Step by step VIC build

Jeff Nading

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #150, on March 15th, 2012, 05:42 AM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 14th, 2012, 09:48 PM
I have a large ferrite C core.

I need to get it cut, once I do I may have a few extra sets.

I don't think it's the right core material though...It's ferrite, 2000 permeability which is too high....Same material Tony Woodside has and he's getting resonance but no gas production.....Which seems to be a common theme.

If anyone has ferrite and does no know how to cut it you need a diamond blade and a lot of water!

Unfortunately I don't have a saw so I was thinking about taking it to a machine shop?
You could take it to a rock shop, they should have a machine to cut the core, and be able to cut it in under 20 minutes.

HMS-776

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #151, on March 15th, 2012, 12:41 PM »Last edited on March 15th, 2012, 12:47 PM by HMS-776
Russ,
The core is too thick, too wide and too long.
I think there is enough in one core to make 4
or 5 vic core sets, give or take 1 or two sets as
I think the first few cuts will crack or break
the ferrite.

Jeff, thanks for the idea,, I will look into
it this weekend to see if the are any local rock
shops.

All of my research indicates that the isolation
transformer is a pulse transformer. What that
means is that the design is very critical.
If any one of many characteristics is
 incorrect the coil will output AC and no
gas will be produced. The core has the most
influence so my hopes for this core are not very high.

~Russ

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #152, on March 16th, 2012, 02:58 AM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 15th, 2012, 12:41 PM
All of my research indicates that the isolation
transformer is a pulse transformer. What that
means is that the design is very critical.
yes, it is... i agree also.

impedance matching and everything needs to be dead on...

Thanks for the info. i hope josh (the guy doing all the calling) will com up with some info on price quotes for the core. then we can see what perm we need... guess and check... but that's the only way as of now...  

~Russ

HMS-776

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #153, on March 16th, 2012, 09:37 PM »
I think the permeability we need is around 1000 or less. I've been looking at Ferrite 46 and some others. In this design Meyer aimed for a center frequency of 5khZ which he explains in the control and driver circuits patent (WO 92/07861).

I am getting ready to wind my bobbins, wondering if I should try winding them on my lathe or just go for the hand winding method....It's hard to get a good wind on a square bobbin....How did you guys wind yours?


~Russ

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #154, on March 16th, 2012, 11:23 PM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 16th, 2012, 09:37 PM
I think the permeability we need is around 1000 or less. I've been looking at Ferrite 46 and some others. In this design Meyer aimed for a center frequency of 5khZ which he explains in the control and driver circuits patent (WO 92/07861).

I am getting ready to wind my bobbins, wondering if I should try winding them on my lathe or just go for the hand winding method....It's hard to get a good wind on a square bobbin....How did you guys wind yours?
the scanning circuit seems to be scanning from 200hz to 5khz...

i used a drill, but want to go back in do it a bit nicer... it may effect the turn counts and that will change the inductance. but how much i don't know...

happy windings ! ~Russ

firepinto

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #155, on March 17th, 2012, 09:06 AM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 16th, 2012, 09:37 PM
I think the permeability we need is around 1000 or less. I've been looking at Ferrite 46 and some others. In this design Meyer aimed for a center frequency of 5khZ which he explains in the control and driver circuits patent (WO 92/07861).

I am getting ready to wind my bobbins, wondering if I should try winding them on my lathe or just go for the hand winding method....It's hard to get a good wind on a square bobbin....How did you guys wind yours?
Haxar designed a hand crank winder for the square bobbins.  I don't know if he tried printing it out though?  Would be sweet if we could strap a couple stepper motors on to it.  Then have an arduino wind them for us. :)

Nate

securesupplies

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #156, on March 18th, 2012, 01:27 AM »Last edited on March 18th, 2012, 01:27 AM by securesupplies
Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on March 12th, 2012, 01:06 AM
im verry excited to inform you all that Haxar was on it with his #30WAG wire!

looks like this may be it!

check out these measurements!!!

not only on the 100hz but 100,120,1k,10k settings they are very close!!! now just time for the core...

here are my measurements:

Code: [Select]
Column1 Feedback 1 Feed back 2 Secondary Choke 1 Choke 2 Primary
wire size 30 30 30 30 30 30
number turns 400 400 2955 2870 3065 560
wire resantce on air core (100hz) 8.455 @ .1757Q 11.576 @ .2244Q 102.59 @ .6518Q 111.64 @ .6804Q 98.16 @ .6335Q 10.419 @ .1084Q
wire resantce on air core (120hz) 8.566 @ .2108Q 11.821 @ .2692Q 116.04 @ .7821Q 127.17 @ .8163Q 110.52 @ .7601 10.473 @ .1300Q
wire resantce on air core (1khz) 33.51 @ 1.7565Q 66.44 @ 2.2407Q 3.117k @ 6.4870Q 3.591K @ 6.7700Q 2.8699K @ 6.3081Q 22.398 @ 1.0838Q
wire resantce on air core (10khz) 2.3996K @ 16.583Q 4.941k @ 19.926Q 237.14k @ 49.895Q 270.90k @ 51.770Q 222.99K @ 49.222Q 1.021k @ 10.667Q
inductance on air core (100hz) 2.2932mh @ .1758 3.935mh @ .2244Q 74.69mh @ .6518Q 82.63mh @ .6800Q 70.63mh @ .6335Q 1.7783mh @ 10.672Q
inductance on air core(120hz) 2.2929mh @ .2108Q 3.935mh @ .2692Q 74.68mh @ .7821Q 82.62mh @ .8160Q 70.62mh @ .7601Q 1.7766mh @ .1300Q
inductance on air core (1khz) 2.2935mh @ 1.7567Q 3.935mh @ 2.2401 74.69mh @ 6.4889Q 82.64mh @ 6.7660Q 70.63mh @ 6.3073Q 1.7766mh @ 1.0835Q
inductance on air core (10khz) 2.2952mh @ 16.586Q 3.939mh @ 19.940Q 75.90mh @ 49.871Q 84.21mh @ 51.435Q 71.73mh @ 49.495Q 1.7784mh @ 10.669Q
capacitance on air core(100hz) 33.08uf @ 5.6914Q 30.83uf @ 4.4580Q 10.11uf @ 1.5341Q 9.696uf @ 1.4700Q 10.27uf @ 1.5783Q 16.54uf @ 9.2271Q
capacitance on air core(120hz) 32.65uf @ 4.7426Q 30.18uf @ 3.7156Q 8.9393uf @ 1.2786Q 8.511uf @ 1.2252Q 9.122uf @ 1.3153Q 16.45uf @ 7.6921Q
capacitance on air core (1khz) 8.341uf @ .5692Q 5.366uf @ .4464Q 331.2nf @ .1541Q 299.9nf @ .1477 Q 349.8nf @ .1585Q 7.698uf @ .9231Q
capacitance on air core(10khz) 109.9nf @ .0603Q 64.13nf @ .0501Q 3.335nf @ .0202Q 3.006nf @ .0194Q 3.529nf @ .0202Q 141.2nf @ .0938Q
wire resantce on air core (fluke) 8.4 11.2 72.2 76.6 70.2 10.5

and the ones Don took from Stans VIC:

Code: [Select]
This set of readings is for each coil independent of all others on an air core (no ferrite)
Coil Feedback1 Feedback2 secondary Choke 1 Choke 2 Primary
Thick in 0.0155 0.0155 0.0155 0.0155 0.0155 0.0155
R (Fluke) Ohms 11.5 11.1 72.4 76.7 70.1 10.5
R(BK) @100Hz Ohms 12 11.58 100.2 106.5 93.27 10.48
R(BK) @120Hz Ohms 12.14 11.74 110.4 119.7 103.5 10.53
R(BK) @ 1kHz Ohms 49.35 51.5 2.64k 3.15k 2.46k 21
R(BK) @ 10kHz Ohms 3.22k 3.42k 190.6k 1200k 1200k 946
L(BK) @100Hz H 3.47mH @ 0.188Q 3.43mH @ 0.192Q 68.7mH @ 0.594Q 76.32mH @ 0.626Q 64.34mH @ 0.577Q 1.65mH @ 0.099Q
L(BK) @120Hz H 3.3mH @ 0.214Q 3.34mH @ 0.225Q 68.6mH @ 0.713Q 76.28mH @ 0.751Q 64.3mH @ 0.693Q 1.65mH @ 0.119Q
L(BK) @ 1kHz H 3.3mH @ 1.8Q 3.36mH @ 1.89Q 68.6mH @ 5.98Q 76.28mH @ 6.27Q 64.26mH @ 5.79Q 1651uH @ 1.0Q
L(BK) @ 10kHz H 3.3mH @ 16Q 3.34mH @ 16.8Q 69.4mH @ 47.4Q 77.36mH @ 50.2Q 65.0mH @ 45.6Q 1651uH @ 9.39Q
C(BK) @100Hz F 23.7uF @ 5.61D 25.86uF @ 5.34D 9.73uF @ 1.66D 9.38uF @ 1.59D 9.89uF @ 1.72D 14.8uF @ 10.2D
C(BK) @120Hz F 23.3uF @ 4.67D 25.5uF @ 4.42D 8.72uF @ 1.39D 8.33uF @ 1.32D 8.91uF @ 1.43D 15.0uF @ 8.4D
C(BK) @ 1kHz F 5.75uF @ 0.552D 5.82uF 0.524D 351.5nF @ 0.164D 317.1nF @ 0.157D 374.6nF @ 0.17D 7.6uF @ 0.988D
C(BK) @ 10kHz F 83nF @ 0.061D 81.85nF @ 0.059D 3.95nF @ 0.021D 3.55nF @ 0.020D 4.22nF @ 0.022D 164.5nF @ 0.106D


god bless everyone for all the help! man!!! after almost a year of messing with this coil... we can finally say we have it! i was getting tired of it lol

~Russ
Now here also google docs

LINK to online excel click the below link

Testing your Vic Style 1 RWG Yours & Stans's
RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #157, on March 18th, 2012, 02:29 AM »
Quote from haxar on November 16th, 2011, 06:17 PM
As for the electronics in Stan's original voltage intensifier circuit, I've done a trace of its card here:



(click to enlarge or download the editable SVG image file zipped in the attachments)

I've drawn up the complete "functioning" schematic of the circuit as well:



(click for a printable PDF of the schematic)

The zipped schematic file in the attachments may only be compatible with gschem of the gEDA electronic toolkit, so compatibility varies.
hi any chance of jpg or gif posting for these?

also invite you edit here

Stan Meyer Vic cicuit rebuilders guide

Daniel

adys15

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #158, on March 18th, 2012, 03:00 AM »
Guys,I dont know if you observed(i did by comparison)that the original vic board does NOT contain variable pulse gen and gated pulse gen.,like vic.sckem pdf shows(see attachment)it contains only voltage amplitude control/cell driver/pulse indicator/PLL/and scaning circuits...the variable pulse and gated pulse gen are on the GMS,hope that helps!

haxar

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #159, on March 18th, 2012, 11:44 AM »
Quote from adys15 on March 18th, 2012, 03:00 AM
Guys,I dont know if you observed(i did by comparison)that the original vic board does NOT contain variable pulse gen and gated pulse gen.,like vic.sckem pdf shows(see attachment)it contains only voltage amplitude control/cell driver/pulse indicator/PLL/and scaning circuits...the variable pulse and gated pulse gen are on the GMS,hope that helps!
I also said this previously in this thread:

http://open-source-energy.org/?tid=170&pid=2408#pid2408
Quote from haxar on January 9th, 2012, 05:46 PM
Quote from Sharky on January 9th, 2012, 02:08 PM
An other question about the Haxar schematic, ... the 74122 is not present on the VIC card, is it a replacement part or did you change the schematic after doing the trace of the vic card?
The Variable Pulse Frequency and the Gated Pulse Frequency sub-circuits are a part of the Gas Management System unit which connect to the VIC unit, not a part of the VIC card.

HMS-776

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #160, on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM »Last edited on March 19th, 2012, 04:04 PM by HMS-776
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Especially after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?


Jeff Nading

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #161, on March 18th, 2012, 03:06 PM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Espically after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
You know, I have done some thinking on this. It occurs to me that some of Stan's devices could have been tampered with by persons wanting to mislead individual's like ourselves, don't know this for sure, but it could be a possibility, so more testing would be the key. Prove and disprove.

waterfreak

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #162, on March 19th, 2012, 12:43 PM »
This is a very strong possibility.
With a lot of Meyer's tech, what has actually been found in his items does not always match what the patents say.
Given the implications of his technology, it is not far fetched to think that 'higher powers' tampered with and even placed 'duds' there to mislead the masses.
Either the patents are right, the devices or right, or a combo of both.
Only time and testing will ultimately tell.
Their goal of killing the project has obviously backfired and now there will be no stopping it.
Keep pressing forward everyone!

securesupplies

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #163, on March 20th, 2012, 08:46 AM »
Quote from Jeff Nading on March 18th, 2012, 03:06 PM
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Espically after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
You know, I have done some thinking on this. It occurs to me that some of Stan's devices could have been tampered with by persons wanting to mislead individual's like ourselves, don't know this for sure, but it could be a possibility, so more testing would be the key. Prove and disprove.
Check the patents

and keep  experimenting too many on this now

IDEA
Get a Basic kit together , just above cost,

1. bobbins
2. Wire
3 boards
4. parts
5 tape
6 include testing and target specs wanted

put all in the guides , circulate it even more !!!

get it out there.
for each of the guides , invite others, get iit out htere

Japs did this and it is now called TOYOTA!

than 10++ people can all start winding
and trying different ways with targets. invite unis and every one@@!!



this will kill the issues and over come blocks super fast
development power BABY!!

Webmug

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #164, on March 20th, 2012, 11:06 AM »Last edited on May 23rd, 2012, 02:37 AM by Webmug
Quote from HMS-776 on March 16th, 2012, 09:37 PM
I think the permeability we need is around 1000 or less. I've been looking at Ferrite 46 and some others. In this design Meyer aimed for a center frequency of 5khZ which he explains in the control and driver circuits patent (WO 92/07861).

I am getting ready to wind my bobbins, wondering if I should try winding them on my lathe or just go for the hand winding method....It's hard to get a good wind on a square bobbin....How did you guys wind yours?
@all,

I would like your opinion about some core material.

Typical Properties:
Mn-Zn Ferrite
Initial Permeability 1200
Maximum Permeability 7500
Saturation Flux Density 5250 Gauss
Remanent Flux Density 2100 Gauss
http://www.cmi-ferrite.com/Products/Materials/data/MN67.pdf
EDIT: http://www.cmi-ferrite.com/Materials/Datasheets/MnZn/MN67%20ISO%20WEB%20DATA.pdf

Custom core can by made with the exact dimensions provided in Dynodon sketches.
The parts will be machined from an iso-pressed block of ferrite.

Minimum order would be 10 pcs.
We need 2 pcs for one VIC unit.

Br,
Webmug



Sharky

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #165, on March 20th, 2012, 11:17 AM »
Quote from Jeff Nading on March 18th, 2012, 03:06 PM
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Espically after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
You know, I have done some thinking on this. It occurs to me that some of Stan's devices could have been tampered with by persons wanting to mislead individual's like ourselves, don't know this for sure, but it could be a possibility, so more testing would be the key. Prove and disprove.
I do not think meyer accidentally added so much turns, he was not the kind of man to do things accidentally. If it was intentional i can only think of it being a band pass filter, thatwould be the most logical reason for the coils being different. About tampering, ... Most info comes from Don, if he changed data to spread confusion we will find out soon enough, we are getting very close to having replicated almost everything by now. However i doubt that very much, what would he gain by that? Getting the WFC tech to market first? He would have done that by now then. Just my two cents ...

firepinto

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #166, on March 20th, 2012, 12:41 PM »
Quote from Sharky on March 20th, 2012, 11:17 AM
Quote from Jeff Nading on March 18th, 2012, 03:06 PM
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Espically after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
You know, I have done some thinking on this. It occurs to me that some of Stan's devices could have been tampered with by persons wanting to mislead individual's like ourselves, don't know this for sure, but it could be a possibility, so more testing would be the key. Prove and disprove.
I do not think meyer accidentally added so much turns, he was not the kind of man to do things accidentally. If it was intentional i can only think of it being a band pass filter, thatwould be the most logical reason for the coils being different. About tampering, ... Most info comes from Don, if he changed data to spread confusion we will find out soon enough, we are getting very close to having replicated almost everything by now. However i doubt that very much, what would he gain by that? Getting the WFC tech to market first? He would have done that by now then. Just my two cents ...
I don't think Don would of tampered with anything.  I think during the time between 1998 and before Don got to see the estate it had plenty of chances to be tampered with.   Personally I think all the "good stuff" is still missing.  We just won't really ever know until we replicate it.  Its too bad the estate wasn't sold to someone who actually cared about getting us off oil power.  I'd love to see that buggy put back together in running condition!

Nate

Jeff Nading

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #167, on March 20th, 2012, 03:13 PM »
Quote from firepinto on March 20th, 2012, 12:41 PM
Quote from Sharky on March 20th, 2012, 11:17 AM
Quote from Jeff Nading on March 18th, 2012, 03:06 PM
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Espically after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
You know, I have done some thinking on this. It occurs to me that some of Stan's devices could have been tampered with by persons wanting to mislead individual's like ourselves, don't know this for sure, but it could be a possibility, so more testing would be the key. Prove and disprove.
I do not think meyer accidentally added so much turns, he was not the kind of man to do things accidentally. If it was intentional i can only think of it being a band pass filter, thatwould be the most logical reason for the coils being different. About tampering, ... Most info comes from Don, if he changed data to spread confusion we will find out soon enough, we are getting very close to having replicated almost everything by now. However i doubt that very much, what would he gain by that? Getting the WFC tech to market first? He would have done that by now then. Just my two cents ...
I don't think Don would of tampered with anything.  I think during the time between 1998 and before Don got to see the estate it had plenty of chances to be tampered with.   Personally I think all the "good stuff" is still missing.  We just won't really ever know until we replicate it.  Its too bad the estate wasn't sold to someone who actually cared about getting us off oil power.  I'd love to see that buggy put back together in running condition!

Nate
I agree with you Nate.  I was not talking about Don! We all just need to prove or disprove.

HMS-776

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #168, on March 20th, 2012, 08:09 PM »
Don is not that kind of person....I have known him for a few years from the forums and had many conversations with him through PM.
He is an honest, good person who is more than willing to share and help others, without his efforts we would be years behind from where we are now.




Muxar

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #169, on March 21st, 2012, 12:13 AM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 20th, 2012, 08:09 PM
Don is not that kind of person....I have known him for a few years from the forums and had many conversations with him through PM.
He is an honest, good person who is more than willing to share and help others, without his efforts we would be years behind from where we are now.
I also trust in Don but i think we must move carefully, the big guys could be watching us and maybe reporting wrong info about his results to mess all, like happened to Allen cagianno.

~Russ

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #170, on March 21st, 2012, 03:16 AM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 20th, 2012, 08:09 PM
Don is not that kind of person....I have known him for a few years from the forums and had many conversations with him through PM.
He is an honest, good person who is more than willing to share and help others, without his efforts we would be years behind from where we are now.
I have talked with don in person about 3 times, some Evan about a year apart, I trust him and do not think he gives out false information. He gives what he knows... Wether its right or wrong, he still gives what he know and dose not mislead, thank god that don even was in the deal, or we would still have nothing to go by... Thanks don!!!

~Russ  
RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #171, on March 21st, 2012, 03:27 AM »
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Especially after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
Something for you all to think about. On the note of the inductors being different values. One very interesting thing that you should recall in almost all the drawings is that you See a variable inductor on the negative side. Why is it that Stan has a variable inductor in the drawings? Have you ever seen one of his devices with a variable inductor? The answer is no.

The reason for this in my opinion is that if you know how to engineer it to the correct specifications you do not need a variable  inductor. I truly think that he did this to show us people who are trying to replicate it that you need to tune that particular inductor. So basically it's a very simple diagram saying "hey dummy try this and see what happens"

Anyway, just some food for thought.

Keep up the good discussion. We will get there. It's all going to take time. God bless ~Russ

Webmug

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #172, on March 21st, 2012, 04:01 AM »
Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on March 21st, 2012, 03:27 AM
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Especially after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
Something for you all to think about. On the note of the inductors being different values. One very interesting thing that you should recall in almost all the drawings is that you See a variable inductor on the negative side. Why is it that Stan has a variable inductor in the drawings? Have you ever seen one of his devices with a variable inductor? The answer is no.

The reason for this in my opinion is that if you know how to engineer it to the correct specifications you do not need a variable  inductor. I truly think that he did this to show us people who are trying to replicate it that you need to tune that particular inductor. So basically it's a very simple diagram saying "hey dummy try this and see what happens"

Anyway, just some food for thought.

Keep up the good discussion. We will get there. It's all going to take time. God bless ~Russ
Hi,

If you read the tech brief p3-10 Memo WFC 422 DA about variable inductor coil, he makes it clear why it is tunable. Movable wiper arm fine tunes "resonant action" during pulsing operations. The relationship between them, electrically balances the opposite electrical potential across voltage zone.

Yes, it is not physical tunable with a dial, it has a tuned fixed relationship.

Br,
Webmug

~Russ

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #173, on March 21st, 2012, 04:41 AM »
Quote from Webmug on March 21st, 2012, 04:01 AM
Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on March 21st, 2012, 03:27 AM
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Especially after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
Something for you all to think about. On the note of the inductors being different values. One very interesting thing that you should recall in almost all the drawings is that you See a variable inductor on the negative side. Why is it that Stan has a variable inductor in the drawings? Have you ever seen one of his devices with a variable inductor? The answer is no.

The reason for this in my opinion is that if you know how to engineer it to the correct specifications you do not need a variable  inductor. I truly think that he did this to show us people who are trying to replicate it that you need to tune that particular inductor. So basically it's a very simple diagram saying "hey dummy try this and see what happens"

Anyway, just some food for thought.

Keep up the good discussion. We will get there. It's all going to take time. God bless ~Russ
Hi,

If you read the tech brief p3-10 Memo WFC 422 DA about variable inductor coil, he makes it clear why it is tunable. Movable wiper arm fine tunes "resonant action" during pulsing operations. The relationship between them, electrically balances the opposite electrical potential across voltage zone.

Yes, it is not physical tunable with a dial, it has a tuned fixed relationship.

Br,
Webmug
I agree. That is corect. But again, just another thing to think about.

~Russ

Jeff Nading

RE: Step by step VIC build
« Reply #174, on March 21st, 2012, 05:21 AM »
Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on March 21st, 2012, 04:41 AM
Quote from Webmug on March 21st, 2012, 04:01 AM
Quote from ~Russ/Rwg42985 on March 21st, 2012, 03:27 AM
Quote from HMS-776 on March 18th, 2012, 01:59 PM
What do you guys think about the chokes being different values?

When Don had the VIC's in his posession he said they were "hand wound and not precision at all"

The difference of the choke coils is about 767 inches. With a median circumference of about 4.18" this turns out to be a difference of around 180 turns. If someone was hand winding these coils and not paying attention I could see how this could happen....Especially after you have wound a few....

In all of Meyer's other designs he always states the chokes are bifilar wound in equal length.

However, in Meyer's early drawings he shows a variable choke on the negative side?

I wonder if there is a specific ratio between the two choke values or if they are supposed to be equal?
Something for you all to think about. On the note of the inductors being different values. One very interesting thing that you should recall in almost all the drawings is that you See a variable inductor on the negative side. Why is it that Stan has a variable inductor in the drawings? Have you ever seen one of his devices with a variable inductor? The answer is no.

The reason for this in my opinion is that if you know how to engineer it to the correct specifications you do not need a variable  inductor. I truly think that he did this to show us people who are trying to replicate it that you need to tune that particular inductor. So basically it's a very simple diagram saying "hey dummy try this and see what happens"

Anyway, just some food for thought.

Keep up the good discussion. We will get there. It's all going to take time. God bless ~Russ
Hi,

If you read the tech brief p3-10 Memo WFC 422 DA about variable inductor coil, he makes it clear why it is tunable. Movable wiper arm fine tunes "resonant action" during pulsing operations. The relationship between them, electrically balances the opposite electrical potential across voltage zone.

Yes, it is not physical tunable with a dial, it has a tuned fixed relationship.

Br,
Webmug
I agree. That is corect. But again, just another thing to think about.

~Russ
Thanks Russ and webmug, this helps greatly.