Water Sparkplug

[ashtweth]

HI Aaron, i had been away on the weekend, can some one point me to where the figures of 40%+ were achieved(i assume Greg's) with the ignition and water mist? ill add that to the PDF summery, can't seem to find the post. Thanks for the back on track post mate.

Ash

[sigzidfit]

Props to the MODS

Trolls and Spooks and Shills oh me oh my!

If you're not taking flak you're not over the target.

Don't forget...1420 Mhz

Peace
PJ

[Aaron]

Greg's results

HI Aaron, i had been away on the weekend, can some one point me to where the figures of 40%+ were achieved(i assume Greg's) with the ignition and water mist? ill add that to the PDF summery, can't seem to find the post. Thanks for the back on track post mate.

Ash

Hi Ash,

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/2242-water-sparkplug-4.html#post36485

direct link: http://www.energeticforum.com/36485-post1941.html

25mpg on the 1300cc seems to be the best Greg got...with Plasma and moisture - seems to be about 35-36...so 10mpg more per gallon. If I did the math right.

repost below:

gmeast
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 323


Test Report
Well ........

I completed my first test run. I drove 300 miles. 65% of that was freeway miles at 55 MPH. The rest was around town, stop and go, my guess is average about 20 MPH - 40 MPH.

I want to say that the factory hype for this vehicle with the stock 1200 CC engine was 31.5 MPG (U.S.). I had the engine rebuilt - new jugs and pistons - which made it 1300 CC - a bigger engine with much more power - same carb as for the 1200 CC.

During the test I ran the Vexus Circuit with its own Oscillator and Voltage Multiplier (doubler). I also made a water drip system that forced steam to be aspirated into the carburetor at a set rate (Bug-on-I-V).

I topped the tank off with 8.44 Gallons of regular gasoline.

Do the math. Not only did we beat the factory estimate by 13% for the stock 1200 CC engine, we beat it with an even bigger, more powerful 1300 CC engine. We also beat the best mileage I ever got on this engine by 43 %!

Spark Plugs:

I did NOT use new spark plugs for this test. The plugs in it are the ones I've been using all along for the bench tests and Vexus Circuit development (in vehicle). I have no real estimate of the 'abuse' miles on these plugs.

I have included a photo of the #1 spark plug along side a new plug. There HAS been wear, so this needs attention ... maybe a different electrode configuration. The left hand plug is from the bug and gauges at 0.041" and the new plug gauges at 0.029".

This test has been conclusive on several fronts ... at least for me.


PLASMA RULES ! ! !


Peace,

Greg

[ashtweth]

Aaron thanks a lot man, its great to have a helping hand , ill emphasize that at the TOP of the forums PDF and add the fixes tonight. That's better then the average hydroxy boost!

[Kinetix]

magnetO, I think that the overvoltage burning of the diodes string is the right explanation. And is very probable that they burn one by one, as insane4evr said.
As you noticed, the problem occured first at full throttle. Well, at full throttle, the electric resistance of the gas/air mix between the spark plug's electrodes is at it's maximum. That's why it needs max HV and burns the diodes.
Yes, a good ignition coil can make even more than 35KV. For example, I have an old ignition coil (for experimenting) that makes 25mm (meaning at least 25KV) in open air, and makes sparks that jump between the center (HV) electrode and one of the other two electrodes (plus or minus). Measured, it's more than 30mm of length.
But in my car (made in 2000) there is a better ignition system, so I have no doubts that at full throttle there are really HV (tens of KV) there...
I do not have an explanation about Greg's setup working in spite of that. Maybe his ingition coil (being old enough) does not make such high spikes of voltage, and keeps it under 15kV. Or maybe his setup does not allow the HV to raise that much. Maybe his carburetor is running leaner. Maybe...

To protect the diode string, I think there are two steps to make:
- first: put enough number of diodes in string (to block at least 30-45KV)
- second: put a resistor (maybe 500k-1M) in parallel to each diode, so that the HV voltage will divide equally on each one. The "domino effect" will probably cease.

All the best.

[broli]

Does putting some higher rate diodes at the front and going with smaller/cheapers one at the end help? It would be most economical if it does.

[WCastle]

Thank you's and praise

@Aaron,

First off, a sincere thank you for starting this thread, the sheer amount of real experiments and replications that have come about as a result of this thread are a testimony to the power of "open source" projects worldwide.


@Gmeast,

Greg, your real world experiments in the area of plasma, cdi, enhanced ignition etc... are an inspiration to thousands of experimenters, please do not let some posts which are adverse to your experiments for whatever purpose get you down, keep up the good work.

[dllabarre]

opto switches

So far I haven't had any problems with optoswitches at all. And my generator has run for more than 30 hours for testing. Of course it is a lot easier using reedswitches and magnets, but that is not so precise

Hi Jetijs

I know my generator setup is similar to yours.
Which opto switch are you using?
Do you have a part number, website to purchase from handy?

Thank you for all you do for this thread
DonL

[Jetijs]

Hi DonL,
I used LTH301-46 optointerrupter. It looks like this:


But you can use any optoswitch that you can find. Just look at the datasheet of that optoswitch and see the output collector current rating, the higher the better, that means that it can handle more current on the output and will be able to turn on/off more powerful transistors without a need for amplification. Mine can handle 20mA and is used to turn on an optorelay that then triggers the thyristor (SCR). Also look for those optoswitches that have the widest gap between photodiode and phototransistor. Mine has a 3mm gap, but the wider, the easier to work with them

[Chris31]

@jet

Not sure if you seen my reply to your previous post but I decided to delete it. I didnt think anyone would be interested in what I do at this time. Ill repost when its complete and have done some proper test on it.

I dont want my work to be confusing

[gotoluc]

Hi everyone,

I've been busy with some resonance experiments and have not check here for 2 days. I'm sorry to see that we have had a derailing attempt I hope we can all move on since we know we have real results thanks to Greg's and everyone's excellent research, development an implementations. This may not be the last attack... as closer we get, some may try to stop it. Let us be strong and ignore any negative comments or posts with a non reply . Eventually they just go away.

Thanks Aaron for stepping in.

and to all

Luc

[Guest]

@Aaron, everyone.

As a complete outsider to the WSP-tread due to lack of time I begin to get interested... Anyway, if someone steps in to clearly upset all hard working members, do NOT take it seriously, just remove the bad post and continue working. That is all.

About Dankie I have seen many posts from him in the Meyer threads and there is a connection between the WSP thread and the gas processor/VIC that H2OPower, Dankie and others promote. Maybe the WSP is the first simple step to a complete gas processor. HV, HF are used in both cases. Simple is ALWAYS the good start! Dankie may feel differently today so let´s forget about his message.

I believe the WSP is very important, the difference to the Meyer water mist ionizer may be the double coils around the spark gap/plates - symmetry. So if we used HV, HF from both sides of the spark plug we may get even better results, match the trf+coil 1 inductance with the second coil inductance. That is pure speculation from my side. That way maybe we can do well without any plasma too.

Sorry to disturb your good progress here.

[Guest]

Just forgot a small detail: Tesla always suggested use of water on caps to enhance effect of sparks.....

[dllabarre]

Thank you

Hi DonL,
I used LTH301-46 optointerrupter. It looks like this:

But you can use any optoswitch that you can find. Just look at the datasheet of that optoswitch and see the output collector current rating, the higher the better, that means that it can handle more current on the output and will be able to turn on/off more powerful transistors without a need for amplification. Mine can handle 20mA and is used to turn on an optorelay that then triggers the thyristor (SCR). Also look for those optoswitches that have the widest gap between photodiode and phototransistor. Mine has a 3mm gap, but the wider, the easier to work with them

I just ordered all my parts.

Thank You for all the help!

DonL

[gmeast]

water mist

HI Aaron, i had been away on the weekend, can some one point me to where the figures of 40%+ were achieved(i assume Greg's) with the ignition and water mist? ill add that to the PDF summery, can't seem to find the post. Thanks for the back on track post mate.

Ash

Hi Ash,

I have tried water mist before and got nothing. I truly believe the fact that I aspirated 'steam' has a great deal to do with an increased thermal efficiency which accounted for the increase in mileage.

If I may present the scenario:
I recuperate waste heat by turning water into steam. By doing this, I avoid the conversion penalty associated with the 'heat of fusion' ... that is the heat a substance, in this case water, absorbs before it changes state, in this case water to steam. This heat energy can't be recovered with a condenser ... it is therefore a penalty ... the 'steam penalty'. But I do this external to the process with (otherwise) waste heat. With the steam (gas) combined with the air and fuel, ignition occurs (thanks to the intense plasma spark) and the combustion heats up 'both' the steam and the air, but the steam is like an inert component that can absorb allot of energy. So it does and generates pressure in exchange. The pressure from both the air/fuel and the steam is about the same as it would be by just the air/fuel itself because it at a lower temperature. This is where the increase in thermal efficiency comes in ... it is a system thing:
The pressure ratio (compression ratio) is the same. The efficiency of the energy extraction (power stroke) is thus the same (p1-p2)/p1 ... if the ending pressure p2 is much, much less than the starting pressure p1, then the efficiency is high (that's why a high compression engine is efficient). The same is said for temperature (t1-t2)/t1. But what does this do for us? Well - the engine runs cooler with more energy being converted to output power because FAR, FAR less heat is being rejected from cooling the engine.

In my tests, after the engine warms up, you can place any cold plate at the exhaust and the condensation is about 3 - 4 times the amount of water as usual. The EGT is also cooler by at least 200 Deg F. But you don't get consistent running unless you use a plasma spark. I can run so much water (in the form of steam) that the normal spark will misfire. There is some inherent fuel/air leaning going on here also. If I aspirate the steam after the venturi, then the fuel/air ratio won't be affected ...this is my next step. BUT YOU NEED A PLASMA SPARK TO DO THIS.

Greg