According to your numbers, PWM produces 1.52 times more gas but this is probably due to measurement error on your part. Power measurement of a pulse is tricky. Do you use a true RMS meter?
The PWM only looked more efficient, it did not produce more gas. Efficiency losses, during DC test, likely caused by high current and small conductor / plate area. Yes, it's a Fluke True RMS multi meter.
...your DC run drew some 55 amps and with the significant heating of the wiring, it is not reasonable to assume that the cell was seeing any thing like the voltage measured across the batteries. At this current you would have to get your readings during the run across the cups, you may be surprised how much voltage drop there is! I beleve you will find the two results are much closer.
ive watched loads of your videos now... not them all but about a good 60% of them... im studying renewable energy in ireland in L.I.T. just wondering what a PWM is .. i know it is a power supply.. but could you explain how it works/what id does/ or advantage over DC supply
Look up Stan Meyer, he made a power supply that used a PWM (in part of the circuit) to make an effecient water fuel cell.
A Pulse Width Modulator is an electronic devise that pulses a DC current at different rates. They are used for many different things including but not limmited to: power supplies,motor speed controlers and timers.
There has to be something to this high frequency, high voltage stuff. Look at the Kanzius affect. I notice with that though it really likes water isolated on the surface or isolated in/on a paper towel--more surface area exposed to oxygen?
I was thinking the same thing . If there was a way to make and measure monoatomic H. It would allegedly reduce the amount of H needed to run an engine (1/4 the amount).
I built the Lawton circuit too and saw that the PWM only really worked as a current controlling device and no significant gas production increase was observed. I also noticed that the ciruit did not allow mark space to be independently adjusted. I am building a more stable frequency generator at the moment with independantly adjustable Pulse width and freq.
Did you know that there are two missing inductors in the Meyer lawton circuit before the anode and cathode of the cell?
put some dish detergent in the bubbler; light up a bubble made With PWM and try to measure the loudness of explosion , do D same W DC 55 Amps, and compare sounds, higher Amps produce more steam than H2, Im not sure if it works ok but you can try
hi all past inventors andrija puharich (who)! invented water fuel injector 1970 stanley meyer copied it . frequencies, you have the pwm now you need to hit both electrodes with frequency 620 molecular 630 atomic 12,000 ethric all in harmony ? i have a frequency generator now but still struggle understanding electronics so that is why i have plced information to those who do .would appreciate advice for my own experiment on how to incorporate the frequency into the electrodes.
Conclusion? DC needed six times the power to produce only four times the gas as the pwm. But was the pwm really more efficient? Was the excessive power used by the DC circuit just lost in heat? Maybe one more test is needed, DC 9amps, to be fair. Also, what kind of gas was produced?
Did the PWM produce H1 (Monatomic Hydrogen) as opposed to just plain H2,
like some people suggest? Sounds like another test!
Reduce to 1 liter/how many watts to find proper correlation. PWM takes 7.8 watts/liter while dc takes 11.9 watts/liter. That's 53% (or that's 1.53 "times") more watts/liter for DC than PWM. Conversely compared, it takes 65.5% less watts than DC, or it takes 1.65 times less watts than DC. I also heard that the frequency setting (+likely other conditions of modulation/pulsing) matters. Sometimes by combining very high frequency and very high voltage, you may get extraordinary results.
PWM is more efficient in terms of amp consumption but it will take 4 time more to do the same work....I've tought that it would be eating less amperage than that....have you tried with different frequencies ? Some says that there is a freq. at that the water breaks more easily.
You would need to crank your PWM to 36amps to get the same output and you would only be using 468watts insted of 715watss so a big saving! well done
deltahho 3 years ago
According to your numbers, PWM produces 1.52 times more gas but this is probably due to measurement error on your part. Power measurement of a pulse is tricky. Do you use a true RMS meter?
IdiotSlapper 4 years ago
The PWM only looked more efficient, it did not produce more gas. Efficiency losses, during DC test, likely caused by high current and small conductor / plate area. Yes, it's a Fluke True RMS multi meter.
mozon1967 4 years ago
...your DC run drew some 55 amps and with the significant heating of the wiring, it is not reasonable to assume that the cell was seeing any thing like the voltage measured across the batteries. At this current you would have to get your readings during the run across the cups, you may be surprised how much voltage drop there is! I beleve you will find the two results are much closer.
HTwoGo 4 years ago
ive watched loads of your videos now... not them all but about a good 60% of them... im studying renewable energy in ireland in L.I.T. just wondering what a PWM is .. i know it is a power supply.. but could you explain how it works/what id does/ or advantage over DC supply
harpersteven 4 years ago
Look up Stan Meyer, he made a power supply that used a PWM (in part of the circuit) to make an effecient water fuel cell.
A Pulse Width Modulator is an electronic devise that pulses a DC current at different rates. They are used for many different things including but not limmited to: power supplies,motor speed controlers and timers.
mozon1967 4 years ago
There has to be something to this high frequency, high voltage stuff. Look at the Kanzius affect. I notice with that though it really likes water isolated on the surface or isolated in/on a paper towel--more surface area exposed to oxygen?
leeroyjenkinsii 4 years ago
Re. Monoatmoic Vs h2: use your little spice jar to measure if the gas explodes with more force.
OlafMeyer 4 years ago
I was thinking the same thing . If there was a way to make and measure monoatomic H. It would allegedly reduce the amount of H needed to run an engine (1/4 the amount).
mozon1967
mozon1967 4 years ago
I built the Lawton circuit too and saw that the PWM only really worked as a current controlling device and no significant gas production increase was observed. I also noticed that the ciruit did not allow mark space to be independently adjusted. I am building a more stable frequency generator at the moment with independantly adjustable Pulse width and freq.
Did you know that there are two missing inductors in the Meyer lawton circuit before the anode and cathode of the cell?
OlafMeyer 4 years ago
Yes, I agree. Yes the circuit remains an enigma to me.
mozon1967 4 years ago
did anyone else realize that it said 12:33 AM
AM NOT PM
matt13ttam 4 years ago
I did.
mozon1967 4 years ago
Higher amperage may produce more steam,
but I would think it's a result of the water heating up. From what I've read
the water heats from excesive voltage combined with low plate/tube surface area. Comparing sound is a good idea...but
I don't have the equiptment to measure outcome. Wouldn't be worth while without
some easy observations or data...Sorry.
mozon1967 4 years ago
put some dish detergent in the bubbler; light up a bubble made With PWM and try to measure the loudness of explosion , do D same W DC 55 Amps, and compare sounds, higher Amps produce more steam than H2, Im not sure if it works ok but you can try
bubble size = for both.
coquivagabundo 4 years ago
hi all past inventors andrija puharich (who)! invented water fuel injector 1970 stanley meyer copied it . frequencies, you have the pwm now you need to hit both electrodes with frequency 620 molecular 630 atomic 12,000 ethric all in harmony ? i have a frequency generator now but still struggle understanding electronics so that is why i have plced information to those who do .would appreciate advice for my own experiment on how to incorporate the frequency into the electrodes.
honda4004 4 years ago
Wish I could help, still learning myself.
mozon1967 4 years ago
Good Work
sidyoung 4 years ago
Thanks Sid!
Regards Maurice
mozon1967 4 years ago
Conclusion? DC needed six times the power to produce only four times the gas as the pwm. But was the pwm really more efficient? Was the excessive power used by the DC circuit just lost in heat? Maybe one more test is needed, DC 9amps, to be fair. Also, what kind of gas was produced?
Did the PWM produce H1 (Monatomic Hydrogen) as opposed to just plain H2,
like some people suggest? Sounds like another test!
mozon1967 4 years ago
Reduce to 1 liter/how many watts to find proper correlation. PWM takes 7.8 watts/liter while dc takes 11.9 watts/liter. That's 53% (or that's 1.53 "times") more watts/liter for DC than PWM. Conversely compared, it takes 65.5% less watts than DC, or it takes 1.65 times less watts than DC. I also heard that the frequency setting (+likely other conditions of modulation/pulsing) matters. Sometimes by combining very high frequency and very high voltage, you may get extraordinary results.
1WayBlues 4 years ago
PWM is more efficient in terms of amp consumption but it will take 4 time more to do the same work....I've tought that it would be eating less amperage than that....have you tried with different frequencies ? Some says that there is a freq. at that the water breaks more easily.
Opinaca 4 years ago
Yes, I've used other freq's (this pwm design has three selectable ranges) but
all have the same result (visibly). Meyer/Boyce systems also use transformers
too make a voltage multipler circuit but
these circuits remain enigmas.
mozon1967 4 years ago