Uncle Fester, I can answer #3 about the plugs . The plugs consist of a Champion resister plug with the resister removed , the ball is tig welded nickel ( no alloy ) turned on the lathe. The cage is nickel tig rod ( no alloy ) flattened and bent over a mandrel then tig welded to the plug body.

HAS ANYONE TRIED... Ionizing the ambient air ( positive ions of oxygen) before doing any of these water plasma experiments???

Check the last 3 or 4 pages of Stanley Meyer Explained... it all comes together there!

Sure great plugs can help... but what about using the ionized oxygen, that is missing 4 of 8 electrons to split the water molecules for you BEFORE THEY HIT THE Combustion Chamber???

Like in the intake manifold???

You see... the BIG HAIRY OXYGEN ATOM, Missing those electrons, wants to stabilize... so the tink weak hydrogen atoms have to give up their valence electrons... for every oxygen atom that is missing 4 electrons, you split TWO molecules of water into hydrogen AND oxygen.....
ANyone interested in combining this with the FANCY PLUGS THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN 89 PAGES TO DISCUSS?

(Just some friendly thread to thread competition) its healthy to think outside of the box( the air is fresher too!)

TRON,

Sounds like it might be worth a try.

I'm currently running Firestorm replications, after today they will be fired by a brand new Crane Cams HI6 CDI and a PS91 coil, I also have an LX91 coil here on standby. The current transfer is via Kiker style copper tube leads, through a Bosch HEI distributor.

I've also asked Aquapulser for an RPG 4700 plasma gen, but have not heard back from them yet.

Engine is a completely stock standard 202 cubic inch inline 6 cylinder, apart from the extractors/headers and a 34 ADM Weber 2BBL carb on a Holley pattern 2BBL intake manifold. The Bosch HEI is from a later model engine and is running a full 12 volts to the module via a relay. Wiring to the distributor has also been upgraded to 20 amp.

I have added a 50/50(by measure, not weight) blend of water/methanol to the equation as well, to augment the standard low octane pump petrol/gasoline. My current water/meth consumption rate is about 4 ltrs per 120 klm.

When I purchased this vehicle, it consistantly gave 230 klm per 40-45 ltrs at highway speeds in standard guise.

The vehicle is no lightweight, it's a 1978 Land Rover 109 GS, 1 tonne rated ex Australian Army vehicle. It weighs 1830kg in it's current state.

It now gives me 300 klm per 40-45 ltrs at highway speeds, though I'm yet to be able to confirm if the HI6 will have increased that by much as I only just fitted it yesterday. This HI6 is brand new.

The initial HI6 I purchased was a second hand unit and after I installed it, the darn thing failed to fire after about 40 seconds, thus it's in being repaired as we speak and will make a good spare if it can be resurrected.

Today the car is running Brisk Premium HOR15LGS spark plugs along with the newly installed HI6, just to give me a chance to inspect my Firestorms more closely.

The Kiker leads have been removed today and replaced by the best leads available from ICE Ignitions, these are 9mm very low resistance type, and touted as the best leads available off the shelf.

Today will see the Kikers refitted along with everything else.

I can already tell that the HI6 will give a positive economy gain, though I'll know more once I screw the Firestorms back in later this afternoon.

The Firestorms have done about 3000 klm of work since last inspected.

Difficult to get economy as the responsiveness and extra horsepower seems to bring out the lair in me, which now sees the vehicle being driven aggressively rather than sedately. I have purchased a new throttle pedal assembly which will enable me to govern the pedal travel, thus slowing me down. It had to be done as I just couldn't refrain from applying the boot.
I'm taking my time fitting that new pedal though.

So far I've managed to increase my range by 70 klm per 40-45 ltrs, but I expect that the HI6 will see another economy increase, if the "feel" is anything to go by.

I installed a large "Fuel Cat" to the fuel line about 3 days ago too, so once I get my entire "combination" refitted, I can then begin trying to test for economy again.

I'd like more info about ionising the intake oxygen.

You will be seeing the same performance form a stock plug with no resistor and no J-electrode when you run them both for a period of time. If you are running less than 1 joule of energy the Firestorm will do slightly better, but when energy levels are increased to an 1.5 Joule or more (minimum acceptable to see good mileage improvement, etc) then normal plugs work as good.

A comparison of the two needs to be performed in order to get an idea of the difference (in hard concrete numbers) unless you don't care about being objective and just simply like one style of plug over another because of looks etc. Without a baseline of RPM increase, mileage increase, etc of each plug it's hard to determine if one plug is better than another.

Uncle Fester , Can you put a 1 joule amount in terms that I can correlate with the equipment I have ? Procomp 6AL ignition box, Procomp PS1 coil , replicated Kiker wire ,and Firestorm plug. Robin

My plugs have Champion shells too, yet differ to Moose 53's in that mine have a solid silver electrode incorporating a ball at the tip, all 1 piece, no welding.

The ball was turned down from a cylindrical blank that was purposely incorporated into the electrode's custom made die, meaning that when the silver was poured into the die, it formed a cylindrical shaped blank at 1 end, thus giving the machinist a suitable shape to begin working with when it came time to turn the balls down.

My cages are as per Moose 53's cages.

My plugs have done about 5000 klm so far with no signs of wear.

I note that you guys had a lot of plug failures, mainly in the area of the ceramics, yet the plugs we're running have yet to present a single failure. This is a curious point. At what point were your plugs failing?

I'd like to know your thoughts on the potential of the Aquapulser RPG4700 plasma unit as it appears to generate high levels of plasma at about .5 joule if I'm not mistaken, thus potentially avoiding the need to go anywhere near the HV transients.

This lower powered plasma should increase in volume under compression, perhaps taking it to the levels you were looking for with the souped up 1.5 and beyond CDI rigs.

It's my understanding that HI6 and PS91 are incapable of achieving a suitable level of plasma release in standard guise, thus requiring the components to be overdriven to achieve a suitable plasma level, in turn bringing on the transients, is that right? Perhaps these RPG units hold the answer.

Part of FireStorm's appeal for me was the low wear due to the ionisation effect and this aspect is still appealing.

Going beyond spark and into plasma is looking for the icing on the cake though, and that's the area we're all most interested in, given the hydrogen molecule splitting potential of this plasma, thus we seek a suitable plasma gen, one that does the splitting yet avoids the troublesome transients.

Can you take a look at the RPG4700 via the Aquapulser website and give your opinion as to it's potential as a suitable alternative to a CDI? Note the "inline" mode as well as the "bypass" mode. You'll need to access the instruction manual via the website in order to view the schematics of each mode.

It's a pity these units weren't available when you were involved with those tests, I do wonder if the outcome may have been different.

I've just been informed that my electrodes were cold formed, not heated and poured into the die, apologies if my error caused concerns.

I'm glad Uncle Fester debunked Krupa and his plug. I do realize though that those who made the effort to replicate Firestorms, or purchased replications, may be less happy.
Anyway: after getting acquainted with the idea "Firestorm" some time ago, and having read some remarks about Tesla using spherical electrodes as points of departure and arrival for gigantic sparks (a good habit since the invention of the Leyden Flask, I think), I went to the nearest by bicycle shop to procure some 3/16" steel bearing balls. (The metric system still hasn't been able to fully penetrate the bicycle trade, for some reason.)
Put balls in gripping pliers, connected ignition coil, and off they went - the sparks, that is.

My observations were:

- between balls: stronger, but shorter sparks;
- between points (nailtips etc.): longer, but weaker sparks.
(Long & short for distance, not time.)

Being totally ignorant of electronics, my explanation is a very unscientific one: in a pointed electrode, the electrons know exactly where to go: to the point, indeed. Arrived at lands end, they don't have to hesitate in which direction to jump: to the opposite point, off course. As soon as they see fit to make it to the other side, they jump, creating a long, slender line of lightning.
Now imagine the electrons in the frontline on a globe: they know they'll have to jump to escape the gruesome pressure of negativism, and they seek desperately for a bridge-head which isn't there, and they hesitate even more as there is no clear target on the other side either. Meanwhile the little folk behind them push ever harder, and many gather around those who seem to have found the area closest to the ill-defined other shore, where luring positivism is awaiting. Finally, when the other side seems close enough and the pressure from behind becomes unbearable, they desperately jump - not in an elegant line, but as a massive, clumsy mass.
So, as you see, the extra time (picoseconds?) they took for their quest for a bridge-head not only increased the pressure (voltage) upon them, but also made them, stimulated by the condition of the terrain, form a broader front, from which many of them departed at once (current). Obvious, isn't it?

It's all clear now: if we want to take advantage of that bit of extra power which a certain shape of electrodes may provide, we'll have to aim for spherical surfaces. The larger the diameter of the globes from which we cut our pieces, the better, I guess. No need for the complicated manufacturing of an entire ball with some kind of cage around it, I'd say. I'd rather start with a plug with a slightly protruding centre - e.g. a BP7ES in NGK-terms - cut off the J, put it in a lathe to round of the inside of the rim, find a body-piercing shop (as somebody suggested on this or an other forum) to acquire a pierced stainless steel bal of 4 - 5 mm diameter to be put on the centre-electrode and fixed with some simple welding. The ball might be cut in halve, of course, before welding it on, or be filed down after the welding, in case a tight piston-headroom or the chosen welding method would ask for it. The spark gap would be in the 2,5 to 3 mm range, which should do just fine for our purposes. I think this configuration is simpler than, but at least as effective as any of the many shapes suggested in the Krupa and Landon patents (Landon: US 6,670,740 B2).
For the moment I confine myself to sawing of the J from a plug without protruding centre - e.g. a B7ES, in NGK-speak - just like Uncle Fester did for his experiments. (In the NGK range anything with an R in it - like BR6ES or BPR7ES - should be avoided, as R stands for Resistor, as you all know.)

Now I'll tell you about some observations for which I have no explanation at all. Plain sawed-off NGK B7ES plug, spark gap 3 mm, nothing but normal Denso motorbike ignition coil, 0.22 µF capacitor.
- 'Normal' set-up: reliable spark, straight to 'inward' arcing, seemingly tending to creep along the insulator. (The plug is used, not clean.)
- low voltage leads inversed: stronger, but less reliable spark (misfirings); spark is arcing outward!
- low voltage leads connected normally, but high voltage inversed - centre electrode to interrupter, HV-lead to rim: reliable spark of normal strength, arcing outward!

Last but not least: probably good news for those of us longing for an Aquapulser: they mailed me, before yesterday, saying they prepare for a second batch of 20 units, becoming available in a week or three.

I ordered two units, as my motorbike has a distributorless ignition system, sporting two independent coils. It's a lot of money, but I somehow feel confident that those guys engineered an efficient system, saving me a lot of experimenting with the numerous systems and circuits which have been developed and published since last years summer. Nevertheless: if one of you is convinced about a certain set-up being 'the best' or 'probably the best', please let us know. I might try to give it a go, as for now I hardly know what to choose and where to begin...

Does S1r's Camaro really exist and does it really run on water? Do the coils in the old pump-relays mysteriously attract energy from the universe? -The garden-scene with the B&S and the later revealed little mystery coil, which nobody, including myself, could get to work at all, didn't strengthen my confidence...

Cheers!
Hendrik.

All this talk about spark length and shapes of the cages, ball vs point, high current...sounds like a 89 page brochure about an all week convention for FRANKENSTEIN MONSTERS... you know, my neck bolts are better than yours, watch my sparks fly, yours are weak...blah, blah, blah.

Why dont youse guys grab the bull by the horns and combine these plugs with a 100% water fuel system? check pages 18-22 of "Stanley Meyer Explained" might give you some fresh insight on electron guns and electron extraction from ambient air so that an oxygen atom can disassociate any thing in its path, including water mist...

My point is simply this.... if you really want to save money on fuel, drive down to the local lake or pond and load er up!

( we need all the technicians we can throw at this thing to get all the builds done, the science is explained in the thread...)

happy days, happy days...no more need for fossil fuel !

Very strong point you make, TRON, really.

Your driver should list the output power in Joules. This rating is energy released from a certain charge. It typically applies to a capacitor of a certain size that is charged to a certain voltage, thus giving you Joules of energy. Our supplier should have this information because it is a critical design parameter when they designed the unit you are running.

The crane cams ignition driver we used was claimed to release 1.5 Joules per firing, but this was also release in a number of pulses (multiple spark discharge) and we found that frequency of pulses was critical in the effect it created. You get more of a cloud of plasma with higher frequencies and more of a single loud bang in a single pulse discharge of the same energy.

If you have any doubt about the energy contained in a pulse from a certain circuit and are unfamiliar with the equations in obtaining charge level in Joules, then I would highly suggest you use the following program to make your calculations for you:

Electronics 2000 | Downloads - FREE Software

Hi folks, its been awhile since I looked in this thread although I was watching the progress and I know what Aaron's theory is on the operation as posted in post #307. While it certainly could be the function of the circuit, I decided to research the web and found a diagram that shows the wiring diagram of the ignition coil and how it relates to the induced field polarity in the secondary and something does not make sense. I am going to post a cad pic of the way the circuit is wired according to the way Peter L. showed in the video he posted and the second circuit in the cad pic is the same circuit just shuffled around to make it easier to see the function. What I am seeing, and of course let me know Aaron and the rest of you good folks if you already understand the proper wiring setup, as I noticed what people posted didn't look right. Anyway it appears that when the cap is briefly discharged it appears the primary and secondary are in parallel and while the primary is charging the secondary has an induced field that aids the cap and the primary as shown by the small polarity signs, and while the primary is still charging the primary and secondary are in series and short circuited via the diode. And when switched is opened the collapsing field coil polarities are shown by the large polarity signs and the secondary finds a path through spark gap. Now I am not refuting Aarons theory, all I am trying to do is understand what is happening in this circuit and Aaron does this fit your theory based on this wiring diagram, that is, if this is the proper wiring setup which It seems to be unless the ignition coil diagram i found on the web is not accurate. Let me know. here is the cad pic
peace love light

[quote=rosco1;58874]My plugs have Champion shells too, yet differ to Moose 53's in that mine have a solid silver electrode incorporating a ball at the tip, all 1 piece, no welding.

The ball was turned down from a cylindrical blank that was purposely incorporated into the electrode's custom made die, meaning that when the silver was poured into the die, it formed a cylindrical shaped blank at 1 end, thus giving the machinist a suitable shape to begin working with when it came time to turn the balls down.

My cages are as per Moose 53's cages.

This is because of the low energy level you are using. Bob told me multiple times that you need at least 1.5 Joules of energy to see any effect in mileage and performance (horsepower). Through testing we found this was generally true. 1 Joules or less was producing minimal plasma, even when running multiple spark discharge drivers and SCR driven capacitor discharge. When running at the needed energy level the plugs he made similar to yours (before he had them professionally machined) would last around 1000 miles before they would eat through the cage so that you simply had four prongs sticking up from the plug body. We tested many of these plugs just for fun and they still worked just as well as the new three and four prong cage designs, even with the top of the cage missing.

What was your mileage gain over the 5000Km test?

This is because his design used a cone shape ceramic with a cup at the top that cradled the ball. This is a patent that you have not seen before because to my knowledge the investor never filed it (because it didn't work and had mechanical flaws). The ceramic was very thin towards the ball because of the tapered shape, and would cause the ceramic to crack under vibration and the ceramic would then fall into the cylinder. I cringed at that after seeing it happen to a high end V-8 engine. We quickly removed the plugs and tried to blow the ceramic out of the cylinder before it did any major damage to the cylinder walls.

It personally doesn't sound like nearly enough energy to get any kind of mileage gain, but then again I am not a physicist, nor do I have a good knowledge of plasma physics. It may be possible to somehow create a large volume of plasma from that tiny amount of energy but I am unsure to be honest. I am just an electronics engineer, machinist, and welder. What I do know is that our tests from multiple drivers showed that you need at least 1 Joule to see any kind of plasma effect.

I can tell you from personal experience that you need to see a large glow of plasma the same diameter of the body of the plug (roughly 14mm or so) or you will not be seeing any major effects on mileage. You need to test this before you put the plug into the chamber or you are just taking guesses at how effect you should see. If you are seeing small lightning bolts across the discharge points on the plug then you do not have enough energy. This thing should look like a light saber fired up on the end of the plug.

This may be true however remember that at 1.5 Joules we still did not see any mileage improvement, although the engine ran much smoother at 14:1 A/F. We need to go 25:1 or higher A/F to see major mileage improvements, and we could go no leaner than 20:1 before the engine started misfiring because it was not able to fire that lean of a mixture. Even when we ran TWO Crane cams ignitions at 1.5 Joules EACH in parallel, the engine was not able to run leaner than 20:1 nor did we see any Krupa claimed miracle effects on the exhaust gas analyzers, etc running these systems.

These units do produce a small amount of plasma, but the MSD portion of the driver needs to be tuned because the less pulses the driver produces, the more power you have per pulse since you are ultimately discharging a capacitor to the output. All of the driver we used eventually blew out (electronic malfunction), even when running stock plugs, so there are other issues with this brand of driver anyway.

It may be difficult to even obtain these drivers for a while though. It sounds like S&S has bought them out.
Crane Cams

We did not find lower wear, in fact, the plugs appeared as though they would not last more than 2000 miles or so using a high performance ignition. And in fact we found that at 1 Joule or more it would be a very short period of time before the plug material on the cage would be missing, even when using beryllium copper and other fairly exotic metals. If however you are using lower energy levels they may last tens of thousands of kilometers, but this has to be tested as well.

This is the most interesting effect in all honesty. The ability to explode water and drive a piston is the best part of this whole idea, but you don't need a firestorm plug to do it. In fact it appears other plugs work just as well if not better at firing water via plasma effects. If a cold fog can be introduced and enough plasma was available to interact with the vapor it might be feasible to run an engine this way. The only thing tha leaves me leary of this is that we did not get big pressure gains in a closed chamber when firing water. In fact we ended up with a slight vacuum after the explosion of the water took place.

It certainly looks impressive in terms of the effect although the size of the plasma ball seems small. If I were to buy one I would make sure I could return it if it did not do what I needed it to do.

It would have made my life alot easier in terms of not having to produce a bunch of electronic circuits for running those plugs.

I don't know if firestorm patent or other already incorporate this design or not. The middle electrode is cylinder and the outside electrode is torus. I think it produce spark equal as ball vs ball without the misfire. Ball vs ball like surface produce bigger spark, rotating/more contact reduce the chance of misfire. Room between the ring and base needed for air to circulate.

Inspired by sanded Brisk spark plug clone, Chinese brand Kagawa.

Attached Images

sparkplugideasucahyo.jpg (9.3 KB, 40 views)

Firstly, I'd like to thank you most kindly for taking the time to post that last response. I know you're a busy man.

I gained quite a lot out of that information and it's given me cause to review my current position.

[quote=UncleFester;59113]
What was your mileage gain over the 5000Km test?

My mileage increase equates to about 70 klm extra distance per tank, though I'm yet to get an honest recent reading as I'm finding it quite difficult to refrain from applying excessive throttle.

This engine has come alive and is performing very smartly now. It's a bit like comparing a semi with trailer to a bobtail rig, the comparison would be similar in its extreme.

This vehicle always gave 230 klm per 40-45 ltrs of regular gas, prior to my modifications.

Post modification it's giving 300 klm per 40-45 ltrs. This has largely been the result of a culmination of mods and can't be attributed to a single particular mod alone. Having said that, the actual mods performed are all just bolt ons, with no tricky stuff.

I do intend to refuel tomorrow, and will make a conscious effort to give a new up to date economy reading, which should be higher as the Crane Cams HI6 is now in service.

Ok, I know you looked at leaning the engine, as have I, and I know what you found in that lean environment, all of that does appear to coincide with what I'm finding too.

I might go the other way then, gasp! I might jet up rather than down, as the plugs currently display a lean appearance, even though I'm currently running bigger jets than standard, thus, I might again add fuel to the point where the plugs begin to display evidence of being rich.

This isn't the track I intended to take, but the hotrodder in me beckons me to look at what happens when these plugs are shown more fuel, rather than less.

It should equate to more power, thus meaning less throttle in the overall scheme of things.

I expect the emissions will rise slightly with this new approach though.

My plan is to acquire an Aquapulser and play with that too, maybe in a richer fuel environment. Common sense suggests this approach should make some good power increases.

I have never seen that design, it's a very interesting design.

We produced about 20 different variations of plug designs. Most any type of odd design was tried, some worked very well and others did not. These were all machined from Beryllium copper. The investor has all these plugs, but I might be able to get pictures of them. About five of them worked much better than the Firestorm under the same energy conditions, and all of them used a ball for the center electrode.

Actually now that you mention it, Bob claimed that using a stock ignition, the Firestorm would give 5 to 15 percent better mileage. We did not find that to be the case, but then again not much run time was tried with a stock ignition because the computer on the Toyota Tundra V-8 vehicle was throwing error codes because of the plugs not having resistor to dampen transients. Also two of the plugs cracked their ceramics and dropped into the engine, we stopped tests on that stock engine at that point.

It might be feasible that you are getting a partial mileage gain from the plugs and ignition driver. I know the High performance ignition drivers alone will smooth an engine out and make more horsepower, thus giving you better mileage if you keep your foot out of it. I can promise you however that plug style has very little to do with mileage gain, and definitely relies more on electronics, how much power is produced by the ignition driver, and how lean the vehicle is running. And of course how often you mash the pedal to the floor

Now, on an interesting side note I talked to some folks who are building 800 and 900 horsepower Semi truck engines (Caterpillar and Cummins), and believe it or not the mileage goes way up once the engine is modified! I know from past experience driving trucks that a normal setup gets about 4-5 miles per gallon pulling 80,000 pounds and typically your foot is all the way to the floor the whole day, and yet these modified engines are getting over 6 miles per gallon, which is a large gain despite the pitiful looking mileage numbers.

So it makes sense that your increase in horsepower by adding more fuel might possibly increase the mileage as well even though it goes against common logic.

Gentlemen,

Has anyone observed a very distinct RF Burst (greater than 200KHz) right after the discharge of this circuit? (Basic Gotoluc topology). It lasts for about 10 uS and is composed of a series of 300 Amp sawtooth discharges. It is frequency modulated and appears to be a relaxation oscillator type response.

This is a classical response that has been modeled using SPICE III. It is a most interesting wave form - but does it happen in actual field circuits of this type?

Spokane1

Hi Spokane1,

thank you for testing the circuit trough SPICE III and posting your findings.

Could you post some scope shots so we can see what you are seeing.

I'm sure the more knowledge may want to look at this and give there expert opinion and maybe suggest a way we could setup to measure this in real life.

Thanks for taking the time to share

Luc

That is interesting .

Dear Mr. Gotoluc,

Attached are three word documents that contain the simulated circuit and a few waveforms plus a short commentary. The SPICE III program outputs a Windows Meta File which only seems to work with Word.

I have completed 95% of an evaluation circuit to see if these RF bursts really exist. I suppose a lot of it is determined by the nature of the spark gap.

IF I get positive results I shall post some scope traces as well.

Spokane1

Attached Files

	Gotoluc RF Burst Page 1.doc (97.5 KB, 33 views)
	Gotoluc RF Burst Page 2.doc (88.5 KB, 20 views)
	Gotoluc RF Burst Page 3.doc (96.5 KB, 19 views)

Thank you Spokane1 for submitting your excellent report.

Unfortunately I'm not qualified or knowledgeable enough to measure and test the real circuit.

I do hope someone who is qualified can take up this challenge to see if it performs anything like it does in SPICE III.

Thank you once again for taking the time to do this test and share your report

Luc

@Spokane1
You may be interested in these notes:

"Electrically induced explosion in water"

Go to page 71 of

Meyer WFC Extra Info

It highlitghts frequencies at which water explodes.

Gentlemen,

It appears that a sawtooth RF burst does take place in the Basic Gotoluc circuit almost like the SPICE III simulator describes.

This is not an exhaustive study but a simple test to see if it was there. The gap is composed of tool steel with the negative (ground) electrode being sharpened. The effect is much greater when the gap is opened up to just short of were it will not arc. In this case the gap is 0.284". The storage cap is a 25 uF 600V oil-paper motor starter type. The power supply is voltage regulated at 300V. The battery operates the contactor to isolate the capacitor from the power supply during a pulse test. The capacitor shunt diode is a little overkill for this application (770 Amp) but I needed something that would handle 30 Amps. The HV diode is a 4-unit string of 8KV at 4 Amp microwave oven devices. The coil is a GM wasted spark model ($3.00 at the local junk yard). This coil has an isolated secondary which might be important because it allows for the polarity of the secondary to be reversed (See SPICE circuit on previous post).

The first scope trace shows the voltage across the gap as measured with a Tektronix 12KV probe. The probe is being driven past its linear range for the initial pulse but it does show the follow up burst wave form OK. The effect only shows voltage swings around 500V. This means that the arc will re-strike at a much lower voltage than the initial breakdown, which is around 15KV in this test, but way off the screen.

The second scope trace is a time expanded version of the first trace. Here we see the sawtooth nature of this process. Notice how the magnitude of the wave train remains relatively constant. The frequency of a single tooth during this portion of the burst is around 116 KHz. The actual frequency content would be higher than this due to its shape. This sample was taken from the last third of the burst where the frequency is slowing down anyway.

It will be interesting to see if this effect can be enhanced.

This observation might help those OU theories that require a HF source to explain any proposed non-classical process.

Spokane1

Attached Images

	D013 (2).jpg (54.2 KB, 390 views)
	D014 (2).jpg (53.8 KB, 23 views)
	DSCF0471 117 KB.jpg (117.5 KB, 40 views)
	DSCF0472 117 KB.jpg (117.3 KB, 33 views)

Mark,

I forgot to tell you, the plug has to be resistorless but you probably already figured that out.

WOW Spokane1

you are very seriously equipped!

Again, your test data is most excellent

Maybe you would like to also analyze the effects of another simple circuit I found recently. The topic is here: Effects of Recirculating BEMF to Coil

I have made 6 videos to date to demonstrate the effect. You may enjoy studying it also. Please have a look at all the videos and let me know what you think.

Many thanks for taking the time to do this important work and sharing it.

Luc

Finally i can get off my PHAT Butt and contribute some R and D. BTW Robins new plugs look IMMORTAL (can take a punishing)

R and D

YouTube - Plasma Water Ignition
New aqua pulsar video

Comments/Idea

WELL DONE, Try an Ecopra kit using water mist injection (using the endothermic reaction ALREADY from the exhaust) to inject THROUGH THE PLUG. Guys Check out Panacea's ecopra install.

YouTube - Panacea Ecopra Installation (1 of 2)

WATER MIST INJECTION IS THERE. Try Water mist through a reservoir -> into Ecopra vaporizer -> through the RPG 4700 through the plug it self for ENHANCED ignition. We may be able to test for you drop me a mail guys.

I think water mist from the exhaust put through Robins plugs is underrated, but what do i know

Hi Ash,

thanks for the links

Concerning the Ecopra vaporizer. I thought this was for Diesel Engines and there are no spark plugs in a Diesel Engine. Do you have this working in a Gasoline Engine?

Thanks for sharing

Luc

@AhuraMazda

I looked at the document you referenced. I saw no reference to frequencies on the page referenced. The only thing I saw concerning frequency (aka speed? interval?) was the range of the scope used (50 mhz).

Actually, I've seen little to no explicit information any where concerning the frequency (at least none with any independent reference or support).

However, if you are interested, see totally ignored post #1988 in this thread:

Again.

Peace
PJ

Hi Luc, they have done one or two tests on a petrol engine and got 20% but used too much water and are optimizing it ATM, i thought maybe the VAPORIZER they use might work for the spark plug?, seems like a neat unit.

Ash