Water Sparkplug

[Jetijs]

Aaron, no I have not yet tried it, but it sounds interesting
I also would like to test out what happens if I take a Bedini self oscillator with trifilar coil, where the third winding is connected to a bridge rectifier with a cap. Then I could use this cap as the spark intensifier for the low voltage circuit part. Maybe there are some differences.

[Aaron]

radiant cap

What I have personally experienced with batts or caps charged with radiant is if they are supplying power...or the cap is in parallel with the bat and is charged with radiant that the light is always brighter and the color changes in the bulb to a more whiter light.

I heard from someone recently that there are other effects that are different with radiantly charged caps.

If mixing it with regular current, I have no idea but you can try it. For now, anything I'm doing is without adding any current from a power supply to the discharge because I'm more interested in the details of what is going on with different aspects of the circuit.

[lighty]

@Jetijs

Ah, then it's a completely different story. Somehow I got stuck in my mind idea that you're getting +HV pulses.

Thx for doing the experiment with reversed polarity. At least now we know that apparently nothing changes.

[boguslaw]

Connections ?

Fast question : did somebody tried to replace spark plug in this plasma system by a Meyer two tubes or plates with small gap ?

[**~Imhotep~**]

Also, **~Imhotep~**, that is a good idea about trying to capture the inductive spikes from the low voltage side. I thing that we could make a bifilar coil with thick wire and about 100 turns and just pulse the low voltage side through one of the bifilar windings. The we just add a rectifier on the other winding and capture the spikes in a battery. Could that work?

its even easier than that, but what i was referring to is ev gray, stated, that he was capturing excess energy off his arcs. Your arcs are white and quite large, possibly if you put a copper tube/screen.. ect. around the area it would be interesting to see if you can get any induced energy off the large spark. I was just curious, because thats what ev gray said he was doing. That would confirm if you could actually capture energy off such a large arc. Great work! you the man! I didnt want to get off topic which is the sparks for the hydrogen manipulation, but i just thought at a later time it would be something to consider trying

[Aaron]

a simple question



The A picture is my simple drawing of the bare bones water spark plug effect method. When the capacitor C1 discharges, it is 100% isolated from both terminals from any power supply. The ONLY input into the coil for the effect is whatever is charged into the cap. Nothing more, nothing less.

It is possible that adding high current pulse from a power supply increases the effect, but lets leave that as a separate issue to deal with because it is a fact that the basic effect IS able to be reproduced over and over with only a charged up photo flash capacitor.

The idea I see expressed as to why the effect happens is this:

1. Close S1 to discharge C1 into the primary of ignition coil
2. HV winding outputs HV pulse to the spark plug causing an arc.
3. The arc gives enough of a conductive pathway for whatever is left in the capacitor to discharge over the gap therefore adding a low voltage pulse to the high voltage pulse.

This is what is claimed.

In picture B, based on what the popular claim for the mechanism, the following would be true, correct?

1. Close S1 to discharge C1 into primary of ignition coil.
2. HV winding outputs HV pulse to the spark plug causing an arc.
3. The arc gives enough of a conductive pathway for C2 to discharge adding to the HV pulse that left the coil.

If the claim for this operating method is accurate, there is no reason why picture B wouldn't work.

C2 is charged to the same voltage as C1.

In picture A, when C1 discharges, there is even less left in the cap to go through the HV diode in order to add it's low voltage pulse to the original HV pulse.

Therefore, by having C2 charged up the same in picture B is definitely increasing the chance for the same effect because after all, if C1 discharged, you have C2 fully charged and if the HV arc across plug really gave a conductive pathway for the cap to discharge through in Picture A, that means that there is no reason whatsoever that C2 wouldn't do the same thing.

If the effect can be duplicated with the schematic in Picture B...and I'm talking about having 2 capacitors and BOTH are totally isolated from any power supply...2 caps sitting there charged...and Pic B is sucessful in having the same effect, then I think there is merit in the idea that the HV spark makes a less resistive path for the low voltage to jump across making the magical water spark.

If Pic B fails to produce the same effect, then the idea of how Pic A works needs to be examined and some other ideas that may or may not have been proposed needs to be addressed.

Can anyone reproduce the effect with Picture B? Because if the idea is correct, the HV spark should make a less conductive pathway so that capacitor C2 should simply discharge through the gap.

[boguslaw]

To Aaron

Have you asked hyphotetical question or just changed your mind about theory , how it may works ?

I'm asking because your video Water sparkplug|Electroradiant event was brilliant and I supposed that your idea is quite different.

I have also thought about ionization by HV arc but even if that is the part of this process it must be not the essential one.

Look carefully at connections of capacitor ,diode and coil. I was surprised about it and checked in my garage with car battery. I might be wrong but if I connect car battery wit a chain of 5 1000V/3A diodes and a lamp instead of coil in the same way as presented in circuit I HAD a current flow!

Hmm...I thought that theory is the quite different here - I would call it deffered capacitor discharge.

Capacitor tries to discharge throught diode but as this discharge is very fast the oscillation of current in coil makes a great impedance and current is stopped actually standing in the coil. The rest of the charge in cap is waiting for discharge and if that occur and is lead throught a primary of coil of the less impedance slamming on standing current and pushing it away, then bouncing on the diode (where probably some energy is wasted as a heat) and going to ground.

Wasn't that your theory ?

Anyway if that theory fits it's a great importance according to rising efficiency to use capacitor which rapidly discharge, to have probably short wires and diode placed near coil or near spark gap to limit bouncing path length.

Forgive me if that peice of comments are stupid but I think that theory would be quite easy to verificate. Just eliminate spark gap and replace with a diode and resistor. Then measure the heat on resistor with and without using cap (though I think you will have to search for diode parts all over the place in case of former embodiment )

[boguslaw]

Capacitor discharge

No matter what the final theory will be I'm very grateful that we are uncovering Tesla method uf using capacitor discharge. with the help of so many foremost thinkers
Finally!

My dream is to see all those wonderful effects like stream discharge covering all the terminals of coil like St Elmo's fire, see incandescent light generated by single wire or even without connection to the coil and use them all to eliminate current restrictions...

Thank you\

[boguslaw]

@boguslaw

There are two ways of driving ignition coil. One is through capacitive discharge through primary (google CDI) and the second one is by magnetization of core by battery and then suddenly turning off the battery (classical break point ignition). Both ways will produce HV impulse and both ways are used in cars.

Also, battery will give you sudden current rise depending on it's voltage and impedance of the load pretty much the same was as capacitor. You don't need cap for that if you don't need some extreme current peaks (which in this case you don't).

@lighty
I think my post where I said about my theory (whcih seems to match Aaron first theory) would explain it in details. You need exactly what you denied - extreme fast current peak (not much current but fast discharge) - for that you need a 'make and break' circuit attached to battery. That would work.Or you can explode battery somehow - that could work also ;-) I think that was the irony from GotGas when he said so... I bet LiOn would generate faster explosion but I'm not an expert

[lighty]

@boguslaw

Extremely fast discharge will generate extremely high current peak and that's exactly what happens when you discharge capacitor into a low impedance load (like a primary of ignition coil).

As for the LiIon batteries, they're quite prone to explosions or fire when pushed over their rated voltage or current limits (both charging and discharging) and that's why each cell needs control electronics. That control electronics would probably get fried with the first HV impulse and the next impulse could cause LiIon cell to explode. Same thing doesn't apply to lead-acid batteries.

[gotoluc]

Today I did some experiments with the basic circuit like Aaron posted. I found out that the following circuit is not exactly right:


Instead it should be like this:


This is because at the first picture the cap is charged up and when the switch is closed, the cap is discharged in the ignition coil, but in the same time the high voltage diode is disconnected from the + terminal of the cap. If you do that, you will have only a small spark. The high voltage diode anode should be connected to the cap + terminal at all times or you will not get the big bang. In the second picture you can see how I did this, first I closed the S1 switch, this made the cap charge up. Then I opened the S1 switch and closed the S2 switch, this discharged the cap into the ignition coil. In fact I did not have the S1 switch, I charged up the cap and just turned the variac off before the discharge.

Hello Jetijs, you are right about the cap not completing the circuit. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I will test it with your suggestion and will inform you of the difference. If it works well or better I will update my circuit (where I originally posted it) with your suggestion.

I was blessed to find this circuit but am a novice in EE and I am very open to any suggestion that can improve this simple circuit. So thank you for taking the time to explain this.

@everyone, I am very happy to see this topic going so well here compare to where I originally started it at Overunity. Keep up the good work and share your finding as Jetijs has done here. This is a great example of finding an improvement and then sharing it. Also a big thank you to Aaron for starting this topic here.

This kind of support and enthusiasm can change our World.

Luc

[Aaron]

A vs B

Hi Boguslaw,

You have part of my idea right but my idea or the other aren't even theories yet. The effect is consistent but the idea of what is happening hasn't enough weight to hold as a theory.

I'm as interested in disproving my own idea as I am about proving the other idea. If more people were interested in this, we can do real science to learn what is happening.

If B works as well as A, it gives more validation to the LV following HV through the HV diode idea. If B doesn't work at all to cause the effect, then the LV following HV through the HV diode needs to be tossed.

Actually, if the LV following HV through arc idea works, then C2 in diagram B could simply be replaced by a car battery...then when the HV arcs across gap, that should immediately short circuit the battery right?

I haven't changed my mind about what is happening. But I'm willing to go through the process of doing the experiments to see what is really happening.

Is anyone willing to do this simple test to see what happens?

I have already done it as well as other variations. I used two photo flash capacitors charged to about the same amount for caps C1 and C2. I closed S1 to discharge C1 into coil. Does anyone else want to post their results on this test? Again, both capacitors are 100% isolated on their own from any power supply.

[Jetijs]

Aaron, I will try this out tomorrow, but I already have tried to use some batteries in series (30V) on the low voltage side. If I connect the battery array correctly, there is a spark in the spark gap, but there is no difference in spark intensity. If I change the battery polarity, there is no spark at all, like the high voltage is just absorbed by the battery. But If I attach a cap charged to 100-200V instead of a battery, I got a big bang. So it might be that we need more voltage on the LV side to get the effect. I will also try different voltages on the cap tomorrow, but I remember Ossie said, that you need at least 100V on the LV side to get the effect. That would be 9-10 batteries in series. I do not have so much batteries. But I really would like someone to try this out.

[citfta]

re: A vs B

Hi Aaron, I am new to this forum as I have only been reading a lot of the posts for the past couple of months. I have learned a lot. Maybe I can be of some help on this subject.

I retired last year from a job as an electrician working on all kinds of industrial machine equipment. I have worked on everything from computer controlled 15 kilowatt lasers to 5 axis CNC machine tools.

To answer your question as to whether or not the high current low voltage current follows the high voltage low current arc, the answer is yes. On industrial welders such as are used for TIG welding there is a high voltage high frequency circuit that is connected in parallel to the high current circuit that supplies the power for welding. When the operator first pushes down on the welding control pedal the high voltage low current circuit is turned on and then the high current follows the arc to the work piece. I can attest to the fact that a welding operator will complain very quickly if the high voltage circuit is not working as he has a hard time trying to get his welding arc started.

I hope this has helped a little.
citfta

[Jetijs]

Ok, we did some HHO exploding tests. We did 3 tests. In all 3 tests we exploded 1.5l bottle full of HHO gas. The first tests was with an ordinary spark, the second and third test was with the intensified spark. Here is a video:
YouTube - Water spark test 3

I can't really say that there is a difference. The bang is just as loud in all three tests. It appeared to us that using the intensified spark, the explosion was a tinny little bit more yellow/orange. But can't say for sure.
Anyway, we had lots of fun and many unhappy neighbors
enjoy the video