Posted on Leave a comment

Brown’s Gas Book 1 COMMENTS and CORRECTIONS

* Note: The electrolyzer described in BG Book 1 will work as described, but in the years since the BG Book 1 publication I’ve developed the ER50 series-cell tabletop electrolyzer; which is a much better design.

HyZor (automotive electrolyzer) Proofs Research Paper can be found here (click)

* Page 5.  While Brown’s Gas may be able to sublimate tungsten, the experiments ‘proving’ it are poorly done.  The samples are actually being liquified and oxidized (burned) which happens at a much lower temperature of  3683 K (3410 °C, 6170 °F).  To sublimate tungsten you’d need to do it in an atmosphere devoid of oxygen; which is imposible to do with a BG flame because BG contains oxygen.  However, 3410 °C is still higher than an ordinary oxygen:hydrogen flame of 2800 °C.

* Page 5.  BG is explosive, and if the explosion is contained the end result is a vacuum as the BG converts to water (water is the ‘ashes’ of the explosion).  liquid water takes up 1860 times LESS volume than the BG, so a vacuum is formed.  Certain components of BG, like ExW, can be imploded without an explosion first… but more on that in other literature.

* Several people, including myself (see BG Video 2) and Denny Klien (click), have duplicated Yull Brown’s “run a vehicle on water”.  Whereby electricity is taken from batteries to create the BG that then fuels an internal combustion engine.  This works but is VERY inefficient; if the electricity in the batteries was used to drive an electric motor, the same vehicle would go AT LEAST six (6) times further on a charge.  Further, the apparatus to make enough BG to fully power the vehicle is large, heavy and costly to make and maintain.  More on this in my Water as Fuel books.

* Page 7.  Deionized water can be cleaner than distilled, but mostly is NOT.  The reason is that the deionizers are seldom properly maintained.  Distilled water is more consistent so I now recommend distilled unless you KNOW the deionizer is working properly.

* Page 9. For easy calculation, when using a capacitive amperage limited (CAL) power supply, the actual wattage is the load voltage and amperage (plus any inefficiencies of electrical connections, wire resistance, diodes, etc.).  The point is that the source voltage and amperage is irrelevent, because the capacitor(s) ‘return’ any un-used wattage back to the source.

* Page 9.  I keep saying that the BG imploded, but that is incorrect.  In these experiments it exploded first, then created a nearly instantainious vacuum as the BG condensed into water.

* Page 13.  I made a big mistake when I stated that two gram-moles of water would make 0.933 liters of diatomic gas per gram of electrolyzed water.  I was assuming that the Faraday Laws were for mon-atomic gasses and that when the gasses became diatomic they would take up 1/2 the volume.  I was wrong.  Faraday Laws are based on the assumption that the hydrogen and oxygen gasses produced are already diatomic.  The correct figure is 1.866 liters of gas produced for each gram of electrolyzed water.

This ‘mistake and correction’ affects the resulting equations, results and conclusions that follow in this book and in Brown’s Gas Book 2.  

The basic premise remains true, that BG electrolyzers produce more volume of gas than the electrolyzers that separate the hydrogen and oxygen; AND that the BG volume is produced using less wattage.  My ER1200 WaterTorches have been independently tested, by several agencies, to have nearly 100% Faraday efficient gas production and greater than 100% wattage efficient when heat generated is added.

Page 16.  Faraday Laws state that there will be 1866 liters of diatomic hydrogen and oxygen created when one (1) liter of water is electrolyzed.  NOT 933.33 liters as I state at the end of column 1.

Since the BG Book 1 was written, several mass spectrometry tests of BG (Toby Grotz) do show mon-atomic hydrogen and oxygen but only at about 3% of the gas.  Gas chromatograph tests show anomoulus constituents (Ruggero Santilli) and can’t even identify about 7% of the BG mixture (Scott Cramton).

My current theory assumes the existance of an electrically formed state of water I call “Electrically Expanded Water (ExW)” which you can read about here (click).

Page 19.  You can use home-made inline backfire arresters that are depicted on YouTube.  I describe them (materials to get, how they are made and online references in the ER50 Resources.

Page 21.  I was wrong on assuming that other commercial ‘single-ducted’ electrolyzers weren’t producing Brown’s Gas.  I have subsequently discovered that any electrolyzer specifically designed to NOT separate the hydrogen and oxygen (single ducted) is making Brown’s Gas.  Different designs vary in efficiency and quality of gas but if the gas is made and never separated, then it is Brown’s Gas.

Page 21.  The circuit drawing has two light lines, going at an angle across the ampmeter and full wave bridge rectifier.  Ignore them, they are a glitch in the software I used to make the drawing and I couldn’t erase them.

Let me know if you notice any other issues that need comment or correction.

General Theory Update:

For a quick example of BG’s OU gas production, let’s use the results of an independent test of Brown’s Gas by an engineer named Harald Hanisch, mentioned in the BG Book1.

Mr. Hanisch was Director of Research and Development of Simmering-Graz-Pauker, a large machine-building and railway-car manufacturer owned by the Austrian government. He couldn’t believe that oxygen and hydrogen could be mixed and burned safely and he certainly would not believe that Yull Brown got 340 liters of gas per kilowatthour.

Mr. Hanisch decided to go to Australia to see for himself. He wanted to test for himself the actual input of electricity and the actual output of gas. During his actual testing, with the water displacement method, he found Yull Brown’s machine produced 368 liters of BG per kilowatthour.  This was about 2.7 watthours per liter of BG produced… An unbelievable efficiency for electrolysis at the time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrolysis_of_water

Published and accepted literature on electrolysis (and Faraday Laws) states that:

1. 1 liter of water would make 1866.6 liters of H2:O2 at STP (0°C).  

2. The theoretical optimum cell voltage for 100% efficient electrolysis is -1.23 VDC

However, because of realities, cell voltage of 1.48 VDC is considered to be 100% efficient.  Any voltage greater that 1.23 VDC is considered to be ‘over-voltage’.

3. A 100% efficient electrolyzer would consume 11.7MJ/m3.

11.7MJ/m3 = 3250 watthours/1000 liters or 3.25 watthours per liter of gas produced

Thus, any electrolyzer that is producing gas at LESS than 3.25 watthours per liter is over 100% efficient by ‘accepted’ electrolysis laws. 

So an electrolyzer operating at 2.7 watthours per liter of gas would be 120% efficient. 

My ER 1200 WaterTorches have been independently tested to produce gas at 1.9 watthour per liter of gas, or over 170% efficient. 

My current technology (2015) can produce gas at 0.9 watthour per liter of gas, or over 360% efficient. 

How can that be true?

It can be true because Brown’s Gas is NOT straight diatomic hydrogen and oxygen. 

An important ADDITIONAL gas is formed in Brown’s Gas electrolyzers that is NOT formed in traditional electrolyzers. 

I call this gas Electrically Expanded Water (ExW).

ExW is the reason for all of BG’s anomalies. 

ExW explains the apparent over-unity (more gas being produced than Faraday Laws predict).  So BG electrolysis isn’t really over-unity.  It’s just that a gas is produced / added that Faraday Laws didn’t predict.

ExW also explains why mon-atomic hydrogen and oxygen can exist in BG.  The mon-atomic Hydrogen and oxygen are ‘held apart’ in molecular structures that Yull Brown called ‘fluid crystal’ and Ruggero Santilli calls ‘magnecules’.

Magnecules

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruggero_Santilli#Magnecule_theory
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2013/10/prweb11208713.htm

ExW is the ‘glue’ that holds magnecules together.  Magnecules are semi-stable molecules formed of various hydrogen and oxygen species.  Thus H and O can exist without forming H2 and O2.

Brown’s Gas also displaces more volume than normal because of it’s mon-atomic constituents.  

Gas Volume Update, using SATP

285.83 kJ to electrolyze 1 mole of water

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/electrol.html

A mole of gas at Standard Ambient Temperature and Pressure (SATP) is 24.79 liters. 

http://www.ausetute.com.au/molarvol.html

So a mole of water will make 24.8 liters of diatomic hydrogen and 12.4 liters of diatomic oxygen, or 37.2 liters of gas at SATP.

A mole of water weighs 18 grams and volume is 18 cc

http://chemistry.about.com/od/moles/a/How-Much-Water-Is-A-Mole-Of-Water.htm

Volume (liquid water to gas at SATP) is 2067x increase. 

So 1 liter of water will make 2067 liters of gas at SATP…  

Thus calculations in BG Book 1 should be modified from 1866 to 2067 because I do all my experiments at ambient temperatures.

Brown’s Gas Book 1 Updates:

Michael Rome has an interesting theroy of why BG has ‘extra’ energy
http://www.brownsgas.info/app/download/762097853/The+Proton+Theory.pdf

Leave a Reply