Author Topic: Resonance WFC  (Read 47932 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Moderator
  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #64 on: February 19, 2011, 16:54:50 pm »
In my recent test,I have found that the positive choke is the only one that part of the LC resonance.The negative choke has no effect on the frequency for resonance.I added a capacitor across the chokes in parellel,as well as the cell,and found out that the frequency for resonance would change when put across the positive choke and the cell,but not the negative choke.The test was done using only one capacitor across one item only.
 
Putting the extra cap across the negative choke had no effect on the resonance frequency.So that leads me to believe that the negative choke has no effect on LC resonance.
Don
Don, thank you for testing this!

Interesting...

br,
Webmug

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Moderator
  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #65 on: February 19, 2011, 17:27:26 pm »
This is basically what happens at resonance, but this is not a good model for simulation of a VIC.
If choke 2 inserted, different resonance frequency is needed (not what tested, see above). Flux coupling is needed.
When Blocking Diode is placed resonance it is messed up.

So here is were I am right now...

br,
Webmug

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Hero member
  • ****
  • Posts: 980
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #66 on: February 19, 2011, 18:31:14 pm »
with the diode the choke mag field is supposed to collapse, and this will interact with the other choke too, so maybe there is an interaction with the matched chokes that you will not see in the simulation, you would have to have them on the same core and see that magnetic field collapse across them

i do think the chokes have to be matched because in all the systems we actually see, the appear to be equal, in the 8xa they are equal bifilar, in the rvic they are equal bifilar, in the 3-23 they appear to be the same size, although separated... no indication of tuning? in the 6-1 coil he does not use the tuning symbol on the second choke anymore does he? he always says they are in balanced electromagnetic intensity, physically same size and shape

interesting stuff you guys are playing with for sure, but i wonder about the diode and matched collapse of the field which is not in the simulation, just another piece of the puzzle

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Moderator
  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #67 on: February 22, 2011, 12:05:32 pm »
Archive information
I have some measurements to give you for the coils.
Using the above pictures as a referance the dementions are as followed.
 
The length of the large coils(left to right) 1.312 inches.
The width of the coils (top to bottom) 1.5 inches
The height of the coils(table up) 1.16 inches.
 
Coil base size measures .360 x .675 inches.
 
Length of small feedback coil (green) is.380 inches.
 
Wire size was 29 gauge .0115 inches.
 
My calculations for the primary wire is between 600-650 turns, wire resistance measured 10.5 ohms
 
Secondary 3000-3200 turns, wire resistance measured between 70-75 ohms between the three coils (2 chokes and secondary)
 
Now get busy
Don
Kali'
Your way off with your turns.
 
Here's the resistance values that I took from the coils with a Fluke meter.
Primary-10.5 ohms
Secondary and chokes-70-75 ohms
Feedback-11.5 ohms
 
Now 29 gauge wire measures 81.83 ohms per 1000 feet,so I come up with the following
 
Primary- 128 feet
Secondary and chokes- 884 feet
 
As for number of turns I come up with
Primary - 600-650 turns
Secondary and chokes - 3000-3500 turns
 
Because they are hand wound and not precision,these should be very close.
 
As for the 220 ohm resister,they were wired across the primary to restrict the current feeding it.10.5 ohms will make the coil heat up with 12 volts feeding it.Some of the coil pacts had three resistors across the primary,all of them were 220 ohm.The largest one was a 5 watt.
Don
The 220 ohm resistors were like I said wired across the primary coil(parallel).A friend had talked with a coil manufacture,and they told him that 10.5 ohms coil would get hot,then he asked them what would happen if you were to wire a 220 ohm resistor across it,and he stated that it would run cooler.Not my words.
 
As for the NVR1550 diode,there is actually a MUR1550 and a MUR1560.The first is a 500 volt,and the second was a 600 volt.
 
Kali,as for your explaination of the voltage step up up 1:5 with 12 volts in and 60 volts out was a little confusing.But I believe I understand what you were getting at.
 
You are stating that if you apply 12 volts to the primary coil,with a step up ratio of 1:5 you will then get 60 volts out to the blocking diode.Now in my testing of my coils,I have a step up ratio of 1:10 or as I would put it 10:1.So if I apply 12 volts to my primary I should get 120 volts out of the secondary.Right?
 
Well when I test the output of my secondary without any load on it,I get a much greater step up than 10:1.I've seen several hundred volts.No just maybe that is what Stan is hoping for with his set up.Maybe because we are restricting amps with the choke coils that this high voltage from our secondary is able to stay high,because of the very low load.
 
Under normal step up coils we are appling loads to the secondary output which pulls the voltage down to the actual ratio of the steup.So just maybe with the chokes restricting the amps,we are able to keep this higher voltage than the stepup ratio produces.Maybe it has something to do with the coils all being on the same core that allows  this greater voltage to be produce.
 
Now again with my coil set up,of 100 turns primary,1000 turns secondary,and 2000 turns chokes,I have seen between 1kv-2kv at the cell.It it hasn't had any ill effect on the blocking diode.And my diode is the same rating as a MUR1560.
 
Thats some of my thoughts on this matter as I have seen it with my own testing.
Don
Primary : 450 turns, 10?, Air Inductance 1.43mH, Core Inductance 8.01mH
Feedback : 450 turns, 10?, Air Inductance 2.98mH, Core Inductance 10.4mH
Secondary : 3000 turns, 78.2?, Air Inductance 87.2mH, Core Inductance 358mH
L1 : 3000 turns, 75.9?, Air Inductance 83.1mH, Core Inductance 359mH
L2 : 3000 turns, 76.9?, Air Inductance 85.5mH, Core Inductance 359mH

So the secondary side total inductance is 1076mH
My testing coils are as follows:
Prim. 850uH 1ohm 200wnd AWG23 (100ohm series resistor) coil former 35mm length max.30mm height
Sec. 150mH 46ohm 2000wnd AWG30 coil former 35mm length max.30mm height
Pickup center tapped 2x 15mH 2x11ohm  2x500wnd AWG30 coil former 20mm length max.30mm height
Choke1 150mH 46ohm 2000wnd AWG30 coil former 35mm length max.30mm height
Choke2 150mH 46ohm 2000wnd AWG30 coil former 35mm length max.30mm height
core hole 10x8mm

Copper wire insulation should sustain 2k5Volt.
Inductance depends on core material used (measured values are without core)
Going to try ferrite core ( UU core )

My wfc cell is insulated in delrin. Wires are fully insulated.
It is 2Mega Ohms 1.8nF.

br,
Webmug
« Last Edit: April 01, 2011, 11:06:09 am by webmug »

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Moderator
  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #68 on: February 25, 2011, 18:58:44 pm »
Update:
I glued 6 ferrite Nickel Zinc (Ni-Zn) rods together as UU-core.
http://www.bnf.com.hk/new_page_1.htm

This is the ferrite material I could get:
Material    ?i    Bms(Gs)    Hc(Oe)    Br(Gs)    Tc(?)    ?(?-cm)    Frequency    (MHz)    ?ur x 10-6/oC
A2G         300    2800    0.52       1500    160    1*107    0.1~3    20~45
Rods are 5cm long  O 8mm

br,
Webmug
« Last Edit: March 08, 2011, 16:07:56 pm by webmug »

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #69 on: February 26, 2011, 00:54:42 am »
Webmug,

I've been were you are going.  I've had good luck building iron powder mixed with epoxy VICs.  They will not saturate at high frequencies and really can transfer some current if needed.  They run cool at 5khz.

NASCO has the finest iron filings to make a thick paste for a EI core mold.   

I've made mine disassemble-able so I can experiment with different coil arrangements, etc.

just a thought

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Moderator
  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #70 on: April 04, 2011, 14:34:37 pm »
As already mentioned here on the forum, that voltage potential is not enough for dissociation of the water molecule, a resonant action must also be accomplished. This is what Stan describes in one of his patents.

Somehow the distance between the plates of the exciters will have, or can be adjusted to have, a wavelength, or a multiple wavelength, related to the motion of the water molecule in traveling from the one plate to the other.

The water molecule will be set in motion and enhanced in motion in the resonant cavity and exceed the impediment of water.

The enhanced physical action on the water molecule in the resonant cavity will directly affect the breaking up of the molecule into its gaseous atomic structure.

The water impediment now is relatively insignificant.

br,
Webmug
« Last Edit: April 04, 2011, 18:34:35 pm by webmug »

Offline Login to see usernames

  • Moderator
  • Sr. member
  • ***
  • Posts: 434
Re: Resonance WFC
« Reply #71 on: April 04, 2011, 17:04:05 pm »
My understanding this "Resonant Action" reassembles to the "Theory and Formula of Aqueous Disintegration" by Keely.
Perhaps Stan used the "Vibration into Thirds at Nodes" for molecular disintegration resolving the water molecule?
Keely goes further with the process, just as Stan did to go to Sixths (new element) second order and yet even further to Low atomic ether!!!
Yet still going further second atomic harmonic!!!

br,
Webmug