Alternating polarity to dislodge gas

[AnActualPhysicist]

Just my two cents, but you can only put so much logic and pinned down physics on this with HHO, you can definitely over think and miss something !! The type of fluid you use does make a difference in different ways. Different resistance. Ease of flow. And contaminants, which changes resistance. That experiment wouldn't work if the water was just dripping due to the lack of flow of electrons. The faster the water the faster the spark occurs. I would think that the spark would increase in voltage as well.

Well certainly some liquids will do better than others. The point I was trying to make was that water isn't a "special" liquid the way other people seemed to think it was. Actually if you wanted to optimize that voltage generator, I would imagine that vegetable oil might work best, since it can break up into smaller droplets and would flow more uniformly. I doubt the resistance really matters though - keep in mind that the capacitance of the generator is extremely tiny, meaning that the amount of charge required to reach a high voltage is actually pretty negligible.

[Madsceintist]

HUM time for an experiment ............... I get back with this very shortly ...........

[AnActualPhysicist]

HUM time for an experiment ............... I get back with this very shortly ...........

Good luck. It's surprisingly hard to get it working, so try not to get frustrated.

[AnActualPhysicist]

So, if there is no net force from an electric field, why the water spreads out before the spark?

Neutral water will experience no net force from an electric field. The polar nature of water doesn't constitute a net charge, so an applied electric field only affects the net alignment of the molecules (which is irrelevant in the context of electrolysis). Read the post I was responding to on page 4 and what I'm talking about will make sense.

With respect to the water-bucket generator, the water droplets ARE charged as a result of electrostatic induction. Basically the open ended cans are highly charged, and attract the opposite charge in the nearby water streams. Once the voltages (i.e. electric fields) become strong enough, the water is visibly pulled towards the cans, spreading out as you said.

I apologize if my explanation is confusing. Here's an illustration, hopefully it will help:

[myoldyourgold]

so an applied electric field only affects the net alignment of the molecules

Can you explain this a little more. What do you mean by net alignment?

[RTJ_Nair]

Just thought I'd add that while electrical resonance may depend on capacitance, inductance, and resistance, mechanical resonance does not. Mechanical resonance depends on the geometry of the vessel and the speed of sound in the medium. And the effect with bubbles you are seeing there is a purely mechanical resonance.

Exactly, what I was referring to was exciting the cell with an electrical frequency and achieve resonance. The use of ultrasonics was using mechanical vibration generated by a piezo transducer. However, the electrical highvoltage frequency acting on the cell also produces mechanical vibrations. The three cases that I have mentioned earlier need to be explored. A pictorial summary is herewith attached for reference.

RTJ_Nair

[AnActualPhysicist]

A H2O molecule is a dipole. The means that the charge is not balanced. The oxygen atom tends to pull electrons away from the hydrogen, making it slightly negatively charged, and the hydrogens become slightly positively charged. Here's a picture to illustrate this point:

Normally water molecules are randomly aligned; the dipole could be pointing in any direction. However, if you put an electric field across them, they will feel a torque. The molecules will tend to rotate to align with the electric field. Note that this is a statistical effect - the alignments of individual molecules are still random, but they are simply more likely to be pointing along the electric field.

*Random Spiel*
An interesting result of this is that under a sufficiently high electric field, this should reduce the heat capacity of water. This is because rotation is a "degree of freedom" which can be used to store energy, and if you remove it the water should change temperature more rapidly with changes in total energy. I imagine the field required would be very very strong though.

However, the electrical highvoltage frequency acting on the cell also produces mechanical vibrations.

Forgive me, I'm quite new here so I haven't had time to read many threads. But I was under the impression that AC voltages don't work for electrolysis. Unless you're planning to use a small amplitude AC voltage with a large DC offset, like rectified AC with a smoothing capacitor. But wouldn't that just be electrically inefficient?

I guess my question is, do the bubbles attached to the plates actually lower the production rate? Have you actually measured a consistent and significant reduction in amperage when the bubbles appear? Are you certain that the two are really correlated, and what supporting evidence do you have?

Based on my knowledge of electricity I am having a very hard time seeing how bubbles could significantly impact the total resistance of the cell.

**Be aware that I'm not attacking you. I just want to get to the heart of the matter and examine it analytically.**

**Also, I wasn't able to open that file you linked, not sure why. Could you re-upload it as a pdf?**

[myoldyourgold]

Bubble occlusion in extreme cases can be seen on the plates in the form of dark rings. What happens is the current / ions pass on the outside of the bubbles not through them and if one is stuck then current is concentrated on a very small area and excess heat is generated and shows up as a dark ring the size and shape of the bubble. Bubbles are insulators and only one bubble can form in one spot at a time. The sooner it can move off the sooner another can form. I am not a physicist but have seen the results of bubble occlusion first hand. If the whole surface is covered with bubbles that are not moving the reactor would be very inefficient and ion movement would be next to nil. This is one reason the gap between the cathode and anode has to be in relation to the amount of amps/gas being made or it acerbates the problem.

[AnActualPhysicist]

Bubble occlusion in extreme cases can be seen on the plates in the form of dark rings. What happens is the current / ions pass on the outside of the bubbles not through them and if one is stuck then current is concentrated on a very small area and excess heat is generated and shows up as a dark ring the size and shape of the bubble. Bubbles are insulators and only one bubble can form in one spot at a time. The sooner it can move off the sooner another can form. I am not a physicist but have seen the results of bubble occlusion first hand. If the whole surface is covered with bubbles that are not moving the reactor would be very inefficient and ion movement would be next to nil. This is one reason the gap between the cathode and anode has to be in relation to the amount of amps/gas being made or it acerbates the problem.

Oh, that's very interesting. If a dark ring shows up, then doesn't that indicate that a high current is flowing along the surface of the bubble? Perhaps the ion density is higher on the surface. This seems to be suggested by these articles:

http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/nanobubble.html
http://www.free-energy-info.com/P6.pdf

But I have to ask again, have you actually seen a significant effect on the cell current after controlling for temperature/voltage fluctuations?

Edit: Oh, I just realized that I was somewhat repeating what you said. Just wanted to be clear though, if the ion density was not greater at the surface, you wouldn't get burn marks.

[myoldyourgold]

This is much more complex than what meets the eye. Water comes in all kinds. By this I mean other chemicals, minerals, type of electrolyte etc in the water used in electrolysis. This all changes the dynamics of what actually is happening. Because of this I buy distilled water which has been distilled once and then run it through my own distiller or double distill tap water and you would be surprised at the oily substances that gets left in the distiller and has to be cleaned each time. Distilled water works like a sponge and should never be stored in plastic. Now you understand how there can be many different phenomenon/interactions going on both in the electrolysis process and any magnet field interactions based more than just water but the amount of other materials/chemicals. If you mean by "voltage fluctuation" frequency through a PWM I have to say no I have not but that does not mean there is none. If you mean by reduced or more voltage per active area then I have to say yes. Remember electrolyte is non ohmic. (Do not ask me to explain that please). This affects what happens in the reactor in each cell. The center cells in a stack run hotter and there is more ion movement than the outer cells. As voltage is increased heat is also increased making the electrolyte less resistive to ion movement and thus draws more amps. This, if not controlled, will cause thermal runaway and possibly melt wires etc. This can also happen where voltage remains the same. If you go the other way the lower the voltage the less heat there is, the less amps it will draw and the less gas will be produced. The ideal spot between 1.24 volts and 2.7 volts per cell depends on many things like; the active surface area, type of material, electrode preparation, electrolyte concentration, pressure in each cell, connections, how thoroughly/equally current saturates the anode and cathode, location of ports, gas flow, magnetic field interference, ambient temperature, if it is a bipolar or unipolar reactor, deuterium concentration, current leakage, just to name a few. This I am sure you are well aware of. Each one of these and many more have to be taken into consideration in order to really answer your question properly and accurately. There is an optimum voltage and electrolyte concentration for every reactor. There is also some trade offs to achieve what ever your goal is. Now that I have muddied up the water I had better take a back seat and learn form those that have the formal training and background which I do not. LOL