The damn picture link didn't work and this forum is setup to not let you edit posts.
Can that be changed btw?
Kinda ruined the joke.
Dave Lawton / Stanley Meyer Plans
27 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
by glenn_aircooled » Wed Jul 12, 2006 9:03 am
The one I saw there said, 2003 I think that is an out dated experiment
that Dave did. Still - one worth trying. Since the transformer is Ferrite
I would also do chokes the same. There may be better cores....
Fast switching is the key. I also dont think that diode is a High voltage
fast acting one. ( I could be wrong ).
that Dave did. Still - one worth trying. Since the transformer is Ferrite
I would also do chokes the same. There may be better cores....
Fast switching is the key. I also dont think that diode is a High voltage
fast acting one. ( I could be wrong ).
Glenn , See Ya.
-
glenn_aircooled - Regular Poster
- Posts: 572
- Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 12:21 am
- Location: Australia
by decisive » Thu Jul 13, 2006 8:56 am
what ever happened to Dave Lawton? His posts over at Icube ended in like June 2005 and I can't find anything else about what he is doing now.
"The ability to perceive or think differently is more important than the knowledge gained"
David Bohm
David Bohm
- decisive
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:31 am
- Location: tampa, Fl
by edge386 » Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:43 pm
I have the same concerns. Getting help on his circuit design is rather tricky also.
I enlisted the help of an electronics technician to help me out here, since my knowledge is ridiculously limited in this field of science. Thing is, he said he didn't understand if those 10k and 47k markins on that diagram were resistors or pots, and getting the answer to this question is seeming to result in beating around the bush. Direct contact with Dave Lawton himself seems tricky as well. If anyone here has an idea what's going on in that circuit diagram, feedback would be greatly appreciated.
I enlisted the help of an electronics technician to help me out here, since my knowledge is ridiculously limited in this field of science. Thing is, he said he didn't understand if those 10k and 47k markins on that diagram were resistors or pots, and getting the answer to this question is seeming to result in beating around the bush. Direct contact with Dave Lawton himself seems tricky as well. If anyone here has an idea what's going on in that circuit diagram, feedback would be greatly appreciated.
- edge386
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:31 pm
by mos68x » Sat Jul 29, 2006 3:16 pm
those 10K and 47K resistors are potentiometers "pots", otherwise known as variable resistors. that is so that you can tune in the the frequency. i had been watching and reading that forum over there for a while and noticed the same thing about dave's lack of posts, has me concerned as well. though he does have a nice setup, the lack of electrode surface area doesn't excite me at all. the real "magic" in that setup is the frequency generators and his electrode spacing(1-1.5mm). of course, no one has yet to disclose the frequencies used so i stop bothering with that setup up. besides for the same space used in his setup you can do far more gas production using flat plates.
there is also another "misleading" concept with that general design. the heat that we get from the low voltage high current flat plate designs is because we have a higher electrode to water ratio, where as that design is the total opposited. which is why stan could get away with saying that he doesn't creat much heat. regardless of what type of setup you will use, you will create heat in the process. now i'm not saying that you don't create FAR less with a frequency type setup, i'm just saying that you won't nearly create as much, because you are doing more work with voltage "potential" and not with raw brute force. of course with stans design he had more water there so that the thermal retention of the design was much higher, allowing for water flowing around the cells to cool before returning to the process. flat plate design doesn't work that way, we have generally little water and not as much flow, so the heat the builds up stays there.
there is also another "misleading" concept with that general design. the heat that we get from the low voltage high current flat plate designs is because we have a higher electrode to water ratio, where as that design is the total opposited. which is why stan could get away with saying that he doesn't creat much heat. regardless of what type of setup you will use, you will create heat in the process. now i'm not saying that you don't create FAR less with a frequency type setup, i'm just saying that you won't nearly create as much, because you are doing more work with voltage "potential" and not with raw brute force. of course with stans design he had more water there so that the thermal retention of the design was much higher, allowing for water flowing around the cells to cool before returning to the process. flat plate design doesn't work that way, we have generally little water and not as much flow, so the heat the builds up stays there.
- mos68x
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 478
- Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:56 pm
- Location: Ft Campbell, KY
27 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Return to Hydrogen Production via Electrolysis
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests