Recent Posts

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »
71
J. Miller / Re: Stanley A Meyer Deercreek Seminar Video Full by
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 10, 2024, 20:15:19 pm »
Hi Jim.

Altrought is more of the same, thank you and the people who make it public.

I am wonder if there will be somewhere in the world any video made by Stan or someone else on resonant cavity working...  ::)


More of the same? In what other video out there does he describe Resonant Action? That video is pure gold, where he describes what's actually going on in the cavity as well as advanced EPG design concepts. We posted it because the world needed to hear it.

I found that when you do exactly what Stan said to do, you get results.
72
J. Miller / Re: Stanley A Meyer Deercreek Seminar Video Full by
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 10, 2024, 19:23:56 pm »
Hi Jim.

Altrought is more of the same, thank you and the people who make it public.

I am wonder if there will be somewhere in the world any video made by Stan or someone else on resonant cavity working...  ::)
73
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 10, 2024, 15:06:25 pm »
Because of what I just said I keep saying Stanley tricked all into thinking a simple transformer would do anything to water

I’m not saying he was bad or anything as I stated before he did it to protect the technology and did so well

74
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 10, 2024, 14:47:55 pm »
I found a problem that would impede the system to work

If we load the resonant coils with a variable Z the resonant frequency will vary so if water get in tune for example it would get instant out of tune so fast we could not even see it

Seems like resistors could be the best way to have a stable frequency of the fields

While seems still a good idea to load the coil to the dc source clamoring it so than driving them with higher voltage directly since the q will be low thru all range

Another way though was to add a coil in parallel with the resonant coils but with a lower voltage than theirs so it act as a load but helps generate even more magnetic field

I noticed that at this point voltages become relatively high

And makes sense a Vic having 2 high voltage instead of two low voltage like I was planing to do

I mean for driving the resonance and not the dc

Those for the dc are as I explained recently for the feedback to be useable


75
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 10, 2024, 09:41:26 am »
I had to made a 3d printed guide to correctly roll the capacitors with more precision

In the mean while the greatest conclusion I got is that the best way to load the resonant tank is to give some of its power back to the input dc souce!

In this way instead of burning 100w on a resistor I get the juice back to the dc power supply effectively reducing the consumed power to some extent

We can even do it electronically by making a switch controled by the lock in signal

It could set a different voltage level based on that too

The idea is that when the tank is loaded we have a higher range of tuning although it would consume more power but with this feedback technic we can actually do the same without burning up power

To do the secondary could make power flow thru the dc before going to the cell or add a secondary with the dc supply voltage when resonance is to reach its half point for example than it would keep limiting the Q above that voltage

Again this is needed because the Q of the coils is indeed very high so we get a band of only some 100hz

Loading it could get useable up to 1khz band around center frequency of resonance

Just some ideas

Having more resistance on the coils would make all this become heat

I think this idea of charging back to lower the Q is simply genius!

But it also is good for helping maintaining the resonance under control by limiting its maximum voltage

Making the Q lower will make the impedance higher requiring a higher input voltage this mean more power is in use

But in this way after all is coming from itself recycling by the circuit so it should not matter more than the increased loss

Anyway this will be much more efficient than dissipating on a resistor as I’m pointing

Basicaly it allow to apply whatever frequency without the problem of resonance hahah

Resonance and feedback is generally something you don’t want on coils and everywhere










76
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 10, 2024, 01:12:29 am »
 I measured the coils in parallel and it gave 22,9 mh

I hope I can start the tests tonight

Still something’s to do but I’m positive about it
77
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 09, 2024, 20:29:04 pm »
I found that the variable resistor will be useful to broad the range of the resonance by simply consuming more power and raising the impedance of the resonance

May have around 49k to  499kohm  in parallel with the chokes to consume some watts

This will require a higher turn ratio on the secondaries driving it to keep the same fields of course

After it’s matched will be easy to simply take it out

The secondary loading it also is a good idea however may not be enough

This secondary can also partetipaye on the tuning by adding capacitance to it too and than using the variable inductor connected to it

So from this simulation you see how simple it is to get the pll to tune we just need the scanning circuit to be off from 180degrees lock range and also make the filter and lock in capacitor such that it will show lock only at the required frequency

From this seems the pll actually don’t follow up the frequency in any way it simply locks and when it’s unlock it scan again and lock again to it


To get any let’s say active locking and tracking to maintain the resonance than the ultrasonic sensor need to kick in when it’s locked!


This can be done with simple circuits to combine or switch

After all this sensor is useless until high energy is in the cavity so makes all the sense to me



78
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 09, 2024, 18:56:01 pm »
I found that for calculating the resonant frequency is actually 22mh that is the sum of the coils in parallel with the 16,25mh mutual inductance between them

I got this aproxima-te value from the simulation and tried to figure out what is happening

This is very non intuitive now

Or we can place the capacitor and calculate with only one inductor and apply the coupling factor to the frequency out

Seems it has 88% of the calculated frequency seems could be related

The formula I did for roled capacitors goes like

Length of copper is = d*c / eo* er * width * k * 2

The 2 comes from the fact that they are rolled so the capacitances add on each side considering all full turns

If they are not full tll the end you can still calculate with adjusting this 2 factor excluding the last layer and the portion of the first layer that don’t complete the turn

This will be very small percentage however

To find the correct capacitor for resonance at a specific frequency once you have the inductance I made this formula

C = 1 /  4 * pi^2 * F^2 * L

You can also find L substituting if you know C

This is the easy way to do it


79
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 09, 2024, 14:26:06 pm »
I made a small piece of stainless steel out of a tube and made it very sharp on one side

Than I made at  the outer tube end a small cut to fit the sharp side of the stainless steel metal

The cell will than be pressed and it will be the connection to the outer tube

I’m 3d printing a holder that will avoid the conduction out of the desired location I may glue the metal in it and it will have a 5mm stainless steel screw holding it and make the electrical conector for the output

The inner electrode is simpler

Anyway the big concern is to not alow it leak water

So probably I may need to glue it on

The problem is that it need to be easy for changing the tube inside so I can test different setups

So I may have to solder it





80
Sebosfato / Re: My new approach
« Last post by Login to see usernames on June 09, 2024, 10:04:00 am »
So you are really waiting me to show a video of it working?

Who is there reading? Introduce yourself !
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 »