hey in regards to geting a feedback, i would try a small third winding on the transformer/coil which fed back to a transistor to trip a input into your programming at the simplest this should i think also have a resistor and a pot attached so that you can adjust your trip level. However the best way is get an A/D convertor either in your chip already or external and then load that data in digitally to track the amount of current in the core that the windings are on and using some manipulation can up with some tables to acquire lock.
But i am really just a noob so you may not want to listen to me.I think it is all dependent on the cap of the cell which changes which using the transformer is good idea, cause this basically is only on the fly why to have a varible inductor that would match the change in the cap of the cell itself.
Lol still a noob so i am probably wrong.

Quote from BAM5 on June 14th, 2012, 05:30 AM

Yup, you lost me. Also, I see the movie now. Are you feeding a square wave into an LC circuit where the L is a transformer? I didn't know you could change the frequency of the LC based on the frequency of the square wave, if that is what you're doing. I thought the frequency of the oscillation within the LC circuit is dependent only on the values of the inductor and capacitor.

HolySmoke, lol, well tell him thanks for his enthusiasm.

No, your interpretation is wrong. The square wave (generated by uC) is dependent on the LC. If you change L or C, uC feel the change (FB zero crossing) and re-calculates the period.
The inductor L is not a transformer (but may be). In my experiment, the uC, feeds a driver and this feeds a transformer, the secondary feeds the LC. (then later ascend a diagram).

Quote from HolySmoke on June 13th, 2012, 09:38 PM

Quote from BAM5 on June 5th, 2012, 05:04 AM

Alright, so I have a bunch of spare time now a days so I am pretty motivated to build Stan's Circuit and start experimenting. I've already built my test cell and have done a little brute force electrolysis with it. Right now I'm trying to figure out how to replicate Stan's cell as quickly as possible. I took apart an old florescent ballast for the transformer, but can't get any arc off of it at all with a unipolar square wave signal, so I'm thinking I'm going to have to take it apart and change the ratio of the coil to get a higher output voltage. To take care of the tricky part I'm going to program my Arduino Uno to send out a PWM wave that I'll modify directly through programming and not use the built in PWM function of Arduino. This way I'll be able to control the duty cycle length and the pulse width. I'll use serial communication through the console to change the signal on the fly to experiment with the frequency. Eventually I'll build a scanning function to detect the resonant frequency. I'll attach the signal to a MOSFET and power it through my DC power supply at 12 V to the transformer.

What do you folks think? There are some pretty experienced people in here and I'd like to get some wisdom so I can take care of any problems before I run into them.

If this works I hope to possibly develop an Arduino shield for Stan's cell, this way the difficult electronics is taken care of and people can build and replicate Stan's circuit quickly and easily since the electronics are what most people struggle with.

Please let me know what you think!

-Brian

I just got off the phone with God and he said "YOU CAN DO IT!!!!!!"
Look around the threads there is some good code for your pulser.
Peace.

Treven

id just like to let yall know i cant wait till we get this thing down to a t you guys keep up the good work...

Oh ok! I see what you're doing now. You're creating a square wave that's the same frequency as the wave in the LC. What are you doing with the square wave then? Feeding it into the transformer to keep the oscillation going? I think that the square wave is the most inefficient way to drive a transformer. Stan had it right to use the sawtooth wave (a rectified sine wave).

Quote from BAM5 on June 14th, 2012, 08:19 PM

Oh ok! I see what you're doing now. You're creating a square wave that's the same frequency as the wave in the LC. What are you doing with the square wave then? Feeding it into the transformer to keep the oscillation going? I think that the square wave is the most inefficient way to drive a transformer. Stan had it right to use the sawtooth wave (a rectified sine wave).

doing this confusion, with the early work of Meyer.
See the latest patents. The V.I.C. is driven with square wave and should have an optimal performance when in resonance.
The sawtooth wave, low frequency, is used to modulate the amplitude pulse trains, the primary of the VIC, as volume control, without affecting the resonance.

Quote from BAM5 on June 9th, 2012, 01:34 AM

As for the cavity short circuiting, It won't. At least not completely. Even with just my tap water it has a fairly large resistance, in between 500 and 1500 kohms. so a charge will build up between the two plates of the water capacitor. I've also heard that the cell has to be conditioned. That there's a powdery white looking substance that forms on the two interacting surfaces. I believe that this will build up the resistance within the exciter array. That is if what I've heard around is true. If not it's just the resistivity of the water that allows for it to build up charge and thus an electric field.

Hy BAM5,

my experience with tap water was that it has a litte resistance. Nearly shorting the circuit. So my ohmmeter says ~1kOhm but when I put on a constant DC voltage the current was high. Because when I calculate with Voltage/Current = Resistance (Ohm´s law), I got 5-20 ohms, depending on the watertype. Maybe the ohmmeter is not able to measure the right value.

The most efficient way to generate a resistance to inhibit the amps is a coil and a pulsing voltage. (Lenz´s law) Because the energy will not be wasted like with a ohmic resistance.

There is also an advantage when you put in a resistance or big inductivity on the secondary of a transformator, the voltage will rise because of the lower amps.

Because of the fact that then a voltage divider is built, the elctrolyses will be inhibit.
Look at my post in the "polarization thread". I got a high voltage field in and around my wfc.

Greetings

Quote from Amsy on June 15th, 2012, 09:03 AM

Quote from BAM5 on June 9th, 2012, 01:34 AM

As for the cavity short circuiting, It won't. At least not completely. Even with just my tap water it has a fairly large resistance, in between 500 and 1500 kohms. so a charge will build up between the two plates of the water capacitor. I've also heard that the cell has to be conditioned. That there's a powdery white looking substance that forms on the two interacting surfaces. I believe that this will build up the resistance within the exciter array. That is if what I've heard around is true. If not it's just the resistivity of the water that allows for it to build up charge and thus an electric field.

Hy BAM5,

my experience with tap water was that it has a litte resistance. Nearly shorting the circuit. So my ohmmeter says ~1kOhm but when I put on a constant DC voltage the current was high. Because when I calculate with Voltage/Current = Resistance (Ohm´s law), I got 5-20 ohms, depending on the watertype. Maybe the ohmmeter is not able to measure the right value.

The most efficient way to generate a resistance to inhibit the amps is a coil and a pulsing voltage. (Lenz´s law) Because the energy will not be wasted like with a ohmic resistance.

There is also an advantage when you put in a resistance or big inductivity on the secondary of a transformator, the voltage will rise because of the lower amps.

Because of the fact that then a voltage divider is built, the elctrolyses will be inhibit.
Look at my post in the "polarization thread". I got a high voltage field in and around my wfc.

Greetings

Yes, water has this feature: resistance as a "NTC" the more current lower resistance.
And an ohmmeter, uses little current (1mA).

Quote from BAM5 on June 9th, 2012, 01:34 AM

Yes, water has this feature: resistance as a "NTC" the more current lower resistance.
And an ohmmeter, uses little current (1mA).

Yes thats right. The current rises exponentially to the applied voltage. That was also my experience.

Quote from Amsy on June 15th, 2012, 09:03 AM

The most efficient way to generate a resistance to inhibit the amps is a coil and a pulsing voltage. (Lenz´s law) Because the energy will not be wasted like with a ohmic resistance.

I also measured the resistance to be about 14 ohms with tapwater, but the exact value indeed is depending on your local tapwater composition and properties. Keep in mind that to lower the amps the resistance of the coil needs to be higher than the resistance of the tapwater otherwise it will sort no effect since the water will be the limiting factor instead of the coil!

Quote from Sharky on June 18th, 2012, 01:15 AM

Quote from Amsy on June 15th, 2012, 09:03 AM

The most efficient way to generate a resistance to inhibit the amps is a coil and a pulsing voltage. (Lenz´s law) Because the energy will not be wasted like with a ohmic resistance.

I also measured the resistance to be about 14 ohms with tapwater, but the exact value indeed is depending on your local tapwater composition and properties. Keep in mind that to lower the amps the resistance of the coil needs to be higher than the resistance of the tapwater otherwise it will sort no effect since the water will be the limiting factor instead of the coil!

Only by supplementing it, show the graphs obtained with tap water, where we observe the exponential curve.

Quote from Sharky on June 18th, 2012, 01:15 AM

Quote from Amsy on June 15th, 2012, 09:03 AM

The most efficient way to generate a resistance to inhibit the amps is a coil and a pulsing voltage. (Lenz´s law) Because the energy will not be wasted like with a ohmic resistance.

I also measured the resistance to be about 14 ohms with tapwater, but the exact value indeed is depending on your local tapwater composition and properties.
Keep in mind that to lower the amps the resistance of the coil needs to be higher than the resistance of the tapwater otherwise it will sort no effect since the water will be the limiting factor instead of the coil!

Yes you are right! The "Pollution" in the water can vary. Also the dimensions of the WFC is a "resistance factor" (like in a drycell->big surfaces have lower resistance)
You pointed it out ! :) The inductivity and the water forms a resistor network which will form a voltage divider (Bleeder, don´t know if the word is correct in english :) ) ->this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_divider#

@faisca
thank you, it coincide with my test notations.

Yes you are right! The "Pollution" in the water can vary. Also the dimensions of the WFC is a "resistance factor" (like in a drycell->big surfaces have lower resistance)
You pointed it out ! :) The inductivity and the water forms a resistor network which will form a voltage divider (Bleeder, don´t know if the word is correct in english :) ) ->this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_divider#

@faisca
thank you, it coincide with my test notations.[/quote]I am not satisfied with the results obtained so far, with a replica of the "VIC" (I think not, be the only one) and from the beginning it was hard to believe that the material discovered by Don, were all intact, just waiting for us make the replicate.
I think if they ("MIB") let us see it all, because this is out of danger for those who do not want this technology breakthrough. In other words, let us see what does not work, and must have deleted it worked.
But I believe that if we make the corrections, we can succeed, because the concept is there, and we feel it.
As the inductor and the cell, to operate must have current.
I'll show you something I did in the past year:
Here I show a cell being pulsed with an inductor, source = 17V. current = 170mA. "RMS" instantaneous peak current, near 1A.
Noticed, this was achieved in very unstable conditions (no PLL), almost by chance in breadboard.
Pd.: The titles are in Portuguese, if interested in any pictures, ask me.

Quote from Faisca on June 19th, 2012, 10:05 AM

Yes you are right! The "Pollution" in the water can vary. Also the dimensions of the WFC is a "resistance factor" (like in a drycell->big surfaces have lower resistance)
You pointed it out ! :) The inductivity and the water forms a resistor network which will form a voltage divider (Bleeder, don´t know if the word is correct in english :) ) ->this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltage_divider#

@faisca
thank you, it coincide with my test notations.

I am not satisfied with the results obtained so far, with a replica of the "VIC" (I think not, be the only one) and from the beginning it was hard to believe that the material discovered by Don, were all intact, just waiting for us make the replicate.
I think if they ("MIB") let us see it all, because this is out of danger for those who do not want this technology breakthrough. In other words, let us see what does not work, and must have deleted it worked.
But I believe that if we make the corrections, we can succeed, because the concept is there, and we feel it.
As the inductor and the cell, to operate must have current.
I'll show you something I did in the past year:
Here I show a cell being pulsed with an inductor, source = 17V. current = 170mA. "RMS" instantaneous peak current, near 1A.
Noticed, this was achieved in very unstable conditions (no PLL), almost by chance in breadboard.
Pd.: The titles are in Portuguese, if interested in any pictures, ask me.[/quote]I agree with you Faisca, I have said as much as well, and again I am not blaming Don, I think that Stan's devises were tampered with before anyone had them in their possession.:huh:

Hy Faisca,

looks like you have achieved a "step charging". :) Nice
Are all this picture diagramms measured over the WFC?

Basically, I believe in that what meyer say, about the current/amperage inhibiting circuit. But I don´t believe in the "resonance circuit". But there will be a "resonance state", what Meyer said, this is a state of highest ionisation and highest gas output with minimum cost of current.

Also I think the "fracturing" process, is this state of controlled ionizing of the water. My considerations are going in this direction, because I think, it is the only way with a clearly finish in front of my eyes :) Finding a "special" frequency, which cracks the water, looks for me a bit confusing and not traceable. :) But that is only my opinion...
Also I could not find a resonance frequency between L and the WFC. Without the diode I was able to find resonance, but the water is a high load for the resonance circuit and it will be a strong damped signal and end up in electrolyses. So not usable for fracturing. :-/

There are also some hints in the patents discribing the ionisation and the high voltage which is needed (~20kVolts) and at the same time inhibiting the amps to prevent electrolyses.
To generate such high voltages it is not possible to do this with high current. So like in a spark ignition coil (from car) the voltage have to be very high and the current very very low. Basically with transformation it is possible, but when we put water into the cell, there will be a dead short condition because the resistance is very low and the voltage break down to a minimum of ~2 Volts. Thats the difference to the spark plug (air has a very high resistance->current will be very low and voltage can rise).

If we look at the pictures of the the VIC and the Coils in the 8XA circuit, there are magnetic cores with an airgap. This looks like they are used as a flyback transformer. Flyback transformers can increase the voltage with low cost of amperage primary, like in a old TV. Maybe it was not noticeable, but if we look very close to the schematic of the VIC, the secondary charging choke is wrapped in other direction like the other two secondary windings in the patents. Maybe it is used as a resistor. Because without the resistor the voltage can not rise and electrolyses will not be prevented... That is what I´m doing in the moment, to find out, where the resistance is in the original VIC.

Quote from Amsy on June 19th, 2012, 12:03 PM

Hy Faisca,

looks like you have achieved a "step charging". :) Nice
Are all this picture diagramms measured over the WFC?

Basically, I believe in that what meyer say, about the current/amperage inhibiting circuit. But I don´t believe in the "resonance circuit". But there will be a "resonance state", what Meyer said, this is a state of highest ionisation and highest gas output with minimum cost of current.

Also I think the "fracturing" process, is this state of controlled ionizing of the water. My considerations are going in this direction, because I think, it is the only way with a clearly finish in front of my eyes :) Finding a "special" frequency, which cracks the water, looks for me a bit confusing and not traceable. :) But that is only my opinion...
Also I could not find a resonance frequency between L and the WFC. Without the diode I was able to find resonance, but the water is a high load for the resonance circuit and it will be a strong damped signal and end up in electrolyses. So not usable for fracturing. :-/

There are also some hints in the patents discribing the ionisation and the high voltage which is needed (~20kVolts) and at the same time inhibiting the amps to prevent electrolyses.
To generate such high voltages it is not possible to do this with high current. So like in a spark ignition coil (from car) the voltage have to be very high and the current very very low. Basically with transformation it is possible, but when we put water into the cell, there will be a dead short condition because the resistance is very low and the voltage break down to a minimum of ~2 Volts. Thats the difference to the spark plug (air has a very high resistance->current will be very low and voltage can rise).

If we look at the pictures of the the VIC and the Coils in the 8XA circuit, there are magnetic cores with an airgap. This looks like they are used as a flyback transformer. Flyback transformers can increase the voltage with low cost of amperage primary, like in a old TV. Maybe it was not noticeable, but if we look very close to the schematic of the VIC, the secondary charging choke is wrapped in other direction like the other two secondary windings in the patents. Maybe it is used as a resistor. Because without the resistor the voltage can not rise an electrolyses is prevented... That is what I´m doing in the moment, to find out, where the resistance is in the original VIC.

I think you are headed in the right direction Amsy.:D

Quote from Amsy on June 19th, 2012, 12:03 PM

Hy Faisca,

looks like you have achieved a "step charging". :) Nice
Are all this picture diagramms measured over the WFC?

Basically, I believe in that what meyer say, about the current/amperage inhibiting circuit. But I don´t believe in the "resonance circuit". But there will be a "resonance state", what Meyer said, this is a state of highest ionisation and highest gas output with minimum cost of current.

Also I think the "fracturing" process, is this state of controlled ionizing of the water. My considerations are going in this direction, because I think, it is the only way with a clearly finish in front of my eyes :) Finding a "special" frequency, which cracks the water, looks for me a bit confusing and not traceable. :) But that is only my opinion...
Also I could not find a resonance frequency between L and the WFC. Without the diode I was able to find resonance, but the water is a high load for the resonance circuit and it will be a strong damped signal and end up in electrolyses. So not usable for fracturing. :-/

There are also some hints in the patents discribing the ionisation and the high voltage which is needed (~20kVolts) and at the same time inhibiting the amps to prevent electrolyses.
To generate such high voltages it is not possible to do this with high current. So like in a spark ignition coil (from car) the voltage have to be very high and the current very very low. Basically with transformation it is possible, but when we put water into the cell, there will be a dead short condition because the resistance is very low and the voltage break down to a minimum of ~2 Volts. Thats the difference to the spark plug (air has a very high resistance->current will be very low and voltage can rise).

If we look at the pictures of the the VIC and the Coils in the 8XA circuit, there are magnetic cores with an airgap. This looks like they are used as a flyback transformer. Flyback transformers can increase the voltage with low cost of amperage primary, like in a old TV. Maybe it was not noticeable, but if we look very close to the schematic of the VIC, the secondary charging choke is wrapped in other direction like the other two secondary windings in the patents. Maybe it is used as a resistor. Because without the resistor the voltage can not rise an electrolyses is prevented... That is what I´m doing in the moment, to find out, where the resistance is in the original VIC.

Ok Amsy, the diagram is the picture, very simple and very unstable. But served to test the concept. You can see that the 555's own driver. that is so poor that they could not always in tune. To get this result, the source was limited in current to 170mA.
To answer your question: Yes, the cell always connected, and producing gas "HHO". And yes, there is resonance, see the first image, where the pulse is 15V. (Above) and the current reaches 800mA. (below) and it starts small and increases until the maximum supported by the 555.
I want to repeat the test, this time with PLL, a power FET and a source much larger and insulated for this experiment. (show picture of the setup)
Important note: in the fourth image (yellow trace) as the source evolves naturally (I did not do this).
The result is very similar to Meyer, what do you think?

I mean no offense Don, I think he did the best.

Quote from Jeff Nading on June 19th, 2012, 12:53 PM

I think you are headed in the right direction Amsy. :D

Thank you! :D I don´t know if it is the right direction to the "finishline", but in my case, I made my best experience so far. (I measured a "high" voltage field generated by 1,5kV in my WFC with a "leakage" of 600µA). Then the isolation of my transformer coils break down. :-/

Quote from Faisca on June 19th, 2012, 03:42 PM

Ok Amsy, the diagram is the picture, very simple and very unstable. But served to test the concept. You can see that the 555's own driver. that is so poor that they could not always in tune. To get this result, the source was limited in current to 170mA.
To answer your question: Yes, the cell always connected, and producing gas "HHO". And yes, there is resonance, see the first image, where the pulse is 15V. (Above) and the current reaches 800mA. (below) and it starts small and increases until the maximum supported by the 555.
I want to repeat the test, this time with PLL, a power FET and a source much larger and insulated for this experiment. (show picture of the setup)
Important note: in the fourth image (yellow trace) as the source evolves naturally (I did not do this).
The result is very similar to Meyer, what do you think?

I mean no offense Don, I think he did the best.

In your case you can reach a resonace frequency, because your diode is not blocking the oscillation of the current between C and L.
In St. M. original VIC the diode would block any current coming  from the WFC. So as he always claimed, that the WFC cannot discharge. But in a ordinary resonant circuit, the C has to discharge periodicaly.

Yes your curve diagramm is looking like Meyers. But my experience is, that resonance in a resonance circuit looks like a sine wave, not like peaks. You can actually try this by, using a real capacity and L without a diode.
"Resonante state" which Meyer said, can be only achieved with high voltages (kV).
Because ionising water needs that voltages, like ionising air also needs high voltages.

You can try to inhibit the amperage flow and to prevent electrolyses, by using a larger coil or a second one on the other side of the WFC. You also can use higher frequencys, then the coil will generate more resistance (XL=2*pi*f*L).

My experience was also, that a little bit of electrolyses can break down the voltage to a minimum. So preventing electrolyses is the primary aim imho, because that needs large energy amounts.

Quote from Amsy on June 19th, 2012, 11:43 PM

Quote from Jeff Nading on June 19th, 2012, 12:53 PM

I think you are headed in the right direction Amsy. :D

My experience was also, that a little bit of electrolyses can break down the voltage to a minimum. So preventing electrolyses is the primary aim imho, because that needs large energy amounts.

I agree.

Hi,

I uploaded the schematic of my circuit, which I was able to produce 1,5kV.

Maybe this will say more than words :D

Quote from Amsy on June 20th, 2012, 08:42 AM

Hi,

I uploaded the schematic of my circuit, which I was able to produce 1,5kV.

Maybe this will say more than words :D

Can you also post photos of what you have setup, this will help tremendously :D, thanks.

Quote from Amsy on June 20th, 2012, 08:42 AM

Hi,

I uploaded the schematic of my circuit, which I was able to produce 1,5kV.

Maybe this will say more than words :D

Sorry, but you could Kv 1.5 in the cell with water?
Or is this a simulation where the reference cell, is using a capacitor?
If this test is real, and if you saw High Voltage, I guarantee that no HHO. You know why? Because, surely there was no potential difference at the poles of the cell. I did this test, with almost 5 Kv (could light a fluorescent lamp, only to bring one of the poles).
Tap water, there is no dielectric, and the behavior of the cell is not equal to a capacitor.
My two cents.

Quote from Faisca on June 19th, 2012, 03:42 PM

Ok Amsy, the diagram is the picture, very simple and very unstable. But served to test the concept. You can see that the 555's own driver. that is so poor that they could not always in tune. To get this result, the source was limited in current to 170mA.
To answer your question: Yes, the cell always connected, and producing gas "HHO". And yes, there is resonance, see the first image, where the pulse is 15V. (Above) and the current reaches 800mA. (below) and it starts small and increases until the maximum supported by the 555.
I want to repeat the test, this time with PLL, a power FET and a source much larger and insulated for this experiment. (show picture of the setup)
Important note: in the fourth image (yellow trace) as the source evolves naturally (I did not do this).
The result is very similar to Meyer, what do you think?

I mean no offense Don, I think he did the best.

In your case you can reach a resonace frequency, because your diode is not blocking the oscillation of the current between C and L.
In St. M. original VIC the diode would block any current coming  from the WFC. So as he always claimed, that the WFC cannot discharge. But in a ordinary resonant circuit, the C has to discharge periodicaly.

Yes your curve diagramm is looking like Meyers. But my experience is, that resonance in a resonance circuit looks like a sine wave, not like peaks. You can actually try this by, using a real capacity and L without a diode.
"Resonante state" which Meyer said, can be only achieved with high voltages (kV).
Because ionising water needs that voltages, like ionising air also needs high voltages.

You can try to inhibit the amperage flow and to prevent electrolyses, by using a larger coil or a second one on the other side of the WFC. You also can use higher frequencys, then the coil will generate more resistance (XL=2*pi*f*L).

My experience was also, that a little bit of electrolyses can break down the voltage to a minimum. So preventing electrolyses is the primary aim imho, because that needs large energy amounts.[/quote]You do this by insisting that literally says Meyer.
And so far nobody succeeded. For there is much misinformation.
The resonance I attained, is between the inductor L, C own inductor (parasitic) and R (NTC) of the cell. The diode is there, and is to ensure unipolar pulses.
To test the resonance of this association (L + cells): the peak load has to coincide with the end of the square pulse (shifted 90 °).

If you look at my essay, the pulses on the cell, reached peaks of 8V. and minimum of 2.5 V. Not reached the highest value, because the source was 17W. was the driver and own 555. (Yes, it is still electrolysis).
Perhaps this is the way: very sharp power pulses and resonance. In my example, pulses of 8V. x 1A. = 8W instantaneous, but in the mean = 0.7 W (discounting the losses in 555).
I think that's what Meyer explored since the beginning. Only at the end he speaks of high voltage and milliamp.
Think about it.

@Faisca,

yes it was a real test with tap water. Only the schematic is painted on the pc.

Yes you are right, there was no HHO because, the 1.5kV are far too little to ionise water.
I also had a potential difference on the cell (0.7V). But thats the point IMHO, because when you have a potential difference you consuming power-->electrolyses. So IMHO it is better to keep the voltage drop as little as possible.

@Jeff

Ok, I uploaded them. :)

The devices were setup like in the schematic in the last posting.
You see the HV diode (8kV), the toroid with the two secondary windings (each 360mH) and the IRFP460 I was using. And of course my tube.
When I achieved the 1,5kV the phasetester shines very bright and no electrolyses was consuming power, also the current was 600µA->no power. Note: I was testing with my phase tester in the leakage field of the voltage zone. Not directly between the tubes.

I measured with my oscilloscope 1,5kV peak on the first coil on the secondary->so this was my voltage source. Also measured ~1,5kV on the second coil, but this measured voltage was a voltage drop.

The frequency was ~10kHz. But also 9kHz worked or 11kHz. 50%duty cycle. 30V was my input amplitude of the square wave.



 

Quote from Faisca on June 20th, 2012, 10:22 AM

You do this by insisting that literally says Meyer.
And so far nobody succeeded. For there is much misinformation.
The resonance I attained, is between the inductor L, C own inductor (parasitic) and R (NTC) of the cell. The diode is there, and is to ensure unipolar pulses.
To test the resonance of this association (L + cells): the peak load has to coincide with the end of the square pulse (shifted 90 °).

If you look at my essay, the pulses on the cell, reached peaks of 8V. and minimum of 2.5 V. Not reached the highest value, because the source was 17W. was the driver and own 555. (Yes, it is still electrolysis).
Perhaps this is the way: very sharp power pulses and resonance. In my example, pulses of 8V. x 1A. = 8W instantaneous, but in the mean = 0.7 W (discounting the losses in 555).
I think that's what Meyer explored since the beginning. Only at the end he speaks of high voltage and milliamp.
Think about it.

Yes every coil has its parasiteric C. Then you build a notch filter. Current will go down to a minimum. So thats the best way to inhibit the current. :) Also tried this few weeks ago, but the frequency generator is not able to produce frequencys above 1Mhz.

So I think thats the right way. Gaining of Z to minimize the current.
But maybe your input voltage potential is not enough. Like in a spark ignition coil you need a high magnetic induction to provide high voltage to the network of Z and the WFC.

I uploaded also a pic of the ampmeter with the 600µA.

[/quote]Yes every coil has its parasiteric C. Then you build a notch filter. Current will go down to a minimum. So thats the best way to inhibit the current. :) Also tried this few weeks ago, but the frequency generator is not able to produce frequencys above 1Mhz.

So I think thats the right way. Gaining of Z to minimize the current.
But maybe your input voltage potential is not enough. Like in a spark ignition coil you need a high magnetic induction to provide high voltage to the network of Z and the WFC.


I uploaded also a pic of the ampmeter with the 600µA.[/quote]Yes that's the point, but always there will be a chain.
If more frequent enough, the chain had fallen quite, but will point out, because the potential remained whole, the inductor, and the cell received only a fraction.
Forget for a moment Meyer. And let's use what we know:
An inductor to be charged, must have current (imagine an LR circuit), turn on and off very slowly, there will be a lot of current, turn on and off very fast, there will be little current, but in both cases will be out of resonance.
The point is correct: when the time is bound coincides with LR load time.
The cell is not like a resistor (nonlinear), I think like an R-NTC. Much like a diode (at least driving the curve). Try to make a model in the simulator, and that could'll know when the oscilloscope waveform that appears, I showed the first picture.

Quote from Amsy on June 20th, 2012, 10:22 AM

@Faisca,

yes it was a real test with tap water. Only the schematic is painted on the pc.

Yes you are right, there was no HHO because, the 1.5kV are far too little to ionise water.
I also had a potential difference on the cell (0.7V). But thats the point IMHO, because when you have a potential difference you consuming power-->electrolyses. So IMHO it is better to keep the voltage drop as little as possible.

@Jeff

Ok, I uploaded them. :)

The devices were setup like in the schematic in the last posting.
You see the HV diode (8kV), the toroid with the two secondary windings (each 360mH) and the IRFP460 I was using. And of course my tube.
When I achieved the 1,5kV the phasetester shines very bright and no electrolyses was consuming power, also the current was 600µA->no power. Note: I was testing with my phase tester in the leakage field of the voltage zone. Not directly between the tubes.

I measured with my oscilloscope 1,5kV peak on the first coil on the secondary->so this was my voltage source. Also measured ~1,5kV on the second coil, but this measured voltage was a voltage drop.

The frequency was ~10kHz. But also 9kHz worked or 11kHz. 50%duty cycle. 30V was my input amplitude of the square wave.



 

Quote from Faisca on June 20th, 2012, 10:22 AM

You do this by insisting that literally says Meyer.
And so far nobody succeeded. For there is much misinformation.
The resonance I attained, is between the inductor L, C own inductor (parasitic) and R (NTC) of the cell. The diode is there, and is to ensure unipolar pulses.
To test the resonance of this association (L + cells): the peak load has to coincide with the end of the square pulse (shifted 90 °).

If you look at my essay, the pulses on the cell, reached peaks of 8V. and minimum of 2.5 V. Not reached the highest value, because the source was 17W. was the driver and own 555. (Yes, it is still electrolysis).
Perhaps this is the way: very sharp power pulses and resonance. In my example, pulses of 8V. x 1A. = 8W instantaneous, but in the mean = 0.7 W (discounting the losses in 555).
I think that's what Meyer explored since the beginning. Only at the end he speaks of high voltage and milliamp.
Think about it.

Yes every coil has its parasiteric C. Then you build a notch filter. Current will go down to a minimum. So thats the best way to inhibit the current. :) Also tried this few weeks ago, but the frequency generator is not able to produce frequencys above 1Mhz.

So I think thats the right way. Gaining of Z to minimize the current.
But maybe your input voltage potential is not enough. Like in a spark ignition coil you need a high magnetic induction to provide high voltage to the network of Z and the WFC.


I uploaded also a pic of the ampmeter with the 600µA.

Good photos, this really helps others understand better whats going on, thanks Jeff. :D