Water Explosion Returns

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

knews4u2chew@yahoo.com - 27 May 2008 06:08 GMT

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.energy.hydrogen/browse_frm/thread/2edf4e97d3a
3c1b3/60672c9b4f7e9e88?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=explosions+in+water#60672c9b4f7e9e88

1. Michael Hannon
View profile
The following is a verbatim text* of the work of a real scientist/
engineer, as opposed to the armchair science practiced by the resident
"good 'ol boys" in this
NG. OHannon *(Minus one
simulated graphic - Fig.1, which will be placed in its original place
in the text below, which shows a series circuit in which a capacitor C
with a voltage Vo across it is in a series circuit with and inductor L
and a Resistance Rw [the resistance of a quantity of water]). There is
an open switch between C and L. /
_______ __/ _| L |___________ | |
_____| | ___|
___ __|_ |

| | | Vo | C | | Rw
| _|___|_ |____|
| | |

__________________________| Fig. 1: Water Arc Discharge
Circuit (anywhere you see mH here it means micro-Henry, and anywhere
you see mF, it means microFarad - the mailer won't send the Greek
micron symbol) "27th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering
Conference Proceedings San Diego, CA, August 3-7, 1992, Vol. 4, pp
335-33 929469
Electrically Induced Explosions in Water Gary Johnson Kansas
State University ABSTRACT A 2 mF capacitor was charged to voltages in
the 1-10 kV range and discharged into water column through a 38 mH
inductor. At voltages up to about 6 kV, the water acted as a
relatively high resistance and the circuit decayed as an overdamped
RLC circuit. Resistance decreased with time. When the resistance
dropped below about 10 W, the water would explode if the capacitor
still had sufficient energy. The loudness was distinctly greater than
an equivalent amount of gunpowder. During the explosion,
resistance would drop still more, so the circuit would become
underdamped and oscillatory. Remaining water droplets are cool to the
touch, so there is no evidence that the water has boiled into steam,
although that has to remain a possibility. A low impedance arc in air
sometimes forms after the explosion so the explosion is not
necessarily caused by an air arc. INTRODUCTION For many years, a
number of researchers have sought a completely new energy source, one
freely and widely available. Tesla, Moray, and Bearden are among the
better known of these searchers [1]. It is likely that some energy
will have to be expended in order to tap into this source, perhaps in
a manner similar to a heat pump. A heat pump is able to move several
units of heat energy from the outdoors to air conditioned space for
the cost of a single unit of electrical energy. The heat energy is
readily and freely available, but requires an electrical input to move
it to a desired location. The ratio of heat energy output to the
electrical energy input is called the Coefficient Of Performance (COP)
and is well over unity. So "over unity" machines are already widely
used. But is there another source of energy in the ambient besides
sensible heat? If there is, we would expect some experiments to yield
more output energy than the known energy input. There would probably
be nonlinear and threshold effects, which would help explain why the
new source has not been previously identified. High voltages, high
currents, and/or resonant phenomena may be necessary. Experiments
which may be operating in, "over-unity" mode need to be carefully
reported and then replicated by other researchers. One such phenomenon
which deserves a careful examination is electrically induced
explosions in water. It has not been proven that the energy released
by the explosion is greater than the electrical energy supplied (and
doing it will be difficult), but there are certainly unexpected
effects associated with the high voltage and high current operation.
There is also an arc, which may be important in developing the new
energy source [2]. A careful investigation of the phenomenon may yield
new insight into basic electromagnetic theory, such as the
longitudinal Ampere's force proposed by Graneau. It may illuminate a
method of tapping into a new energy source assuming the energy
developed in the explosion is great than the energy originally stored
in the capacitor. And even if it can be fully explained by classical
physics, it may still offer a technique for protecting the contacts
high voltage switches. With a water channel in series, the switch will
close into a moderately high impedance, with minimal arcing. After a
small time delay (allowing the switch to be fully closed), a plasma
arc is established in the water, providing a low impedance path to the
load. GRANEAU'S EXPERIMENTS Peter Graneau, a physics professor at
Northeastern University, and his associates, have performed several
experiments with water-plasma explosions [3,4]. The basic circult for
all the experiments is shown in Fig. 1. The capacitor C is charged,
and then discharged through an inductor L and a water column with
effective resistance R'o. [3] describes a 0.5 mF and a 2mF capacitor
charged at voltag' up to 10 kV, while [4] describes a 8 F capacitor
charge at voltages up to 30 kV. The inductance was 876 mH in [3] and
11.1 mH in [4]. The discharge from a small voltage was silent, with
unnoticeable movement of the water. They call this type a electrolytic
discharge. As either the voltage or the capacitance increased, an arc
discharge would form, with audible noise. Arc formation seemed to
depend on the total charge passing through the water. A float above
the arc would be forced upward, but the impulse seemed to terminate
with the arc. No followthrough push from expanding steam nor any vapor
escape from the water could be discerned. /
_______ __/ _| L |___________ | |
_____| | ___|
___ __|_ |

| | | Vo | C | | Rw
| _|___|_ |____|
| | |

__________________________| Fig. 1: Water Arc Discharge
Circuit In two cases with the same stored energy, a 0.5 mF capacitor
charges to 6 kV and a 2 mF capacitor charges to 3 kV, the second case
resulted in an arc explosion while the first did not. In both cases,
the heat dissipated in the water was less than one calorie, in a
container of about 120 grams of water. Their conclusion, based on
measurement, calculation, and visual observation, was that the
explosion was not based on thermal effects. They conclude, rather,
that the explosion was due to longitudinal Ampere forces. This concept
of a tension force in a single conductor due to the current flow in
the conductor is not taught in introductory electromagnetic theory
courses, but Graneau makes a good case for such longitudinal forces
in [5]. They discovered that tap water produced explosions about
twice as strong as those in saturated saltwater. The explosions in
distilled water were even stronger, except that it was difficult to
initiate the arc in distilled water. The calculated pressure in the
chamber in the last test in [4] was 27,000 atm. Their comment was
"This explains why the cartridge was split." They defined a figure of
merit as the strength of the explosion per unit action integral of
the current pulse, and found that the figure of merit for their
system was three times as high as the very best railgun performance.
Railguns have better acceleration characteristics than chemical
explosives, so water arcs have more "bang per buck" than any other
explosive, save perhaps nuclear. Water arcs are therefore interesting
to study. At a minimum, they would ndicate that Ampere's force law
needs to have a longitudinal component. It is conceivable, however,
that careful experimental studies will show that the total energy
emitted from the explosion is greater than the input electrical
energy. This would certainly support the concept that the vacuum has
a high energy density and that we might be able to extract some of
this energy with the right equipment." More forthcoming........
More options Jun 27 1997, 12:00 am
Newsgroups: sci.energy.hydrogen
From: Michael Hannon <ohan...@mailroom.worldnet.att.net>
Date: 1997/06/27
Subject: Water Explosion
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original

| Report this message | Find messages by this author

The following is a verbatim text* of the work of a real
scientist/engineer, as opposed to the armchair science practiced by
the resident "good 'ol boys" in this NG.
OHannon

*(Minus one simulated graphic - Fig.1, which will be placed in its
original place in the text below, which shows a series circuit in
which
a capacitor C with a voltage Vo across it is in a series circuit with
and inductor L and a Resistance Rw [the resistance of a quantity of
water]). There is an open switch between C and L.

/ _______
__/ _| L |___________
| |_____| |
___|___ __|_
| | | |
Vo | C | | Rw |
_|___|_ |____|
| |
|__________________________|

Fig. 1: Water Arc Discharge Circuit

(anywhere you see mH here it means micro-Henry, and anywhere you see
mF,
it means microFarad - the mailer won't send the Greek micron symbol)

"27th Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference
Proceedings
San Diego, CA, August 3-7, 1992, Vol. 4, pp 335-33

929469

Electrically Induced Explosions in Water

Gary Johnson Kansas State University

ABSTRACT

A 2 mF capacitor was charged to voltages in the 1-10 kV range and
discharged into water column through a 38 mH inductor. At voltages up
to
about 6 kV, the water acted as a relatively high resistance and the
circuit decayed as an overdamped RLC circuit. Resistance decreased
with
time. When the resistance dropped below about 10 W, the water would
explode if the capacitor still had sufficient energy. The loudness was
distinctly greater than an equivalent amount of gunpowder.

During the explosion, resistance would drop still more, so the
circuit
would become underdamped and oscillatory. Remaining water droplets are
cool to the touch, so there is no evidence that the water has boiled
into steam, although that has to remain a possibility. A low impedance
arc in air sometimes forms after the explosion so the explosion is not
necessarily caused by an air arc.

INTRODUCTION

For many years, a number of researchers have sought a completely new
energy source, one freely and widely available. Tesla, Moray, and
Bearden are among the better known of these searchers [1].

It is likely that some energy will have to be expended in order to tap
into this source, perhaps in a manner similar to a heat pump. A heat
pump is able to move several units of heat energy from the outdoors
to
air conditioned space for the cost of a single unit of electrical
energy. The heat energy is readily and freely available, but requires
an
electrical input to move it to a desired location.

The ratio of heat energy output to the electrical energy input is
called
the Coefficient Of Performance (COP) and is well over unity. So "over
unity" machines are already widely used. But is there another source
of
energy in the ambient besides sensible heat? If there is, we would
expect some experiments to yield more output energy than the known
energy input. There would probably be nonlinear and threshold effects,
which would help explain why the new source has not been previously
identified. High voltages, high currents, and/or resonant phenomena
may
be necessary. Experiments which may be operating in, "over-unity" mode
need to be carefully reported and then replicated by other
researchers.

One such phenomenon which deserves a careful examination is
electrically
induced explosions in water. It has not been proven that the energy
released by the explosion is greater than the electrical energy
supplied
(and doing it will be difficult), but there are certainly unexpected
effects associated with the high voltage and high current operation.
There is also an arc, which may be important in developing the new
energy source [2].

A careful investigation of the phenomenon may yield new insight into
basic electromagnetic theory, such as the longitudinal Ampere's force
proposed by Graneau. It may illuminate a method of tapping into a new
energy source assuming the energy developed in the explosion is great
than the energy originally stored in the capacitor. And even if it can
be fully explained by classical physics, it may still offer a
technique
for protecting the contacts high voltage switches. With a water
channel
in series, the switch will close into a moderately high impedance,
with
minimal arcing. After a small time delay (allowing the switch to be
fully closed), a plasma arc is established in the water, providing a
low
impedance path to the load.

GRANEAU'S EXPERIMENTS

Peter Graneau, a physics professor at Northeastern University, and his
associates, have performed several experiments with water-plasma
explosions [3,4]. The basic circult for all the experiments is shown
in
Fig. 1.

<snip>

Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / May 2008

Water Explosion Returns