Quote from Amsy on October 8th, 2012, 01:32 AM

Quote from geenee on October 7th, 2012, 11:26 PM

-next step,i will try "knocking a fluorescent light into a tank of water",and see what happen???

OK let´s do this :)
But be carefull with the electrical connection, don´t put in the high voltage (120/230V) in the water! :exclamation:
Only try to see what happens when the lighttubes are immersed in the water.

Ha Ha!!!Already killed 2 ea 13W CFL circuit.Nothing result with new CFL circuit.i will try with OLD circuit(ballast,starter).

thanks
geenee

Quote from geenee on October 8th, 2012, 05:18 AM

Quote from Amsy on October 8th, 2012, 01:32 AM

Quote from geenee on October 7th, 2012, 11:26 PM

-next step,i will try "knocking a fluorescent light into a tank of water",and see what happen???

OK let´s do this :)
But be carefull with the electrical connection, don´t put in the high voltage (120/230V) in the water! :exclamation:
Only try to see what happens when the lighttubes are immersed in the water.

Ha Ha!!!Already killed 2 ea 13W CFL circuit.Nothing result with new CFL circuit.i will try with OLD circuit(ballast,starter).

thanks
geenee

Could be the bulb being used. Try using ultra violate or black light. Then think what could Steven have been doing to cause a CCFL to fall into the water, could he have been cleaning a fish aquarium? They use certain type bulb or light to promote plant growth in a fish aquarium.:D

Quote from Jeff Nading on October 8th, 2012, 07:11 AM

Quote from geenee on October 8th, 2012, 05:18 AM

Quote from Amsy on October 8th, 2012, 01:32 AM

Quote from geenee on October 7th, 2012, 11:26 PM

-next step,i will try "knocking a fluorescent light into a tank of water",and see what happen???

OK let´s do this :)
But be carefull with the electrical connection, don´t put in the high voltage (120/230V) in the water! :exclamation:
Only try to see what happens when the lighttubes are immersed in the water.

Ha Ha!!!Already killed 2 ea 13W CFL circuit.Nothing result with new CFL circuit.i will try with OLD circuit(ballast,starter).

thanks
geenee

Could be the bulb being used. Try using ultra violate or black light. Then think what could Steven have been doing to cause a CCFL to fall into the water, could he have been cleaning a fish aquarium? They use certain type bulb or light to promote plant growth in a fish aquarium.:D

i think JP know about the type of fluorescent light.but in 1890-1900 has modern electronic circuit??i think that years fluorescent light use ballast and starter or not??i will try to killed all type of that - -* Ha!!Ha!!.

thanks
geenee

Quote from Jeff Nading on October 8th, 2012, 07:11 AM

Quote from geenee on October 8th, 2012, 05:18 AM

Quote from Amsy on October 8th, 2012, 01:32 AM

Quote from geenee on October 7th, 2012, 11:26 PM

-next step,i will try "knocking a fluorescent light into a tank of water",and see what happen???

OK let´s do this :)
But be carefull with the electrical connection, don´t put in the high voltage (120/230V) in the water! :exclamation:
Only try to see what happens when the lighttubes are immersed in the water.

Ha Ha!!!Already killed 2 ea 13W CFL circuit.Nothing result with new CFL circuit.i will try with OLD circuit(ballast,starter).

thanks
geenee

Could be the bulb being used. Try using ultra violate or black light. Then think what could Steven have been doing to cause a CCFL to fall into the water, could he have been cleaning a fish aquarium? They use certain type bulb or light to promote plant growth in a fish aquarium.:D

Compact florescent bulbs don't have the same ballasts as regular long tube fixtures.

The story said something about him being in the metal plating business at the time.
It could have been a simple shop light encased in plastic like many have for shop purposes.

I don't really see how backing up that far and using a ballast will help in building working circuits. The place to start is where Stan left off.
Stan laid it all out how he builds the needed circuit including the specs for the Resonant Charging Choke in the 8Xa and 9x circuits.

Whatever florescent fixture it happened with was back in the 1970's. The basic ballasts haven't changed much but you can simply wind the coil the way Stan shows.[attachment=2432]
The date on Meyer's Choke says "1980."

Just duplicate the 8Xa circuit, build a choke, and start there.

Cheers,
JP

all type of florescent lights thanks JP.Ha Ha!!

like JP said replicate 8xa that easier than kill florescent lights.if that diagram right,bifilar is inductive canceling(not coupling).that bifilar act like capacitor in paralell with WFC.this's why need air gap,because adjustable tune for completely canceling inductance(0 Henry).

thanks
geenee

HY All!I managed to get some signals out of the 74122 but this is not quite corect!!I'l try to explain:when i select 4th freq of the 9xa (555pin3) the signal look distorted( far right image).when i select the 3rd freq the signal becomes square and when i rotate the pot of the gating the ''Mark'' becomes smaller and smaller and by the half rotation it becomes distorted(see the 3 images stuck together from left to right) what can i do??

Good quote from:
From:

http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6227-stan-meyers-secret-preventing-electrolysis-4.html



To sum the whole analysis up:

 The basic theory for this can be found looking for Tom Bearden's "don't kill the dipole". Basic conclusion of that: the electric field comes for free. Potential (voltage) comes for free as long as you don't influence the charge carriers that create your dipole, your voltage source.

 In the analysed systems, they all basically resonate two inductive loads in series, such that the overall load is resonating at full wave resonance, which is at 4 times higher frequency than the usual quarter wavelength resonance being used. When you resonate an open coil in full wave resonance, you get high voltage, zero current at the terminals, in phase. So there you have the basic connection to using the voltage source for free, but you have to figure out a way to do that without disturbing the charge carriers that give you the voltage source.

 However, with a single coil, the current stays inside the coil, so you can't use that. So, when you split the coil into two, you get the current in the middle for free, provided you don't disturb your voltage source, your driving circuit. So normally, when you use the current, you will disturb the resonance, which will eventually also disturb your driving circuit, so you still have to provide current to keep the system in resonance and pay the price.

 And here's the trick: the driving signal is delivered to the coil on top of a rectified carrier wave, which is fed into the circuit trough a high pass filter. Then, you get the current and the power, but the disturbances caused by using the power, cannot reach the driving circuit, because of the high pass filter! And then you finally got what you want. You can use your voltage source, without disturbing it, so then you don't have to pay the price.

 And the final trick is to drive two identical loads in opposite phase trough quad half wave rectifiers, so the whole system is perfectly in balance and in resonance.


 Update: You can read all about "don't kill the dipole" here:
Article:Free Electric Energy in Theory and Practice - PESWiki

 Update 2:
 Turns out there is a difference between Gray, Meyer and Puharich after all. Gray used full wave resonance, Puharich used half wave resonance and Meyer used quarter wave resonance. I'm a bit off in my "official story" to be completely honest. However, it's the principle that counts and that had to be brought out there first. See: Gray Tube Replication

 Update 3: As for the filter: Gray had this, he used capacitors. See: Resonating TF using Bedini circuit -- the attached pdf shows the basic circuit.
 Last edited by lamare : 09-01-2010 at 06:57 PM.

Quote from geenee on October 7th, 2012, 12:01 PM

thanks for great suggestion,JP.

about word" Inductive Canceling".i don't know its name.that 's my word - -*.because when connect that way ,inductance is low(2 wires-canceling magnetic field).

Great history about "knocking a fluorescent light into a tank of water".All this's IMPORTANCE for first step to go to success understanding.

Great all,
geenee

I don't know for a fact that it was that way.
I said, "I read that." but I do know Stan didn't "discover" the idea of using the circuit that way. He just agreed to be the guy to run off and improve ot when they realized the voltage was doing the work.

Try thisfrom:
http://www.overunity.com/6702/hydromeyers-vic/60/#.UHNEyUaKIlE

Re: HydroMeyers Vic
« Reply #60 on: February 05, 2009, 01:55:39 AM »
All you need to prove out Meyer's VIC choke is wrap a few hundred turns of #36 around an off the shelf choke.

Put it in your circuit and then short out that outer winding. Notice how the pulse get's much higher and shorter? That is compression. Now do that about 7 times and on the 8th ping it through the high voltage side going through a gas discharge tube like Meyer showed you in his drawings.

Now are Dankie or hydro doing that? Nope, but as usual they are claiming they have it all figured out with stupid videos filled with mystery that prove nothing. By tomorrow hydro will probably be putting up a video saying he has to release his information because someone is stealing his intellectual property - that was one of the best ones so far wacko. Paranoid emotional idiot freaks.

Meyer was probably sequentially shorting out those windings through a decade counter and a row of SCR's originally but then figured out he just had to modify number of turns per bank on the primary side and shorted out the two ends of the outer coil and didn't bother to build a new RF shield / case.

Suddenly the 14 outer banks with a common ground explains the 15 pin connector. Been trying to teach these same idiots this covertly for a year now but they are so wrapped up in their damaged ego's they can see what is being taught.

If stupid people spent 10% of the energy they expend hiding their ignorance and conning others into thinking they are smart, into instead actually educating themselves, they would be smart. That personality flaw based in insecurity is the root of why people are stupid and poor. They live in a false reality and it is the reason they can't see the reality being handed to them. Instead, they take it as a personal attack since they spend all their time hiding who they are. They are all about hiding who they are.

I have explained Meyer so many ways and on so many days to these same people for a year now and all they care about is their dependtard false image that only fools other idiots. It is the reason they pack up. The republicans call them "the crazies" for a reason - they are.

O.K., dependtards - you can get all emotional now and ignore the information that teaches you what you claim to be figuring out as usual.

Here is a picture of the base experiment:

 thane_choke.gif (64.83 kB, 346x428 - viewed 307 times.)

And there is this:
http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/6227-stan-meyers-secret-preventing-electrolysis-4.html

To sum the whole analysis up:

 The basic theory for this can be found looking for Tom Bearden's "don't kill the dipole". Basic conclusion of that: the electric field comes for free. Potential (voltage) comes for free as long as you don't influence the charge carriers that create your dipole, your voltage source.

 In the analysed systems, they all basically resonate two inductive loads in series, such that the overall load is resonating at full wave resonance, which is at 4 times higher frequency than the usual quarter wavelength resonance being used. When you resonate an open coil in full wave resonance, you get high voltage, zero current at the terminals, in phase. So there you have the basic connection to using the voltage source for free, but you have to figure out a way to do that without disturbing the charge carriers that give you the voltage source.

 However, with a single coil, the current stays inside the coil, so you can't use that. So, when you split the coil into two, you get the current in the middle for free, provided you don't disturb your voltage source, your driving circuit. So normally, when you use the current, you will disturb the resonance, which will eventually also disturb your driving circuit, so you still have to provide current to keep the system in resonance and pay the price.

 And here's the trick: the driving signal is delivered to the coil on top of a rectified carrier wave, which is fed into the circuit trough a high pass filter. Then, you get the current and the power, but the disturbances caused by using the power, cannot reach the driving circuit, because of the high pass filter! And then you finally got what you want. You can use your voltage source, without disturbing it, so then you don't have to pay the price.

 And the final trick is to drive two identical loads in opposite phase trough quad half wave rectifiers, so the whole system is perfectly in balance and in resonance.


 Update: You can read all about "don't kill the dipole" here:
Article:Free Electric Energy in Theory and Practice - PESWiki

 Update 2:
 Turns out there is a difference between Gray, Meyer and Puharich after all. Gray used full wave resonance, Puharich used half wave resonance and Meyer used quarter wave resonance. I'm a bit off in my "official story" to be completely honest. However, it's the principle that counts and that had to be brought out there first. See: Gray Tube Replication

 Update 3: As for the filter: Gray had this, he used capacitors. See: Resonating TF using Bedini circuit -- the attached pdf shows the basic circuit.
 Last edited by lamare : 09-01-2010 at 06:57 PM.

Quote from geenee on October 8th, 2012, 12:00 PM

all type of florescent lights thanks JP.Ha Ha!!

like JP said replicate 8xa that easier than kill florescent lights.if that diagram right,bifilar is inductive canceling(not coupling).that bifilar act like capacitor in paralell with WFC.this's why need air gap,because adjustable tune for completely canceling inductance(0 Henry).

thanks
geenee

In electrotechnical words:
The airgap normaly (in electrotechnical devices) is used in flyback transformers to store the magnetic energy in the gap. When the primary puls reach the state OFF, the stored energy can be consumed on the secondary side -> With the size of the air gap you can adjust the inductive coupling of the secondary coil and which amount of energy is transfered to the secondary side....

In the case of the circuit picture which JP posted (8XA), normaly the inductance would be 0H (tested this also in the past, canceling of the magnetic field)->Bifilar rod!
So allthough the schematic pic shows a bifilar coil around a rod, this is misleading. The real 8XA has an air gap (photo of JP)!! This leads to a big difference in detail of function!!
So the overall inducantce is not 0H!

Also the VIC core has an air gap! (attachment)
In the patents and schematics, no air gap is beeing shown! Why??
Also in the memos the VIC always be shown and descripted as a "one core" transformer. (??)

regards

Quote from Amsy on October 8th, 2012, 11:22 PM

Also the VIC core has an air gap! (attachment)
In the patents and schematics, no air gap is beeing shown! Why??
Also in the memos the VIC always be shown and descripted as a "one core" transformer. (??)

regards

I fail to see an air gap in that small hole you point to tbh.
It's an interesting question though.
Dog one has also mentioned the importance of an air gap in the core, so it's
definitely worth checking out.
What would be equally interesting would be to hear from someone who actually
has one of Meyer's original VIC's, if this in fact is the case.
While we're at it, it wouldn't hurt to get additional data of all the coils in there.........:angel:

Quote from Lynx on October 9th, 2012, 12:29 AM

Quote from Amsy on October 8th, 2012, 11:22 PM

Also the VIC core has an air gap! (attachment)
In the patents and schematics, no air gap is beeing shown! Why??
Also in the memos the VIC always be shown and descripted as a "one core" transformer. (??)

regards

I fail to see an air gap in that small hole you point to tbh.
It's an interesting question though.
Dog one has also mentioned the importance of an air gap in the core, so it's
definitely worth checking out.
What would be equally interesting would be to hear from someone who actually
has one of Meyer's original VIC's, if this in fact is the case.
While we're at it, it wouldn't hurt to get additional data of all the coils in there.........:angel:

Yes, it is hard to see. For me it seems, that this little hole is for visual controlling of the gap. Found a better one (attachment)
Because of the two U-profiles which the core out of exist, an air gap will exist, coercive. Although when you press the two profiles together, there will be a little air gap in the core.
I spoke to an old electrotechnical constructer in our company who has a lot of experience in building special application devices, he said to me that this makes a hugh difference in the behavior of a circuit!

Also the two E-Profile cores of the 8XA Charging chokes, do have an air gap.

The use of the air gap is, to provide/save more magnetic energy in the core instead of a closed loop core. (because of "non" existing saturation of the core)

i search information about air gap, coefficient coupling.

coefficient coupling maximize=1.
=minimize the leakage flux or maximize the coupling coefficient.

sample if you have 1:1 transformer and perfect coefficient coupling = 1 then input voltage=12 output voltage=12.

if has air gap,coefficient coupling is reduced(cause leakage flux) to <1 like 0.6-0.7.something like that. if  input 12v output is about 8.7v.

then like Amsy said,if has air gap inductance isn't 0 Henry.but still cancel inductance(bifilar of 8xa).

thanks
geenee

Quote from Amsy on October 9th, 2012, 01:57 AM

Yes, it is hard to see. For me it seems, that this little hole is for visual controlling of the gap. Found a better one (attachment)
Because of the two U-profiles which the core out of exist, an air gap will exist, coercive. Although when you press the two profiles together, there will be a little air gap in the core.
I spoke to an old electrotechnical constructer in our company who has a lot of experience in building special application devices, he said to me that this makes a hugh difference in the behavior of a circuit!

Also the two E-Profile cores of the 8XA Charging chokes, do have an air gap.

The use of the air gap is, to provide/save more magnetic energy in the core instead of a closed loop core. (because of "non" existing saturation of the core)

Alright guys, lets step through this very carefully and I want you to correct me if I screw up:
   Yellow -- primary
   Green -- feedback
   Blue -- secondary
   2 Red -- resonant charging chokes (RCC).

Air gap between the two red coils; probably another one underneath the green coil as well.

Primary winding magnetically coupled via core with one of the resonant charging chokes.

Secondary winding magnetically coupled via other half of core with the other resonant charging choke.

Feedback winding lays across air gap.

Resonance charging chokes are not wound any special way--not bifilar.  We cannot assume their polarity meaning they may very well both push in opposition to each other across the air gap.  Which also means it is possible each half of the core to be working magnetically against it's opposing core.  It could be that this flips back-n-forth during operation--sometimes the two cores push part, sometimes they pull together.  It all depends on which way the coils induce the magnetic field.

The purpose of this device is to minimize current draw in the primary winding, which means the primary winding must always be in resonance with its half of the core OR be in an off state (gating ?).

So if we take all the factors listed above (lock them down), what will the rest of the device allow?

Can the right side (one with secondary coil) oscillate at multiples of the left side (one with primary coil)?  I'd say yes since there is an air gap and it would seem possible the two halves could easily run independently of each other as long as one is a harmonic of the other.  If anything happens on the left side that would cause current flow (back EMF), the feedback coil should sense this.  Based on the position of the feedback coil, it's a little hard for me to tell if the fields in the two cores oppose or attract; does this impose a voltage in the feedback coil...?  I think probably the feedback coil only gets a voltage induced within it if the oppose/attract changes.  If it's always opposing or always attracting the feedback coil should see no voltage.  Which translates into resonance, meaning the pulse frequency is locked on.

So my question is:  Where does the secondary coil collect it's magnetic field from?  Does it get enough jumping the air gap?  Is it getting it from the RCC by way of the WFC?  We know it must be getting a magnetic impulse to create the step-up voltage, so how does it do it?

Also, the RCC coils are every bit as large as the secondary coil, might they be overriding the secondary coil?

This is a fascinating device and it would sure be nice to fully understand how it works.  :huh:

There was an excellent article referenced by a member in a different thread on this forum, it discussed transformers at length and showed some calculations on air gap effects etc.  I found it interesting without really understanding how to use the information.  I will hunt around to see if I can find it and reference it here.

I also found this: http://www.sklaic.info/electronics/transformer/ which appears to be software for you to calculate the physical properties of the trancformer required to get specific output effects.  If it is true that we know Stan was aiming for certain harmonics - then maybe this will be able to help to calculate the physical properties of such a core.

Quote from Dog-One on October 9th, 2012, 01:16 PM

Quote from Amsy on October 9th, 2012, 01:57 AM

Yes, it is hard to see. For me it seems, that this little hole is for visual controlling of the gap. Found a better one (attachment)
Because of the two U-profiles which the core out of exist, an air gap will exist, coercive. Although when you press the two profiles together, there will be a little air gap in the core.
I spoke to an old electrotechnical constructer in our company who has a lot of experience in building special application devices, he said to me that this makes a hugh difference in the behavior of a circuit!

Also the two E-Profile cores of the 8XA Charging chokes, do have an air gap.

The use of the air gap is, to provide/save more magnetic energy in the core instead of a closed loop core. (because of "non" existing saturation of the core)

Alright guys, lets step through this very carefully and I want you to correct me if I screw up:
   Yellow -- primary
   Green -- feedback
   Blue -- secondary
   2 Red -- resonant charging chokes (RCC).

Air gap between the two red coils; probably another one underneath the green coil as well.

Primary winding magnetically coupled via core with one of the resonant charging chokes.

Secondary winding magnetically coupled via other half of core with the other resonant charging choke.

Feedback winding lays across air gap.

Resonance charging chokes are not wound any special way--not bifilar.  We cannot assume their polarity meaning they may very well both push in opposition to each other across the air gap.  Which also means it is possible each half of the core to be working magnetically against it's opposing core.  It could be that this flips back-n-forth during operation--sometimes the two cores push part, sometimes they pull together.  It all depends on which way the coils induce the magnetic field.

The purpose of this device is to minimize current draw in the primary winding, which means the primary winding must always be in resonance with its half of the core OR be in an off state (gating ?).

So if we take all the factors listed above (lock them down), what will the rest of the device allow?

Can the right side (one with secondary coil) oscillate at multiples of the left side (one with primary coil)?  I'd say yes since there is an air gap and it would seem possible the two halves could easily run independently of each other as long as one is a harmonic of the other.  If anything happens on the left side that would cause current flow (back EMF), the feedback coil should sense this.  Based on the position of the feedback coil, it's a little hard for me to tell if the fields in the two cores oppose or attract; does this impose a voltage in the feedback coil...?  I think probably the feedback coil only gets a voltage induced within it if the oppose/attract changes.  If it's always opposing or always attracting the feedback coil should see no voltage.  Which translates into resonance, meaning the pulse frequency is locked on.

So my question is:  Where does the secondary coil collect it's magnetic field from?  Does it get enough jumping the air gap?  Is it getting it from the RCC by way of the WFC?  We know it must be getting a magnetic impulse to create the step-up voltage, so how does it do it?

Also, the RCC coils are every bit as large as the secondary coil, might they be overriding the secondary coil?

This is a fascinating device and it would sure be nice to fully understand how it works.  :huh:

Conventionally two halves of c-cores separated by an air gap are working as one. there is no individual behaviour because the magnetic flux lines always propagate to a closed loop from north to south. if the core is not gapped the magnetic properties depend on the core material. if the core is gapped the magnetic properties are dominated by the air gap dimensions. in conventional gapped transformers there is no difference if a coil is applied over a gap or put somewhere else.

Quote from geenee on October 9th, 2012, 08:39 AM

i search information about air gap, coefficient coupling.

coefficient coupling maximize=1.
=minimize the leakage flux or maximize the coupling coefficient.

sample if you have 1:1 transformer and perfect coefficient coupling = 1 then input voltage=12 output voltage=12.

if has air gap,coefficient coupling is reduced(cause leakage flux) to <1 like 0.6-0.7.something like that. if  input 12v output is about 8.7v.

then like Amsy said,if has air gap inductance isn't 0 Henry.but still cancel inductance(bifilar of 8xa).

thanks
geenee

Good and easy explaination.
Yeah, so no complete canceling of the magnetic flux... but why?
8XA and VIC do have in common, that the two charging chokes have an air gap between.

Quote from Dog-One on October 9th, 2012, 01:16 PM

Alright guys, lets step through this very carefully and I want you to correct me if I screw up:
   Yellow -- primary
   Green -- feedback
   Blue -- secondary
   2 Red -- resonant charging chokes (RCC).

Air gap between the two red coils; probably another one underneath the green coil as well.

Primary winding magnetically coupled via core with one of the resonant charging chokes.

Secondary winding magnetically coupled via other half of core with the other resonant charging choke.

Feedback winding lays across air gap.

Resonance charging chokes are not wound any special way--not bifilar.  We cannot assume their polarity meaning they may very well both push in opposition to each other across the air gap.  Which also means it is possible each half of the core to be working magnetically against it's opposing core.  It could be that this flips back-n-forth during operation--sometimes the two cores push part, sometimes they pull together.  It all depends on which way the coils induce the magnetic field.

The purpose of this device is to minimize current draw in the primary winding, which means the primary winding must always be in resonance with its half of the core OR be in an off state (gating ?).

So if we take all the factors listed above (lock them down), what will the rest of the device allow?

Can the right side (one with secondary coil) oscillate at multiples of the left side (one with primary coil)?  I'd say yes since there is an air gap and it would seem possible the two halves could easily run independently of each other as long as one is a harmonic of the other.  If anything happens on the left side that would cause current flow (back EMF), the feedback coil should sense this.  Based on the position of the feedback coil, it's a little hard for me to tell if the fields in the two cores oppose or attract; does this impose a voltage in the feedback coil...?  I think probably the feedback coil only gets a voltage induced within it if the oppose/attract changes.  If it's always opposing or always attracting the feedback coil should see no voltage.  Which translates into resonance, meaning the pulse frequency is locked on.

So my question is:  Where does the secondary coil collect it's magnetic field from?  Does it get enough jumping the air gap?  Is it getting it from the RCC by way of the WFC?  We know it must be getting a magnetic impulse to create the step-up voltage, so how does it do it?

Also, the RCC coils are every bit as large as the secondary coil, might they be overriding the secondary coil?

This is a fascinating device and it would sure be nice to fully understand how it works.  :huh:

I agree to your very good explaination. Yes, it is a quite hard to see what realy happens.
Maybe this can help me/us a little bit to better understand the basics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_circuit#Summary_of_analogy_between_magnetic_circuits_and_electrical_circuits (scrolling down)

The (two) air gaps are a big magnetic resistance according to the rest of the core.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_reluctance#Applications

A very important part to know would be if it is used flyback transfo mode or a normal used transfo mode with air gap. This is depending on the wrap direction primary to secondary (polarity). Does someone have a original VIC?

A flyback transfo first stores the energy of the primary winding in the air gap and when the primary puls is off, the magnetig field in the air gap collapse and hits every coil on the secondary side. This was one thing Stanley Meyer descriped in some videos (collapsing magnetic field), very high voltages can be reached with that kind of transformer. (e.g TV Transfo)

But, Stanley Meyer schematics in the memo shows a normal use of the transfo, this can be seen on the polaritys which are drawn into the circuit schematics.... but also hide that the core isn´t a "one core solution".

However....
On the photos the air gap also looks adjustable.
Russ already showed that in one of his videos....
Was this the "fine tuning" (wiper arm) of the second Charging Choke which Stanley Meyer descriped in his patents and memos?
His construction (white plastic material) around the cores and the little hole inside the bobbin looks like it was for adjusting purposes of the core/air gap, also in the 8XA.

Assumed, that Meyer is using the VIC in a "non Flyback mode":
As geenee said, the air gap can higher or lower the voltage of all secondary coils on the core.
But to get out 20kV or more, you will need to use the collapsing field like in the flyback mode, IMHO.

Generaly:
The purpose to restrict the amperes on the primary leads to a need to restrict the amps on the secondary: The restriction of the amps basically can be done by rising the resistance what Stanley Meyer already did by using the stainless steel wire. So the dominating resistance on the secondary are the ~23kOhm of the two Charging Chokes (2x11.6kOhms) instead of the resistance of WFC (waterresistance). Then it would make sense that both charging chokes are connected in that way, that the voltage will add together. The big ohmic resistance and the high frequency adds the inductive resistance and the ohmic resistance together. Because the resistance of the secondarys windings will rise when the frequency is rising. (>2H and ~10kHz). Corect me if iam wrong. 2*pi*f*L + Rwire = ~125000Ohms + 23000Ohms = ~148kOhms overall resistance.

For comparison: Also in every microwave oven transformer the secondary winding has a high ohmic resistance to push up the voltage and restrict the amperage on the secondary side. Because the coils acts like a voltage source on the secondary side of the transfo, it is like having a big internal resistance in a voltage source. This always leads to minimal current and maximum voltage.

So why not using something like a microwave oven transfo to rise the voltage and restrict the amps?

How about a healthy mix of the 2?
First the VIC with it's primary, secondary, if needed the pickup, then the 2 resonant charging chokes, with one of them being variable (somehow).
Then add to that the bifilar wound E-core inbetween the RCC's and the cell.
What would be extra here would be the 2 RCC's on the VIC, on the other hand they would add to the "restricted amps"
thing that's needed, right? :cool:

Quote from symanuk on October 10th, 2012, 12:51 AM

There was an excellent article referenced by a member in a different thread on this forum, it discussed transformers at length and showed some calculations on air gap effects etc.  I found it interesting without really understanding how to use the information.  I will hunt around to see if I can find it and reference it here.

I also found this: http://www.sklaic.info/electronics/transformer/ which appears to be software for you to calculate the physical properties of the trancformer required to get specific output effects.  If it is true that we know Stan was aiming for certain harmonics - then maybe this will be able to help to calculate the physical properties of such a core.

Here is the home link for the transformer builds you were looking for, scroll down to tutorrials then click on transformers and coils. Has a host of information we all can use.:cool::D:P
http://ludens.cl/Electron/Electron.html

Quote from Jeff Nading on October 10th, 2012, 07:42 AM

Quote from symanuk on October 10th, 2012, 12:51 AM

There was an excellent article referenced by a member in a different thread on this forum, it discussed transformers at length and showed some calculations on air gap effects etc.  I found it interesting without really understanding how to use the information.  I will hunt around to see if I can find it and reference it here.

I also found this: http://www.sklaic.info/electronics/transformer/ which appears to be software for you to calculate the physical properties of the trancformer required to get specific output effects.  If it is true that we know Stan was aiming for certain harmonics - then maybe this will be able to help to calculate the physical properties of such a core.

Here is the home link for the transformer builds you were looking for, scroll down to tutorrials then click on transformers and coils. Has a host of information we all can use.:cool::D:P
http://ludens.cl/Electron/Electron.html

thanks Jeff,Good information.

now we know alots why use air gap.
1.reducing the effective permeability of the core(air=1,ferrite=2000 reduce to lower etc.like powdered iron=120)
2.***Energy storage in magnetic cores = maximum input power(W) than without = saturation
3.reducing Henry

this is "don't need inductance but need Energy storage in magnetic cores(=Capacitor)".

thanks
geenee

Thanks Jeff, I hunted round and couldn't for the life of me find that thread!

Quote from symanuk on October 10th, 2012, 11:08 AM

Thanks Jeff, I hunted round and couldn't for the life of me find that thread!

Your welcome, I had originally posted it.:D:P

Quote from bussi04 on October 10th, 2012, 01:02 AM

Conventionally two halves of c-cores separated by an air gap are working as one. there is no individual behaviour because the magnetic flux lines always propagate to a closed loop from north to south. if the core is not gapped the magnetic properties depend on the core material. if the core is gapped the magnetic properties are dominated by the air gap dimensions. in conventional gapped transformers there is no difference if a coil is applied over a gap or put somewhere else.

Okay, I was hoping someone would clarify that.  My point was to find the bounds of possibilities so that we can zero in on the central operation.  Now JP mentioned "high pass filter" and why that never occurred to me I'm not sure, but it does make a lot of sense.

BTW, thank you Jeff for that transformer link--good reference to keep handy.  Great section on calculating air gap and it reducing the effective permeability of the core.

So we have an air gapped transformer, good for step-up and on the output side we have a choke in series with a (water) capacitor.  That to me is a high pass filter circuit.  One would think then if we could pulse at a high enough frequency, the impedance to drive the cell goes to infinity.  Has anyone tried pulsing in the megahertz range?  I've only ran at audio frequencies.  Seems I recall some magic number around 21MHz being associated with the atomic resonance of a water molecule--maybe that's the first harmonic of a hydrogen atom, can't recall.  Also, isn't an air gapped transformer much better at handling high frequencies than a solid core?

Quote from Dog-One on October 10th, 2012, 10:20 PM

So we have an air gapped transformer, good for step-up and on the output side we have a choke in series with a (water) capacitor.  That to me is a high pass filter circuit.  One would think then if we could pulse at a high enough frequency, the impedance to drive the cell goes to infinity.  Has anyone tried pulsing in the megahertz range?  I've only ran at audio frequencies.  Seems I recall some magic number around 21MHz being associated with the atomic resonance of a water molecule.  Also, isn't an air gapped transformer much better at handling high frequencies than a solid core?

Hy Dog-one,

every coil has is own resonant frequency, then the impandance is at "infinity". This is, because the coils do have a "parasitic" capacitance because of the windings.
This two components work like a parallel resonant circuit. The impendance Z of this parallel resonant circuit does have the peak at the resonant frequency of L and the parasitic C.
In the memo book of meyer, there is the "VIC Matrix Circuit". You can see this in the attachment and here is some info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_capacitance
(Cd1 and Cd2)
We know the frequency of Stanley Meyer was in audio range (video evidence), normally no high frequency, but if the coils are big enough (>1H is hugh) and they are wrapped in many winding layers, the capacity is high enough, you can reach the resonant frequency also in audio range frequencies.

So the combination of the airgap energy storeage and using the flyback mode, you are able to reach very high voltages. The very high Z in the coil is also good current blocker. :)

We also know that the water it self, specially tapwater or citywater do have little resistance. So the big part of the overall resistance must be exist in the circuit.
We can find on the last pages of the meyer memo an electrical data table of the VIC. It sais, 40.000V@1ma =40watts -> So the overall resistance of the VIC Secondary must be Z=E/I = 40.000kOhm = 40MOhm. It is a sum of all the resonant circuits impendances and the ohmic resistance (11.6kOhm) of the coils.
(12V@3,3A = 40 Watt)

Maybe this can help a little bit.

Quote from Amsy on October 10th, 2012, 01:05 AM

So why not using something like a microwave oven transfo to rise the voltage and restrict the amps?

Those transformers work at 50/60 hz. you can´t pulse those iron cores in the 100s hz.
so you have to build a ferrite core transformer to operate at higher frequencies.

that´s the reason why the transformer core calculation program linked in a former post can´t be used. it´s limited to 50/60 hz.

Quote from bussi04 on October 11th, 2012, 01:00 AM

Quote from Amsy on October 10th, 2012, 01:05 AM

So why not using something like a microwave oven transfo to rise the voltage and restrict the amps?

Those transformers work at 50/60 hz. you can´t pulse those iron cores in the 100s hz.
so you have to build a ferrite core transformer to operate at higher frequencies.

that´s the reason why the transformer core calculation program linked in a former post can´t be used. it´s limited to 50/60 hz.

Generally:
Do we need high frequencys to generate high voltages? I think ->no, see the MOTs
Does it make sense to rise the frequency-->yes to performe resonance in a circuit to rise the voltage more, see "resonance transformer"

Good brain storming guy's, now I really think we are getting somewhere. Audio range, air-gap, ferrite core transformer. And, as always, thanks for all the hard work. Too, again, you "all" are welcome for the transformer link, glad it could help. :cool::D:P