Magnetic (Ruskin) Filter

[RustyLugNut]

Ruty, I would have thought that you would have commented on this:

I should have added that it is also claimed that para does not. You seem to be equipped to make this fact of fiction.

moyg (myoldyourgold), I think I have made my position clear that I think the para/ortho question has little bearing on our situation. If you have some good information from other than the pseudo science sources I keep getting in a net search, I would be appreciative. A good paper, weather it is a study or a lab report, usually has a prodigious amount of valuable information in the sources listing and footnotes. I will keep looking in classic science reports for anything that might apply to our situation. If you can post some of the sources or snippets of quotes that refer to the para/ortho question I would be appreciative. It may take time as the search slows down once we start poking into .edu's and .gov's and such.

And, I do not have a lab in my home or business that has the capability to do analytic chem tests or nuclear quantum tests.

I do have connections to several universities and a government forensic lab to run some of the tests of para/ortho existence, amount and reactivity. It is not as simple as walking up to them and giving them a pile of money. You must DEFINE the work or they will not know what to make of you. Once there is clarity, then there is the work of setting up the equipment to make your required tests. The time frame and the costs involved make it clear why it is important to look at the research that has come before so that we are not just simply reproducing old work.

Once there is a need for such tests, I will have to gather the funding either through direct means or through research granting and such.

Since talk is cheap, and thought is free (or should be), we can continue to discuss and gather data and previous studies and define our testing path.

Well IMHO this is where science some times goes wrong. By standing on the shoulders of giants they some times tend to miss new discoveries made by the simple experimenters due to the fact there heads are in the clouds. LOL Science can not be ignored but it also should not be keeping you from seeing what is below the clouds. I only say this because a very good friend who has more then one sheep skin on his wall and is considerd a leader in his field told me that adding HHO to the combustion could not and would not yield any gain in fact a loss in efficiency. Loves to use the Myth Busters as an example. He refused to change his mind when I proved differently. He is still trying to figure out how I somehow was able to fool him with my demonstration. He has spent hours and the results are still the same. He finds no tricks and it has become an obsession with him to find something in my demistration that will prove me wrong. LOL He just can not get his head out of the clouds yet. I hope with all his efforts, even through they are misdirected, he might actually come up with some valuable information on why it works like it does. Time will tell. I have not been holding my breath though.

Some good stuff Rusty and we just have to all keep an open mind that on the practical side of things we might not always find a easy explanation the fits an existing science model. To many variables and to many tests being done that are not in a finely controlled lab situation make it very difficult.

I do keep an open mind. That is why I am here on this forum. I am one of the science and engineering types that knows that this works. Believe me, this does not make me popular with my peers. They do think I am crazy.

And one must remember that science is a human endeavor to understand the physical world around us. Little by little, we creep up on this understanding. Questions become answers, become truth. When another question pops up, you do not abandon the previous truths or fall back to anarchy of thought. You build on the previous truths and move forward.

You use your acquaintance as an example of close minded academia. And yet, lay people fall into the same trap. They are not immune to the disease of narrow thought. Look at the posts on this forum. There is example after example of those that cling to their hollowed beliefs against all reason. Fact and reason. The physical world will present you with the facts. You just have to reason it out.

We both agree that HHO works. We just disagree HOW it works. And that is ok. I have a heavy science and engineering background to build on. I will approach the problem from my viewpoint. Others will take their unique experiences and move towards the answer, which is there, unmoving and waiting to be discovered.

[RustyLugNut]

It is sad, but there are some people who can only see things one way, and one way only -even if the truth is laid out plainly before them. It is an utter waste of time to argue with such ones, as they rarely ever change their ways. To show the severity of this dilemma -even God has no use for people like those since they refuse to show humility. (Note that he does not force anyone to serve him, and it's their loss if they do not.)
"The first pig to squeal is the one that got hit." = "Who the cap fits, let them wear it."

Anyhow, can we get back to posting info, without all the bickering, please?

BTW...this goes for BOTH the Octane and Ruskin Filter threads.

For some reason, people have this naive belief that just because someone disagrees with you, they must be out to "get you" and "bring you down".

Without dissent and solid discourse, one may never see the other side. And consequently, they may miss the answers they seek. Surrounding yourself with people that do nothing but agree with you leaves you vulnerable to self entrapment.

The discourse we are engaged in, just as long as it is carried out with reason, is what this parallel inquiry into HHO is all about. This discussion is needed. We can build HHO generators. We can install them. And we might see gains. And yet we don't understand them. The theory must parallel the practical. At some point, the theory becomes accepted principle and the practical is just an engineering exercise of application of these principles. That is the goal of this forum, if I read the title statement correctly.

[myoldyourgold]

moyg (myoldyourgold), I think I have made my position clear that I think the para/ortho question has little bearing on our situation.

I can not honestly confirm or deny your position on the ortho/para question. The reason being is because I have very strong practical evidence that is repeatable that shows that there is a change of some kind in the gas (both coming from the reactor and from a gas conditioner) that until I find some other explanation, that is reasonable and understandable, I find it hard to explain any other way but am totally open to the fact it is something other than the ortho/para question. There is really no disagreement here just a quest for the right answer.

We both agree that HHO works. We just disagree HOW it works. And that is ok. I have a heavy science and engineering background to build on. I will approach the problem from my viewpoint. Others will take their unique experiences and move towards the answer, which is there, unmoving and waiting to be discovered.

I am not sure at least in my mind that we disagree on anything really. We might just not understand each other based on our backgrounds and understanding of some of the processes. We both could be right or both wrong. LOL I have to admit that I have very few of the technical answers but when ever I go to academia I find it is way more trouble and have to counter way to much of their negativity. It just is not worth it in my experience in most cases where HHO is involved. I can hardly blame them though because of past and current scammers who promote total impossible explanations.

I agree that there are lay people that are no different than academia but in a lot of cases they have the excuse of lacking the ability to understand technical explanations, education, IQ, or what have you to understand some explanations. I think that when most or shown working models they are convinced even without understanding the science behind it. Academia on the other hand is much harder to convince unless you already have the answer or enough of the answer described in there own technical vocabulary. I am sure there are exceptions but not in my experience.

Everyone needs to continue working and we both agree an answer will eventually surface. When it really comes down to the bottom line the potential rewards of using HHO are enough and even though answers to some questions would be helpful they are not going to effect the use and experimenting that is on going in most cases.

[RustyLugNut]

I can not honestly confirm or deny your position on the ortho/para question. The reason being is because I have very strong practical evidence that is repeatable that shows that there is a change of some kind in the gas (both coming from the reactor and from a gas conditioner) that until I find some other explanation, that is reasonable and understandable, I find it hard to explain any other way but am totally open to the fact it is something other than the ortho/para question. There is really no disagreement here just a quest for the right answer.



I am not sure at least in my mind that we disagree on anything really. We might just not understand each other based on our backgrounds and understanding of some of the processes. We both could be right or both wrong. LOL I have to admit that I have very few of the technical answers but when ever I go to academia I find it is way more trouble and have to counter way to much of their negativity. It just is not worth it in my experience in most cases where HHO is involved. I can hardly blame them though because of past and current scammers who promote total impossible explanations.

I agree that there are lay people that are no different than academia but in a lot of cases they have the excuse of lacking the ability to understand technical explanations, education, IQ, or what have you to understand some explanations. I think that when most or shown working models they are convinced even without understanding the science behind it. Academia on the other hand is much harder to convince unless you already have the answer or enough of the answer described in there own technical vocabulary. I am sure there are exceptions but not in my experience.

Everyone needs to continue working and we both agree an answer will eventually surface. When it really comes down to the bottom line the potential rewards of using HHO are enough and even though answers to some questions would be helpful they are not going to effect the use and experimenting that is on going in most cases.

The problem is . . . if you continue to design and build and experiment to wrong principles, you hit a dead end and have wasted time and resources doing so. It might be fun and enjoyable for you, but that is another topic.

Why don't you continue the para/ortho question. Maybe even the monatomic hydrogen angle.

I will look into active radical production.

[myoldyourgold]

I have no further interest in monatomic and unless something comes up will not pursue that directly. I am more interested in the effects HHO has on the ICE so most of the work from now on will be real world results which is the best way to measure the changes made to the reactor or any part of the system, at least for me. Some long term testing is on going to establish reliability issues. Ortho/para or just better quality of gas based on changes to the reactor or a gas conditioner will be on going but some basics I doubt will change much. Efficiency is going to measured in MPG gain and not LPM of the reactor/generator. Percentages are misleading. After all this is what it is all about.

[myoldyourgold]

Lets get back to the topic of the Ruskin's patent or gas conditioner. None of the builds that I am aware of including my experiments followed the patent. Here are some things I found. Because we are using plastic pipe not metal and different sized magnets to mention only 2, the results might not be the same at all. I first increased the length and went to smaller magnets in length. This is not following the patent at all. The idea was to give the gas more increased exposure time and more changes of field per second. (24" compared to 12") This did seam to make a small difference. I am now looking at wrapping the whole thing in a few layers of aluminum tape. This is for two reasons. One the field that is generated is affecting other parts of the system negatively that are hard to relocate and two, this might work like a crude Faraday cage redirecting more of the energy back into the device. The next experiment is to place the magnets in a steel spring the fits tight in the pvc pipe and the magnets fitting tight in the spring. This idea might make assembly easier. I am open for suggestions.

Measuring the effect is the real problem for lack of expensive equipment, being away form my lab and in my case it only made sense by checking for any increased MPG over a reasonable length of time, multiple times and then compare to the same measurement over a similar length of time with the first version. The average was slightly better. Both were better than without but only marginally with everything being the same. There were other things done later that made for a larger difference that might have taken advantage of the changes to the gas but lets keep this simple.

Now if this is really worth it remains to be seen. It might not be worth the expensive. If possible lets keep why there seems to be more gains using a gas conditioner until there is more evidence that there really is. We can then hash out why if this is confirmed. Because the method or measuring is not that accurate and involves many variables like weather more tests need to be done by many different people to get an accurate picture or a better way of measuring. If it does not give you more MPG per amp it is no good.

[myoldyourgold]

For discussion..... in our total setup which does include some water injection I am thinking that with the right HHO reactor, a working gas conditioner ( I use this term instead of filter) there might be the possibility of creating methane gas and syngas in the compression stroke or even before. With all the additives, which might contribute, in our fuel this could be a possibility. This is just another possibility as to why we see the results we do?? Remember the charge in the intake also includes exhaust gas and crankcase gases. By varying and controlling these alone there are measurable differences when using HHO. Lots of things going on in a very short period of time both chemically and physically. This is where science should be able to help but there again it could be possible that this reaction is not one that has been studied or tested. Lots of variables involved and very complex. It might not fit into a standard mold. The catalytic effect that ortho or HHO in general, might have on all of this might be something more than is currently understood.
.

[RustyLugNut]

For discussion..... in our total setup which does include some water injection I am thinking that with the right HHO reactor, a working gas conditioner ( I use this term instead of filter) there might be the possibility of creating methane gas and syngas in the compression stroke or even before. With all the additives, which might contribute, in our fuel this could be a possibility. This is just another possibility as to why we see the results we do?? Remember the charge in the intake also includes exhaust gas and crankcase gases. By varying and controlling these alone there are measurable differences when using HHO. Lots of things going on in a very short period of time both chemically and physically. This is where science should be able to help but there again it could be possible that this reaction is not one that has been studied or tested. Lots of variables involved and very complex. It might not fit into a standard mold. The catalytic effect that ortho or HHO in general, might have on all of this might be something more than is currently understood.
.

This is precisely what I believe is going on with the addition of HHO in the combustion chamber pre combustion - the creation of reactive species which create a form of syngas or other simpler aromatics of fuel compounds. The fact many unleaded fuels have 10% ethanol which is easier to thermally decompose makes this a great possibility.

Classic studies have concentrated on the 4% and above addition of H2 gas and not on the sub 1% that we can inject with our HHO generators. But, classic theory supports what you have described, that the HHO can act like a REACTANT to facilitate a change in the fuel before the spark event. It doesn't have to be ortho or para and water has a great amount to do with it.