https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uSBKUsKpYQ

Quote from gpssonar on November 14th, 2016, 12:17 PM

Matt the time on is the same as the decay time which gives you 50% Duty cycle. Just double the 4Hz Frequency. Only thing different in the decay time is, it decays down to 38% instead of 63% rise but takes the same amount of time.

Yeap.  I mostly expected that.  The primary diode forces the back EMF to turn around and re-enter the circuit and the WFC just soaks it up--the energy has nowhere else to go.

And by the way everyone, you can calculate these time periods or use an amp probe on your scope so you can clearly see the charge/discharge cycles as you adjust frequency.  Big inductors like these at low frequency typically show a textbook response--just like Ronnie's images above.  You can also use a CVR (low ohm, non-inductive resistor) placed in series with the primary, then connect your voltage scope probes across the resistor.  I have a 0.1 ohm and a 0.02 ohm that I use often for this.  The smaller the better because you don't want to mess up your impedance match.  You'll find it interesting to put it in series with the transistor output and then put it in series with the primary, the later way you can see the back EMF (recoil) surge back against the diode.

All good information Ronnie.

What's next on your list?

Quote from Ris on November 14th, 2016, 12:42 PM

good old physics Nothing much changed since the invention of hammer :) :) :)

An electrical hammer...

So simple in concept.

So versatile in its implementations.

Quote from andy on November 14th, 2016, 11:11 AM

Ronnie
Can you tell - vic must produce 2:1 ratio charge. You wrote in answer to Russ more B+ voltage.
Are you mean vic must produce 2x  more positive charge than negative?
Thank for answer
andy

I hope its 1.4 x more turns on + or.7 less on -

Quote from gpssonar on November 13th, 2016, 03:25 AM

If we use your example of 3 ohms in the primary we would have 3volts/12volts=4 amps in the primary so you can see the wire size 29 gauge is not rated for that. Therefore you would have to use a different wire size to handle the amps in the primary.

And I have a fix for that...

I can use thicker wire with two bobbins.  One bobbin has the current amount of turns needed and this bobbin is placed on the core as the primary.  The other bobbin is wound until the total ohms is matched and this bobbin is left off the core as an air-core coil.

And we're back in business.  No burns, no errors, no problem.

Matt Watt
I ask you
In earier your post you wrote this:
Now when you bring the cores together with a small gap, the L1 and Secondary begin to kick-in their contribution to the positive charge on the positive plate.  As stated above, there must be a spot where the negative charge produced at the negative plate is exactly twice in absolute value or strength as the positive charge produced at the positive plate.  This is your goal--task number two.  What's going on here with the gap is the manipulation of the coupling factor to achieve the desired charge ratio.  I can't tell you how touchy this adjustment might be, because I haven't done it yet, but I'm sure you will want to fill the gap with some kind of a sturdy material that will not compress, so once you have things dialed-in, they will stay that way.

Are you mean that by manipulation gap we adjust charge ratio to achieve 2x more positive charges than negative charges.
thank for help me
andy

if you pulse the primary 50% du, you can multiply the current by 1.41. So max. current is (1.1976*1.41) = 1.689A [50%du]
Meaning you can push it to 28.6 watts at 16.9 volts.

~webmug

Sometimes I'm angry at Stan Meyer because it uses an unconventional explanations but this is not a conventional machin after all.
and in the end 20 53 He says just the right words and I am very grateful for his work
and Max. what  possible more could I tell

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsSdiItglCM

"Success is measured by determination to make it work."

Damn straight!

Could the Mods remove my post from Oct 18....
Starting to get Spam to my website.

Quote from gpssonar on November 14th, 2016, 12:17 PM

Matt the time on is the same as the decay time which gives you 50% Duty cycle.

So I connected my VIC up and thought I'd show some input drive signals, both voltage and current across the primary.

First scope shot is without the parallel primary diode; the second one with the diode.  I set the duty cycle a little below 50% so it is more clear when the pulse is on (smaller width).


I'm hoping Ronnie recognizes these signals as looking much like his do.

Ronnie
You wrote this:

 He tells you exactly what I have been talking about how to switch off the covalent bond of the water molecule. Notice the two hydrogen and one oxygen and listen to him. He uses the voltage on the B+ to switch it off. Question is how does dial in the B+ voltage?
What set of cores is the B+ on?
Would the Gap of the two cores adjust the fine tuning of the B+ voltage?

You know now that the two hydrogen atoms will place more charge on one plate than the one oxygen atom will due to cancel of charges. You should know how to raise the B+ voltage by taking turns off the L2 and placing them on L1 in order to control it's charge on the plate and how to fine tune it with the Gap of the cores.
end quote

I understand from this , that we need the twice more positive charge on B+ plate than on B- plate.
Is this correct?
andy

This would probably be some good wire to have on hand for this project:
https://www.temcoindustrial.com/28-awg-copper-magnet-wire-5-lb-mw0216-magnetic-coil-gpmr200.html

Dielectric strength of 10,000 volts per layer should be about right.


When I use this wire and run the numbers with my cores/bobbins, I get pretty close to Ronnie's values:

is it possible to use high dielectric transformer oil........... :D
So put the whole VIC inside a oil bath??

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

More testing today...

I have two scope shots showing the output charge ratio in action here.

The schematic depicts where my reference point is.

Yellow trace is B+; blue trace B-

You can clearly see how B+ is twice the voltage of B-.  This should be rather obvious since L1 and the secondary are connected in-phase so the voltage from each adds together.  L2 is out-of-phase and shows reverse voltage.

The final scope-shot I found rather interesting.  It is with a cap connected across B+ & B-.  Take a close note at where the left-hand tic mark is for the zero reference point of the B+.  The cap is never completely discharging to zero as we would expect the WFC to do also.  Granted, the dielectric properties of this cap is much different than that of water, so you can probably guess this VIC is not tuned to it at all, but if it was, can you imagine how the voltage would increase until the cap exploded somewhere above 6000 volts...

Now some might ask why I'm not hitting high voltages here.  The main reason is because I'm only driving this VIC with a low power signal generator--I'm not throwing any serious amps at it at all.  The core is miles away from saturation.  Those spikes you see are the change in flux over time; most of which happens in the first few milliseconds.  This change would be far more intense if I was using two amps instead of 200ma and the voltage rise would go up proportionately.  With a quicker and higher rise, the frequency could also be increased, which translates into more power in less time, leading to higher charge levels.  Once you get to a point where input power exceeds leakage, that's when things take off to infinity.

Guy's I'm not avoiding anyone. I am having to work a lot of overtime since the weather has changed. I have to go back to work at 7:30 tonight to change out a circulation pump.

Looking good Matt, we will get on skype again when I have time.

Hey Matt, just a guess here....that's not an electrolytic cap you used was it?

Quote from gpssonar on November 17th, 2016, 03:04 PM

Looking good Matt, we will get on skype again when I have time.

Sounds good Ronnie.  Making progress, but it's sure easy to get myself screwed up.

Speaking of screwed-up, I had my L2 wired backwards.  Easy to do.  Looked right at the schematic and did it wrong.

So with that fixed, have a look at how this thing functions now.  As you can see, L2 does not add to L1 and the secondary, it subtracts from it.  This is how we get the proper charge ratio.  Charge is absolute between the VIC and WFC, but relative to the rest of the world.

So this scope-shot shows the VIC charging a capacitor, depicted by the purple math trace.  Notice how now the B+ and B- waveforms are no longer altered by having the capacitor connected.  I also have the duty cycle set way down to conserve input power while still providing a strong impulse.

You might ask why does the B+ and B- appear to have the same voltage peaks.  L1 and the secondary combined are twice the turns ratio, meaning half the amperage capability.  This allows the L2 to over-power them amperage-wise, which pulls the voltage down to the same level as L2.  As you can see though, I still have 40+ volts to start the electrolysis process and form a few bubbles.  Once the amp-leakage is overcome, then things should start to get interesting...

Quote from newguy on November 17th, 2016, 04:46 PM

Hey Matt, just a guess here....that's not an electrolytic cap you used was it?

No, it's a 6000 volt ceramic, 0.001 uF.  Still don't know the best way to simulate an actual WFC.  This cap provides enough load to keep voltages manageable with the scope probes I have.

Quote from Matt Watts on November 17th, 2016, 04:50 PM

No, it's a 6000 volt ceramic, 0.001 uF.  Still don't know the best way to simulate an actual WFC.  This cap provides enough load to keep voltages manageable with the scope probes I have.

All I know is ESR of lectrolytics are much higher than ceramics if that matters.

yeah adding a resistance is the best you can do. Good first tests Matt. I have a feeling once you connect a cell you will be scratching your head. :)  all in all you got to try. Looking forward to playing catch up with your testing. :)

~Russ

Quote from Matt Watts on November 17th, 2016, 04:49 PM

Sounds good Ronnie.  Making progress, but it's sure easy to get myself screwed up.

Speaking of screwed-up, I had my L2 wired backwards.  Easy to do.  Looked right at the schematic and did it wrong.

So with that fixed, have a look at how this thing functions now.  As you can see, L2 does not add to L1 and the secondary, it subtracts from it.  This is how we get the proper charge ratio.  Charge is absolute between the VIC and WFC, but relative to the rest of the world.

So this scope-shot shows the VIC charging a capacitor, depicted by the purple math trace.  Notice how now the B+ and B- waveforms are no longer altered by having the capacitor connected.  I also have the duty cycle set way down to conserve input power while still providing a strong impulse.

You might ask why does the B+ and B- appear to have the same voltage peaks.  L1 and the secondary combined are twice the turns ratio, meaning half the amperage capability.  This allows the L2 to over-power them amperage-wise, which pulls the voltage down to the same level as L2.  As you can see though, I still have 40+ volts to start the electrolysis process and form a few bubbles.  Once the amp-leakage is overcome, then things should start to get interesting...

That's what I was going to talk to you about on Skype. LOL Glad you got it corrected.

Quote from Matt Watts on November 17th, 2016, 04:50 PM

Still don't know the best way to simulate an actual WFC.

there are options but who knows whats the best

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

transistors use feedback to get a more linear response....brilliant :)

Quote from ~Russ on November 17th, 2016, 06:58 PM

I have a feeling once you connect a cell you will be scratching your head. :)  all in all you got to try.

You're right, I had to do some more playing with this thing.


I hooked-up a decent driver and put about 5 volts at 1 amp to it.  It started making a few real tiny bubbles in a little single cell I had laying around is all.  No matching or anything done yet, just point and shoot and see what sticks.

Pretty clear to me the charge ratio is well out of whack, but at least it's all together doing some semblance of a Stan Meyer VIC.

I'll scratch my head for a while and see if I can think of what the proper adjustment(s) should be...