Tube cell reloaded

[Login to see usernames]

set up the meyer / naudin circuit again. this time using distilled water without further insulation, capacity is fairly good though. 300-500V peak come out of the transformer, works fine.
the problem is again, no voltage at the cap (not more than 2.4V of that 500V peak!), even at relatively low 20kHz. used a 3,6k resistor in series for charging the cap and also reducing current further. current on the high side is then around 90mA (measured without rms meter so not necessarily correct).
this has got to work somehow, the other problem is that if i replace the wfc with a real capacitor it doesn't charge to 2*Upeak like it should, i don't know what i'm doing wrong.

[Login to see usernames]

set up the meyer / naudin circuit again. this time using distilled water without further insulation, capacity is fairly good though. 300-500V peak come out of the transformer, works fine.
the problem is again, no voltage at the cap (not more than 2.4V of that 500V peak!), even at relatively low 20kHz. used a 3,6k resistor in series for charging the cap and also reducing current further. current on the high side is then around 90mA (measured without rms meter so not necessarily correct).
this has got to work somehow, the other problem is that if i replace the wfc with a real capacitor it doesn't charge to 2*Upeak like it should, i don't know what i'm doing wrong.

Hi haithar,

I had the same issues with the Naudin circuit.
I even had contact with Naudin, but he didnt want to say much about it.
Here is the copy of text of the email about the insulation:


Dans un e-mail daté du 27/06/2008 09:52:48 Paris, Madrid (heure d'été), stevie1001@hotmail.com a écrit :
Does this mean:
1. only the outside of the innertube is insulated with tape?
2. the whole innertube is NOT touching the water at all? Inside and outside insulated?
 
br
Steve
 
Dear Steve,
 
The cathod is FULLY insulated and also its wire connection, this is a stainless steel rod fully covered on all sides with insulation.
 
Sincerely,
Jean-Louis Naudin
Email: jnaudin509@aol.com
Web site : www.jlnlabs.org

[Login to see usernames]

My other email with him:


Re: wfc replication?
Van:  JNaudin509@aol.com 
Verzonden: vrijdag 27 juni 2008 7:00:41
Aan:  stevie1001@hotmail.com

Dans un e-mail daté du 25/06/2008 17:07:43 Paris, Madrid (heure d'été), stevie1001@hotmail.com a écrit :
Dear Jean-Louis Naudin,
 
Over the years, i have been reading your website with lots of interest.
I am bussy with the wfc technic for some years and you made me a happy man with your publication about Stan meyer.
Thank you for publishing your results of the Stan Meyer replication.
I made a topic of this on my forum http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php/topic,459.0.html
I hope you have time to read some of the postings there and maybe you can answer some questions?
We are all very enthousiastic but some are sceptic.
 
I was hoping that you could answer some of the questions:
1. what were the exact numbers of the consumed power and gas production?
2. Is your conclusion that when you raise the voltage to higher levels that production would raise as well?
 
Thanks in advance and
Sincerely yours,
 

Dear Steve ,
 
Thank you very much for your comments and for your interest in my WFC experiment published in my web site. The current test report about the WFC is a only preliminary test report to explore the feasibility and the working of the Meyer's device on the lab test bench.
 
I have published on June 26 all the technical details (diagram and size) about the current WFC cell under tests and some additional datas about the transformer that I have used at : http://jnaudin.free.fr/wfc/index.htm
 
I have also added some links about Ravi Raju and Dave Lawton WFC replications at the bottom of the WFC Project page.
 
You will find also there experimental data results at : http://www.liberationtechnology.co.uk/wfcdata.htm
 
Today I am convinced that the Stanley Meyer's WFC works as he claims, I am now working on a new WFC reactor v2 and on the new electronic circuit based on my latest measurements published in my web site. The new setup will allow me to do measurements about the gaz flow at the WFC output.
 
Stay tuned, I shall soon post some news and updates...
 
Sincerely,
Cordialement,
Jean-Louis Naudin
Email: jnaudin509@aol.com
Web site : www.jlnlabs.org

[Login to see usernames]

maybe you should try something similair like this:

Instead of SCR, use a FET.

http://teslahv.com/DC%20Resonant.htm

[Login to see usernames]

where's the difference to the stan meyer circuit / dc tesla coil circuit? it doesn't work because you have to short out the cap first to "charge" the coil and then connect both in series to get 2*Ud onto the capacitor. That's what the richie burnett circuit does with the spark gap, it shorts the cap when the spark gap fires so the coil can get the magnetic field and then the cap is charged with Ud + Magnetic Field voltage. At least that's my own explanation and the only one i could make why it does not work.


anyway, i blew my last hv mosfet because i forgot the flyback diode, not good at 300V. now i'll have to order new ones, so i'm delayed another week. the 30 seconds everything was working gas was created, but also 1A current. Higher frequency -> lower current, but also higher voltage spikes which blew the mosfet.

[Login to see usernames]

where's the difference to the stan meyer circuit / dc tesla coil circuit? it doesn't work because you have to short out the cap first to "charge" the coil and then connect both in series to get 2*Ud onto the capacitor. That's what the richie burnett circuit does with the spark gap, it shorts the cap when the spark gap fires so the coil can get the magnetic field and then the cap is charged with Ud + Magnetic Field voltage. At least that's my own explanation and the only one i could make why it does not work.


anyway, i blew my last hv mosfet because i forgot the flyback diode, not good at 300V. now i'll have to order new ones, so i'm delayed another week. the 30 seconds everything was working gas was created, but also 1A current. Higher frequency -> lower current, but also higher voltage spikes which blew the mosfet.

Now you are getting there, Haithar.
In our simulators you must add a resistor in parallel with the cap for make it leaking.
In real time, your wfc will leak. Thats why you need a parallel setup of tubes.

To make you feel good:
I also blew up 2 FETS and 2 very expensive diodes....argggg

Maybe a small tip. In powersupllys from computers you can find many usable components.......

Steve

[Login to see usernames]

when you gate the pulses, will that not let the cell drain off as if it was shorted? i think the gating is an important thing to think about, he will pulse it a few times, then gate it as soon as the voltage peaks... or the cap is charged... what do you guys think?

[Login to see usernames]

when you gate the pulses, will that not let the cell drain off as if it was shorted? i think the gating is an important thing to think about, he will pulse it a few times, then gate it as soon as the voltage peaks... or the cap is charged... what do you guys think?

most of the charge / voltage will drain off, yes. probably to save power, probably to give the gas time to leave the bath, who knows