Wet Cells and Current Leakage

[Farrahday]

While there would seem to be definite efficiency benefits of what is known as a Dry Cell when compared to that of a Wet Cell, it makes very little sense that this has anything whatsoever to do with current ‘leakage’.

I know that in this area of science and research, things often get said on a whim, without anything by way of substantiated proof, and then get picked upon by others and spread like the common cold. Eventually the original source is lost in the annals of time, and what was originally and idle, perhaps even thoughtless remark, can become accepted by many as a truth, a given, and indeed science fact, when in reality it is nothing of the sort.

Current leakage is one such thing that, if given some thought, makes no sense at all. It is said that Dry Cells are more efficient than Wet Cells, because they do not allow current to bypass the electrodes. But, think about it for a minute - this is never going to happen anyway.

Consider this. Two electrodes in a jar of water, a cathode and an anode. We apply a voltage of 12 volts across these electrodes and we get the cations in the water heading off to the cathode and the anions heading off towards the anode. Both only move because they are repelled from one electrode and attracted to the other electrode. No charged species is going to go off on a merry tour of the surroundings!

Now if we add a floating plate between the cathode and the anode, this floating plate will see a pd of 6 volts, and will be relatively more negative one side than the other side. Again the cations and anions within the water will be repelled by the like charged electrodes and attracted to the unlike charged electrodes. But, and here’s the thing, there is never any reason for the charge carriers to bypass electrodes. After all, why would they? They are being effectively pushed away from one electrode and pulled toward another. They will take the shortest route from one electrode to another. It makes no sense whatsoever that ionic current would circumnavigate around a charged electrode!

So if Dry Cells are indeed more efficient than Wet Cells, then there must be another explanation and perhaps this demands further investigation.

[jdcproducts]

I am just starting to experiment with HHO but the idea of "current" leakage with a wet cell to me means the following....

In a wet cell all "edges" of the plate are exposed to the electrolyte. From what I understand electrons try to flow to the path of least resistance, so they are all going to gather at the outer edges of the plate because its much easier to get to where they wanna be, in turn possibly causing a loss in hho production. I think of it like a pan with no lip to keep the "stew" from spilling out. Your not going to be very efficient making the stew if the ingredients needed to make it keeps spilling over the sides.

In a dry cell you have completely eliminated the outer edge of the cell from being exposed to the charged electrolyte solution. The reaction inside the cell is much more "focused" if you will because of that.

I do not know if their is any logic to that but it makes sense to me. Although I'm sure if you were to coat the outer edges of the plates in some sort of rubber or non conducting material, this would be the same thing as a dry cell.

I will be testing this theory in the months to come to see if their is any relevance to "current leakage". Good post and way to think outside the box.....

[Farrahday]

In a wet cell all "edges" of the plate are exposed to the electrolyte. From what I understand electrons try to flow to the path of least resistance, so they are all going to gather at the outer edges of the plate because its much easier to get to where they wanna be, in turn possibly causing a loss in hho production. I think of it like a pan with no lip to keep the "stew" from spilling out. Your not going to be very efficient making the stew if the ingredients needed to make it keeps spilling over the sides.

Don't really understand what your getting at here. Why would electrons gather at the edges of a plate? Why do you say there is less resistance at the edges of the plates? How is that easier for them to get where they wanna be?

Nevertheless, as I mentioned, from everything I've gleaned there does seem to be some tangible benefit from these dry cells in terms of efficiency, though I've never made a dry cell myself.

I just feel that current leakage is a wrong analysis and hence a wrong term, and that something else is occurring. I mean, current can't actually leak out of the electrolyser, and charges are only attracted and repelled from the charged plates, so they have no reason to take other than a direct path. It's not the same as your stew boiling over as nothing is lost or escapes the confines of the electrolyser.

I've seen people liken it to leaky capacitors in the past, but of course this is utter drivell as a leaky capacitor simply allows the charges to pass through the dielectric from one plate to another, which is effectively exactly what we want to happen in our electrolysers.

Very interesting, and not sure what it comes down to, but current leakage certainly would not be near the top of my list!

[Roland Jacques]

Farrah, you bring up a interesting point.

The way i understand current will seek the path of least resistant. So Some current leap frogs the some neutral plates in a wet cell. I suppose that the weaker concentration of Dope / electrolyte would result in a little less "leakage" (or bypassing). Or maybe less resistant neutral plate the same would be true. i believe it just means the current see less plate surface. What do you think ?

On a side note, i just found some of your research and posts. You are a awesome person to follow you. I really look forward to your conclusion on Mookie's exciter cell. It would be nice to see how good of a quality of gas it produces.

Ps. Your insight on the two different reasons for conditioning plates, explains a lot to me and makes a lot of sense. Maybe you could share that here or allow me to copy and paste what you side about it.

[Farrahday]

Hi Roland, feel free to copy and post anything of mine you feel relevant - I won't be filing copyright lawsuits, I'm strictly open-source.

I have a work bench that I can moderate over on OverUnityResearch, so it's better for me to post my findings there as I can keep it uncluttered.

Farrah, you bring up a interesting point.

The way i understand current will seek the path of least resistant. So Some current leap frogs the some neutral plates in a wet cell. I suppose that the weaker concentration of Dope / electrolyte would result in a little less "leakage" (or bypassing). Or maybe less resistant neutral plate the same would be true. i believe it just means the current see less plate surface. What do you think ?

I think a big problem is what people term as 'neutral plates'. Of course, they are not neutral in any way. I prefer the term floating plates as this best describes them and does not infer that they do not see a pd - which they do. I hate the term 'neutral plates', but like the term HHO (which is also rather annoying AND incorrect), on these forums, it seems to have become the generally accepted and indeed the most commonly used term.

So, as these floating plates see a potential difference, the path of least resistance is from one plate to another, not around them!

Stick a floating plate in between a cathode and an anode at 12v pd, and the floating plate sees a 6 volt pd with respect from both the cathode and the anode. Any charge carriers have no reason to bypass this floating plate as they will be attracted or repelled by the pd on this plate. And the path of least resistance is the most direct path to the first plate that shows a pd and so attracts and repels.

[myoldyourgold]

I guess my electronic skills are lacking. I am more mechanical and know enough about electricity to sometimes be dangerous. Well not that bad maybe LOL. If you have 3 plates. Example: Plate 1 connected and plate 2 floating and plate 3 connected to a 12v power supply and if you measure voltage across 1 and 3 you see 12 volts. If you measure 1 and 2 you see 6 volts and the same for 2 and 3 the same. I take it that the pull/push of the two end plates is not greater but equal to the 6 volts read on 1,2 and 2,3. The distance between the facing plates makes it such that the current will travel to the the closest plate 1 to 2 and 2 to 3, off the face of the plates, but the edges charge the electrolyte and cause some current to go directly to the end plate through the conductor (charged electrolyte). I have read and have somewhere in my piling system some technical papers that when I put my hands on them I will post them. They will give you a much better scientific explanation of how this works. Just do not hold you breath. I am out of station or home base at the moment.

[Farrahday]

I guess my electronic skills are lacking. I am more mechanical and know enough about electricity to sometimes be dangerous. Well not that bad maybe LOL. If you have 3 plates. Example: Plate 1 connected and plate 2 floating and plate 3 connected to a 12v power supply and if you measure voltage across 1 and 3 you see 12 volts. If you measure 1 and 2 you see 6 volts and the same for 2 and 3 the same. I take it that the pull/push of the two 12v plates is greater than the 6 volts read on 1,2 and 2,3. The distance between the facing plates makes it such that the current will travel to the the closest plate 1 to 2 and 2 to 3, off the face of the plates, but the edges are attracted to the 12v plate. I have read and have somewhere in my piling system some technical papers that when I put my hands on them I will post them. They will give you a much better scientific explanation of how this works. Just do not hold you breath. I am out of station or home base at the moment.

I understand why you have said this, and indeed this is the common response as to why current can leak around plates. However, what you are interpreting as a greater 12 volt pull or repulsion when compared to the 6 volts of the floating plate is a common misconception.

Think about it for a minute, the potential difference seen by any charged species is dependent on its actual position within the cell - it's all relative. Assuming just an anode and a cathode and 12 volts, only a charged species at the 0 volt cathode will see 12 volts at the anode, once this charged species has moved to half distance between the two electrodes, it only sees +6 volt at the anode and -6 volt at the cathode. At this stage the effective attraction to one electrode is equal to the effective replusion at the other electrode, but at anything less than halfway between the two electrodes, the repulsion is a greater force than the attraction, likewise anything after halfway point and the attractive force begins to take precedence (but both forces always add up to the same). The inverse square law will come ito play too, that is, the closer the charged species gets to the attractive electrode, the greater the attraction becomes, and likewise the further it is away from the repelling electrode, the less the repulsion is felt.

Place a floating plate midway and the any -vely charged species approaching this plate will be highly attracted to the +6 volts on the plate, while to a lesser degree still being repelled by the 0 volt cathode. When this charged species arrives at the floating plate, the potential difference now between this plate and the 12 volt anode is only 6 volts, so it makes no sense whatsoever for this charged species, which has just arrived at a + 6V floating plate, to bypass it and head for the anode which itself is now relatively only +6 volts with respect to the floating plate. And to take this just a step further, any -vely charged species halway between the 12v anode and the central floating plate will only see and attraction of +3 volts at the anode! So you see the +12 volts is only relative to the 0 volt cathode.

Have you ever tried this:

Put two plates (anode and cathode) a fair distance apart in water, apply 12 volts (or whatever) and then attatch the -ve lead of a voltmeter to the cathode. Now put the +ve probe from the voltmeter in the water between the two plates and watch the voltage alter as you move it various distances between the two. At mid-way between the plates you will see that your voltmeter shows half the supply voltage. This is just to say that the voltage is spread equally through the liquid medium, and you don't need an electrode as such to see this.

[myoldyourgold]

Put two plates (anode and cathode) a fair distance apart in water, apply 12 volts (or whatever) and then attatch the -ve lead of a voltmeter to the cathode. Now put the +ve probe from the voltmeter in the water between the two plates and watch the voltage alter as you move it various distances between the two. At mid-way between the plates you will see that your voltmeter shows half the supply voltage. This is just to say that the voltage is spread equally through the liquid medium, and you don't need an electrode as such to see this.

Your explanation is exactly right how the voltage travels through the reactor and my attempt was feeble at best. After writing that I realized that it was lacking but let it go planning to come back and revise it. There is no greater pull that is true but some of the charged species do make it to the opposite side with out going through the floating plate.

Your above experiment is something close to solving the problem. The electrolyte being conductive is charged and no matter where you put your lead you will get a reading. There is no way to stop that except in a "dry cell" where there is no conductive material running around the out side of it. No matter how many plates etc. you have, some of the current from one side through the conductor (electrolyte) makes it to opposite connection with out touching the floater. You can put your lead anywhere in the electrolyte and get a reading so how do you stop that current from going straight to the other side. It is almost as good as a wire going from one side to the other. There just is nothing stopping the current in an open bath and forcing it only to go where you want it too. Most of it will but some will not. We are not talking about something other than a small leakage but it tends to turn into a supper highway in time.

I have edited my previous post to clear things up. You can read the original post in Farrahs quote.

[Farrahday]

but the edges charge the electrolyte and cause some current to go directly to the end plate through the conductor (charged electrolyte).

Nothing charges the electrolyte, the charged species already exist within the solution. It is simply the influence of applying a voltage that sets them into motion by attraction and repulsion. The charged species are what make up the current, and this current only exists due to the voltages on the electrodes/plates.

The electrolyte being conductive is charged and no matter where you put your lead you will get a reading. There is no way to stop that except in a "dry cell" where there is no conductive material running around the out side of it. No matter how many plates etc. you have, some of the current from one side through the conductor (electrolyte) makes it to opposite connection with out touching the floater. You can put your lead anywhere in the electrolyte and get a reading so how do you stop that current from going straight to the other side.

Ok, we know from experience the dry cells are more efficient, but I see that we are still not on the same page regarding the apparent current leakage.

For a start, if we are talking about, say a anion bypassing the floating plate and heading off instead toward the anode, there is one major problem with this scenario. Apart from the fact that it is for some reason circumnavigating a +vely charged floating plate which is what should be attracting it, drawing it, inducing it to move, it then is faced with entering an effectively -ve, or like charge area on the other side of the plate, which by rights it should be repelled from. This is just another reason why this 'current leakage' argument is hard for me to come to terms with. I play this out in my mind and for the life of me I can see no reason why a charged species would bypass one unlike charged plate. Logic dictates that even a charged species that is not directly between the plates, should be drawn to the nearest attractive plate. I need to give this whole thing some real thought and make some tests.

This is not a priority of mine at present, but I'd love to do some indepth study and investigate what is really going on, why and under what conditions. Something is simply not adding up.

[Roland Jacques]

Hi Roland, feel free to copy and post anything of mine you feel relevant - I won't be filing copyright lawsuits, I'm strictly open-source.

Ahh, now i can't find the post. The info you shared on conditioning plates. The TWO reasons to do it, I thought where very valuable to many folks. It seems to be very overlooked and ignored by most of us. That post of yours made it clear to me that it is time will spent. I will be doing both types of conditioning you mentioned in the future . The Calcification build up by Dave Lawton was new to me.

Do you know where you mention it? I really think folks here would benefit from it.