precursor to the WFCI....

some details

Quote from Gunther Rattay on April 28th, 2015, 03:42 AM

did you know that Stan already used a micro-controller system in the 90´s when he was ready to go for industrial production?

I did know that, but the only evidence that I've seen is on the home heating unit.  This unit was designed from the ground up to use a micro-controller.  The problem is that it still has the development equipment plugged on to where the IC chip goes.  My gut feeling says that programming for this unit was still being done or going through troubleshooting phases.  Point being, his old technology worked, while this unit doesn't look like it operated.

I would bet that the WFC injector system also intended to use microprocessors.  But I have a feeling that is in some other collection these days.

Does Pgen currently calculate cell resistance via r=  dV/dI? 

Quote from firepinto on April 29th, 2015, 06:41 PM

...
Does Pgen currently calculate cell resistance via r=  dV/dI?

yes, but it doesn´t need to calculate dV/dI. simply by adjusting frequency via PLL using the feedback line it dynamically adjusts immediately to dV/dI. so PGen can balance the system.

the VIC itself takes r=dV/dI of the cell into account by creating an appropriate phase shift

Quote from firepinto on April 29th, 2015, 06:41 PM

I did know that, but the only evidence that I've seen is on the home heating unit.

some parts of Stan´s documentation and components have been taken away for sure. obviously the most advanced parts made sense to be hidden from the public. his latest newsletter could not be undone by TPTB. so we know that he did by the newsletters but there is no more evidence ...

Quote from firepinto on April 29th, 2015, 06:41 PM

...
Point being, his old technology worked, while this unit doesn't look like it operated.
...

in his patents from the 80s´ Stan published basic circuitry to claim that kind of technology. once the principle was published and patent granted there was no need for a published circuit design update. nevertheless he had to update his circuit design because his ic based system was not able to implement PLL with gating. It´s almost impossible to plug in 80s technology to upgrade 555/4046 to get it running. you would have to store/buffer the capacitor´s actual voltage level to get his circuit running as needed.
with modern add-ins that should work but it´s much more work than implementing it by using a microcontroller from scratch using his circuit design idea as a template.

Stan first started using mechanical means like rotary switches and alternators. then he switched over to semiconductor electronics and progressed to integrated circuits.

then he entered the eprom stage emulating logic dependencies by using address lines and data output lines of small sized eproms. he did in a basic way what modern FPGAs can do.

Then he migrated to microcontroller usage and now his competence was no longer visible on a pcb but was hardcoded into a microcontroller rom.

that´s the last step of technology, it was taken away and that is the step we should jump in and continue his work ...

the vic is only the starting point for control. now imagine adding in the pulsed gas processor with it´s laser leds and eec in stacks of 4 or more ...

imagine the number of knobs and the multitude of discrete integrated circuits to operate and synchronize them all together.

add in temperature and pressure dependencies and feedback information from actual motor control systems via CANBUS or else ...

.. no means to store parameters in the discrete digital world ...

things have become more complex today, not easier ...

... but means to build have become much easier to use ...

this thread talkes about EEC. wherever you put in the EEC in the system, into the cell or into the gas processor, any case the EEC must be pulsed synchronous to the excitation pulse.

so far - so good.

Stan says that the EEC must be active, when excitation is off, easy to realize of course, but what if the timescheme is more complex to optimize the effect???

to explore these effects you need flexible tools. scope, power supply and flexible pulse generator, ...

otherwise you will soon have to become a soldering magican ... :)

Quote from Heuristicobfuscation on April 28th, 2015, 04:11 PM

something missing?

yes the whole negative electrode lol....

where did it go?   :whistle:

well acording to Stan you dont need it... :exclamation:

this is very interesting.....

think about it :thinking:

seriously this is something else....

Look familiar?

Quote from firepinto on April 29th, 2015, 06:41 PM

I did know that, but the only evidence that I've seen is on the home heating unit.  This unit was designed from the ground up to use a micro-controller.  The problem is that it still has the development equipment plugged on to where the IC chip goes.
...

Once more "electronics and software" from Newsletter 11A.

Noone would prepare such a setup for a fraud ...

Quote from Matt Watts on May 1st, 2015, 04:01 AM

Look familiar?

I find this amazingly interesting.....

I was trying to find how he was "accelerating" water in tubes for particle impact.
this is how i ran into that picture (see bellow)..although its supposed to be for the "steam resonator" he used same drawings as for the spherical resonant cavity..

Something I don't understand is why would he have "amp restrictive" circuit pulsed onto single electrode?

how is current going to be consumed anyways if there is  no oposite electrode?

This  should be a simple experiment in which i could try..
 just trying to understand concept.

Almost seems like an antenna.
instead of brodcasting radio waves... he was broadcasting. Electrostatic pulses?

Quote from Heuristicobfuscation on May 2nd, 2015, 07:38 PM

I find this amazingly interesting.....

Almost seems like an antenna.
instead of brodcasting radio waves... he was broadcasting. Electrostatic pulses?

Why not.  If you can charge an electroscope and have the foil plates separate, seems reasonable you could charge water and have the molecules do the same thing.  Molecules form to share electrons right?  So give the molecules lots of electrons and they should no longer need to share.  Seems logical to me, but now we have Stan talking about electron extraction.  Why does that sound backwards?

The thing to keep focused in your mind is that you can have charge without having definite polarity.  A capacitor has two wires.  How many wires does a metal box have?  There are some Russian fellows that really grasp this idea.  I'm still working on it.

Quote from Matt Watts on May 2nd, 2015, 10:06 PM

Why not.  If you can charge an electroscope and have the foil plates separate, seems reasonable you could charge water and have the molecules do the same thing.  Molecules form to share electrons right?  So give the molecules lots of electrons and they should no longer need to share.  Seems logical to me, but now we have Stan talking about electron extraction.  Why does that sound backwards?

The thing to keep focused in your mind is that you can have charge without having definite polarity.  A capacitor has two wires.  How many wires does a metal box have?  There are some Russian fellows that really grasp this idea.  I'm still working on it.

i disagree, here is why.  polarity is specific, the neo mags do that, they split the charge carriers,  hence a negative electrode with the positive side as ground,

the force on 2 plates is either attracting or repelling sort to speak. the action of the wires show that effect.


not sure if that helps, one electron is stripped from a hydrogen atom. if you learn how, and its easy you it. all u need is magnets to separate the charges,

if you learn how to do this by electrolysis then u have it. all in one.  you need a blast of 50 kv voltage to saturate the water, it will then go into break down ant the ferrous material become saturated. excess voltages now peals the single electron from the hho atom.away.

sounds simple? well it is if u gra..sp the process. what must occur for a given reaction... cherrs

Quote from freethisone on May 3rd, 2015, 02:11 PM

sounds simple? well it is if u gra..sp the process. what must occur for a given reaction... cherrs

how do you want to create the 50KV? at what power supply resistance? DC or pulsed? if pulsed at what frequency and duty?

Quote from Gunther Rattay on May 3rd, 2015, 02:20 PM

how do you want to create the 50KV? at what power supply resistance? DC or pulsed? if pulsed at what frequency and duty?

spell check really failed on that last post lol.

here is the theory, but also was done with experiment. im not leading u on a false hunt.

i say the water is not the capacitor

i say to use pulsed dc you should use a common ground.  i say water is like iron bar. if i saturate the core, well it simply over flows.

i say water is the same way. i say a plate in conjunction with your vic coil or inductor can make it a variable capacitor. now u simply change the size of the plate to accommodate its internal resonance..

so what i am saying is. if it be Stans system is already a pulsed DC, then you should use a common ground wile switching.

the capacitance is all in the inductor, and it would be wise to advance this even further by using capacitor banks in the charging process. step up. variable transformer. you should get the same effect Stan did. if you did not now i say the size of the tank is important. the volume of water.

i say adding salt for testing is a good idea. finally if all had failed i drop a coil of stout wire into the tank, and pulse it as a bias to the original circuit.

therefore it is true the high voltage should overcharge the water, and by that i mean saturate the dielectric., and hence adding capacitance is like adding a variable inductor.

the reason a blast of high voltage at a 3 to 5 second on period off period combined with the normal pulsing operation of the Stan pulsed dc system success would be see. and a great deal learned in the process.

.
i forgot if frequency is a problem could be operated  between 22  to 45 khz but there is my old post in the Edward Michel Vic thread. i think i added a number of patent for understanding its theory.


gunther here is another one of my advancements. , if it be you need to do this for the reason we wind a coil in this manner then that may help answer another question?

reluctance? or a way to equal  or balance.

teach me what else must be done? saturation of dielectric O:-) O:-), charging and discharging plates.. i think its simple,. adding the back of caps should really blow the door of this sheet one and for all...

Quote from freethisone on May 3rd, 2015, 03:37 PM

spell check really failed on that last post lol.

As well as the logic and reasoning analyzer.

Show me magnets splitting water.

And adding salt to the water is a really bad idea.

Free, you need to hit the bench and demonstrate what you are saying BEFORE you say it.  Especially when posting in someone else's thread.

This is not easy, period.  If it was, we'd all have it solved by now and fully understand how it works.

Quote from Matt Watts on May 3rd, 2015, 03:50 PM

As well as the logic and reasoning analyzer.

Show me magnets splitting water.

And adding salt to the water is a really bad idea.

Free, you need to hit the bench and demonstrate what you are saying BEFORE you say it.  Especially when posting in someone else's thread.

This is not easy, period.  If it was, we'd all have it solved by now and fully understand how it works.

i think i was editing at the time you posted, i am dialectics..  tell me what you dont understand? be specific i really thought i was..

Quote from Matt Watts on May 2nd, 2015, 10:06 PM

Why not.  If you can charge an electroscope and have the foil plates separate, seems reasonable you could charge water and have the molecules do the same thing.  Molecules form to share electrons right?  So give the molecules lots of electrons and they should no longer need to share.  Seems logical to me, but now we have Stan talking about electron extraction.  Why does that sound backwards?

The thing to keep focused in your mind is that you can have charge without having definite polarity.  A capacitor has two wires.  How many wires does a metal box have?  There are some Russian fellows that really grasp this idea.  I'm still working on it.

yes good points..

I was thinking same way ..although a static charge can be "polarized"  that is positive or negative..  but it seems logical that he was not introducing electrons into the system.

The method he was using could very well enhance the electron extraction.....
he is using the anode... not the cathode... as a pulsing train.
so assuming this works it would

#1 attract the electrons in the water solution to positive anode.

#2 repel the positive charged oxygen atom witch will carry the molecule..

still thinking about the charge without polarity statement... :thinking:

we do know that the layden jar.... has one electrode.... yet it can exibit multiple charged states..
can the layden jar be charged and yet not exibit a polarity?

if we where to have an equal amount of  negative charge and possittve charge in same layden jar ..then we can
assume that it has net zero charge or no visible charge...
yet it is composed of energized particles that have been ballanced.
looking at it this way i can see that there is a potential for multiple charge states and yet exhibit no polarity....

Quote from Heuristicobfuscation on May 3rd, 2015, 05:46 PM

still thinking about the charge without polarity statement... :thinking:

we do know that the layden jar.... has one electrode.... yet it can exibit multiple charged states..
can the layden jar be charged and yet not exibit a polarity?

I think it can, but referenced to what?

Ken Wheeler says it's, "Charge and Discharge", that is all.  Polarization is an entirely different thing.

Quote from Heuristicobfuscation on May 3rd, 2015, 05:46 PM

if we where to have an equal amount of  negative charge and possittve charge in same layden jar ..then we can
assume that it has net zero charge or no visible charge...
yet it is composed of energized particles that have been ballanced.
looking at it this way i can see that there is a potential for multiple charge states and yet exhibit no polarity....

Ah, but the balance, that needn't happen immediately.  So the states of charge and discharge can ring/oscillate.  Picture two spheres with a wire between them connected to both spheres.  Given enough time the two spheres will come to a state of equilibrium, but what happens when you first touch one sphere with a charged body having different potential?  Doesn't the added charge to that sphere first equalize on that sphere and then begin to migrate over to the other?  What if you where to pulse the one sphere?  The process of migration takes time and therefore has a potential for resonance.  So you charge one sphere, it immediately begins to discharge to the other sphere.  Now you discharge the first sphere and the second sphere begins to discharge back to the first sphere.  It's easy to see that you can keep the two spheres out of equilibrium indefinitely.

Now what would happen if we thought of the two spheres as ions, O and HO?  Could we create a similar resonance where each cycle increases the difference in charge (step charging)?  At some point it seems logical to me the bond (wire) between the O and OH ion snaps.  At that point you no longer have a water molecule.  The trick to me in all this is to keep the O and OH ions from reforming back to a water molecule.  If we can get the Os to bond together as O₂, then we can start working on the ionic bond of OH and get it to split.  Lot to do here to get to the fuel gas we are after.

So lets suppose we heterodyne two resonant signals on the water.  One targets the O and OH bond; the other the O and H bond.  Now all we need to do is to make sure we target all of the water so there is no place within the device these bonds can recombine.

So back to Electron Extraction...

In one of Eric Dollard's lectures, he talks about what an electron is.  Basically it's the snap when a single piece within an electric field gives up.  The snap and creation of an electron, in his terminology, is the destruction of energy.  Lets think about this as it would apply to Stan Meyer's Electron Extraction.  If we are extracting electrons, there are two ways to think about this phenomena.  One, we are avoiding the creation of electrons or snaps within the electric field.  Or two, we are allowing the snaps to happen, but are immediately rebuilding the electric field, since for every snap and creation of an electron, we lose energy in the field.  I tend to think in the case of turning water into gas, we are allowing/encouraging these snaps, but we rebuild the field rapidly.  The creation of the electrons are the breaking of bonds.  Very different terminology I understand.  So when we create an electron (a snap in the electric field), we break a bond, rebuild the field and extract the gas.  You can think of this gas now containing the electron or a tiny portion of the energy that was in the field to start with.  So thinking this way, we really aren't directly extracting "electrons", instead we are extracting the product of the electric field breaking at a discrete point in the electric field.

 Re: Transformer core saturation from overvoltage
winnie Offline
Member

Registered: 09/15/03
Posts: 652
Loc: boston, ma    
WFO,

1) No.
2) Depends upon the transformer.

I find it easier to think of things from the opposite direction: what is it that _limits_ the current flow in a transformer, both during normal and saturated conditions.

Start by considering an 'air core' inductor, simply a coil of wire. This has essentially no saturation issues. I'll also start by talking about applied DC voltage, not AC.

The voltage applied to this _inductor_ will act to change the current flowing through the inductor. But when you have a changing current through the coil, you get a corresponding changing magnetic field developed by the coil. This changing magnetic field induces a voltage in the coil, and if we ignore resistance, we will find that the magnetic field is changing at just the right rate to induce a voltage which balances out the applied voltage.

Put another way: the rate change of current through an inductor is proportional to the applied voltage and inversely proportional to the inductance.

When you put an iron core in the inductor, you change the relationship between current flowing through the coil and magnetic flux developed. But you don't change the relation between change in magnetic flux and induced voltage. What happens is that you need less current to develop the same magnetic flux, and thus less _change in current_ to develop the same voltage. Net result: with the same coil and the same applied voltage, the current flow increases more slowly.

Put another way: the addition of the iron core increases the inductance of the coil.

But the core has an issue: saturation. Above a certain magnetic flux density, the boost in magnetic flux caused by the core starts to diminish rapidly. This means that once you reach saturation, the inductor will act more like an air core inductor. With the same applied voltage, the current flowing through the coil increases rapildy.

Put another way, when the core saturates, the inductance of the coil goes down.

Looking at applied AC voltages: At any _instant_ in time, the rate change of current in the coil depends upon the applied voltage and the inductance of the coil. But with AC, the applied voltage is constantly changing, which means that the rate change of current flow will be constantly changing. The current flow at any instant in time is proportional to the _integral_ of the applied voltage, and inversely proportional to the inductance.

Saturation makes the inductance not constant. What happens is that at the peak of the current flow curve in the inductor, the inductance goes down, and the current flow rises more rapidly, so you get pointy tips on the current flow curve.

This saturation current flow is still lagging the applied voltage, and is still reactive power; energy is still being stored in the inductor magnetic field. However this increased current flow is accompanied by increased resistance losses, and thus increased real power consumption by the inductor.

A transformer primary is just an inductor, but with a secondary coil magnetically coupled to the circuit. Any current flowing in the secondary is in some sense subtracting from the magnetic field, thus reducing the 'back emf' in the primary and increasing the primary current flow to compensate. The additional primary current flow means more voltage drop in the primary versus any resistance, thus reducing the voltage that the magnetic flux needs to act against. So as you increase secondary current, if there is resistance in the primary circuit, the peak magnetic flux and magnetizing current will go down. The significance of this will depend upon circumstances.

Note that when a motor is in locked rotor, you essentially have a transformer with a _shorted_ secondary. Lots of current will flow, but it is in phase with the supply voltage, delivering real, rather than reactive power.

-Jon

source  http://www.electrical-contractor.net/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/130154/Transformer_core_saturation_fr.html

hope that helps see pdf for more info.  http://www.arresterworks.com/ArresterFacts_files/ArresterFacts%20010%20-%20The%20Switching%20Surge%20and%20Arresters.pdf

Dielectric strength
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Dielectric saturation)

In physics, the term dielectric strength has the following meanings:

    Of an insulating material, the maximum electric field that a pure material can withstand under ideal conditions without breaking down (i.e., without experiencing failure of its insulating properties).
    For a specific configuration of dielectric material and electrodes, the minimum applied electric field (i.e., the applied voltage divided by electrode separation distance) that results in breakdown.

The theoretical dielectric strength of a material is an intrinsic property of the bulk material and is dependent on the configuration of the material or the electrodes with which the field is applied. The "intrinsic dielectric strength" is measured using pure materials under ideal laboratory conditions. At breakdown, the electric field frees bound electrons. If the applied electric field is sufficiently high, free electrons from background radiation may become accelerated to velocities that can liberate additional electrons during collisions with neutral atoms or molecules in a process called avalanche breakdown. Breakdown occurs quite abruptly (typically in nanoseconds), resulting in the formation of an electrically conductive path and a disruptive discharge through the material. For solid materials, a breakdown event severely degrades, or even destroys, its insulating capability.

Factors affecting apparent dielectric strength

    it decreases with increased sample thickness.[1] (see "defects" below)
    it decreases with increased operating temperature.
    it decreases with increased frequency.
    for gases (e.g. nitrogen, sulfur hexafluoride) it normally decreases with increased humidity.
    for air, dielectric strength increases slightly as humidity increases

Quote from Heuristicobfuscation on April 9th, 2015, 05:53 PM

Has anyone replicated the Electron Extraction Circuit :huh:

In the videos and speaches..
It seems that Stan is describing a progressive technological achievment..

For example one of his first "achievment"  was being able to limit the current in the water fuell cell bath with the VIC.
but it wasnt till he starts talking about the "Electron Extraction Circuit"  where things realy started to go into high gear.

With the "Electron Extraction Circuit"   and the "resonant cavity cell" he can now achieve  "on demand" gas yeild...
he mentiones this "on demand' couple times in reference to the  "Resonant Cavity Cell" and "Electron Extraction Circuit"
not the VIC!
"Resonant Cavity Cell"....not very effective until we introduce the "Electron Extraction Circuit".

see acording to stan the (EEC) is  what creats the condition for "higher yield" of gas....

The (EEC) in action is what allows the water to enter into a gas ionized state togheter with the resonant cavity :exclamation:

In the Resonant Cavity he talkes about "particle impact".. now upon watching his videos over and over... this is conclusion ive come to ... that the "particle impact"  can only occur when the (EEC) is working properly.

See the (EEC) is the (VIC)..
In other words the (VIC) was a precursur to the (EEC) ...
not forgeting that Stan was using the Kiss methode. 
I think Stan Got his master design and subdivided it into tiny little chunks for the patent office.

This makes it very hard to replicate!

In the Water Fuell Cell demo that  he showed the patent office in witch most of us have  replicated. He does not show  the (EEC) in action!

.. Now the "Resonant Cavity"  im thinking was a precursor to the (WFCI) Water Fuel Cell Injector.

And just like the original "Resonant Cavity" was not functional without the (EEC)  I belive the (WFCI) is not funtional without the
(EEC).

One more insight... the (EEC) is what possibly he was using to alter gas states and testing in the (EPG).

 :thinking: Has anybody out  there replicated this?  This is probably important peace of puzzle..

i think you started a good thread, i also think we answered all of the questions. what is left??   plenty of ways to advance..

???

Quote from Heuristicobfuscation on April 27th, 2015, 02:07 PM

funny reading my own post and cheking for  errors... I noticed the following....


This mistery:   the one were voltage and Resistance rise and current falls...
all this time I havent been paying attention but it seems that this effect mimics whats called a "Negative Resister"

According to Wiki;

"In electronics, negative resistance (NR)[4] is a property of some electrical circuits and devices in which an increase in voltage across the device's terminals results in a decrease in electric current through it.

This is in contrast to an ordinary resistor in which an increase of applied voltage causes a proportional increase in current due to Ohm's law, resulting in a positive resistance.[8] While a positive resistance consumes power from current passing through it, a negative resistance produces power.[9][10] Under certain conditions it can increase the power of an electrical signal, amplifying it"

well

Quote from Heuristicobfuscation on April 27th, 2015, 02:07 PM

funny reading my own post and cheking for  errors... I noticed the following....


This mistery:   the one were voltage and Resistance rise and current falls...
all this time I havent been paying attention but it seems that this effect mimics whats called a "Negative Resister"

According to Wiki;

"In electronics, negative resistance (NR)[4] is a property of some electrical circuits and devices in which an increase in voltage across the device's terminals results in a decrease in electric current through it.

This is in contrast to an ordinary resistor in which an increase of applied voltage causes a proportional increase in current due to Ohm's law, resulting in a positive resistance.[8] While a positive resistance consumes power from current passing through it, a negative resistance produces power.[9][10] Under certain conditions it can increase the power of an electrical signal, amplifying it"

i added a patent that covers this. it was based on using pulsed dc and a shared negative ground. the energy was captured directly from the water, and shuttled back to capacitors, a renewable by product..

Quote from freethisone on May 4th, 2015, 10:10 AM

i think you started a good thread, i also think we answered all of the questions. what is left??   plenty of ways to advance..

???

ah yes thank you all for your comments .... i am very grateful for this forum..@Rwg..

I hope I never stop asking questions... the day I do would be the day I stop learning.

there is something called "Hive intelligence" and it  only occurs in a collective environment..
I am simply trying to tap into this collective....everybody has something to say..two minds are better than one..
and a "Hive mind" has that much more to offer.

and yes.. we have to learn to filter out the "Buzz" and see the "Dance"

Go to 1:22:00

Stan mentions the following ... "that for a long time there was two things I  would not discus"

#1  (VIC)
#2  (?) ill let you guys fill this out. lol..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqCaVFWIWQ&list=PLhUKba_vZ9vqJTrCQ1Jzrf1_LzOhWviDP&index=1