I recognized the many advantages to this assembly design. I have kept with that basic plate assembly design ever since. Most all of my changes have centered on the container because of Safety & Feasibility issues.

So where am I today? Well this latest Version 6 Electrolyzer makes quantum leaps in all of my design goals accept for Reproducibility. In striving to achieve high marks across the board I have been forced to let this one slide. That is NOT to say that others can’t reproduce my design… it’s just going to be more challenging for them. I would also like to note that I did NOT do this on purpose… Reproducibility is just an unfortunate "victim" in this case.

OK let's start with safety since that's probably the most important thing here. Why is this design so much safer then other designs and more importantly why is it so much safer then many of the designs being sold on the market (EBay) today?

1. Nothing at all is coming through the top of the electrolyzers which is consequently where your explosive gas is going to be. There are no hot electrodes, no wires, no plates no sensors... nothing at all up top except for a PLASTIC cap and plastic fittings. That achievement alone is huge when it comes to safety.
2. The PVC tubing has in no way been compromised or drilled through. The entire tube is intact and therefore retains all of its original strength which is VERY substantial in this case.
3. The PVC tubing is schedule 40 - 2 inch ID. This means that we're talking about an extremely tough piece of tubing here. One that is able to withstand a huge amount of PSI if we should require such performance from it.
4. The tops of these electrolyzers are the natural “weakest link” in the assembly. That means if you ever did have a flashback into an electrolyzer, it would merely blow the top off of the tube and not blow you to kingdom come!
5. Built in high strength bubbler… how about that for a warm fuzzy feeling!

Here we're looking at the top of the Electrolyzer Array. What you're seeing is each of the electrolyzer tops around the outside and the bubbler in the center. They each have a single tube coming out of their top to deliver the gas to the bottom of the bubbler. The tubes are fed down through the triangular gap between each of the outer cells and the inner bubbler. So the tube comes out and makes a U turn down through the gap to the underside of the array where you will see that it then enters the bubbler.

Production designs are probably going to have an additional hole in the top of each electrolyzer for filling. These caps were rounded so I could only drill and tap one hole into each of them, hence the use of "quick disconnect" fittings in this case. That allows me to easily remove the tube and fill right through the quick disconnect fitting if necessary. I found that I had to use a large bore hypodermic to fill these things because water would "get stuck" in the quick disconnect hole if I tried any other method of filling. The hypodermic was the fastest way of filling that I've found so far. I just attached one to the top of a soda bottle cap and then screw that onto a little 1 liter drinking bottle filled with distilled water. Invert and insert into the quick disconnect hole, then squeeze! -Pretty simple and it works for a prototype... but will need to be better for the production units.

Now thinking about this I may need to stick with the quick disconnects because even if there is a second hole for filling... you'll have the same problem. Trying to pour water into a small hole where the air is given no other exit, poses a significant problem. The quick disconnect would provide an alternate "escape" hole for the outgoing air while filling. Hmmmm again I'll play with this and see what I can come up with.

Now you're looking at the bottom of the Electrolyzer Array. Here you see the individual tubes exiting the bottom of the triangular gaps that they were fed down through. They then make one more U Turn up and connect via a pressure fitting into the bottom of the bubbler. The bottom cap of the bubbler is drilled with 5 holes in this first prototype. The production bubblers will have either 6 or 7 holes in them to accommodate each of the tubes coming from the electrolyzer cells.

This is a very important safety feature. You see EACH ONE of the electrolyzer cells (each outer PVC tube) has its very own hydroxyl line connecting directly into the bottom of the bubbler. That means if there was every any sort of a flashback that somehow happened in one of the cells, it would have to travel through the WATER to actually reach another electrolyzer cell. Chances of that ever happening are little to none.

Bubblers are, in my opinion, the safest way to run any sort of setup like this because the flame propagation rate of a hydroxy flame is just so very fast, you can't be sure a flashback arrestor will stop it.

So click the picture and you'll see that each of the individual tubes are feeding up into the center bubbler. Pretty cool huh?