Matt already did this. But I'm doing it again for my sanity.

If we look at magnetic flux
Here all coils are adding in magnetic flux

But not in electron / curent flow. Do not.

Where am I thinking wrong. This is in one direction. The other with the dioed and it's more complicated.

~Russ

I could be wrong but from Don's drawings it looks like the chokes are aiding each other but opposing the primary and secondary coils.

I would think that was Stan's trick to having all coils on the same core and preventing the chokes from acting as secondary coils.

I have tried numerous coil configurations and see little differences?  Maybe I need to go back and look at my notes...

I think your drawing is correct Russ.

ok so now look at this,

this is what the flux from the primary will be doing to the flow of current... Via magnetic flux (right drawing)  you can see the blue circle's are places of conflict... where the current flow will be apposing... so looking at it this way, we can see that Pri and Sec are adding in magnetic flux but the L1,L2 are are opposing with current.

the left hand photo is the one from before, it shows the conflict of flow of current vs the magnetic flux. here we can see that Pri and Sec are adding in magnetic flux but the L1,L2 are are opposing in magnetic flux.

so it dose no madder how we look at it. there are apposing things going on here.

by the way this is just if there was lets say DC on the primary... all kinda of other interactions happen when its a "PFN" its a new new animal.

but we need to break it down like this so we can do all the math on it...

by the way dont worry about the "flow" going the wrong way with my + and - signs : )

so now the questions are this, what happens if we break the core?  things change...  some.. enough that we need to factor that in.

please correct me again if i'm confused.  again we some times get lost in our words... but this photo should clear that up...
~Russ

Photo

bu the way this is why the Ground refrance point can be thought as in the Sec and L2 connection... it *should* be the 0 Point... although its floating...  again go back to that schematic where there were grounds drawn in...

gnd

this goes with that. coils called TX

Quote from ~Russ on January 16th, 2017, 01:36 PM

Photo

S to S, F to F for the sec and chokes is it not?

Quote from Webmug on January 16th, 2017, 01:59 PM

S to S, F to F for the sec and chokes is it not?

yes thats what i got.

~Russ

I see what your saying about the diode....Interesting thing though, if I put the secondary coil negative or positive lead to the diode I get the same results in the circuit, except one way the current is a little higher.

Here's a video I made earlier today after adjusting the choke orientation and inductances again. Scanning from 4-25kHz....Just wanting to see if others are seeing similar things. The blue trace is the current flow between the diode and the L2 choke.

https://youtu.be/ZF3WGg9MuGE

I'm not 100% sure this correct, but it's what Ronnie posted early in this thread.  The second one is what I reduced to a schematic.

Does it agree or disagree with what you have?

It doesn't agree with Don's sketch on the chokes....On Don's sketch the current travels in the same direction on both chokes (from their Start to Finish, so they are aiding). The chokes oppose the primary & secondary since its on the opposite leg but their current is still going in the same direction.

http://www.electronics-tutorials.ws/inductor/series-inductors.html

See 'Cumulatively Coupled Series Inductors' and 'Differentially Coupled Series Inductors' about 1/4 way down the page.

Since the core is circular the flux points one way on one leg and the opposite way on the other leg, but all coils are oriented the same way...Primary and secondary are aiding, and the L1 and L2 chokes are aiding, but the transformer side and chokes are opposing each other.

I think the reason for this was to keep the chokes from acting as additional secondary coils.

It could be that Don made a mistake though....Since we know Ronnie has had it working.

oh geese, now i' m lost... Ronnie keep telling my over and over that "its connected just like Stan's" 

one step forward 20 steps backwards.

so what it is. here is everything i have downloaded from the other thread. 

i just went back over Stan's estate photos and concluded that don's sketch is correct.

I guess time will tell us more....The whole thing with the coils is confusing....On that diagram 620 of Stan's the chokes are opposing, which is funny because in the first few pages of the TB he states they are aiding. ..I think it's one of those things where Stan put it all in there to cover himself and protect the invention.

I know Ronnie pointed out earlier that the L2 choke opposed the secondary coil and caused the virtual ground to be moved between the secondary and L2....The only problem I see is if that were a requirement to get the VIC working then how would it work when the chokes are on a separate core?

This should be accurate if Don's sketch is what we base our work on.

The blue colored Secondary has its dot switched, compared with the Tech Brief.

Contrast that with Don's sketch: the Start and Finish for both C1 and C2 are switched. (They should be called L1 & L2.)

This is wired right, regardless of Don's Start&Finish error on the sketch.

The primary could be switched. It is unipolar and that can matter.

The corrected Capture13 image has its arrows pointing in the same direction.

Quote from Webmug on January 15th, 2017, 08:53 AM

So the PLL function was not tested on a LC tank circuit? If the du (duty-cycle) of 50% is not there how can you lock-in?
I tested the PLL (with the circuit Stan used and a mosfet circuit) and could not get it to lock after gating the pulses. Gunther had the same problem getting the PLL locking-in after gating. Solution is inserting a lower pulse signal in the gate time so the PLL sees the resonance.g

I had the problem with CD4046 and that headed to PGen 2.0 microcontroller solution. last significant frequency is stored during gating time and reestablished with next pulse after end of gating.

Hax, I still have a question about the winding direction and the dot notation.

It has been said all the coils are wound the same direction start to finish--basically the bobbins were put in the same coil winder and spun the same way.  If this is true, the phasing dots should all be at the same place for each coil following the flux path.  It doesn't matter whether you flip the start/finish positions as long as the coil is wrapped in the same direction.

Where you have moved the dot position on the secondary, tells me this particular coil had to have been wound the opposite direction.  That's the only way the phasing could be opposite to the flux path.

So phasing dots are correct in my original, whether the wiring is correct, I still don't know.


If you look at Stan's drawing though, clearly the L2 is not wound the same direction as the others.

Quote from Matt Watts on January 17th, 2017, 02:28 AM

It has been said all the coils are wound the same direction start to finish--basically the bobbins were put in the same coil winder and spun the same way.

Yep. I don't see evidence where L2 is indeed opposing. All aiding and wound in the same direction.

Quote from Matt Watts on January 17th, 2017, 02:28 AM

Where you have moved the dot position on the secondary, tells me this particular coil had to have been wound the opposite direction.  That's the only way the phasing could be opposite to the flux path.

The phasing dot on the Secondary is connected towards the diode. GrandmasChristmas-VIC image reflects that.

Quote from Matt Watts on January 17th, 2017, 02:28 AM

If you look at Stan's drawing though, clearly the L2 is not wound the same direction as the others.

Does the text say otherwise? Actually, this is Figure 3-23 of the Tech Brief. It has no phasing dots.

If we are absolutely certain all the coils are spun on their bobbins in the same rotation, this image pretty much tells us the orientation.

Matt, that photo is correct you just posted.

And the schematic now looks like this.

Going once.  Going twice.  G...

Quote from Matt Watts on January 17th, 2017, 02:28 AM

If you look at Stan's drawing though, clearly the L2 is not wound the same direction as the others.

Can you see this again? If you were to short B+ to B- in Figure 3-23, the circuit flow remains the same. There's no supporting text otherwise for an opposing coil.

If it's electrically oriented correctly, it's good I think.

For some devices I've seen, replicating them must be exact, electrically (phase), wind rotation and start/finish location.  Hopefully we got it.

I like using the schematic representation of the VIC when we are laying numbers on the images, makes it easier to comprehend test results.  This schematic should be good based on our assumptions.