PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2026-08-21, 14:10:37
News: The text input boxes (where you write your messages) are resizeable.  Just drag the bottom border of the text box to size it appropriately to your device.  The changes are persistent across your devices.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
Author Topic: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion.  (Read 731 times)
Topic Options img
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #25 on: 2012-03-01, 17:45:05 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
  Good points, Jean -- and yes:
Anyway, even with a moderate cop (3), all these measurements errors will be of much less importance.
Would they not?

Agreed; but I still like to exercise care in measuring of course,  as I see you do also.

I don't know much about the 220V power across the pond -- do you have a "neutral" and a "hot" wire as we do west of the pond? 
If so, do you connect the "neutral" wire to the ball or the outer bell?
   
img  Slider2732
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #26 on: 2012-03-01, 20:26:59 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.
This is a "hot" thread ...we're on Page 2 :)
In the United Kingdom it's the same system, except 240V and bigger wall plugs. I always find that American plugs work their way out of the wall and want to just drop on the floor...which is kinda what we're attempting to achieve in any case.

Jean, this was pure GOLD for information -
Quote
the ball is also from these 2 bells old alarm clock
I have a small collection of vintage clocks, that were bought from yard sales over the last couple of years and 95% of which now run. 4 of them have bells on and the fact that those 4 are all awaiting external cosmetics restoration is a blessing for this project. I can zap the bells like there's no tomorrow and could just sand them back down or repaint them if they ended up back on the clock !


 


---------------------------
ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #27 on: 2012-03-01, 21:17:55 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
  Good work, Mark.  Seems like a guy has to grow some bells to participate in this project!   ^-^
   
img  NerzhDishual
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #28 on: 2012-03-01, 22:22:16 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 166
@Prof Jones,

Yes, we have a "neutral" wire and a "hot" (= Phase) wire.

The colors norms are:
Neutral = blue.
Hot (phase) = any color  except blue, yellow, green.
Ground = yellow and green.

Please see attached pictures.
The first picture is from Prof. Savic.

---------------------------------------

@Slider2732

Good building....

For my part I use the demo version of Cool Edit96 to find the frequencies.
You can find it here:
http://freenrg.info/4SJ/cool96.zip   

Very Best,
Jean
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #29 on: 2012-03-01, 23:22:39 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
  Thanks, Nerzh, for the photo of the mains -- that is clear.   I wonder if connecting P to the outer bell would make a difference?  since that is more likely to "vibrate " ?  just a thought.
   
img  Slider2732
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #30 on: 2012-03-02, 01:05:15 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.
I could try running Cool Edit in Wine (running Ubuntu Linux here), but I think it's where the Wilcom audio freq generator comes into this...and gives the 1980's old girl a definite free energy role :D
It'll also drive me to work through the frequency sweeps it's capable of.

Hmm, resonant cavity. I'd think the mains frequency to be the leader and the strongly evident main component frequency. Such that, it goes to the ball part. In the Davey video demo we see he has the ball encompassing the whole unit...reminding me of the thing that snaked around trying to look for humans in the house, in the 1990's War Of The Worlds movie.
The vacuum area draws in the water, the steam is of higher pressure and so is ejected, replaced by the cooler water and hence setting up the vacuum area.
I'll have to review the video again, but that would need a slot around the ball part.
The bell has to hit the natural frequency of the water and, we're told, water doesn't have one. More that it exhibits a natural frequency only because of what it is surrounded by....not sure on that whole textbook thought.
If we picture a large flat piece of wood in a bathtub and then slosh back and forth, at some particular rate the sloshing is amplified so much that the water exits the bath and on to the floor. Goldilocks again - too fast and the wood would fight itself to move, to slow and the energy imparted isn't great enough to get the water to exit the bath.
I'm seeing that as the effective resonance condition of the frequency in the chamber.
Kinda liking the idea that the frequency is a multiple of 7.8Hz, because water properties, especially nano magnetics are something of an interest.
If the mains is at 60Hz, then that would be 468Hz. Could one of you chaps possibly try that frequency ?

Prof Jones - I note your crucibles resonate at 240Hz. The device of Davey's appears to be quite small and, so, if the crucibles were 1/2 sized, they would approximate 468Hz. Just a random observation. I used to be a campanologist in my teens, hence bell ringing goes back a long way LOL



---------------------------
ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu
   
img  NerzhDishual
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #31 on: 2012-03-02, 19:35:59 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 166
First of all, some pictures here:
http://www.freenrg.info/4SJ/Some_SSB_Pictures.html
---------------------------------
@Prof. Jones,

Yes, it was also my 'intuition' that connecting the Phase (hot wire) to the "cup"  seemed more
appropriate... I will also try this configuration.
---------------------------------
@Slider2732

Quote
If we picture a large flat piece of wood in a bathtub and then slosh back and forth,
at some particular rate the sloshing is amplified so much that the water exits
the bath and on to the floor. Goldilocks again - too fast and the wood would fight
itself to move, to slow and the energy imparted isn't great enough to get the
water to exit the bath.

Appetizing food for thought. Thanks. O0

Juts a question please? Does Goldilocks utter gobbledygook?
-----------------------------------
I was wrong when I said that the "cup" of the Savic's Sonic Boiler was not tuned.
So the Q factor should, in fact, be high.

Actually, I tried to clean this cup and I saw that there was some mastic or  painting around its 'edge'.

Before cleaning, the main freq of the cup was about 1610 Hz.
While cleaning, I removed some material and the freq drop to about 1580 Hz.
I added a small quantity of this cold welding mastic and now the cup freq is about 1600 Hz.

So, if the tunings have to be very accurate we're not out of the woods yet.
(in French we say 'brambles' (and even 'inn') instead of 'woods')...

That is why I'm wondering whether it would be not more judicious to kinda "tune the grid frequency"
 with a "Variable Frequency Pure Sine Wave Power Inverter"
(12 Vols DC to 110 to 220 AC / 50  to 400 Hz)...
This apparatus is not available on EBay of course.... :-\

Another half backed idea would be to use a sampler to record some (or one) frequency(ies) and to play them back to the Sonic Boiler with an audio amplifier. I must confess that I do not master all the electronic technical issues of my 'delirium'.

-------------------------
In fact, all what we all need here are some bl' ù£^"& theoretical clues.

Prof. Savic does not give so much precisions. He insists that the "cup" freq is 400 Hz and the "ball" freq 1000 Hz. No way! = sorry but I strongly beg to differ...

Very Best,
Jean
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #32 on: 2012-03-03, 21:10:32 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
Nerzh:
Quote
That is why I'm wondering whether it would be not more judicious to kinda "tune the grid frequency"
 with a "Variable Frequency Pure Sine Wave Power Inverter"
(12 Vols DC to 110 to 220 AC / 50  to 400 Hz)...

Good idea...  A while back, a friend and I in town played with an inverter, but could not see a way to vary the Freq much...  If you find a way, let us know!

What I can do easily is to vary the Voltage... with my variac.  ;)
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #33 on: 2012-03-04, 17:22:19 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
4 March 2012, about 10 am mountain time.  Carrying on then with the experiments, I have confirmed and extended the results reported 28 Feb 2012:

Quote from: PhysicsProf on 2012-02-29, 06:11:10
28 Feb 2012 -- I performed some experiments regarding BOILING, both in the control experiment (using an electric kettle and bringing a measured amount of water to boiling) and with my two-bell sonic boiler (2BSB).

CONTROL run was instructive.   Attached photos show the Kaloric electric kettle once again.  Note that the jug can be simply removed from the electric-power-supply-base.  This makes measuring the weight of the jug and jug+water (shown on the right) straightforward, with no cord to worry about.  The weight/mass scale can handle up to 5000 g, which is plenty for these experiments (so far).
[snip for brevity]

I like this method, then I applied the same approach, weighing the water before and after and this time using the 2bellSB, and found:

Qevap      = 0.628 W-hr * delta-mass in grams = 0.628 * (1742g - 1700g) = 26.4 W-h (output energy).

The input energy from the calibrated energy meter 22.3 W-h, so there appears about 18% excess during boiling, using the 2-bell device I built.  

 

I purchased four more bells as shown in attached photo, left two of nickel and right two of iron.  Purchased from a chemical-supply stockroom.  I had a machinist friend drill TWO holes in each of these bells, one for the nylon-bolt to hold 2 bells together and pass the wire, and one to allow steam to escape.  

I decided to basically replicate the previous two-nickel-bell build, with two holes now, rather than drilling two holes in the original 2-bell system (which I built several weeks ago).  Second photo shows the new 2 bell sonic boiler (2BSB) held over the Kaloric electric kettle previously described. Third photo shows the 2BSB placed in the water in the Kaloric EK.
 Photos also show two electric-mains power/energy meters used for these experiments (input power and energy).

  Results follow, comparing evaporated-water-mass for the Kaloric EK control, and for the 2BSB system.  What I did is to run for 19 kW-hrs for each run, both control runs and SB runs.  First, I heated the water to boiling using the EK, then weighed the water quickly on the mass scale, then did the boiling run putting 19kW-hrs into the control OR the SB, then quickly weighed the water again on the mass scale to determine the weight lost due to steam production.

Run   Control or SB     Measured Delta-mass (due to steam production)

1.       SB                    41g

2.       SB                    37g

3.       Control              18g

4.       Control              20g

5.        SB                    35g

6.       Control               20g

Thus, in each case the 2-bell sonic boiler caused a greater steam production than did the Kaloric control.  
I find these data quite compelling -- and repeatable!  So the replication confirmed the results I obtained in February.  

  If you see an error, pls let me know.  I can't find an error, , but I do plan to put better insulation around the Kaloric kettle to cut down on heat losses to the room through the walls of the container -- By comparing the SBoiler and Control runs, in the same kettle-container, such effects should be pretty much equal between the control and the SB device runs.  I also plan a build with the iron crucibles.  It would be interesting if the nickel in the crucibles/bells I've been using is important  (proton-capture on nickel anyone, like e-cat???  I don't think so...  ;)  )

I also have two short videos, one recording the tone produced when the outer bell is struck, and the other recording the peculiar hissing sound made by the device during boiling (and showing the set-up in operation).  I will try to post these videos.

I should note that in my build of this 2-bell device, I went back and looked at photos of Peter Davey's original 2-bell device and tried to pattern my construction after his original. See drawing; see http://www.rexresearch.com/davey/davey.htm .
I wonder whether Davey is still alive; his invention goes back roughly sixty years!  He would be about 96 years old now.
 

I do not mean to step on anyone's toes here; just proceeding cautiously and as a curious scientist, building on the work of Peter Davey.  Please keep these results inside the group.   As I've noted before, my wish is not to make a lot of money (a fair/modest return to inventors/builders is great), but rather to get this new technology out for the blessing of mankind as quickly as possible.
Besides Peter Davey (!), I wish to acknowledge contributions to my effort especially by Nate J and Les K and Abe C, who live in town and who have made good suggestions.
« Last Edit: 2012-03-04, 18:52:51 by PhysicsProf »
   
img  NerzhDishual
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #34 on: 2012-03-04, 21:23:31 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 166
@Prof. Jones

Yes, a Variac....
IMO, it should be also be possible to find a way to vary the freq.
I have found a lot of web pages about inverters circuits.
Suffice(?) to embezzle/hijack the frequency generator part of the Circuit.
This is a little bit over my head but I could be helped with an 'OU' phone-friend of mine.

An ('OU')  phone-friend is a guy that you have never meet but only got it touch with at phone.
It is the magic of 'OU' researches and researchers.
For example, I was given, by a 'normal' friend a phone call of a guy who is interested in HHO generation.
I didn't know him. I phoned him and we spent more than one hour at phone.
I must add than, contrary to myself,  this person, in the 'real' live, is not know as a very talkative
individual...

------------------

Your results look very very interesting. O0
I would be prudent and not give any precise COP number.

Anyway:
Just consider the means.
SB = (41 + 37 + 35) / 3 = 37.7
Control = (18 + 20 + 20) / 3 = 19.3

Of course, the COP is not 37.7 / 19.3 but this can been seen as an Increased Efficiency Ratio
(or something like that).

Now, please consider:
Your control can not be 'OU'. OK?
The efficiency of your control can not, also, be less than, saying, 60%.
Unless you are using a non 'conservative' control device (Div(EK) <>0). No? :o

Now: 37.7 * 0.6 / 19.3 > 1.
Would the efficient of your EK only  be 51% that 37.7 * 0.51 / 19.7 = 1!

So, IMO, this is 'OU' Prof Jones!

Else #1: have you noticed that the 'standard deviation' of the SB is far more important than
the control? This, IMO, shows that, contrary to you EK, your SB is not a 'dead' device.

Else #2:
According to my Table Scale and some measurements, the weigh of a plastic beaker filled with 'hot' water
(hot > 50/60°) is not the same than the weight of the same beaker with ''cold' water (cold <20°).  

It can vary of about 1% ore more.
For Ex: in my last experiment: 626 grams Vs 620 grams.
The plastic beaker by itself weigh 185 grams. Is it the plastic?

So, Prof Jone all your result bode well.

My last one too!
http://freenrg.info/4SJ/More_Results/Encouraging_Results.html

I got a COP of 1.4???

Very Best,
Jean






.
 
 
   
img  Slider2732
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #35 on: 2012-03-04, 23:52:20 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.
I may be able to help you fellows with mains frequency conversion.
If you know the top end amperage required, then the following idea can be scaled to suit the throughput.

The basis, is something like the Jeanna's Light or a recent circuit by Sergdo on OU.com.
The power comes in, can come from anywhere - solar, batteries, whatever we choose and the output is frequency dependent on a variable pot. For mains current abilities, the circuit could be driven from a car battery.
You may have heard large toroids singing away in some peoples videos....using the pot, you can vary that frequency, from upwards of 20kHz, to as low as a few Hz. That singing is the inverter frequency.
In common with anything, size dictates the frequency, it being much easier to have a very large toroid tune down to the lower Hz while listening to it. The frequency becomes easily audible when inverting to 120V ranges with using, say, the toroid from the neck of a CRT computer monitor.
The circuit is very simple and very effective AND might just offer frequency tuning abilities for these experiments with the Davey boilers :)
Best thing, to me anyway, is that a 1.5V AA battery can run a normally mains powered 2W LED lightbulb !!!
So we're looking straight away at perhaps avoiding the need for a plug in the wall.

If one bell input is the mains frequency and from a traditional plug, then the inverter circuit can supply whatever frequency we wish to use for the other bell.
If both bells ran via 2 inverter circuits, then both become tunable, both become able to be powered by much smaller sources of power like a car battery.
Who knows, maybe at resonance and with the correct inverter frequencies, we may be able to boil water with a flashlight battery :)
With now seeing that a size such as 0.9" toroid can deliver at least the voltage, if not the amps due to wire gauge, we may imagine a larger toroid fitting under a traditional household kettle. In such a way, the kettle becomes a full Davey boiler, but looks to the mainstream market just like a traditional kettle.

Here's a pic of one of my inverters running, the whole circuitry fits around the screw terminal of the unaltered household bulb:

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a129/slider27/100_0090-1.jpg
Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion.



Here''s a video demo, just to see how simple the circuit is and to see it in operation for potential Davey boiler uses:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmgerjLztkc&feature=youtu.be

On my previous video, which shows the audible 'benefits' for tuning the frequency, one viewer just posted in answer to another viewer and it's related:
-----------------------------------
@spicer41282
You can build a JT circuit to resonate at various frequencies, depending upon your coil and capacitors you add. You can intentionally keep the resonant frequency real low ... for a nice pleasing HUM ... or high ... say 30khz or greater to be above human hearing. It might bother your dog though.
morpher44 2 hours ago
-----------------------------------
Here's that video, shows quite clearly how the audible tuning would need no speaker, external circuitry etc:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afilkouuiJo&lc=v_eEVzpNnfRkC2NJSr3so12yQkcUFM3KhFQaZtqbS5A


I hope the idea is of merit and use.
« Last Edit: 2012-03-05, 02:01:47 by Slider2732 »


---------------------------
ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #36 on: 2012-03-05, 00:57:42 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
First, the video of my 2-bell device boiling water (apparent OU) yesterday is shown here:
http://youtu.be/Nezjc-0DxcE
Replicates the 28 feb experiment, but with holes in the bells.

Very short -- less than 15 seconds. Notice the distinctive hissing sound.

Mark -- can we come up with variable freq output at about 500-800 W?  that's what is needed here...
BUT -- as I tuned the bells to approx 240 Hz (as explained), the 60 Hz from the mains seems perhaps to be working.
I will soon try varying the voltage, and other bells.
 
Good continued work, Nerzh/Jean!  let me replY IN CAPITALS.

Quote from: NerzhDishual on 2012-03-04, 21:23:31
@Prof. Jones

Yes, a Variac....
IMO, it should be also be possible to find a way to vary the freq.
I have found a lot of web pages about inverters circuits.
Suffice(?) to embezzle/hijack the frequency generator part of the Circuit.
This is a little bit over my head but I could be helped with an 'OU' phone-friend of mine.

-- OK, GOOD IDEA.
...

Your results look very very interesting. O0
I would be prudent and not give any precise COP number.

Anyway:
Just consider the means.
SB = (41 + 37 + 35) / 3 = 37.7
Control = (18 + 20 + 20) / 3 = 19.3

Of course, the COP is not 37.7 / 19.3 but this can been seen as an Increased Efficiency Ratio
(or something like that).

YES, I AGREE.

Now, please consider:
Your control can not be 'OU'. OK?
The efficiency of your control can not, also, be less than, saying, 60%.
Unless you are using a non 'conservative' control device (Div(EK) <>0). No? :o

NO, THE CONTROL SHOWS EFF < 1; YESTERDAY, ABOUT 70% FOR THE CONTROL.

Now: 37.7 * 0.6 / 19.3 > 1.
Would the efficient of your EK only  be 51% that 37.7 * 0.51 / 19.7 = 1!

So, IMO, this is 'OU' Prof Jones!

IT APPEARS SO.  MORE TESTING TOMORROW!  (SUNDAY, TIME WITH FAMILY ETC)

Else #1: have you noticed that the 'standard deviation' of the SB is far more important than
the control? This, IMO, shows that, contrary to you EK, your SB is not a 'dead' device.

GOOD POINT; THE SB IS NOT A 'DEAD' DEVICE.

Else #2:
According to my Table Scale and some measurements, the weigh of a plastic beaker filled with 'hot' water
(hot > 50/60°) is not the same than the weight of the same beaker with ''cold' water (cold <20°).  

It can vary of about 1% ore more.
For Ex: in my last experiment: 626 grams Vs 620 grams.
The plastic beaker by itself weigh 185 grams. Is it the plastic?

I PUT THE HOT-WATER CONTAINING VESSEL ON A PIECE OF STYROFOAM ALWAYS, ABOUT 1 CM THICK.  THE WEIGHING DEVICE MAY BE HEAT-SENSITIVE, BUT THIS SOLVES PROBLEM.

So, Prof Jone all your result bode well.

My last one too!
http://freenrg.info/4SJ/More_Results/Encouraging_Results.html

I got a COP of 1.4???

YES, GOOD WORK -- YOUR COP FROM SAVIC' "FIXED-UP" DEVICE LOOKS MUCH BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL!  I ENCLOSE ONE OF YOUR PHOTOS OF THE ORIGINAL CONDITION BELOW.

Very Best,
Jean

SO WE CARRY ON -- WITH IMPROVED POSITIVE RESULTS!  THANKS, JEAN.
-- STEVE
   
img  Slider2732
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #37 on: 2012-03-05, 01:11:54 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.
Great to see a video - have subscribed.

Quote
Mark -- can we come up with variable freq output at about 500-800 W?  that's what is needed here.
I'll get onto it!
A power MOSFET, such as the MJE13009 can handle the approx 6-7A current and the mains voltage (datasheet - http://www.datasheetcatalog.org/datasheet/stmicroelectronics/5294.pdf)
I'm seeing the power handling as 110W max though and that confuses.
I have another large split toroid and will see what happens with that transistor, but may run at 12V then 24V initially :)


---------------------------
ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #38 on: 2012-03-06, 07:18:19 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
  Thanks, Mark and Jean!  let us know of your progress...   O0

So I've completed more experiments, 5 March 2012, since Saturday with the positive results, I wrapped the calorimeter I'm using in bubble wrap to better insulate it, to see whether this would improve the measured efficiency while running the resistive-heater control.  See photo. I also refined the measurement regarding the input energy needed to bring the water to boiling temperature, just before beginning each VAPORIZATION run.

With these refinements, I wanted to see whether the efficiency in the CONTROL would be close to unity as expected -- and whether my little 2-bell device would continue to show "interesting" effects.  Here are the results, in order that the data were acquired, again comparing evaporated-water-mass for the Kaloric-kettle/calorimeter control, and for the 2BSB system inside the SAME calorimeter.  What I did today is to run for 17 kW-hrs for each run, both control runs and SB runs.  First, I heated the water to boiling using the electric kettle, then weighed the water quickly on the mass scale, then did the boiling run putting 17kW-hrs into the control OR the SB, then quickly weighed the water again on the mass scale to determine the weight lost due to steam production.

Run   Control or SB     Measured Delta-mass (due to steam production)

1.       Control              24 g (1748 g to 1724g)
2.       SB                    39 g

3.       SB                    33 g

4,5,6  Controls              23 g, 25 g, 25 g

7.        SB                    36g


Note that the control runs are in reasonable agreement, somewhat more variation with the sonic boiler -- but still, in each case the 2-bell sonic boiler caused a greater steam production than did the control.  So the replication with refined "calorimeter" confirmed the results I obtained on 2 March and in February.  

Now let's look at the efficiency n = Eoutput (heat) / Einput (electrical):

Control:  Q out = 0.63*24.3g-vaporized = 15.3;   n = 15.3 (output W-h)/16.5 (input W-h) =  93%.  
So still some losses in the system but not bad.

Now for the 2-bell device I built based  more-or-less on Davey's original design, the efficiency from the measurements;
Average of three device runs = 36 g vaporized; @ 0.63 W-h per gram vaporized:
2bell-sonic boiler:    Q out = 0.63*36g= 22.7 W-h;   n = 22.7 (output W-h)/16.5 (input W-h) =  138%.  
Remarkable.

I performed another device-run after adding more water, and inputting 20 W-h this time; then the mass-drop of the water was 1701g to 1658g, 43 grams lost due to vaporization, so
Q out = 0.63 * 43g = 27.1 W-h  
and
n = 27.1/ 20 = 136%, confirming the earlier results.  

Oh, and also used a paper towel above the vessel to catch water-droplets; the mass increased from 7g to 8g, so the spitting is estimated at about a gram, having a small impact on the above results.  Both the control and the device spit some water out, but the water level is roughly 10cm below the top of the vessel so much of the ejected liquid (from boiling action) would tend to fall back into the vessel.
 E.g., the last result would go from 43g to 42g, and Qout to 26.5, so n= 26.5/20 = 132%.

Observation:  I also note that a black powdery residue builds up on the bells especially hear the mouths of the bells as the device runs.  I suspect this is a nickel oxide... I wiped this off with a paper towel from time to time as I think this might affect performance.

Whew!  what fun!    O0

But I had some bad news today also, from one of the "angel donors"... best put that on the "prize" thread...



 
   
img  Armagdn03
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #39 on: 2012-03-06, 21:02:10 »
Newbie
*

Posts: 34
That is great news Steve! I am really impressed. i have been going over all the info on the energetic forum page, and now here. I am glad to see you are making progress. I will post when i have some thoughts on the subject!
   
img  NerzhDishual
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #40 on: 2012-03-06, 21:43:19 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 166

Hi blokes,

First of all, I have made a new web page about some of my "Spe_cal_culations" (TM  ;))
http://jeanyves.hervouet.free.fr/NDS/Speculations.html
Slow (but free) web server.

I do like playing with (non random) numbers.
I also hate... some things.
I will shut my bl' f' French critical - nit picking -  "theoretical(ly?)-oriented" inclinated big mouth.
Breton people are just 'mockers' and 'derisory'.
So, please imagine French + Breton?

Anyway. Guess what? Perhaps, after exchanging with you,  would all of us be able to build
a kinda SSB while understanding what we are doing instead of trials and errors?

Actually, IMO, errors are indispensable but to many random trials are boring  especially
when you have to reinvend  a still existing sort of wheel.

-------------------------------
@Slider2732

Thanks for you videos.
Thanks for you offer.
Thanks for all, BTW. :)
I would need a continuous variable frequency pure sinus inverter that can deliver
up to 4 amps (about 1000 VA). IMO, This is not so easy to design. Is it?

------------------------------------
My 'COPs' (nothing to do with any Law Enforcement Officers) are those of a skeptic.

I'm not a skeptic (Free-Energy-wise) but I prefer to be very pessimistic.
Actually, the temperature of my room was also increasing and I do not take account of this.

Yes, I must insulate the beaker.
For the moment, I just want to see what is going on. I can see some 'huge' air 'bubble' ('water rim')
between the "Cup" and the "Ball". Sometimes it bursts rapidly, sometimes it is more stable for a while.
This is a clue.

-------------------------
I have measured 2 news cops. My 4 last measurements:

COP #1 1.4. Needs to be confirmed. Configuration Number 1 was used
COP #1 0.17 with the same configuration (Number 1) as #1 but a with a "ball" full of air.
COP #3 0.7  With another configuration (Number 2).
COP #4 0.68 with the same configuration(Number 2) as #3

This shows that the SSB efficiency is very depending upon the configurations (see pictures).

In MY bl' Opinion:
In the configuration Number 1 the cup can transmit its vibrations to the ball (and reciprocally).
In the configuration Number 2 the two "electrodes" are kinda "mechanically 'appart'".





Very Best,
Jean
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #41 on: 2012-03-06, 21:58:35 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
Quote from: Armagdn03 on 2012-03-06, 21:02:10
That is great news Steve! I am really impressed. i have been going over all the info on the energetic forum page, and now here. I am glad to see you are making progress. I will post when i have some thoughts on the subject!

Good to hear from you, Andrew.   Would like to hear your thoughts!

Good to hear from you also, Jean!  I agree:
Guess what? Perhaps, after exchanging with you,  would all of us be able to build
a kinda SSB while understanding what we are doing instead of trials and errors?
   
img  NerzhDishual
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #42 on: 2012-03-07, 01:15:21 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 166

@Prof. Jones and Everybody,

Your own devices strongly seem to be 'OU'. Perfect! And thanks a lot for that.
IMO, you are on the right track.

Now, your devices are just made out of some 'fuzzy' parts. Or what?
In my bl' f' froggy Opinion (IMBFFO), with some frequencies tunings, you should be able
to multiply your COP by a consistent factor.

I think that I might have discovered - this very day -  (hence not still tested)
some SSB secrets.

IMBFFO, these 'secrets' are:

It must be an Air?/HHO?/Else?/(void?-No!) gap between the 2 'electrodes' (even at 'rest').

The 2 'electrodes' must be in mechanical tight touch.

The 'gap' between the 2 'electrodes' must be in accordance of the wavelength relative to the
speed of 378 m/s.
http://jeanyves.hervouet.free.fr/NDS/Speculations.html

If the freq. of the grid is FG.
If the (main) freq of the first electrode is FE1
If the (main) freq of the second electrode is FE2
FE2 > FE1

You must (= it would be very nice (COP-wise) to) have:
FE1/FG = an integer number
FE2/FG = an integer number
FE2/FE1 = an integer number

Now, these considerations are just out of some of my (successful? and failed)
experiments and my playing with Prof Savic (shuffled?) numbers.

All comments, questions, criticisms are welcome, of coarse.

Very Brest,
Jean
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #43 on: 2012-03-07, 05:53:53 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
  Jean -- I can see that you have given the SB matter a great deal of thought.  It may be that the frequencies should be varied and in proper ratios as you suggest...  as I often say, "theory guides, experiment decides."   
 
   What particularly caught my attention was your link to the drawings you did of the SB, various versions.  I attach one of these here for discussion.   Let me start with this question -- did you do this drawing in September 2011?  and if so, was it based on Prof Savic's design, or whose?
   
img  NerzhDishual
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #44 on: 2012-03-07, 07:17:46 »
Full Member
***

Posts: 166

Hey Prof. Jones!

This picture is from Prof. Savic.

I'm Capricorn ascendant Virgo.
As soon as I see any information (picture or else) that could be of any help that
I store it in my computer. I'm also able to retrieve this information.

Astrologically wise:
I have also Neptune in my First House (for Music) and Uranus in my 10Th house
(for computer programming skills)..

I spare you my nasty moon in Scorpio... >:-)

Very Best,
Jean
   
img  Slider2732
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #45 on: 2012-03-07, 10:58:15 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.
I have dust in my house, does that count ? :)

FANTASTIC news on the 138% !

Quote
This is not so easy to design. Is it?
I've been looking at such high power sine wave oscillators and need to work through what will work, rather than what will trip circuit breakers. The fave idea is a simple enough MOSFET flip/flop, with capacitor smoothing of what would be square wave output. Changing out capacitor values could, feasibly, introduce anything from sine to square if needed. Sharp snaps would seem prevalent in many areas of research, so is just an idea for incorporation.
But I do apologise for slowness, not been very well the last couple of days (wife thinks it's anxiety) and so have been a little less intense.


---------------------------
ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #46 on: 2012-03-07, 15:38:59 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
  Take 'er easy, Mark!    I find that exercise helps me reduce anxiety when I feel it rising (happens sometimes).

   I have posted a private video from the 2-bell sonic boiler runs on 5 March 2012:  http://youtu.be/N5y5B-8ndiw  .
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #47 on: 2012-03-10, 06:49:32 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
Friday, 9 March 2012.  Today I constructed another 2-bell system, this time using iron crucibles (smaller nested inside the larger), again joined together using nylon nuts and a bolt.

Inner bell "hot", outer bell neutral wire.  I wanted to see whether the iron Davey would work as well as the Nickel system.  These are approx the same size, iron bells a little smaller.  Will provide photo.

Nutshell, as it is late here:  vaporized mass for 20 W-hrs was 42g, then 43 g.  42.5g X 0.63 = 26.8 W-h output.  n =  26.8/20 = 1.34  (!)  (The nickel bells gave approx. n = 1.38; both Ni and Fe are magnetic materials BTW.)

Still could hardly believe it, so I thought of another control.  This one using the suspendable resistance heater I had purchased, placed in water in the SAME container/calorimeter.  Important check, because now both the control and the 2-bell system are suspended (one at a time!), about the same depth in the water.  

Also -- turns out the control used abt 300 Watts, the 2-Fe-bell-SB used about 310 Watts, so very close to the same time for the runs.  Same input power and energy; we compare directly the output energies observed.

I was pleased at the similarity between control and 2-bell system.  Anxious to try the control, did so.  
Control Results:  vaporized mass for 20 W-hrs (SAME on energy meter as for the 2-bell device):  34g, 29g, 28g, 33g, 31g.  Average 31 g ==>

  31 g X 0.63 = 19.5W-h output.  n = 19.5/20 = 98%...   very good, expected for the control runs.

Output energy comparison, 26.8 W-h / 19.5 W-h = 137%.

Wow, everything looking good.  Does anyone want to try this?  Easy to set-up really, once you have the bells to do it!!   :D

Photos tomorrow ; its nearly midnight here.
   
img  Slider2732
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #48 on: 2012-03-10, 09:59:00 »
Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1602
... .-.. .. -.. . .-.
Excellent  O0
Just had a thought - Is it inherent to the bell system to get such results, or could that be a less than efficient comercial kettle ?
Am just so very impressed with how the bells work, that one has to wonder what a sceptic would leap to !

All i'm short of for an alarm clock bells test run is a nylon bolt and nut. But, hmm, will dig about. I wouldn't mind a short on a 1.5V AA, but mains is mains. The heat sensors etc are something I don't have.
My aim, is to simply make a coffee with something home built and it would be immediately practical. So yes, will be joining in.
Quite oddly and as a personal drive for efficiency, the first coffee of the morning comes through my present coffee maker as stone cold. It has to sit on the hotplate for about 15 minutes til it warms up. I have completely no idea how the water can raise up through the tube thing if it isn't being heated. Quite often, the method is to boil water on the stove for that first one, while the coffee maker slowly begins it's day   :-\

Also, materials do have a huge importance, for the longevity of any practical solution system. We don't want folks having to replace corroded bells or having to throw cleaning agents in every couple of weeks. I'm sure that's an obvious, but was wondering such things within battery experiments and the way that deterioration level is increased with battery use. Therefore, 120V through these bells will presumably see rapid oxidation and erosion of the metals, even though made of the same metals. At least I probably need a clarification on that thought.
A 'sacrificial anode' may be a route if longevity issues do arise, something that people with especially harder water supplies would benefit from. At the most, they would pull the strip out every now and again and replace.


---------------------------
ʎɐqǝ from pɹɐoqʎǝʞ a ʎnq ɹǝʌǝu
   
img  PhysicsProf
Re: Davey Sonic Boilers -- and Controls. Experimental results and discussion. « Reply #49 on: 2012-03-10, 15:06:34 »
Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3249
Quote from: Slider2732 on 2012-03-10, 09:59:00
Excellent  O0
Just had a thought - Is it inherent to the bell system to get such results, or could that be a less than efficient comercial kettle ?
Am just so very impressed with how the bells work, that one has to wonder what a sceptic would leap to !
....

Indeed, it is an important question -- how do you PROVE anything to a skeptic? (do you need to??)   OR, to your self? -- that is more important.

Think about this, though -- where does the heat from a resistance-water-heater go, if not into the water?  see photos.    I'm getting efficiencies of electrical-energy-into-heat of over 90% routinely now, with the insulated container, using two DIFFERENT controls.  Some heat is lost in the wires etc, less than 8% according to the measurements.  And the two different controls agree (to within about 5%).  But maybe they are BOTH wrong by over 33%?  And maybe the input energy meters are also BOTH WRONG?   Or the weight scale (which is repeatable to about a gram) is off in measuring CHANGE in mass by over 33%? That's what it would take to over-turn the results above that I've presented.

I don't know that you could ever convince a skeptic, but that's a matter more of psychology than of science perhaps.  Yet to convince myself and those who are scientific in their approach,  I suppose I would need:

1.   Higher efficiency, well above errors in measurement.  If 134% or 138% is not enough, perhaps 200%?  or 300%?

2.  Replicated in four independent labs, all seeing over 200% efficiency?  would that do it?

2.   How about -- a self-runner?   Extract output energy, convert to electricity in such a way as to self-run the device AND run a load at the same time.  That would be the gold-standard, I suppose.  

Comments?  Can we ever be convinced, or convince others regarding freedom energy, with (1) above?  or do we NEED a self-runner?  would even that be convincing to "skeptics"??

If we get to the point where the device is heating your house and the bills are down by a factor of THREE (say), does it really matter if the "skeptics" are convinced or stop their derogatory comments?
« Last Edit: 2012-03-10, 16:55:24 by PhysicsProf »
   
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2026-08-21, 14:10:37