### Author Topic: Understanding the VIC  (Read 47628 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

• Sr. member
• Posts: 349
##### Re: Understanding the VIC
« Reply #24 on: December 11, 2011, 07:33:20 am »
Tony, maybe I'm wrong, I don't know why but the video was really small, I was under the impression that he was using a Vic set up?

• Member
• Posts: 238
##### Re: Understanding the VIC
« Reply #25 on: December 11, 2011, 09:11:51 am »
Hmmm.

Back to the voltage at the cell....I think I was wrong earlier when I mentioned that the voltage was from the square wave or high circulating current across the choke parallel tank ckts.

In Stan Meyer's control and driver circuit patent he states that the voltage is determined by the turns ratio of the coils. From don's measurements we know the primary coil had 450 turns while the three secondary coils had 3,000 turns each, for a total of 9,000 secondary turns. We also know that the diode used for the WFC VIC was a 600V diode, which is also stated in the control and driver ckts patent.

From the calculations the WFC VIC had a turns ratio of roughly 1:22.5, so 12V in would yield 270V out. Now I want to state that I do think resonance may be occuring between the L1 choke and cell, but that the diode prevents the typical AC series resonance from occuring. I say this because if the typical series resonance were occuring at any frequency the Q factor of the circuit (XL/R) would have to be less than 2.2 (270V X 2.2=600V) or else the diode would be destroyed. Knowing the circuit values we know if typical series resonance was occuring the Q factor would be much higher than 2.2 and the voltage magnification would destroy the diode.

Can anyone with a working replication tell us what voltage they are getting across the cell?

I'm just wondering here because if the VIC is utilizing DC resonant charging then it would be around 540V (not taking losses into account).

So for the longest time I thought the VIC was getting a higher voltage than what the turns ratio provided....Now I think I was wrong all along?
« Last Edit: December 11, 2011, 10:42:32 am by HMS-776 »

• Sr. member
• Posts: 349
##### Re: Understanding the VIC
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2011, 18:43:14 pm »
Tony, here is the schematic that Alex says he is using http://www.singularics.com/docs/alex-petty_simple-wfc-energization-circuit.pdf

• Sr. member
• Posts: 460
##### Re: Understanding the VIC
« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2011, 20:33:18 pm »
yea thats the circuit he has on his website, but if you look in the video he is using a different circuit. This is the circuit he is using in the video.
(http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/A.Petty_Circuit.png)

• Sr. member
• Posts: 349
##### Re: Understanding the VIC
« Reply #28 on: December 11, 2011, 20:37:24 pm »
Thanks for clearing that up. I watched it again and saw that schematic at the end. Not a Meyer replication,
« Last Edit: December 11, 2011, 21:21:06 pm by Dave »

• Sr. member
• Posts: 460
##### Re: Understanding the VIC
« Reply #29 on: December 12, 2011, 00:37:51 am »
HMS, in one of Stan's patents he writes about the Sec., L1 & L2, each being wrapped with a ratio of 10:1 compared to the primary. This would make the summation of the coils a 30:1 step-up. I mentioned this back last year, but I guess nobody paid me any attention. Stan says that with 12v input to the primary, you will get 360v at the output of the chokes.

Now, the thing that we all need to understand about the cell is this, the cell will act almost as a dead short with having a resistance around 200 - 250 ohms. What Stan was doing or attempting to do is make the cell act as a true capacitor. It will act as a really bad leaky capacitor, but once you, as Stan says, tune into the dielectric value of water, only then it will act as a real true capacitor! Like I stated earlier in this thread, the water has a dielectric of 78%, which is non-conductive. So at a certain frequency you will nullify the 22% conductivity and tune into the 78% non-conductive part of water and the voltage will rise dramatically with no current leakage!

• Member
• Posts: 238
##### Re: Understanding the VIC
« Reply #30 on: December 12, 2011, 02:04:00 am »
Tony, thanks for the insight.

It makes sense, I'll just have to study more about dielectrics to fully comprehend it.

Back on the voltage and turns ratio, It's just very confusing because Stan makes several statements in the TB that would lead me to believe otherwise. I think there are VIC's that got their voltage from the turns raito and others which developed higher voltages than their turns ratio provides....Like the injector VIC, I built one  a while back and could not get anywhere close to a high enough turrs ratio to develop 20 or 40kV.