Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
restricting dry cell current leaks
Author Message
DodgeViper Offline
Member
***

Posts: 109
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #11
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
(03-01-2009 08:25 AM)benny Wrote:  
(03-01-2009 05:55 AM)mtnhillsman Wrote:  
(02-28-2009 07:51 PM)colchiro Wrote:  Staggering is the preferred method.

If your water doesn't go above the top hole, do you need to stagger that too?

I guess not, I was thinking the same thing. it is hard to say where the water level will be though since you can't see it. I'd think that the water from below fed from the bottom hole will rise as much as possible and would only fall just enough to let the gas escape. if that is true then you'd still have a current leak for whatever portion of the upper hole is submerged. does that sound right??

what about the hole size?? is 1/4" ok or could I go smaller??

thanks...


As well as a second separate bubbler, I use a combined bubbler/reservoir system. i.e. HHO from the generator is fed into the bubbler/reservoir unit at about the midpoint of the level of electrolyte in the bubbler. Return from the bottom of this combined unit goes to the bottom of the generator and maintains the electrolyte level in the generator.

What I have found is that the difference in height between the HHO outlet of the generator and the level of the electrolyte in the bubbler, head height, can make a huge difference in the way that the generator operates.

With a large difference in height, large head, the generator tends to throw a fair amount of electrolyte out with the HHO, sometimes as foam. With a small difference in height, small head, there is less pressure difference due to level, and the electrolyte level in the generator drops to a point where little electrolyte is expelled, with the HHO gas, from the generator. Bonus - no foam. i.e. the greater the head of electrolyte, the greater the flow of electrolyte to the generator, and the greater the volume of electrolyte expelled with the HHO.

From observation, having tried various outlet hole diameters, it would seem to make little difference what size the top holes in your plates are. Once the gas has driven the electrolyte to a level lower than the gas outlet holes, you should have practically no current loss across these. Staggering these outlet holes also appears to make little or no difference.

Note that, as well as reservoir head height, the volume of HHO generated also appears to make a difference. With higher HHO production rates, there is slightly lower electrolyte level in the generator, and less electrolyte expelled from the generator.

If you can set up for a reasonable balance between reservoir head height, plate outlet hole size, and HHO production rate, you should have few problems.


Also aim to have the outlet holes as near the top of your plates as possible to maximise plate usage. Stick to near one corner of the plates. That way you can also experiment with using your generator in 'diamond' configuration. (ie tilted 45 degrees)


As for the bottom holes, if used, these only need to be of sufficient size to allow for electrolyte replenishment during normal operation, and, since these will be submerged, then, as Colchiro says, it is definitely recommended that these holes should be staggered.

Benny,

If I understand you correctly you have your bubbler/reservoir tank mounted about the same height as your generator or slightly above?

[Image: Hydrogen%20Powered.jpg]
2002 Dodge Quad Cab 4x4 Ram
4.7L EFI
03-01-2009 08:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jbalat Offline
Member
***

Posts: 280
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation: 1
Post: #12
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LADZTmV9msw

Note that the smack drills 2 holes near the top only... Zero current leakage since he uses a plastic pipe with individual refill holes for each gap so that electrolyte is always seperated.
(This post was last modified: 03-02-2009 02:23 AM by jbalat.)
03-02-2009 02:22 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
benny Offline
Member
***

Posts: 332
Joined: Sep 2008
Reputation: 5
Post: #13
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
(03-01-2009 08:48 PM)DodgeViper Wrote:  
(03-01-2009 08:25 AM)benny Wrote:  
(03-01-2009 05:55 AM)mtnhillsman Wrote:  
(02-28-2009 07:51 PM)colchiro Wrote:  Staggering is the preferred method.

If your water doesn't go above the top hole, do you need to stagger that too?

I guess not, I was thinking the same thing. it is hard to say where the water level will be though since you can't see it. I'd think that the water from below fed from the bottom hole will rise as much as possible and would only fall just enough to let the gas escape. if that is true then you'd still have a current leak for whatever portion of the upper hole is submerged. does that sound right??

what about the hole size?? is 1/4" ok or could I go smaller??

thanks...


As well as a second separate bubbler, I use a combined bubbler/reservoir system. i.e. HHO from the generator is fed into the bubbler/reservoir unit at about the midpoint of the level of electrolyte in the bubbler. Return from the bottom of this combined unit goes to the bottom of the generator and maintains the electrolyte level in the generator.

What I have found is that the difference in height between the HHO outlet of the generator and the level of the electrolyte in the bubbler, head height, can make a huge difference in the way that the generator operates.

With a large difference in height, large head, the generator tends to throw a fair amount of electrolyte out with the HHO, sometimes as foam. With a small difference in height, small head, there is less pressure difference due to level, and the electrolyte level in the generator drops to a point where little electrolyte is expelled, with the HHO gas, from the generator. Bonus - no foam. i.e. the greater the head of electrolyte, the greater the flow of electrolyte to the generator, and the greater the volume of electrolyte expelled with the HHO.

From observation, having tried various outlet hole diameters, it would seem to make little difference what size the top holes in your plates are. Once the gas has driven the electrolyte to a level lower than the gas outlet holes, you should have practically no current loss across these. Staggering these outlet holes also appears to make little or no difference.

Note that, as well as reservoir head height, the volume of HHO generated also appears to make a difference. With higher HHO production rates, there is slightly lower electrolyte level in the generator, and less electrolyte expelled from the generator.

If you can set up for a reasonable balance between reservoir head height, plate outlet hole size, and HHO production rate, you should have few problems.


Also aim to have the outlet holes as near the top of your plates as possible to maximise plate usage. Stick to near one corner of the plates. That way you can also experiment with using your generator in 'diamond' configuration. (ie tilted 45 degrees)


As for the bottom holes, if used, these only need to be of sufficient size to allow for electrolyte replenishment during normal operation, and, since these will be submerged, then, as Colchiro says, it is definitely recommended that these holes should be staggered.

Benny,

If I understand you correctly you have your bubbler/reservoir tank mounted about the same height as your generator or slightly above?

Note that present testing is being carried out on bench test.

I presently have the bubbler/reservoir set up to have the electrolyte level in the bubbler/reservoir at a couple of inches higher that the outlet port of the HHO generator.

Observations were made over time when varying the height of the bubbler/reservoir unit, thus varying the electrolyte level in the bubbler/reservoir above the outlet port.

The lower the height of the bubbler/reservoir unit with respect to the generator, the lower the amount of electrolyte thrown out the generator output port, and vice versa.

A similar effect can be obtained by restricting the return/refill pipe, thereby limiting the rate of electrolyte replenishment into the generator, but this takes a fair bit of fiddling around to get a balance point where there is little electrolyte ejected with the HHO from the generator.

One thing to note. With lower amounts of electrolyte ejection, any heat generated during electrolysis tends to stay in the generator.

Simple explanation is that, if there is low electrolyte replenishment rate, there will be little electrolyte ejection from the generator, once the system has balanced itself at startup time.

The greater the head of electrolyte reservoir:generator, the greater the pressure forcing electrolyte back to the generator. More pressure from head of electrolyte, higher refill flow rate. Higher refill flow rate, higher level of electrolyte in generator, until level reaches above lower point of outlet port. Ergo more fluid ejection from the generator.
Fluid ejection when head is greater, looks to be cyclical (up to a point). ie fluid ejection comes in bursts. More balanced output with low head .

Thinks it's all down to fluid mechanics 101.Smile

Note that at startup, if setting up a system in this manner, until the system equalises, electrolyte is forced back to the reservoir as gas builds in the generator. Expect the electrolyte level in the reservoir to rise and allow for same. I do not use check valves in the refill line, but, in any case, fluid would still be ejected to the reservoir at startup through the outlet port.

One benefit of low head setting is that little or no foam is generated.

Like everything else, its all a trade off.
(This post was last modified: 03-02-2009 02:42 AM by benny.)
03-02-2009 02:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mtnhillsman Offline
Member
***

Posts: 54
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #14
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
(03-02-2009 02:22 AM)jbalat Wrote:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LADZTmV9msw

Note that the smack drills 2 holes near the top only... Zero current leakage since he uses a plastic pipe with individual refill holes for each gap so that electrolyte is always seperated.

This is a good design, after watching this and many of his other videos I was sold on the idea so implemented it in my cell.

Further research and thought led me to the fact that although the refill tube is pressed against the plate holes and it fills the cells individually, there is still current leakage through the tiny fill holes, so the current would flow from cell one's fill hole, through the tube to cell 2's fill hole. Now of course this current leak is drasticlly reduced, the drawback is it takes a while to fill the cell from empty.

This brings me to my next thought, if you have a small current leak in those tiny fill holes anyway, why not just stick with the staggered design, filling from the bottom using tiny holes??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKJgZXn1vmU

Check out this one, advance to about halfway through the clip. He had a cell returned because the corner melted down. The current leak between the holes in the refill tube is very acceptable in a single 7 cell unit, however in his Dual 7 cell unit, each half is separated by the solid gasket, but the refill tube still passes through the entire cell. I think the heating issues hes having are as a result of a full 13.8 volts leaking from one partition to the other.

I think normally our minor current leaks are not an issue because they only allow current to leak from one plate set to the very next, or maybe the second. Note his wiring for the 2 cell partitions, it's an excellent idea to keep the magnetic fields aligned, however right at the partition of the 2 halves you have a full 13.8 volts leaking through the refill tube.

This is where the intense heat is being generated in that one spot. Now, his solution was to upgrade certain parts to withstand the heat, which is fine, im sure it winds up still being more efficient than larger holes being staggered but it is still a waste of energy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heMjCPKMZd8

I think this further proves my point. This is an efficiency test of the same cell using 26 volts. In this case the jumper wires were removed and its just one big series cell. He reports a 17% increase in efficiency this way. It doesent make sense to me why simply using double the voltage over double the number of cells would change efficiency that drasticlly. I believe this is due to the fact that in this case you dont have that partition where 13.8 volts can leak through the fill hole to the other side of the cell.
03-04-2009 02:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mtnhillsman Offline
Member
***

Posts: 54
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #15
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
Well, finished my cell(see images). there are 2 sets of holes, in the upper corners. The left utilizes the drilled refill tube as the smack does. The right is straight through for the gas outlet, both holes are 1/4", the plastic refill tube fits very tightly so once the electrolyte is displaced below it by the hho there should be zero current leak.

My gaskets are 1/8" neoprene, 8" x 8" x 1", so each cell has 6"x6" for electrolysis. The plates were sanded in the X pattern using 30 grit and washed.

I've been using a 10% concerntration of Potassium Hydroxide and running the cell off a battery charger i just set to 10 amps. At that rate i am only seeing around 6 mmw.

The smack unit gets 7.5-7.75 mmw. Trying to figure out why im coming up short. The only differences are, his cell is 6x6 overall, and his gaskets are .080".

Also, the cell he has reported those efficiencies on is the dual unit using the jumper wires to keep the magnetic fields aligned. I dont believe there would be any efficiency difference on a single unit but I tried it anyway. The one in the picture is a single, but i also assembeled it as a dual. One variation to his dual design was i used a 1/4" plexiglass divider between the 2 cell halves(see 2nd picture). I didnt want to have current leaking between the cell halves through the refill tube so just made 2 partitions but still used the jumper wires to keep the magnetic field aligned.

Both units gave me the same 6 mmw, with electrolyte @ 10% concerntration @ 10 amps set on the charger. Note that at a 10% concerntration the current will go much higher but ill have to play with that once i get some more equipment.

One issue is the grade of stainless, I paid for, ordered, and was invoiced a 316L 4x8 sheet, but later noticed the cardboard backing had 304 written on it. When i disassembeled the single unit one side of each plate was black, I've heard this is from impurities coming out of the inferior material but wonder if it would happen to 316L to a lesser extent. The first run of the single cell was 2-3 days but i never switched polarity so the black might be normal for a new cell?

So i got 3 possibilities for my lack of efficiency, either its the 1/8" gaskets are too thick, the concerntration of the electrolyte is not strong enough, or the stainless is not 316L. What do you guys think??


Attached File(s) Thumbnail(s)
       
(This post was last modified: 03-10-2009 11:05 AM by mtnhillsman.)
03-10-2009 10:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
abe Offline
Member
***

Posts: 159
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #16
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
(03-10-2009 10:59 AM)mtnhillsman Wrote:  Well, finished my cell(see images). there are 2 sets of holes, in the upper corners. The left utilizes the drilled refill tube as the smack does. The right is straight through for the gas outlet, both holes are 1/4", the plastic refill tube fits very tightly so once the electrolyte is displaced below it by the hho there should be zero current leak.

My gaskets are 1/8" neoprene, 8" x 8" x 1", so each cell has 6"x6" for electrolysis. The plates were sanded in the X pattern using 30 grit and washed.

I've been using a 10% concerntration of Potassium Hydroxide and running the cell off a battery charger i just set to 10 amps. At that rate i am only seeing around 6 mmw. Have you tried gasket material they sale at Lowe's for shower pans. It around 1/32 I think. The closer your plates are the less electrolite you need. Dont pull to many amps are they will get hot. I,m running a mod of the "tero" cell now also , runninf a diamon patern , but droped one n plate.Only useing 5 N.this also droped the amount of electrolite I needed

The smack unit gets 7.5-7.75 mmw. Trying to figure out why im coming up short. The only differences are, his cell is 6x6 overall, and his gaskets are .080".

Also, the cell he has reported those efficiencies on is the dual unit using the jumper wires to keep the magnetic fields aligned. I dont believe there would be any efficiency difference on a single unit but I tried it anyway. The one in the picture is a single, but i also assembeled it as a dual. One variation to his dual design was i used a 1/4" plexiglass divider between the 2 cell halves(see 2nd picture). I didnt want to have current leaking between the cell halves through the refill tube so just made 2 partitions but still used the jumper wires to keep the magnetic field aligned.

Both units gave me the same 6 mmw, with electrolyte @ 10% concerntration @ 10 amps set on the charger. Note that at a 10% concerntration the current will go much higher but ill have to play with that once i get some more equipment.

One issue is the grade of stainless, I paid for, ordered, and was invoiced a 316L 4x8 sheet, but later noticed the cardboard backing had 304 written on it. When i disassembeled the single unit one side of each plate was black, I've heard this is from impurities coming out of the inferior material but wonder if it would happen to 316L to a lesser extent. The first run of the single cell was 2-3 days but i never switched polarity so the black might be normal for a new cell?

So i got 3 possibilities for my lack of efficiency, either its the 1/8" gaskets are too thick, the concerntration of the electrolyte is not strong enough, or the stainless is not 316L. What do you guys think??

Have you tried gasket material they sale at Lowe's for shower pans.They are around 1/32 I think. With thiner gaskets you dont need as much eletrolite to pull amps. buy dont go to high are you'll run hot. I to am running a mod "tero" cell also,only a dioman patern. I also droped one nutral plate to 5 now. I get better out put now at lower amps
(This post was last modified: 03-10-2009 01:33 PM by abe.)
03-10-2009 01:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Zipstor Offline
Member
***

Posts: 360
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #17
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
What I think about these acrylic gasket is that with the heat, any plastic material will go soft, expand and dissolve gradually. Why not using silicon?

>> http://brownsgas.com
03-10-2009 11:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
benny Offline
Member
***

Posts: 332
Joined: Sep 2008
Reputation: 5
Post: #18
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
(03-10-2009 11:05 PM)Zipstor Wrote:  What I think about these acrylic gasket is that with the heat, any plastic material will go soft, expand and dissolve gradually. Why not using silicon?

Sorry Zipstor. You still haven't won a watch. Try again. You are, however, a good source of misinformation.

Plastics. Properties.

Acrylic

Melting point. 130–140 °C (265–285 °F). Boiling point. 200.0 °C (392 °F)

Solvents for acrylic-type resins, methylene chloride works very well. This solvent can be used to completely solubilize Plexiglas and other acrylic polymers. It is a principal ingredient in commercial paint strippers.
Also, Zipstor, nail varnish remover will dissolve this material readily. Please be careful where you do your makeup.
Neither KOH nor NAOH are listed as solvents for either acrylic or polycarbonate.
You really need to do a lot more research, Zipstor, before coming here and posting nonsense.
(Have you heard of the new brilliant web search program GOOGLE.
Actually it's not so new, but you obviously either haven't heard of it, or don't know how to make optimum use of it.)

Polycarbonate
Melting temperature ™, 267 °C

LOTS More information here.

http://www.dynalabcorp.com/technical_inf...bonate.asp

Have a look at the melting points, shown above,for both acrylic, and polycarbonate.
Unless your generator bursts into flames, I doubt whether you generator temperature will ever reach this level. The electrolyte will have boiled off long before the acrylic, or polycarbonate, melts.

Water boiling point = 100 °C

No electrolyte, no current flow. No current flow, no heat. Electricity 101.

Main problem with acrylic is that it tends to be brittle, meaning that it can crack/fracture under low loading pressures. (For you, Zipstor, that means excessive tightening of bolts)

Polycarbonate is an all-round more robust material.
(This post was last modified: 03-11-2009 02:04 AM by benny.)
03-11-2009 02:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Zipstor Offline
Member
***

Posts: 360
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #19
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
So you reckon that even if the acrylic goes soft, there is no molecular dispersion at all?

>> http://brownsgas.com
03-11-2009 02:34 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mtnhillsman Offline
Member
***

Posts: 54
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation: 0
Post: #20
RE: restricting dry cell current leaks
(03-10-2009 01:03 PM)abe Wrote:  Have you tried gasket material they sale at Lowe's for shower pans.They are around 1/32 I think. With thiner gaskets you dont need as much eletrolite to pull amps. buy dont go to high are you'll run hot. I to am running a mod "tero" cell also,only a dioman patern. I also droped one nutral plate to 5 now. I get better out put now at lower amps


I'm going to give that a shot next. This really sucks that i need thinner gaskets, i had 60 gaskets cut from a rubber manufacturer so i would have a nice clean look, my 8x8x1's were 3.15 each, not too bad but i had to order alot, i figured id have enough for several cells.... Anybody wanna buy some gaskets for some in-efficient dry cells??? C'mon...In-efficiency is the new Efficiency these days...

The only other thing i found was that the quality of the battery charger can come into play. Mine is very OLD...and its been overloaded a few times, i have a 75 amp IOTA coming so im going to hold off on the new gaskets until i verify its not the charger.
03-11-2009 06:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)