Kelvin's Thunderstorm - Create Lightning From Water and Gravity! PDF

Kelvin's Thunderstorm - Create lightning from water and gravity!
share what you make
sign up or login or
Go Science Apple Arduino 3D Printing CNC Kits Electronics Lasers LEDs Soft Circuits USB See More
Print PDF
Favorite
Email
105
Followers
Follow
Author:
9
NK5
Related
Be a Scientist: Build an Electrostatic Motor
by Kiteman
Build an Electrostatic Motor

by John Chase
120,000 Volt Van De Graaff Generator

by Tool Using Animal
Did you know that you could recreate thunderstorm lightning in your own home? It's possible and is really easy to do. Granted, it's not nearly as exciting as a good old fashion thunderstorm, but the effect is still pretty cool and this lightning won't kill you! The scientific name for this experiment is a water-drop electrostatic generator. Watch the video for a quick overview, then check out the detailed instructions to see how to build your own! (Scientific explanation is on step 6) WARNING: This experiment can generate several thousand volts out of thin air, possible injuring or even killing a harmless little gnat or even a fly! Video overview:
The World's Simplest Electrostatic Machine

by innovationview
DIY Fuel Ionizer for real cheap. Really works.

by makenakai
More Related
Info
Stats
http://www.instructables.com/id/Kelvin-s-Thunderstorm---Create-lightning-from-wate/?ALLSTEPS[10/19/2012 5:00:37 PM]
Author:
NK5
65,218
views
105
Followers
Follow
Published: Aug 31, 2007 License:
Related: kelvin, s thunerstorm electrostatic generator lightning create science project water drop discharge charge electricity static, high_voltage_guide
Guides
Step 1 Supplies
HIGH VOLTAGE
TURBINES
More Guides
Show All 8 Images
Here's a list of supplies you will need for this experiment. You can get them all at your local hardware store.
Garden Hose Two buckets - 8 quart or larger are perfect Packing Styrofoam Hose 'Y' Adapter with flow-control valves One foot of 3/4" plastic tubing Two 3/4" end caps Nylon thread or string Wire - any kind of conducting wire works, even alligator leads. Two bottomless soup or coffee cans A drill with a small bit
Step 2 Prep the parts
There's a couple of things you'll need to do before putting it all together: 1. Drill holes in the end caps. This is the most important step. The end goal here is to create several continuous streams of water droplets. In order to accomplish that, the holes must be properly spaced, otherwise they will join into a solid stream, defeating the purpose. (This will still work with only one stream of droplets, but the energy buildup time is greatly reduced by having several!) 2. Drill holes in the cans. The cans will need three holes. Two on top for suspending it from something, and one on the bottom for the metal wire.
Step 3 Prep the parts - continued
Now that you have all your holes drilled, it's time to finish the prep work. 1. Attach the wire to the can. Cut yourself plenty of wire to work with, and make sure it has good contact with the metal of the can. 2. Attach the thread to the can. Tie one end of the thread to the can. Cut a few feet to ensure there will be enough to suspend it.
Step 4 Put the pieces together
Now it's time to put it all together. 1. Connect the y-adapter to the hose. 2. Put the end caps in the plastic tubes. Be sure they are tight! 3. Attach the tubes to the y-adapters. I ended up having to use hose clamps to keep them them from slipping off.
Step 5 Put it all together
Show All 7 Images
Now it's time to put the pieces together. I used one of those folding ladders to attach the hose to, and to suspend the cans from. 1. Align the cans so they are directly under the tubes. 2. Connect the wire from each can to the opposite bucket. You can also use the wires to help secure the position of the cans under the plastic tubes. NOTE: Make sure the wires don't cross or come very close to each other! 3. Move the buckets close together. This is where the spark will jump. If you can't get them within about 1/2 inch of each other, you can also just attach a couple more pieces of wire to the handles of the bucket and use those for the spark gap.
Step 6 Explanation
So what exactly are we doing with all of this? Water, like many things, is composed of vast quantities of positive and negative electric charges in perfect balance. As water drips down from the top, the slightly positively-charged water is attracted to the more negative can, and the slightly negative water is attracted to the more positive can. This water-drop contraption utilizes Electrostatic Induction to generate a voltage difference between the two buckets. The charges then build up in the can connected to the bucket opposite of it - attracting even more charge. This results in a positive feedback loop. When the voltage difference is high enough (usually a few thousand volts) , a spark will jump between the buckets, discharging the voltage. OK, but how does it start? During dry conditions, everything near the generator ends up with a tiny electric charge just from being handled. It's the same concept that causes a shock after walking across carpet and touching a grounded object. Once the water begins flowing, that natural charge is amplified over and over very quickly, resulting in a large imbalance that corrects itself as a spark between the buckets. For more information about electrostatic induction, refer to these great books from Amazon.com Electrostatics by Niels Jonassen Creative Experiments in Electricity Electrostatic Discharge
Step 7 Turn it on!
Now it's time to turn the electrostatic generator on and begin producing some miniature lightning! Turn your hose on, and then use the flow control valves on the y adapter to adjust the flow. The water should come out fairly fast, but it needs to be as droplets and not a continuous stream. A continuous stream won't give the charges a chance to break away from the source, which is grounded. Ideally, the droplets should begin to form just above the can, before it passes through it. I found that it wasn't very hard to get this working properly without much adjustment. The water also shouldn't drip on the can, but pass through it instead. A little splashing is normal and doesn't seem to affect the generation of electricity. Once the water begins flowing, it should only take a few seconds for the first spark to appear. The more individual water droplet streams, the faster and more often you will get sparks! Watch the video for close-ups of the sparks in action (Fast-forward to 34 seconds to go right to the sparks!):
Step 8 Troubleshooting
If you are not able to get things working as expected, here are some tips for troubleshooting your design: 1. Humidity If you live in a high humidity environment, don't even bother with this experiment - it won't work. I produced the results you see here with a relative humidity of around 60%.
2. Ground your water source Your garden hose should be grounded already. If you're having problems getting sparks, grab some extra wire and attach it to the screw of a wall outlet, or carefully attach it to the ground prong of an electrical cord, and then plug it in. 3. Double check your wires from the cans Are they touching each other? Are they too close together? 4. Move the buckets closer together. It's best to move the buckets within a couple of millimeters to start off with, to be sure the generator is working properly. Then you can move them farther and farther apart.
118 comments Add Comment

1-40 of 118 next
aaronXtreme
5
says:
Aug 23, 2012. 7:26 AM
hey this is cool, coulde I make this with a nini 9 volt?

Reply
Ewade15
says:
Apr 28, 2012. 8:35 PM
I just tried this experiment and it didn't work. We ran it for about 3 minutes and didn't see a spark. the cans got a little wet but not very much. it also rained earlier in the day. We used just a piece of metal wire as the conducting wire. Could someone please point out where I may have gone wrong? Do I need to get new conducting wire? Do the cans need to be COMPLETELY dry? Was the rain making it too humid? its only like 50 degrees here
Reply
cupcake9621
says:
Feb 12, 2012. 8:29 AM
How big is the spark suppose to be? How big did the spark get?
Reply
dungeon runner
3
says:
May 21, 2010. 2:00 PM
I think I should just make this clear to people worried about the dangers of high voltage: There is none. You could get hit with several million volts right now and not even notice it. It's the amperage of the current that counts.
Reply
ahmaddaniels
says:
Sep 19, 2011. 10:13 AM
Thank You soo much for stating this for those "Fear Mongers" out there, and those people who just love to be scared of everything they don't fully understand.
Reply
fundash
2
says:
Sep 28, 2010. 8:17 PM
yea, I saw a video on yotube, where it was only 2 volts, but high amps and it melted a wire! XD
Reply
Langarulz
says:
Aug 19, 2011. 2:48 PM
umm? wheres the video thingy?

Reply
sizcer says:
2
Feb 26, 2011. 1:51 PM
Hi! excusme how do i connect the power source to the hose? and the adaptator of how many volts? tnks (:
Reply
framistan
7
says:
Jan 7, 2010. 6:55 PM
i built this same thing in 7th grade. We found it DIFFICULT to make the spark because the water MUST not touch the metal cans as it falls... and the cans must sit on a DRY NONCONDUCTIVE surface... or else the electric charge would LEAK from one metal can to the other. It is NOTEASY to keep the area DRY when you are dripping water everywhere! So this is just a note in case anyone tries to construct one. It does work but you must not be messy with the water.
Reply
stefannasehi
says:
Sep 8, 2009. 3:33 PM
what would the flux cap do

Reply
stefannasehi
?
says:
Sep 8, 2009. 3:33 PM
Reply
AlexWillisson
Time travel
1
says:
Dec 15, 2009. 9:21 PM
Reply
thierrywalt
says:
Oct 10, 2009. 3:16 PM
Do you have any idea on how I could connect this generator to this motor: http://www.instructables.com/id/E3ZNG7N7UFEP286FJA/ ? Thanks!
Reply
phyck
says:
Sep 13, 2007. 7:45 PM
ok i now almost nothing of this science , but hypothetically if you could curculate the same water with a pump , (or gravity suction tube thing) , and some how harness the electricity isnt that potencially a pretty damn easy renewable energy resource ? please enlighten me if this is possible with the correct enginereing , or if its just a quick idea that wont work -thx =)
Reply
shakna says:
Jul 15, 2009. 9:30 PM
Well it's a good idea... But it has one fatal floor before all the math of conservation works... It's STATIC electricity. Not DC/AC, and you can't actually convert between static and AC or DC. Static can be used to burn things, but as for powering them, it has a few problems.
Reply
mousewrites
2
says:
Sep 3, 2008. 10:33 AM
Well, as those below have said, even in a 'nearly perfect' system, you will slowly lose energy to the system itself. But if you're using kentic energy that has been stored by something else (like a waterfall), you could get some tiny bit of energy out of it using this system. It's all about letting something else put energy INTO the system you want to get
it out of.
Reply
Zanpakutou
says:
Dec 22, 2007. 11:16 AM
It won't work. No matter how hard you tried, you would always be putting more energy into the pump than you would be getting back. And you can't circulate water by gravity alone.
Reply
spikeychops
says:
Aug 25, 2008. 5:09 AM
Yep, can't get more out than in, conservation of energy, just like an 'A' bomb...hang on,..no that's not right is it..slightly more energy out than the TNT or tiny A bomb used to set the main A bomb off.. Ok, then...the atom itself. The atom demonstrates the laws of conservation perfectly, doesn't it? The electron(s) spin(s) around the nucleus until it runs out of ener...oh dear..no, that's another bad example really isn't it. OK, got it this time...the solar system! That, needs to be constanly fed new energy in order to maintain orbits, planes etc..hang on a moment! That doesn't work either, does it. Hmmm..this conservation of energy 'law' is a bit of a flakey law really isn't it. The only poeple this so called 'law' has served, is the people that try to convince the rest of us that this law exists and is valid 100% of the time. The truth of it, is that it's only valid MOST of the time. A bit like saying 99 out of 100 UFO sightings are not really space/dimentional craft, but other normal objects, therefore, UFO's don't exist. Fine until you realise that because most are not 'real', if just 1 of 100 IS 'real', then the other 99 count for zilch.
Reply
Noego
says:
Sep 11, 2009. 10:48 AM
Please, spikeychops, there is no evil conspiracy in the CoE law. The law works on mechanical principles, not nuclear ones (until you get down to the sub-at level, where it really still does). You really have to look into laws like this with a (decently) educated background. Once you know all the facts of it you will find that it does work, 100% of the time. Not saying no conspiracies exist period- just that if you look for them everywhere you will make them up with a combination of incomplete and flawed knowledge and vindictive imagination.
Reply
josephlebold
says:
May 19, 2011. 10:47 AM
what happens when the electrons in matter run out of energy and they stop spinning around the protons? do they finally meet up with the protons and cease to exist? since no energy is left in the atom does it just vanish silently?
Reply
Pie Ninja
1
says:
Dec 18, 2008. 3:16 AM
Ugggh, Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be changed into aother form...wait, why am I writing all this out? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_conservation_of_energy Why is it that the people who know the least, know it the loudest?
Reply
rivetgeek
says:
Dec 1, 2008. 12:59 PM
*sigh* God I hope you haven't passed 5th grade science yet. splitting the atom simply releases energy storing in the form of nuclear binding forces. It doesn't create energy. Energy can not be created. Ever. It can only be converted from one form to another.
Reply
Pie Ninja
1
says:
Jul 1, 2009. 10:50 PM
I apologize if i was unclear, I was merely explaining to him the law of conservation of energy, I am perfectly aware that E = mc 2 and that by splitting an atom you release
energy equal to its mass multiplied by the speed of light squared, i.e an astronomically large amount.
Reply
Pie Ninja
1
says:
Jul 1, 2009. 11:15 PM
And can anyone tell me how to get my text back to normal after I make it superscript?
Reply
Zanpakutou
says:
Sep 7, 2008. 8:38 AM
The law does exist and is valid 100% of the time. Regarding the A-Bomb, you've got to remember that matter and energy are equivalent; energy was put in, in the form of matter, which was converted to energy during the explosion. As for the orbits of planets and electrons, they aren't losing any energy as they orbit, because there is no friction from air etc., so no more energy needs to be added in order for them to maintain their orbits. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the law still holds in each example.
Reply
spikeychops
says:
Nov 1, 2008. 4:42 AM
Hi Again, I think you have it wrong when you say there is no friction on the planets. Cosmic dust and debris smash into the planets and have done to a greater or lesser extent for billions of years. Thousands and thousands of tonnes of dust, rock, metal falls through our atmosphere every year, the same is true of all other planets. The friction is evidenced everytime we see meteor trails burning in the sky. Also, space is not 'empty'. It has billions of tonnes of charged particles whizzing around, it has loosely spaced atoms of virtually ALL elements, perhaps a few atoms every cubed foot or so, but x that by infinity (for space) and x that by 4.5 billion years (approx age of our planet), and that makes for a lot of resistance. What about electrons? Well, they have to contend with forces too. Electromagnetic attractions and repulsions, chemical interactions, quantum particle interaction, all have an effect, but an electron (as far as we can tell at our present tech) will orbit it's nucleus at a constant speed and distance until the end of time. But where does the 'energy' or driving force come from that causes this to be so? If the electron (or scale up exactly the same model for a solar system, a spiral galaxy, perhaps even this whole universe itself), isn't an example of (I'll NOT say perpetual motion, even though it is) 'obtaining energy through non apparent means', then I can't think of a more obvious or apt example to prove the existence of this phenomena. All we ridiculous humans have to do, is discover and replicate the effect, and we'll all be moving to the stars, to start our own private family planets!
Reply
rivetgeek
says:
Dec 1, 2008. 1:00 PM
electromagnetism. It's a basic force. Next.

Reply
davecollinsnz
says:
Sep 9, 2008. 4:02 AM
Err, actually the planets are losing energy, because the sun's gravity is tugging on the planets, making them orbit instead of flying off in a straight line. So eventually (ignoring the future expansion of the sun) the planets would crash into the sun.
Reply
Langarulz
says:
Aug 19, 2011. 2:56 PM
but the planets have momentum so we would never crash into the sun (ignoring the expansion of the sun)
Reply
chriskarr
1
says:
Sep 7, 2008. 9:07 PM
Matter and energy are not equivalent. Matter can not be turned into energy, just as energy can not be turned into matter, but, instead, the energy that's already in the atom can be forced out. If you think about the fact that the atom's nucleus will explode at nearly the speed of light (thanks to the SNF - that's the strong nuclear force) because of the energy already contained within the atomic structure. There is no such thing as a conversion from matter to energy.
Reply
PyromaniacDaniel
1
says:
Oct 28, 2008. 11:50 PM
"matter and energy are not equivalent" actually we now know that what we perceive as matter is really just the interaction of different energys and everything is energy and theoretically could be converted from one form to another. everything is made up of atoms. atoms are made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons. these are made up of quantum particles which just recently have been found to be forms of energy themselves. Correct me if I am wrong. which this is off the top of my head not from a source. but its late and I don't feel like looking it up.
Reply
davecollinsnz
says:
Sep 9, 2008. 4:11 AM
Ever heard of this small equation? E=MC Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared Thats the basic theory (I think) behind a nuclear bomb, matter is converted to energy. :D
Reply
chriskarr
1
says:
Sep 9, 2008. 5:33 PM
Matter is NOT converted to energy. The strong nuclear force is being overpowered by the initial blast in the bomb. This causes rapid atomic decay, in which the protons of the atom are shot out at speeds near to, at, or exceeding the speed of light. Matter is not converted to energy, but, instead matter gives off energy. An easy way to describe this is in a similar manner to an exothermic or endothermic reaction; in an exothermic or endothermic reaction, the reactive material gives off energy or pulls in energy, respectively. In an exothermic reaction, bonds are generally broken; because it takes energy to make those bonds, the reaction puts off energy. In an endothermic reaction, the opposite is true. The same basic principle applies in a nuclear reaction, only on a MUCH larger scale (with smaller parts!). Isn't science wonderful?
Reply
BlackFang171
says:
May 16, 2011. 5:35 AM
Matter IS being converted into energy, as is evident in the difference of mass that is exhibited between the mass of a particle you split, and the sum of the masses of the resulting particles. This is elementary physics.
Reply
chriskarr
1
says:
May 16, 2011. 2:20 PM
Sorry; I am going to need to take back my prior comment, to a degree. Matter is, in fact, not being *converted* to energy...matter is naught more than condensed energy receiving mass from its interaction with a sort of 'grid', according to the standard model of particle physics and the theory of Higgs interaction. This is quantum physics.
Reply
Dirtie Hippie
says:
Sep 27, 2009. 6:29 AM
I had not thought of it before, but you are right. Matter is not converted into energy. Even in an atomic blast. The protons, neutrons, and electrons are still there just as they were before. Good old E=mc2 only refers to the release of the energy bonds. The electromagnetic bond of the electron/proton is broken and the electron goes flying off and photons carrying that energy go flying off. The nuclear bonds of the proton/neutron are broken and they go flying off and photons carrying that energy. The matter (i.e. proton, neutrons, and electrons) are all still present, just not bonded together. And as for some particles exceeding the speed of light. Why even get into that? Yes, some tiny, tiny, tiny amount of them do. But that's this crazy quantum mechanical, they can do it cause we can't observe them thing. It just confuses people. By people I mean laymen, students, advanced physicists with
three doctorates. :)
Reply
davecollinsnz
says:
Sep 9, 2008. 8:37 PM
"in which the protons of the atom are shot out at speeds near to, at, or exceeding the speed of light." Something tells me that the above statment is flawed. Matter, travelling near the speed of light? Yes. (LHC particle beam 99.999%) At the speed of light? Nearly impossible. (Massive amount of energy) Exceeding the speed of light? No. Photons travel so very fast because they have little to zero mass. When I talk of matter to energy, I'm meaning matter to photons (aka electromagnetic radiation). I know that a neutron can be split into a proton and an electron, which then bombard other sub-atomic particles, thus setting up a nuclear chain reaction, in the right materials. For the exothermic and endothermic reactions, you sorta had a comparision, since as the molecules interact and electrons moved about, they emitt or require infra-red radiation to react. :D
Reply
Pie Ninja
1
says:
Dec 18, 2008. 3:20 AM
Actually to travel at the speed of light you'd need infinite energy. sry for bein a pedant.
Reply
Pie Ninja
1
says:
Jul 1, 2009. 10:58 PM
Also you can travel faster than light, you just need to go back in time, and to do that, all you have to do is go faster than the speed of light. :P
Reply
wilddog
says:
Dec 7, 2010. 5:19 PM
According to quantum physics you can't go faster than light...

Reply next
1-40 of 118
Add Comment
Explore Channels in Technology

3D Printing Apple Arduino Art Assistive Tech Audio Cell Phones Clocks CNC Computers El Wire Electronics Gadgets Kits Laptops Lasers LEDs Linux Microcontrollers Microsoft Photography Remote Control Reuse Robots Science Sensors Soft Circuits Software Soldering Speakers Steampunk Tools USB Websites Wireless
Join Our Newsletter

Join over 800,000 Instructable fans who receive our DIY newsletter.
About Us
About Mobile Site Advertise Press Contact Jobs Legal Help Privacy Policy
enter email

Kelvin's Thunderstorm - Create Lightning From Water and Gravity! PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Kelvin's Thunderstorm - Create Lightning From Water and Gravity! PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Kelvin's Thunderstorm - Create lightning from water and gravity!

share what you make