Ionizationx: a clean environment is a human right!

Projects by members => Projects by members => Timeshell => Topic started by: timeshell on June 23, 2012, 19:29:49 pm

Title: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on June 23, 2012, 19:29:49 pm
It was brought to my attention in a past experiment with the assistance of a fellow named Charles Seiler that a low resistance was required between a coil and water cell to effectively produce gas. This actually makes sense and I have been looking at this in relation to Meyer's VIC.

If the resistance of the choke is greater than the resistance of the water cell, the current from the choke's inductance will force current through the water.  Thus we end up with conventional electrolysis.  Now, let's say we wind the choke with low resistance instead so that the water cell can completely push back against the current with its own resistance.  Now we get a charge across the capacitor that the current is unable to push through because the resistance of the cell is higher than the chokes resistance.

Update: Confirmed in simulation.  Working now to confirm in model.

2013-02-09:  I have measured the resistance of all the coils I have made to date and can confirm that the only ones I have had any measure of success with have a very low resistance value.  This along with adys15 results leads me to conclude that this is a fact.
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,2426.msg24546.html#msg24546

2015-02-15:  As far as I can now determine, the resistance of the actual coils is not a particularly important factor in current limiting but does have an important impact when sizing the coils to make sure that that the current generated in the coils during resonance doesn't cause them to burn out.  HOWEVER, the coils REACTANCE in relation to the capacitor is of particular importance for the very same reasons in that if the coils reactance isn't equal to the WFC reactance then no charge can properly develop on the capacitor.

While some of the principles in this topic still apply, the context is out of date.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low impedance is preferable in VIC Coils
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 06, 2012, 08:00:16 am
hmm The L1 inducter is in series with the water cap which would give us maximum power transfer. I believe a high impedance is necessary to build any voltage
Title: Re: Theory - Low impedance is preferable in VIC Coils
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 06, 2012, 08:02:34 am
If you look at the information we have about Stans vic, it looks like the inducters are in a self resonance. From my tests, the water cap only has a small effect 
Title: Re: Theory - Low impedance is preferable in VIC Coils
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 06, 2012, 18:49:16 pm
If you look at the information we have about Stans vic, it looks like the inducters are in a self resonance. From my tests, the water cap only has a small effect

To an extent I agree.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low impedance is preferable in VIC Coils
Post by: Login to see usernames on October 08, 2012, 05:37:55 am
I have been able to confirm in simulation that low impedance coils are required in the VIC to achieve high voltage charge at resonance when using a blocking diode in the circuit.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low impedance is preferable in VIC Coils
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 17, 2013, 06:13:36 am
Timeshell,
  Can you post your simulator circuit?  What type of voltages are you getting in the resonant part of the circuit? (as multiples of the incoming voltage).
My read on it (a la Tesla), was that the impedance from the coil pushes the current out of phase from the voltage, so it holds the current up, and then releases it.  Meanwhile, the capacitor charged up with voltage completely, and when the current starts coming in, the voltage is coming out...  With a ping pong effect.

  All a lower impedance will do is change the resonant frequency (making it a higher frequency).  Although, if the inductors are too strong, there is a potential backlash effect whereby the capacitors plates could be taking opposite charges (I saw this on the scope today, testing a new inductor that was an order of magnitude too strong for the little capacitor).

Kirk Out!
Title: Re: Theory - Low impedance is preferable in VIC Coils
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 17, 2013, 14:18:16 pm
Timeshell,
  Can you post your simulator circuit?  What type of voltages are you getting in the resonant part of the circuit? (as multiples of the incoming voltage).
My read on it (a la Tesla), was that the impedance from the coil pushes the current out of phase from the voltage, so it holds the current up, and then releases it.  Meanwhile, the capacitor charged up with voltage completely, and when the current starts coming in, the voltage is coming out...  With a ping pong effect.

  All a lower impedance will do is change the resonant frequency (making it a higher frequency).  Although, if the inductors are too strong, there is a potential backlash effect whereby the capacitors plates could be taking opposite charges (I saw this on the scope today, testing a new inductor that was an order of magnitude too strong for the little capacitor).

Kirk Out!

I went back to my previous notes and communications with Seiler and realize I may have made an error.   I am adjusting my posts throughout this topic to reflect corrections today.   Essentially, it's not the impedance that is the concern but the resistance that is.   The resistance of the water cell vs the coils is far more important.  If the water cannot push back on the coils resistance, you can't have a voltage buildup.  I will post an excerpt of an email conversation with him about this, which includes my failed attempt when I used a coil with too high a resistance.

Quote
From: Timeshell
Sent: Sat, 11/13/2010 6:53pm
To: Charles Seiler
Subject: RE: High Voltage Electrolysis

Incidentally, the impedence on the transformer is 600 ohms on the primary and secondary and tertiary (not presently using).

On Nov 14, 2010, at 23:57, "Charles Seiler" wrote:

To answer your question, yes, I did try smaller wire. I have a coil with 66 ohms on the primary and secondary and it won't even charge batteries, although it resonates nicely and puts out a crisp 400 volts with only 12 volts input. But it never was much use after weeks of constant experimenting.

On 11/14/10 10:39 AM, Charles Seiler wrote:
I would recommend scraping what you have and buying some wire spools from ebay. My latest charger works better than any others. It is the one with the clear CD case cover. It is a spool of 4 strands of 23 gauge wire, and 1 27 gauge trigger wire, all wound paralell to eachother on a spool. I don't know how many turns are on it, but I would start with 200. This charger works better than any, and boils batteries easily. It produces the same amount of hydrogen with much less power input.

So, as per above, I wound a new multi-stranded coil designed to minimize resistance and then I had success with his setup.   I don't believe his setup is what Meyers had in mind, but I believe it works on the same principle.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 17, 2013, 22:57:41 pm
Timeshell,
  This brings up an interesting point of discussion.  As far as I understand.  The High Voltage is driven by resonance, nothing else.  Not the water, type of water, etc.
The performance of the cell (making HHO) is related to using REALLY HIGH voltage (again, opinion), but along the lines of Tesla and our power distribution system.
They use HIGH Voltage NOT for nothing, but for efficiency.  The resistance drops significantly.  Losses are reduced.

  So, the thought of adding a resistor FEELS wrong to me.  Doing this requires EVEN HIGH voltage to get where you are going.

  Now, thinner wires, tighter coupling/winding of transformers.  These things FEEL right to me.

  Then there is IMPEDANCE, which is a bit difference then regular resistance.  And this is where my knowledge ends.

  High Voltage, Proper Frequency (resonance), and non alternate plate charges in the capacitor (although, something FEELS off when I think of this, and try to visualize a pendulum 1/2 swinging, but I have no proof)  This is what I am studying.

Kirk Out!
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 18, 2013, 00:25:39 am
So, the thought of adding a resistor FEELS wrong to me.  Doing this requires EVEN HIGH voltage to get where you are going.

  Now, thinner wires, tighter coupling/winding of transformers.  These things FEEL right to me.


Who said anything about adding resistors?  If you are referring to the resistor in parallel with the cap, that is because a water cell is a lossy cap.  It's to represent the losses in a water cell.

Thin wire is used for high voltage only because high voltage usually means low current.  Thicker wires are for the benefit of current not voltage.  If you are not using high current, it is self defeating to use thick wire since it is much more expensive.

Also please  refer to http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,2527.msg24468.html#msg24468 for details on resistance and inductors/high voltage.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 18, 2013, 03:14:59 am
Have another question...   applying signals to each electrode seperatley, is this in fact what we are doing and if so.. i would like to  also understand how that could possibly allow one or the other electrode to see its respective electrode as a high impedance as in referance to the last section of this page:

http://www.timedomaincvd.com/CVD_Fundamentals/plasmas/Cap_parameters.html
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 18, 2013, 03:52:39 am
Have another question...   applying signals to each electrode seperatley, is this in fact what we are doing and if so.. i would like to  also understand how that could possibly allow one or the other electrode to see its respective electrode as a high impedance as in referance to the last section of this page:

http://www.timedomaincvd.com/CVD_Fundamentals/plasmas/Cap_parameters.html

Does capacitive plasmas apply to our context?

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 18, 2013, 05:16:13 am
Have another question...   applying signals to each electrode seperatley, is this in fact what we are doing and if so.. i would like to  also understand how that could possibly allow one or the other electrode to see its respective electrode as a high impedance as in referance to the last section of this page:

http://www.timedomaincvd.com/CVD_Fundamentals/plasmas/Cap_parameters.html

Does capacitive plasmas apply to our context?




TS

mY Bad...   nevermind that ?
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 07:46:15 am
I just wanna jump in this thread to mention that all Stan's research is based on the concept and testing that can be found in the documents "Electrically Induced Explosions in Water" which can be found here on my website http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip (http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip)

Basically it says the cell has a very low resistance, usually less than 10 ohms. From what I can tell, they are charging the inductors and then allowing the stored energy to discharge into the cell.

Another thing you can also say is that the Secondary is in Parallel with the cell, but the Inductors are in Series with the cell...kinda like a series-parallel circuit.
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 13:49:49 pm
to Tonywoodside.

i back to read birth of new tech book again,i found good things in wfc hydrogen gas management system.

about delrin, constant voltage across cell, pulse frequency, gate frequency, resonant of water molecule, longitudinal wave ,resonant action, ionization ,insulated housing ... etc. i never read it clearly,fast read and not interesting cause that is advance(i just need to know a basic).we must read it again!!!!

- about electrostatic filter assembly unit(440,figure 3-45)=purify water to delrin wfc.notice that pure water only to process resonant action in resonant cavity. read in section;Impurity Extraction Process!!!!!

Do you know about this part??
http://open-source-energy.org/forum/attachment.php?aid=3194

thanks
geenee
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 16:39:53 pm
I just wanna jump in this thread to mention that all Stan's research is based on the concept and testing that can be found in the documents "Electrically Induced Explosions in Water" which can be found here on my website http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip (http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip)

Basically is says the cell has a very low resistance, usually less than 10 ohms. From What I can tell, they are charging the inductors and then allowing the stored energy to discharge into the cell.

Another thing you can also say is that the Secondary is in Parallel with the cell, but the Inductors are in Series with the cell...kinda like a series-parallel circuit.

The cell being low resistance should be very difficult to charge then unless its resistance is enough to hold the charge back between the cell and the choke.    We want the choke to push the charge to the cell but we want the cell to hold as much of it as possible without it leaking across since, as we understand, the point is to use the voltage potential, not current, to cause the breakdown reaction.   But every test so far indicates that current is absolutely required to make this work. 

I'm getting frustrated. 

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 20:31:16 pm
Yes TS,i also think that first you need a bit curent and then minimize it with tuning.I saw this on my miny vic,Stan also say this....see att.
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 20:38:29 pm
Yea you have to have some current in the system to make the magnetic field in the coils. Like I've said before in other posts on here, the resonance looks to be taking place between the two inductors and the cell has very little significance. I haven't yet got this to take place with the 5 coil VIC Transformer, but I have had success with this taking place with the 8XA circuit and bifilar chokes.
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 21:33:48 pm
Like I've said before in other posts on here, the resonance looks to be taking place between the two inductors and the cell has very little significance.

I generally agree fom my own experience.  The cap seems to have some influence but seems mostly determined by the coils.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 22:15:20 pm
Yea you have to have some current in the system to make the magnetic field in the coils.

Up until now, I have had a small ammeter inline between the choke and the cap.  Except for one occasion for me which I have not been able to replicate, usually the gas production is directly related to the current to the cell.  My ammeter goes from 0 to 50 mA.   At 10mA and less I usually have a slight trickle, at 20mA I have a gentle stream, at 40mA I have a steady stream (all when the circuit is locked in resonance).  But I get nothing like I would get if I put straight DC at 1A on the cell.

Tony, the PDF you just linked to say they experimented with 4 gauge wire with fairly low turns around a 6" pipe as a primary in one instance.  Have you tried a coil with such large wire and diameter?  How wood this function differently from using 22 gauge around a 2" core?

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 03, 2013, 22:57:22 pm
Yea you have to have some current in the system to make the magnetic field in the coils. Like I've said before in other posts on here, the resonance looks to be taking place between the two inductors and the cell has very little significance. I haven't yet got this to take place with the 5 coil VIC Transformer, but I have had success with this taking place with the 8XA circuit and bifilar chokes.
Yes Tony,i have built a new 5coil vic with 0.1mm wire for all coils,i too was not able to get it to work.But a mini injector coil  vic seems to be working.I put a lightbulb in series with the primary,to see the curent draw.At first i got 3v across the cell(lightbulb was bright on the primary)when I twiched the freq the voltage rise to 7v and the light intensity droped to barely an orange filament,and production increased prior to 7v strait dc.A very strange thing i noticed though...i get over 1000v out of the secoundary on all frequencies ranges...although my tr.has a 1:3 ratio between pr.and sec.,with12v pulsing at the primary.The voltage was tested with a multim.which was maxed out,then i put a small neon bulb which lit....Could someone explain?...Thanks!!!
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 04, 2013, 08:02:19 am
I just wanna jump in this thread to mention that all Stan's research is based on the concept and testing that can be found in the documents "Electrically Induced Explosions in Water" which can be found here on my website http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip (http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip)

Basically it says the cell has a very low resistance, usually less than 10 ohms. From what I can tell, they are charging the inductors and then allowing the stored energy to discharge into the cell.

Another thing you can also say is that the Secondary is in Parallel with the cell, but the Inductors are in Series with the cell...kinda like a series-parallel circuit.

Tony
In pdf You mentioned they are charged 2 microfarad capacitor to 1-10 kV and then discharged it thru 38 microhenries inductor into a water column, not like You said '' they are charging the inductors and then allowing the stored energy to discharge into the cell."  It is unlike as in Stans vic - there is not other capacitor , only water capacitor.
andy
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 04, 2013, 20:20:56 pm
If you discharge a capacitor thru a coil what is the instant current? zero right? because all the emf will be at the inductor.

If the inductor is charged instead current is at maximum...

...
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 05, 2013, 20:54:12 pm
Hy TS ,i'v done some testing with thiner wire on the chokes,i got the hv with the cell unconected,but when i conect it the voltage droped to 3v.So 0.4mm chokes=10v---03mm chokes=3v=your theory works.Thicker chokes acts like a capacitor when conecting the cell,it is not leting the voltage to drop very much,it oposes  the cell with more strenth..Cheers!!
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 05, 2013, 21:05:27 pm
Hy TS ,i'v done some testing with thiner wire on the chokes,i got the hv with the cell unconected,but when i conect it the voltage droped to 3v.So 0.4mm chokes=10v---03mm chokes=3v=your theory works.Thicker chokes acts like a capacitor when conecting the cell,it is not leting the voltage to drop very much,it oposes  the cell with more strenth..Cheers!!

Excellent verification adys15!!   But more specifically, the WFC becomes more able to exercise resistance against the choke, the choke having less resistance due to higher surface area (skin effect) allowing a greater voltage potential to become established. 

I'm assuming you did the same number of turns with a similar core in both cases.  Also, did you try reversing polarities on the chokes?  I find that sometimes you'll get different results just by reversing the wires.

Thanks!!

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 05, 2013, 23:39:06 pm

Quote
Excellent verification adys15!!   But more specifically, the WFC becomes more able to exercise resistance against the choke, the choke having less resistance due to higher surface area (skin effect) allowing a greater voltage potential to become established. 

I'm assuming you did the same number of turns with a similar core in both cases.  Also, did you try reversing polarities on the chokes?  I find that sometimes you'll get different results just by reversing the wires.

Thanks!!

TS
Yea,a lot of bif winding by hand today... i used the same core wounded just end to end(it is a mini multicoil vic).I usualy hook the chokes out of phase.i tried in phase but it draws more curent from primary and it loses voltage a bit...The thin wire chokes i did not try them in phase...I put even a larger wire size 0.8mm,but acted worse like 0.4mm(the diference with 0.8 is that was on top of the secoundary,and the 0.4was  stuck to the core...then on top primary,,and last layer secoundary...)I also tried bif chokes from speaker wire and got beter voltage..18v...I still dont get why i get over 1000v out of the secoundary on all freq ranges.More setups tomorow...
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 06, 2013, 00:21:48 am

Quote
Excellent verification adys15!!   But more specifically, the WFC becomes more able to exercise resistance against the choke, the choke having less resistance due to higher surface area (skin effect) allowing a greater voltage potential to become established. 

I'm assuming you did the same number of turns with a similar core in both cases.  Also, did you try reversing polarities on the chokes?  I find that sometimes you'll get different results just by reversing the wires.

Thanks!!

TS
Yea,a lot of bif winding by hand today... i used the same core wounded just end to end(it is a mini multicoil vic).I usualy hook the chokes out of phase.i tried in phase but it draws more curent from primary and it loses voltage a bit...The thin wire chokes i did not try them in phase...I put even a larger wire size 0.8mm,but acted worse like 0.4mm(the diference with 0.8 is that was on top of the secoundary,and the 0.4was  stuck to the core...then on top primary,,and last layer secoundary...)I also tried bif chokes from speaker wire and got beter voltage..18v...I still dont get why i get over 1000v out of the secoundary on all freq ranges.More setups tomorow...

My experience suggests the coil layering is important also.   The primary should always be on top of the secondary for the best power transfer.  Not sure whether secondary is better over chokes or not or if it even matters.  I'm also not experienced with the concepts of mutual induction.  Speaker wire can be even better as the multiple strand provides more surface area, again skin effect.  I haven't tried that large a variation of wire types yet, but I'm very pleased to hear your results.  I think I may try using house wire 16gauge for a couple chokes just to see what happens.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 06, 2013, 00:28:49 am
Incidentally, I must state that this theory did not originate with me.  Although I have it in my list as I've been mulling how it applies to Meyers circuit, I became aware of it through Charles Seiler (aka supermuble).  Credit where credit due.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 06, 2013, 00:43:56 am
Quote
My experience suggests the coil layering is important also.   The primary should always be on top of the secondary for the best power transfer. 
TS
I did not try that, Stan had the primary between the sec and chokes,and i think that is more eficient because the 2 layers are pulsed'' 2 at once...Thanks fot sharing your thoughts.Cheers!
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 06, 2013, 01:08:01 am
Quote
My experience suggests the coil layering is important also.   The primary should always be on top of the secondary for the best power transfer. 
TS
I did not try that, Stan had the primary between the sec and chokes,and i think that is more eficient because the 2 layers are pulsed'' 2 at once...Thanks fot sharing your thoughts.Cheers!

If you're doing the same core as him, I would agree.  I'm winding all around same bobbin with air core.  Less resistance that way.

TS
Title: Theory
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 06, 2013, 02:43:18 am
For a given applied voltage smaller inductances will provide more energy per discharge or greater frequency to be applied...

The step charging effect occurs because same charge per collapse is applied to a charging capacitor which changes the time of the discharge as its charged causing step increasing potential to be applied ...


The current is restricted because its limited to the current available in chokes and distributed capacitance...
Title: Re: FACT - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CONFIRMED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on February 09, 2013, 20:56:10 pm
2013-02-09:  I have measured the resistance of all the coils I have made to date and can confirm that the only ones I have had any measure of success with have a very low resistance value.  This along with adys15 results leads me to conclude that this is a fact.
http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,2426.msg24546.html#msg24546

My lower resistance chokes had a value usually of 8 ohm or less.  My chokes with higher resistance were as high as 125k ohm and did not function well at all (ie. little to no gas produced).

Charles Seiler in the past had indicated to me that a resistance of 4 to 6 ohm was ideal for use with his circuit.  I had tried a 400 ohm with his circuit which did not work.   When I made my own with very low resistance it worked.

TS
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 15:30:43 pm
I just wanna jump in this thread to mention that all Stan's research is based on the concept and testing that can be found in the documents "Electrically Induced Explosions in Water" which can be found here on my website http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip (http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip)

Basically it says the cell has a very low resistance, usually less than 10 ohms. From what I can tell, they are charging the inductors and then allowing the stored energy to discharge into the cell.

Another thing you can also say is that the Secondary is in Parallel with the cell, but the Inductors are in Series with the cell...kinda like a series-parallel circuit.

New information on this.  According to Gpssonar, we find the resistance of the water cell simply using V=IR.  In my case, my entire water cell is 480ohm.

This changes everything posted in this thread.  Low impedance coils are not the answer.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 16:20:03 pm
TS i can have depending on water many resistances ranging from 10ohm to 40kohm

how does it tell you that the resistance of the coil would change anything?

i´m testing  a theory that tells me that if stan restricted the amps using the coils only as a field source the way to go would actually as he himself describe on the new zealand (design a bigger one as needed) bigger means bigger... higher length and or thickness..

For my mechanical analysis of the problem.. if the cell is a capacitor it is a spring.. the coil is the mass...

voltage is the pressure and current the displacement in this problem...



Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 16:33:56 pm
I measure the resistance of the water in the cell with straight DC and calculate actual resistance using V=IR according to Ronnie's instruction.

Then, impedance match the coils to be equal to the water resistance of a single cell.  Remember the transmission line?

I will only refer to information that Ronnie has made public.  But even as he said, he has given enough information now for people who know what is going on to be able to do it.  My own work hasn't deviated much from the direction of Ronnie's and I have made adjustments to mine based on what I have learned from his information.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 17:01:59 pm
i have tried some of this matching resistance stuf.. .but seriously i do not believe totally into this part... or at least it is not the all story... how about the turn count?

this is not what stan describes at first glance at least i can add a variable resistor any time in a circuit to match the impedance the question is match what to what? and even more critical why?

reformulating why the coil resistance and cell dc resistance is so important if we want to restric the amps  this only mean to me that the same power would be dissipated on either side no?

there are many ways the coils can be arranged... i tried many i got up to 50kv going to the isolated bath...
not a bubble on very pure water

if air has dielectric breadown of 3kvmm water molecules is in the order of  250kv/mm ... on very pure water the electrostatic field that holds the ions in the matrix is around 25kv/mm

wish i could understand



Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 17:15:13 pm
I don't worry about the turn count.  I overwind the coils past the approximate resistance zone, mainly based on coil weight.  I then measure the coils inductance and tune them to each side of the cap.  Of course I have an idea of the number of turns and sizes of the coils.  The resistance of each coil should still be in the zone of the water resistance.  If the coils and wc reactance is tuned to be the same on both sides at a given frequency they will cancel out at resonance leaving pure ohmic resistance.  When properly impedance matched you have maximum power transfer.  Resistors just create heat and should be avoided if possible.

It's useful to have a spreadsheet to lay this all out for you.

I agree that there are many ways to arrange this.  However, the principles are still mostly the same.  If you don't design it correctly it simply won't work.

This obviously isn't the whole story.  Ronnie has given a lot of tips lately at OSE.  You should read up on them again.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 17:19:15 pm
how you wound your coils? separate bobins?

i have this bobbins with 29awg but they dont fit the core all the coils at thesame time... i have primary secondary c1 and c2 made in different ways.... i can get primary and c2 on a core and l2 and c1 on other core..

i wound them to spec trying to make even different diameters of the coil cavity and it was very impossible to get acount of the turns..

untill i decided to wind a fixed number of turns on each layer and leave spaces on the sides.. this way they dont fit well at all...

working on oil they stand the voltages i meant

i have to give a new try now with more equipment maybe i can find something else intersting in all this...
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 17:22:20 pm
Separate cores as I describe in http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,2946.msg27332.html#msg27332 based on Ronnie's direction.

I use bobbin I redesigned based on a design from Ronnie and printed out:

http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1023349
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 17:31:18 pm
nice design... whats the dielectric breakdown of the material you printed it up?

i have this coils

also i made a secondary with a 1 inch inside hole so ican fit the primary inside it before the nucleus.. actually i did two like this..with teflon wire..

the problem being the primary willhave high leakage inductance.. being in separate leg...

the only coupled energy to the other coil in this case is thru the core..

in my last test i found that the primary leakagen and magnetizing inductance can be nulified if the primary iswound over the secondary instead of bellow

and this is the reason most high voltage transfomers has the primary around the secondary like the car transformer...
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 17:38:14 pm
Don't know dielectric breakdown of the bobbin plastic, PLA plastic.  Not sure that's important though.

I can't stress enough the importance of matching the coils to the WC, both for reactance and impedance.  Ronnie says the primary needs to be 10ohm.  I haven't figured out why yet, but looking at your 18 turn 14 gauge wire, I know that will be so little resistance that it doesn't come close.  And Ronnie just reminded us recently that the impedance ratio on Stan's coils was 1:10.  Not that it has to be that, but it give an idea of Stan's setup since we know the resistance of his coils and therefore also know the resistance of his WC.

Gotta piece all these things together.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 17:55:37 pm
thats 18awg.. should go ok  with up to 16 amps before fuse.... hhehe

i havent figured it either...

do you know about relaxation?
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 18:06:23 pm
Yah, but the thing is, you should never ever need that much current.  Ronnie has been reluctant to comment on whether someone else's configuration should or shouldn't work and rightfully so as he realizes he doesn't know what other configurations could work and what calculations others have done.  I have tried to maintain a similar attitude.  That being said, and yes I can be blunt in the way I say it, I think you're trying too hard to throw power at this thing to force it to give you the voltages you're looking for.

When a coil goes to discharge when it doesn't have a constant current flowing through it, it will try to discharge as quickly as possible.  It may have been charged with only, let's say for example, 20V.  But if the current wasn't flowing or stopped for whatever reason once it was charged, it will discharge with thousands of volts in an instant with minimal current.  This is the trick with the VIC.  Not just trying to step up the voltage with the turns ratio.  It's stopping the current via properly connecting the coils so that their mutual inductance opposes each other and through resonance so that the coils discharge instantaneously.

I'm probably not explaining this accurately in its application in the VIC.  But I have enough experience with my own experiments to see these effects.

Not sure what you mean about "relaxation".
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 18:52:02 pm
Yes man that a good posture to take when we are dealing with science... respect is a base... me too prefere to suport instead of distort someone thoughts.. .

yes your are totaly corrent in that a coil will discharge to the most highvoltage if the current stops...this is my point with my vic... i want the secondary to charge the cell and chokes capacitance during pulse on but on the pulse off collapse the chokes capacitance sums with the chokes voltage on the discharge...

the correct way of seeing is that a coil will develp a current and this current wont like to stop.. so it will jump acrosswhatever resistor you pull into it but the time of this discharge will be so as fast as it is the L/R ratio
Title: Re: Theory - Low Resistance is Preferable in VIC Coils [CORRECTED]
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 19:23:30 pm
I just wanna jump in this thread to mention that all Stan's research is based on the concept and testing that can be found in the documents "Electrically Induced Explosions in Water" which can be found here on my website http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip (http://www.globalkast.com/docs/Electrically_Induced_Explosions_in_Water.zip)

Basically it says the cell has a very low resistance, usually less than 10 ohms. From what I can tell, they are charging the inductors and then allowing the stored energy to discharge into the cell.

Another thing you can also say is that the Secondary is in Parallel with the cell, but the Inductors are in Series with the cell...kinda like a series-parallel circuit.

New information on this.  According to Gpssonar, we find the resistance of the water cell simply using V=IR.  In my case, my entire water cell is 480ohm.

This changes everything posted in this thread.  Low impedance coils are not the answer.

Okay, and what is the applied dc voltage, 1, 6, 12,  24, 1kV to measure 480ohms at your cell?

~webmug
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 19:26:27 pm
I measure the resistance of the water in the cell with straight DC and calculate actual resistance using V=IR according to Ronnie's instruction.

Then, impedance match the coils to be equal to the water resistance of a single cell.  Remember the transmission line?

I will only refer to information that Ronnie has made public.  But even as he said, he has given enough information now for people who know what is going on to be able to do it.  My own work hasn't deviated much from the direction of Ronnie's and I have made adjustments to mine based on what I have learned from his information.

There isn't enough information, on how the Re of 78.54 (23dC) is applied in the formula using the 4 inch WFC dimension.

~webmug
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 19:28:12 pm
in my case i did my vic to have the secondary to charge the cell and chokes to 600vapplying 10v or so but when the field collapse the 600v of the chokes parasite capacitance will sum with the collapse field of the chokes and discharge into the cell

iwill try other ways too but this seems to be doing the frequency doubling isnt it?.


webmug pugling this on coax impedance give a low impedance for the small cell coax

Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 19:35:49 pm
If the coils and wc reactance is tuned to be the same on both sides at a given frequency they will cancel out at resonance leaving pure ohmic resistance.

Wrong! The coils impedance is the Zt and are the reactances where the voltage is produced and not cancel out both side leaving pure ohmic resistance. Total impedance Z is the reactance plus the pure coils Resistance. The same voltage is applied from both chokes connected opposite in polarities B+,B- to the Array.

~webmug
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 21:27:00 pm
If the coils and wc reactance is tuned to be the same on both sides at a given frequency they will cancel out at resonance leaving pure ohmic resistance.

Wrong! The coils impedance is the Zt and are the reactances where the voltage is produced and not cancel out both side leaving pure ohmic resistance. Total impedance Z is the reactance plus the pure coils Resistance. The same voltage is applied from both chokes connected opposite in polarities B+,B- to the Array.

~webmug

Trust me when I say there is no hope for them as the ditch they managed to climb into is too deep for them to get out of.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 22:24:04 pm
I measure the resistance of the water in the cell with straight DC and calculate actual resistance using V=IR according to Ronnie's instruction.

Then, impedance match the coils to be equal to the water resistance of a single cell.  Remember the transmission line?

I will only refer to information that Ronnie has made public.  But even as he said, he has given enough information now for people who know what is going on to be able to do it.  My own work hasn't deviated much from the direction of Ronnie's and I have made adjustments to mine based on what I have learned from his information.

There isn't enough information, on how the Re of 78.54 (23dC) is applied in the formula using the 4 inch WFC dimension.

~webmug

What do you mean not enough information?  The formula is in Stan's documents.  My WC isn't 78.54ohm although it appears Stan's was.

The specific applied voltage is irrelevant.  The formula V=IR still applies.  The voltage and current will have specific values when measured.  The only element missing is resistance which can be calculated on the formula.  If you must know, my current was 0.025mA and my voltage was 12V when I took the measurement.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 22:29:15 pm
If the coils and wc reactance is tuned to be the same on both sides at a given frequency they will cancel out at resonance leaving pure ohmic resistance.

Wrong! The coils impedance is the Zt and are the reactances where the voltage is produced and not cancel out both side leaving pure ohmic resistance. Total impedance Z is the reactance plus the pure coils Resistance. The same voltage is applied from both chokes connected opposite in polarities B+,B- to the Array.

~webmug
Trust me when I say there is no hope for them as the ditch they managed to climb into is too deep for them to get out of.

Webmug: I agree I didn't word it properly.  Explaining technicals correctly has never been my strength.  No argument.

TGS: Hmmm.  I guess we will see.  :)

Just trying to help.  I guess I won't anymore.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 22:38:10 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resonance

At resonance, the series impedance of the two elements is at a minimum and the parallel impedance is at maximum.

Ergo, at resonance we are left with the ohmic resistance of the water and wire.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 22:56:11 pm
this is absolutely correct... but is also true that if you have the reactance = to the resistance you have a critically dumped system not resonance..

this is one thing that is also plausible... as we cancell the resonance the vic would be able to apply any frequency to water without impedance changing with frequency...
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 23:43:12 pm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resonance

At resonance, the series impedance of the two elements is at a minimum and the parallel impedance is at maximum.

Ergo, at resonance we are left with the ohmic resistance of the water and wire.

Wrong, again! Impedance is maximum so is voltage!

Hint: Meyers VIC restricts current E=IZ
http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-6/q-and-bandwidth-resonant-circuit/

~webmug
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 15, 2016, 23:54:05 pm
I measure the resistance of the water in the cell with straight DC and calculate actual resistance using V=IR according to Ronnie's instruction.

Then, impedance match the coils to be equal to the water resistance of a single cell.  Remember the transmission line?

I will only refer to information that Ronnie has made public.  But even as he said, he has given enough information now for people who know what is going on to be able to do it.  My own work hasn't deviated much from the direction of Ronnie's and I have made adjustments to mine based on what I have learned from his information.

There isn't enough information, on how the Re of 78.54 (23dC) is applied in the formula using the 4 inch WFC dimension.

~webmug

What do you mean not enough information?  The formula is in Stan's documents.  My WC isn't 78.54ohm although it appears Stan's was.

The specific applied voltage is irrelevant.  The formula V=IR still applies.  The voltage and current will have specific values when measured.  The only element missing is resistance which can be calculated on the formula.  If you must know, my current was 0.025mA and my voltage was 12V when I took the measurement.

So why isnt your wfc 78.45 ohms? Did you build it with the same specs as meyer (resonance cell)?

If you have build it like meyer, you see its not 78.54 ohms...

~webmug
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 16, 2016, 00:27:45 am
It's not to same spec as Meyer obviously.  I've adjusted my parameters accordingly.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 16, 2016, 00:44:34 am
Obviously, having been away from this research for a few months, I'm a little rusty.  So, I think I'll just shut up for a bit and review my notes.

Thank you for adjusting my thinking.
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 16, 2016, 03:02:57 am
Obviously, having been away from this research for a few months, I'm a little rusty.  So, I think I'll just shut up for a bit and review my notes.

Thank you for adjusting my thinking.

Your very talented guy hope you make some time to help us solve the puzzle..

i will post soon some moreinfo on my coils with higher resistance..  scopeshots and all..

lets hope good with it
Title: Re: Reactance/Resistance/Impedance VIC Coils - Correction 2016-01-14
Post by: Login to see usernames on January 16, 2016, 11:44:28 am
I think my last comment may have been misinterpreted.  I was not intending to demonstrate hostility or frustration towards anyone.  I was just acknowledging my faded memory and stepping back.

Despite what I may have said in error, anyone looking at my past research should know I have a very good grasp of how things work.  My present circumstance prevent me from keeping up with my research as much as I'd like and my present health is affecting my mental stamina.

I have presented information based on my experiments and documented much of it here in my threads.  I know where my understanding stands and know where it is going.  Stan's tech is within my reach very soon.