### Stanley Meyer Understanding Vic 2020

Some of the latest

Key Points of this page are on the final Vic flay core  Versions 6 +

The information is priceless

do your best to save all of it immediately in a word doc and upload pdfs

I think we should replicate Stan's stuff as close as possible, but in order to really understand it we'll have to do some things differently.

Something interesting-In Stan's WO patent he states primary voltage is adjusted from 0-12V. His PLL drive circuit also has the variable voltage.
Do the math and you'll see that at 1V to the primary you'll only be using 95mW of power. If you can produce gas at that power level then you've really got something.

Are you convinced one A.R. VIC can power a 10 WFC load? Or do we need more A.R.VICs. How are they connected?
According to GPSsonar, he has 20kV output of the transformer, question is, was it unloaded or with a load and from where was that signal measured?

I use the flat core and measure 250Vpp from the secondary coil, (PGen 12Vdc, 0.01A) if the diode and the chokes are added the voltage almost triples, measured at the pos and neg terminals...but still no load. If this is balanced equal but opposite voltage amplitude on a load it must do something with it...

there can't flow current...(only static voltage)... one WFC is a flatliner... two could do better...added equal cell surface areas etc. (even number)

gpssonar has taken his voltage measurement at points D & A (webmug notation). So there is no information about the voltage between D & E. I requested that information (D & E) from gps but did not get an answer.

Just out of curiosity, are people using differential probes to take these measurements?

If not, then wherever they connect the ground lead from the scope,

they are adding a significant capacitance to the circuit,

just like a top-load on a Tesla coil.

there is a significant difference between following the rules of the scientific method (1) and layman´s work (2):

(2) throws in some inconsistent information like an appetizer or a commercial to raise interest of open minded people.
(1) gives a brief and complete description of the whole setting, creates a model and compares results against the model.

of course (1) is the only way to go if the community wants to create results not derived by chance but it needs a minimum of education and discipline and willingness to create comparable results.

otherwise activities are turning in endless circles at fluffy niveau - a situation that can be noticed for many years now ...

Take a look at this simulation:

finally got this fixed...

have a look: RARE  SAVE IT

Russ

Coil Tests

This File is large may not open in browser or ap this is a normal thingp with out download

any issue email Dan

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AqxyHUVb2_mlj_tsTuagDrq4KBg-8A?e=WsDc2T

Webmug

Here is my graph of the 5 coils C-core VIC transformer using all the exact values of the air coils from 100Hz to 10kHz from Dynodon excel sheet.

This is what my impedance analyser measured with only one WFC attached with rain water in it. I did a scan from 10kHz to 30kHz.

I give you measurements of two core materials used in this transformer and you can see what is happening with the frequencies and the impedances. Remember Stan was using a lower perm core without airgap, so his frequency is much higher!!!

Now the main question is why this thing has high impedances on frequencies where the WFC capacitance can never have LC resonance between positive coil and WFC capacitance because my wfc is too high in capacitance?

And the chokes have high impedance on the same frequency.

But the resonance takes place at 14.4kHz and 16.7kHz so the cell has about 64-80pF instead of 1.1nF what I measured?

Also the chokes impedance peaks are unequal in heights, so there is something missing. If you adjust the Rp (primary parallel resistor) you can adjust the peak heights of the impedances, never the frequency!

My thoughts:
This has to do with using only one WFC instead of the series WFC array and or using multiple VICs...

Coil tests very accurate

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AqxyHUVb2_mlkIxaRraALGReXva9TA?e=c8WvCW

IF you down load this Take the Time to forward to universities

#### Relay Triggered VIC'S 10 Vic  Parallel

There are other simple version 9xb 9xa which work fine for care and much better than using salts.  as show in VOLTROLYSIS ASSEMBLY VERSION MAP . HERE

SO WHY PURSUE THIS COMPLICATED ONE ?

This version 6 + of Flat core vic was to be the best maximum efficiency for making BULK

nano bubble water fuel and or GTNT gas for example prior to filling a car or on demand water fuel filling.

These water fuel format can go direct into a injector

If nano bubbles are in the water you can fill up with water  with nano bubbles init which can last up to 2 years and or be made on demand back into the water .

So yes we are going to and have gone to  great lengths to master this and teach it .

#### The current through any branch of a parallel circuit will be less than the total circuit current.

So perhaps the first C-core transformer positive choke output connected to the second C-core transformer negative choke output balances the impedances.

If we use multiple WFC in series (Exciter Array), we think Meyer had ten cells series connected, he needed ten C-core transformers to get the voltage needed to do the EPP. (1000V to 1500V per cell). My idea is that he had ten transformers running at the same frequency but all had their own driver circuit connected in series. (C-core VIC voltages adds in series)

### The Equipment

I searched for a cheap solution measuring impedances for a long time and found an Evaluation Kit with this tiny chip:AD5933:  1 MSPS, 12 Bit Impedance Converter Network Analyzer :)Here is the link with all the information: link

### ImpedanceMeasurement

My thoughts:
I tried to match the chokes impedance, but I think it's "impossible" to match them with only one C-core VIC transformer. Still not sure yet!

But looking at the graph we see the choke impedance on the same scale, but as you can see they have not equal resistance at the same frequency.

If we put Meyers theory to a test and want to match the impedance to restrict our current to the WFC then we need to balance the impedance with adding equal amount to both chokes?

#### Here is the link with all the information:

How to input to simulation software using

a highly variable water cap?

By using a known cap as a substitute for the cell, the secondary inductance could be estimated by monitoring the current on the primary by pulsing a fairly low voltage there in order not to brake the cap.

The frequency at hand would be found at the minimum primary current and the secondary inductance could then be derived by the formula F = 1 / SQRT (L x C).

After that then the cell capacitance could also be estimated using the same modus operandi by pulsing low primary voltage and check for the lowest primary current.

Same formula would then give the C part of it all.

I agree that the chokes need to be matched to get equal but opposite polarity.

As for the equipment of Stan's, when I had it here, my observations of how it was hooked up, was as follows.

• There were ten vic cards and coils.

• There were ten outputs to the ten tube sets

• The VIC control panel had ten outputs meant to go to the cell.

• All the signals from the ten VIC circuits went out ten different pins to the cell.

• So that tells me he originally made it to be one VIC to one tube set.

If all the VIC circuits were meant to be tied together,

it would have made sense to do it inside the control panel and not outside going into the cell.

When I first saw the cell wired in series, that through me for a loop.

My thoughts were that something had changed and he or someone else rewired it.

As anyone knows, in series, the tubes share to voltage between them,

so yes, like you said we need 1kv-1.5kv per tube total.

So for ten tubes in series, we would need 10kv-15kv input to the cell.

One thought that I have on this subject is, seeing how all the tubes are in the same bath of water,

maybe the voltage applied to the tubes all add to the water to give us a total equaling the applied voltage. Say we send 1kv to a ten tube cell, we would have 100 volts across each tube, but maybe the ten tubes will all add together to see 1kv across the water, since their all in the same water bath.

That's something I ponder.

I checked out the link, but it's not something I will be looking at, at this time.
Don

UPDATE: I did some more impedance measurements on the VIC transformer.

More thoughts:
Looking at it makes me wonder if the total impedance with a type of water as load, has to shift to the maximum impedance of the VIC transformer resonant frequency where the chokes have maximum impedance or the other direction.

Meaning the VIC is too low in resonance frequency for one WFC as load.
Where the maximum impedance is on 17.8Khz, but the chokes are on 15.7kHz, somehow this needs to shift...?

Maybe lowering the inductances of the VIC coils to get higher frequency or change the WFC capacitance (not an option, I have only one cell)!

The single cell with

• Tap water was LCR measured at 10kHz and has 3.3nF         18ohms.

• Distilled water LCR measured  at 10kHz and has 1.28nF      105ohms.

The true capacitance is lower on 17.8kHz where the impedance is maximum in the graph!

So there is a impedance difference using different types of water in the WFC.

If I short the VIC chokes (always dead short condition, even with cell attached) we compare both frequencies of the chokes impedances and the total impedance, needs to be on the same frequency. This total impedance is changed by the resistance and the capacitance of the WFC.

Both impedances of the chokes also needs to be the same to get the equal but opposite polarity voltage amplitudes.

Webmug, what you are finding out here, may be the reason why Ronnie Walker says we need to build the chokes to match the cell. He also claims that it can't be done with only one tube set

Instead of quoting impedance, if you start explaining as resistance, inductive reactance, capacitive reactance separately, and then quote the impedance, you should be on top of this.

it is a dielectric setup, use the impedance differences between coils for step charging, impedance matching for resonance network and capacitance for dielectric discharge.

NOTE for chart Above

for understanding the methods and thinking path

One thing I notice is how high the impedance values are at resonance. Their in the millions, is that right?

One of the first graphs you measured the cell with tap water and distilled. They appear to be @ 1khz apart. This to me would be a problem for tuning if we don't stay with the exact same water when refilling the cell. So if it is important that we tune into impedance matching, this is a problem.

So saying that, do we need to match impedance values in ohms, or just the frequency that gives us the maximum impedance. I think trying to get the same impedance numbers for all components would be impossible. Getting all components impedance at the same frequency is possible, if we don't use different forms of water.

The impedance is matched to the cells and the resistance (Re) also depends on the type of water and water number of gaps and gap sizes. Resistance (Re) is also affected by the temperature of the water.

#### VALID CORECT COIL TEST

This is the impedance map of my VIC transformer with Dynodon's coil measurements from the excel file.
I tried to get the air-inductances the same as measured in the sheet.

Frequency sweep was from 10k to 30kHz.

Note:
My cores are not the same what Stan had, so the frequencies are off. Right now my coils on a core have higher inductances, but all the coil relations are the same. Core material types are in the attachments. I tested two cores.

VIC was connected at one WFC with rainwater in it.

Update:
Scope graph, no WFC attached!
yellow trace CH1 is between secondary and negative choke and positive choke output,
blue trace CH2 is between secondary and negative choke and negative choke output,
purple CH1+CH2.

Differences in type of cores.

Russ

Coil Tests

This File is large may not open in browser or ap this is a normal thingp with out download

any issue email Dan

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AqxyHUVb2_mlj_tsTuagDrq4KBg-8A?e=WsDc2T

Webmug

Coil tests very accurate

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AqxyHUVb2_mlkIxaRraALGReXva9TA?e=c8WvCW

IF you down load this Take the Time to forward to universities

Ronnie Walker says we need to build the chokes to match the cell.

He also claims that it can't be done with only one tube set.

Here it is. There are 512 data points from the impedance analyser scanned from 10kHz to 30kHz.

Webmug

Coil tests very accurate

https://1drv.ms/x/s!AqxyHUVb2_mlkIxaRraALGReXva9TA?e=c8WvCW

Yes, the inductances of the secondary and the negative choke are in series,

but are magnetic opposing (C core back to back), we want current restriction.

So if both voltage amplitudes are equal but opposite from each other there is maximum current restriction! Yes?

{Lt = (L secondary + L choke negative - 2M) = L choke positive} You need to know the core material, because this changes the Mutual inductance between the coils.

That's why I build a couple of coils first with more and less turns and found a good match with the inductances.

And guess what, all the coils resonate on one frequency simultaneous. That's why a feedback coil can work and pickup the voltage phase from the swinging magnetic field in the core through all the coils and compare it with the primary gated/pulses.

I grabbed a couple of scope shots today and want to make a new diagram how the signals look with the new approach.

When looking at my signals I noticed my secondary frequency is a little off resonance so it has not the maximum voltage amplitude so I need to tune I a little more... It's pretty difficult to get the coils to match.

Now the most difficult part is when we want to connect the WFC... The resonance frequency is found from choke positive inductance and wfc capacitance (plate). We can't tune on one frequency if the plates are different, my understanding, then it has a different charge (voltage) at the plates. And the resistance, not sure yet.

============================

MUTUAL inductance calculation
a) { L choke positive = (L secondary + L choke negative - 2*M) } opposing configuration

The calculation of the total inductance Lt,cc [choke coils] from the TB:

b) { Lt,cc = (L choke positive+ L choke negative + 2*M) } aiding configuration
M=k*sqrt(L choke positive* L choke negative)

This means that the inductance of both Chokes in series with the WFC in between, has the aiding configuration and has higher inductance than the secondary.

• The secondary frequency divided by 2,

• The diode (half wave rectifier),

• But the chokes frequency is a frequency doubler.

• The secondary has opposing configuration and lower inductance.

Example:

secondary frequency 16kHz --> 8kHz chokes

the negative choke creates a double frequency (phase shifted 180 degrees) of the positive choke.

The frequency is calculated from the WFC capacitance and the Lt,cc inductance(b)

so you can calculate the secondary inductance (a) (frequency times 2).

Primary, feedback, secondary, positive choke and negative choke are all in synchronization.

i post two screenshots of the input output signals at the VIC transformer. Here i wanted to generate the resonance frequency signal on the VIC core (all in sync with the coils). This signal is continuous with a minimum voltage offset then picked up from the feedback coil. It is the main target frequency that the VIC transformer is resonating on.

In the gated offset voltage (higher voltage pulses) we see the stepping (charging of the choke) with higher output voltage. This would charge the WFC series array with little current (because all is on resonance).

The blue scope trace is the output signal from the VIC transformer. The signal may never go under arbitrary “lowest voltage potential ground” voltage level and is always unipolar pulsed.
The scope shots are 3 years old and improvements are needed/made on the used pulsing circuit. This stuff will eventually be digital controlled.

Have a great day and keep building and testing Meyer tech!

### Air in the Gap

I was reading Patent 4,394,230 today and he shows the spike that was in video figure 6A in stage discussion.

It occurred when open circuit condition was created by removing water from between plates.  In the stages he talks about the conditioning step that Stanley also references.where water conditioning step.

Interesting he states there are very little bubbles even though gas is being generated and that process stops (Stanley was interested in the ionized gas!)  He also states that increasing power did not cause gas generation to restart.

Reversing plate voltage did and also vibration did but that caused voltage spikes.

I also wondered if relaxing time (t3) would allow cycle to be restarted?  It this works it might explain the 11 cells in the car so always one or more cells are outputting gas while other are recycling.  Note: In patent he states not all stages he lists are required.

Some of Stanley's Patent and his Birth of New Technology, Puharich's Patent 4,394,230 and both of Ronnie long threads and several of the other threads.

Having done that in a very short period of time I see a lot of similarities between Puharich's Patent and what Stanley is doing.

To me it appears Puharich discovery process in his medical work and patented it.

He even states this in one of his documents.  He approached it from a science point of view and had tools most experimenters do not microscopes, spectrums analyzers, and access people to looks at the physic of process.

In his 7 phases he describes what is going on in each phase and it appears he has no problem repeating things and even points out where process hangs up.

As this is not much use in medical field I think we just moved on to other things as states only 70 to 80 percent effective.  I guessing this is where Stanley started is experiments because he had a problem he wanted to solve.

One of things I got out watch his video's and his documents Stanley is more of engineer (so am I) we take a different view we state a problem then try to figure out solve it.

Puharich  in patent provide several key things.

1) Process to split H2O into gas by his method works

2) show steps to do that (AM and FM modulations in certain frequencies ranges)

3) Event talks how to combine and frequency ranges to use

4) showed a cell design that works (reminds of Stan's injector)

5) documented problems with his system working i.e. gas cells stick to walls

6) process as described is only 70-80 % efficient

I guessing Stanley looked at this process as he was looking for another source of energy.

It, is 70-80 percent efficient can I make it better

Having read the about documents and trying to figure what I needed to do to get involved I decides I need to know a couple of things.
1) How to solve the  impedance of the VIC system

(not my favor things even when I studied this in college)

even started my own spread sheet in excel to help solve equations

(stop when I realized I needed to know more).

20 More about coils etc. (good coverage in threads (lot of good people)

3) The timing of they "system" I wanted to know how AM and FM signal were put together and phased and how the voltage steps where created but also WHEN the voltage steps were applied as both Puharich and Stanley state their is a conditioning step that "must" be satisfied before moving to next steps.

In the two threads WATER FUEL CELL Technical Brief and Understanding How Stan Meyers Fuel Cell Works, Ronnie and others have provided a wealth of information.

The work that Ronnie has done just amazes me he duplicated in lot a whys what Stanley did approach it from a systems approach and answer the question what do I need to do to make it

### Zooming in

The key to amp restriction is the waveform as there must be an equal amount of negative and positive voltage which one can see on the oscilloscope.

This is where I find most people don't know how to actually use their oscilloscopes or even interpret the readings their oscilloscopes are showing them.

This is the part of physics most people either don't know or failed to pay attention to while in college level physics classes. Here is a video that goes over how to find out the total work done: [size=78%]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q3Cw6dzSZ0[/size]

In this simple video he goes over what to do with negative areas under the curve.

This applies to what is being shown on the oscilloscope as positive reading indicate current flowing through the system. Negative reading means it took energy from the system so if with one pulse the positive and negative pulses are equal the total energy flowing through the system is zero for that pulse.

Then Meyer set up a series of pulses each will put both negative and positive pulses to the water fuel capacitor and again if those energy are equal in their voltages the net energy that flows through the water bath is zero.

I got it really close to zero as the voltage of the positive pulses was around 5 volts more than the negative voltages. So the total work, or in our case current flow, is dependent on the how well one can get the negative and positive voltages to be equal.

The area under the curve shown on the oscilloscopes shows the current that is flowing through the system be it negative or positive readings and one must know how to interpret these readings.

This is why when people say that my waveforms are incorrect I know they simply just don't understand how to make sense of this technology as they just don't have enough education under their belts to be trying to solve this technology.

For they don't understand for every one pulse sent to the VIC transformer you get two pulses in return one being negative and the other being positive in that order as that is how Meyer set up the transformer in the voltage intensifier circuit.

Since the current is being canceled out with a balanced waveform the only thing left to do work is voltage.

Those people showing you their wave forms with nothing but positive areas above the zero line are pushing current through the water bath as that is physics and if you can get them to take temperature readings over time you will find out that the water bath heats up depending on how much current they are flowing through the water bath.

However they know this and will more than likely refuse to take temperature readings over time as that doesn't square up with what witnesses to Meyer's technology say about setup as it ran for over an hour while they observed it.

These eye witnesses tell the water temperature did not change like it should have done if it was standard electrolysis taking place and know you all should have an idea why.

A Word of Caution interpreting the scope shots shown here

To make gas bubbles you must have a DC hitting cell  if you read over the total pages here you will see that depending on where you connect your scope you will see ac bounce

keep in mind the best place to read cell is ether side of cell.

the follow scope shots where done by Ed, and put here to let you read and connect the dots

they show some of the interpretation but not all the lower part of this page must be read about lmd and other areas to fully grasp the dc  balanced sign DC than and only than will you be close enough to hit  air gap bubbles water and gas all at the same moment.

READ on and ENJOY YOUR NEW Water FUEL KNOWLEDGE GOD KNOWS THE NUMBER OF MEN AND MAN HOURS PUT IN TO HAVE THIS  PAGE HERE FOR YOU SAVE IT SHARE IT TEACH IT

### 10  What does it mean

If this is the current passed through the cell, then the area is the number

of kulons passed in one or the other direction.

Correct, and in physics it's known as the ability to do work. Thus if you see someone with a waveform that is only positive they are doing pulsed DC electrolysis and might as well do what everyone else does to make Faraday style electrolysis work better

. But in Meyer's work the waveform is to be balanced with both positive and negative voltages being equal so in this way the work done to perform normal electrolysis simply isn't there as the two areas cancel each other out. In my experiments I have gotten the current down to just 0.3 mA which Meyer calls "Amp Leakage."

This is how voltage can now do work as in this way a very high voltage potential difference can be place on the plates of the WFC which is basically mimicking a thunderstorm in nature.

In the first photo is of Max Millers waveform and the second From Ed another builder where we compare

Things to note we both have the circuit hooked up the same way with the only difference being Max has just two cells hooked up in series and Ed has  ten cells hooked up in series.

Basically he over loaded the transformer and as a result it was not able to charge the negative voltage and all of that positive energy went through the water bath.

Now in the last two drawings each vertical line represents one pulse sent to the transformer with a total of five pulses sent to the transformer.

When it is hooked up correctly it always puts a negative voltage ahead of the positive voltage and if the two are equal no current flows through the water bath. But there is always a little energy left over at the end that will pass through the water bath as shown in the last drawing.

Can you see just how important that question is now?

A Builder with a Working Cell

1) he stated that Stan's had said smaller cell's were better never said why
2.) In his discussion on independence balancing he showed why ten cell helped as it added more resistance
3) In conditioning discussion he talked about not using all the available power - start creating bubbles to late is bad (said should start around 2 volts and not enter full gas production until near 12 volts)  resistance of the cells will be a factor in this

The procedure is actually pretty straightforward:  Low voltage, center tune, up the voltage a tiny bit, center tune and so on until you finally have it precisely dialed in.  Once dialed in, you can power up to full voltage from a cold start and it should run.

As you can see from Max's and Ed's  waveform when the waveform is right ,

it cancels out the current

as I have the reading to prove it and if you pay close attention to Max's video

you can see heat waves being generated as the current is flowing through the water.

It's just as Meyer stated in the New Zealand video that the current is canceled out by magnetic fields.

The oscilloscope allows us to see the action and verify everything mathematically. In physics these are just work summation problems adding up all the energies and for each pulse sent to the VIC transformer two pulses come out be it one negative and the other positive and as long as they are close to equal there will be little to no current flowing through the water bath as the sum of the energies is zero.

#### Skills of the Art

Now that its taking shape and it is explained how to actually read and interpret things the oscilloscope shows one can clearly see that these wave forms are pushing current(NOT GOOD) through the water bath as after all the oscilloscope is just a tool to aid us in seeing what is actually going on.

That last waveform is actually correct but the transformer was over loaded which is from Max Miller and again you can clearly see he is pushing amps through the water bath as he just max the dial to show it goes to infinity or until parts pop which they did LOL

SPECIAL NOTE be aware if you push up amps you move from cold voltage to arc voltage  which can spark use caution as you enter the next section where you make gas and high voltage and fuels/

# Working Builder 1

that's the time base the scope is set for not the frequency.

But yes 19.2kv

Stan said up to 20,000 volts, I am as close as I'm going to get with this VIC.
A Sperm Wave, that is a good name for it Matt,

I think I will adopt it. LOL if you don't mind.

Hv probe from positive of the cell back to the neg of the choke

where the secondary ties together with the neg.

the applied voltage which is 14 volts @ .01 to .02 mamps

Here it is the whole 20,000 volts. As Matt put it "The Sperm Wave"

The oscilloscope is trying to measure two frequencies on one channel (pulse and gate) which it cannot do. That frequency of 485Hz is not the pulse or gate frequency, its more like an average.

NOTE

The reason why pulse and gating can´t be displayed there is that pulse and gating are not synchronized. so they are always Floating against each other and the first and last pulse get cut off more or less. that´s not precise.

But I don´t agree, there are several ways to measure that configuration with gating:

1. if you use a digital scope press "freeze" and you always get a precise momentary scope shot
2. if you use a digital scope use alternate Trigger and feed in pulse to one channel and Trigger to the other channel, then display the mix
3. use the trigger output of your pulse generator and you always get stable scope shots.

PGen TEST pulse Generator serves a trigger output for each of it´s four channels.

But it´s a unique feature you won´t find somewhere else

SO IT SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO ALL 2020 and beyond as a important feature

for tuning and training

Example

If Stanley used a 1.1mm gap on his cell the outer tube and the inner tube would have about a 6% difference in size.

L1 and L2. are about 6% different in size if you use Dons numbers.
Im thinking the cell might need to be impedance matched to the coils like

GPS said a long time ago.Correct all the way.. My initial belief was that L2 was smaller so that the electric fields would be equal since each electrode has a different area.

Since the wfc is connected in series the cells do not have the same polarity. On one cell the outer electrode will be positive, but on the very next cell the outer electrode will be negative.

IMO the different sized chokes are not used to maintain an equal electric field at each electrode.

RE Image Above

Is the input Freq 485Hz?

I used Dons Specs about 1.2H and my Vic tuned in at about 16-19 Khz.

I got the same from my simulation. In order to get this thing to run at 485Hz I think I would need about 10H on each coil.

looks close to 10khz, (pulse) gate is way different

• Each division is 500us

• so if each division was a pulse, they would be 2khz.

• But there is 5 pulses in one division,

• This makes it 5 pulses x 2khz =10khz

The other number is measuring some thing else. (Look at the cursors)
I did some cool calculations and that should be true,

The calculation,

2.18ms = 458.72 hz

So  we are looking like just over 10khz
10,666.7hz

There are 16pulses in 1500us

If  correct ,

just asking my self if it's half that? As it needs to be a full cycle.
If it's half it's 5,333.335hz

# Working Builder 2

Special thanks to Russ Gries and Alex G[s Webmug and others in the

Open Source Science community

That core bring up the inductance very fast!!! :D

I was thinking out loud: have you been testing the self-resonance of a coil on the core?
I think it's important to test, how far off the coils are with the total resonance frequency. If they get Mutual inductance on the core we can see what has changed. Subtracting or adding inductances. If this frequency is in phase with all the coils.

My opinion is that Choke1 and Choke2 inductances are divided --> A=1/(1/choke1 + 1/choke2) so then the secondary inductance factor becomes 1=(A/B) = (B/A) and needs to be equal -->B=1/(1/Sec + 1/Choke2) those have almost the same values! Balance the coils.

Just a wild guess... please correct me if I'm wrong and I will modify!!! Just learning...

I'm still thinking through this with you...  that's deep...
but it makes since.

i will say i did some tests with moving the inductors to the same core and the secondary and primary to another. i did not see any real change. as if it dose not madder..

don't forget that what Alex was seeing was a fluke in having a another meter in the circuit...

don't forget that what Alex was seeing was a fluke in having a another meter in the circuit..

That is exactly why you can not get 1 3 5 7 9  cells to work, they have to be paired in two's. (2 4 6 8 10) ect. (1 3 5 7 9) will not work.

Now flat cells are completely different they can be made to have the same surface area on each plate. On the round cells, when you reverse you leads when measuring the capacitance the meter should read the same capacitance either way with 2 cell or a even number of cells.

But when you have odd number of cells you will get a different capacitance reading when you reverse your leads on the cell. And if you do have a different reading it's because your cells and cell housing and caps are not machined to close tolerances.

The closer you are to having the same capacitance when reversing your leads, the better off you will be when trying to match up your coils to your cells

I see Gpssonar saying the same thing in several places, matching the coils to the cells.

He also mentions that its better to build the coils around the cell, because building the cell for coils is difficult.

In these statements what is the thing he is seeing or measuring in the cells, which is used in building the coils.

I see in builders thread everyone talking about the coil resonance. but Gpssonar seems to be stressing more on the cell than the coils.

Does any one else see it that way.

of course the cell is the reactor because here the ionization producing the monatomic ions takes place. so all other parts of the circuit are drivers and regulators for that process.

pulse generation, resonance, impedance tuning etc. are all dependent drivers for the effect in the cell we are looking for.no he is saying don't design the cell around your coils. its to difficult.

he is not saying resonance is not a factor. it is a factor. it is the only reason it works at all. Gps Did say this...

(The positive choke will resonate with the cell as long as the reactances of the coil and cell cancel each other out. The negative choke is smaller because it is below the resonate frequency and will limit current.)Stan even stated that yes the cell and L1 are the LC circuit. indicated by a diagram in the tech brief. now this LC is just all dependent on the frequency.i think this is the ezy part...

============

the other cols are where it gets tricky. theses have to " do there job" something im still pondering over but me and alex explain what we think " there job" is in our video / blog Post.

Pulse Generation - short burst of energy into the circuit, nothing special

no but... a sharp on or of dose help a lot!

impedance matching - matching of resistance between i/p and o/p so that max energy transfer happens, may be something but in our case nothing special

this is EXTREMELY important !!!!  this allow for maxim power transfer!!!!

impedance tuning - is it making sure that all the coils in the network have the same inductance, why? shooting for a common resonance frequency. What is the point?

i'm thinning you mean something else here... but tuning is needed. not for the same inductance but for a balance of all coils to do there " job"

when we say resonance, is it coil resonance frequency,core magnetic resonance or DC resonance step charging - what is it?

might be all of them...

I guess GPS 2 core setup should give an idea now, coil resonance frequency or magnetic resonance is not important for him. Although they are a beauty and mystery on its own.
Its the step charging that is important, he wants to increase the charge with step charging logic, doesn't want to negate the charge with BEMF or something like that, so the 2 cores aids him to some extend, but thats not a killer thing, because even in 1 core you could get the same voltage increase, ask Ed.  We can also ask Russ on how much significant difference it makes when he switch inductors across cores? there shouldn't be much. if what i say is true then here also nothing special

i found switching the coils around to not have to much effect at all. but one way is better than another according to our theory.  now 2 cores is less effective IMO but could be easier  to tune. on the other hand the single core is best but much harder to tune.

I want to learn and i really don't want to sound arrogant, so please with all kindness read my post with a humble sound :)

humble is good :)

Now if some one can explain the energy/current flow in the VIC using old school's style, where current flows from -ve to +ve
and then prove me that all that i marked as nothing special is wrong and there is something special. I will really appreciate your kindness in setting my thought process straight.

Where does the -ve start and where does the +ve end in the single core circuit and 2 core circuit. To me its just an infinity circuit. there is always a continuous flow of energy, as long as the nature induces something in the circuit to do so. Alex Petty  could answer that, with his recent experiment.

Lots of misinformation, hope and wish you guys nail this.

you did see this post yes? i have never seen anyone else explain it quite like this...

webmug, interesting thoughts.. i did some calculations but did not get the same out put. can you do the math and show mw that there the same? i was off ( 73.81mH to 96.44mH)

OK so close but not all there... mabet i need to adjust it till it dose match.

but there are still some problems. there needs to be more calculations done  on this on to p of those... still looking at what.

~Russ

After re-thinking about those calculations my conclusion is that they are wrong! If even number of cells are connected the chokes has to be wound with the same wire length. So the factor is always 1. Why the measurements from dynodon excell sheet have not the 1 factor are a question. looking at one WFC the surfaces have unequal charges so maybe this is why the choke coils had different wire length.

But I still don't know for sure if one WFC can work with one VIC transformer? I think it won't work, because it has too low voltage potential!

### Testing Resistance Note

its just like battery's in series.  you still have both poles,
one way to look at it is that there now a single "capacitor"  so they do have polarity.

if we are looking at this system as tuned circuit then this is going to be extremely important to match everything.
resonance happens when XL and XC are equal. so we must match the secondary to the cells

. ( secondary is XL and cells are XC)

so this means that the chokes are "voltage amplifier's." as well as amp restricting devices

i would think that the chokes would need to be impedance matched to get maxim power transfer and boost voltage/current with in the tuned circuit?

am is way off here? dose this not make scene?
OK here is what i measure when distilled water is filling my cells and there are 6 connected in series,

measuring +on the inner tube and - on the outer tube:     241.6pf
that's with my cheep meter, that's suppose to be more accurate... so that's what im using.

my question is how do we go about impedance matching the cells to the inductors?
whats the calculation?

i would say we use 7500HZ for our frequency and calculate from there?
another question is do we need to calculate the L1 and L2 in to the secondary inductance to do the math correctly? so:
(secondary , L1 , L2) = total xL and all 6 cells = xC  ??? we need xL=xC @ 7500hz

=====================================

Primary 10.5 ohm
you get 10.02 ohms.
Then multiply that by 7, the ratio of the transformer, you get 70.14 ohm
This is the exact resistance of the secondary coil on Don's spec sheet.

So my guess is to add all of the secondary side S1+L1+L2 = 70.1+72.4+76.7 = 219.2
219.2 ohms sure looks close to 220 ohm..

If the cell was 10.5 ohm at 20,000V you might have a balanced impedance match for your high voltage standing wave generator. (VIC)

==============================================================

so my question would be are we trying  to impedance match the primary to the rest of the VIC or are we trying to impedance match the secondary to the capacitor ( cells)

For RF we consider impedances. The condition for imped
ance matching
is that real part of the impedance should be equal to
the real part of the
load and reactance's should be equal and opposite in char
acter. For
example if our source impedance is R + jX to achieve matchin
should be R – jX.
If we assume that we have a chamber with capacitive dischar
ge the
impedance in general will be R – jX. Generator typical
output impedance
is 50 Ohms. Then the matching network has to make 50 = Rl
and jX = 0."

The positive choke will resonate with the cell as long as the reactances of the coil and cell cancel each other out. The negitive choke is smaller because it is below the resonate frequency and will limit current.Take Webmug's advice look into how you can get all the coils to resonate at the same frequency.

#### Separate note

Stan says in the NZ video that the resonance changes as more bubbles in the cell effect the dielectric property but I don't think it will drop close to air because there is still a dielectric path around the bubbles,

I would say it might drop to between 50 and 60 but not down to 2 or 3. If you use a capacitance calculator, a reactance calculator etc then the calculations come out at impossible ranges but I guess we are dealing with unknowns so anything can happen.

Well Nav, I agree that the capacitance wasn't also changing much. If the capacitance would drop down with 2 or 3 dielectric the choke LC is out of range.  Stan had his 5 coiler VIC designed for natural rain water. So the ppm didn't change too much (TB water table). All that changed could be tuned with the range of the scanner electronics.

My conclusion is that the above impedance match is wrong!! Prove me wrong...

~webmug

Everything I have said here has been said in my own personal thread. Good example is what has been discussed here about the dielectric changing from water to gas.

How many times can you go to my thread and other places and show me where i told everyone that you had to start at 2 volts and tune and raise the voltage to 4 volts and tune and so on and so on.

What is this telling you? I will answer it for you, it is telling everyone that i was tuning into the dielectric (properties of water) even Stan told everyone that was what he was doing. I would assume people has no clue what the dielectric properties of water is.

I can't help if people don't have the common since to research about things they know nothing about.

Still wondering how Stan came up with the constant Re=78.54 ohms value. It is correct, he mentioned that value all over the place. Looking at his patent there is an analysis how he did the amp leakage test comparing different configurations to restrict current. In the graph we see different level of voltages and configurations. Also in the table with different types of water we see the Re of 78,54ohm.

So every water capacitor has an Re of 78.54 ohm... ?

Using the minimum gap separation of 1/16 inch we get maximum gas generation with maximum voltage.

I ask this because he said it's the gap separation which determine the operation but does this mean it's always 78.54 ohm no matter the gap separation?

Is this always valid using all kinds of water? The table with water-types states different ppm...
(rainwater 16.1ppm TDS ->25.2microS/cm).

@Ronnie,
I hope Ronnie would answer my question, why you changed the gap spacing in the WFC?
Also using the Impedance Matching Formula, I get a low turn count using the (secondary, chokes and Re) resistance.
Did he used the 1:30 ratio for the secondary only or what?

===============================

Something for you all to think about. On the note of the inductors being different values. One very interesting thing that you should recall in almost all the drawings is that you See a variable inductor on the negative side. Why is it that Stan has a variable inductor in the drawings? Have you ever seen one of his devices with a variable inductor? The answer is no.

The reason for this in my opinion is that if you know how to engineer it to the correct specifications you do not need a variable  inductor. I truly think that he did this to show us people who are trying to replicate it that you need to tune that particular inductor. So basically it's a very simple diagram saying "hey dummy try this and see what happens"

Anyway, just some food for thought.

Keep up the good discussion. We will get there. It's all going to take time. God bless ~Russ

Hi,

If you read the tech brief p3-10 Memo WFC 422 DA about variable inductor coil, he makes it clear why it is tunable. Movable wiper arm fine tunes "resonant action" during pulsing operations. The relationship between them, electrically balances the opposite electrical potential across voltage zone.

Yes, it is not physical tunable with a dial, it has a tuned fixed relationship.

Typical Properties:
Mn-Zn Ferrite
Initial Permeability 1200 Most using 2000 Perm
Maximum Permeability 7500
Saturation Flux Density 5250 Gauss
Remanent Flux Density 2100 Gauss
http://www.cmi-ferrite.com/Products/Materials/data/MN67.pdf
EDIT: http://www.cmi-ferrite.com/Materials/Datasheets/MnZn/MN67%20ISO%20WEB%20DATA.pdf

Custom core can by made with the exact dimensions provided in Dynodon sketches.
The parts will be machined from an iso-pressed block of ferrite.

Minimum order would be 10 pcs.
We need 2 pcs for one VIC unit.

National Magnetic s Group

https://www.cmi-ferrite.com/Materials/'

### High Voltage Probe

6.5 KV probe

but now he´s using a 15 KV DIFFERENTIAL PROBE

probe for actual cell voltage measurements.

potential free measurement. better look for a high voltage potential probe like Ed Mitchell uses. it´s in the \$ hundreds but it works up to 15 KV potential free.

these differential probes are black boxes built for high voltage measurements with integrated HID safety means and they all have a power supply of their own.

their generic function is a resistor array of course but an operation amplifier with differential inputs generates the signal output from differential input. both inputs are floating at a high resistance potential related to scope and/or system ground.

the 6.5 KV probe worked fine up to 9 KV over the cell but we can´t be sure that that works too long and so in the meantime he had to use the 15 KV probe ... and for higher voltages we need it anyway now ...

Another option is DP 30

30kV (peak to peak) 50Mhz differential probe from Pintek at 400€ on this site :
https://www.globalmediapro.com/dp/A2JGB4/Pintek-DP-30K-Differential-Probe-30KV-50MHz/

you'll have to include taxes + customs fares (~140€ for Belgium) to pay at your local post office before receiveing your package ... so that's ~550€ for this probe

Building Probe in a Remote place no money ??

anyone find an active probe that can handle Meyer voltages that is less than \$3k ... ?

The answer is yes, a fluorescent bulb will do the trick with no problems, It will tell you all there is to know if your getting high voltage in the cell or not, it will tell how much voltage your getting into the cell by how bright or dim it is..

It is the Best Cheap Probe on the market and it want ground out the cell either.. You can even stick it in the water bath or outside your cell..still want short it out..

If i remember right it is good down to about 700 or 800 volts and above. It really glows bright at 20KV.

Do we have ideas how to accurate measure low AC current/high voltage

(range 1 - 30mA, 1-50kHz) with a sense resistor (low,high side?) or a sense coil?

I can't find a decent active differential instrumentation amplifier below

100kHz with scope connector signal output.

Meyer states if we adjust our B+,B- voltages we restrict current.

But I think the coils won't have exact current 90 deg out of phase

(LEICIE) if we also have voltage 180 deg out of phase...hmmm Leakage!!

Perhaps both currents wont be equal at all?

We need some low cost DIY toy

(differential current sense instrumentation amplifier)

to measure the B+,B- currents...2 or 3 channels...

https://www.tindie.com/products/LDLabdevice/accurate-high-bandwidth-currente-probe-100ma/ \$\$\$

breakout-pcb?
devkits?

### Accurate High Bandwidth Current  Probe (100mA)

Very accurate (uA) high bandwidth AC/DC current probe (100mA / 10mA range)

Designed by Labdevice in Switzerland

https://www.tindie.com/products/LDLabdevice/accurate-high-bandwidth-currente-probe-100ma/

Very accurate (uA) high bandwidth AC/DC current probe (100mA / 10mA range)

The active differential probe is a high performance, low cost current probe which can be used together with an oscilloscope for precise AC/DC low current profile measurements from the low uA range up to 100mA.

The USB powered current probe is an ideal tool for electronic development where accurate measurements are needed.

It has a switch for two different ranges. This makes it ideal for accurate measurements in a specific range. It also has a switch for bandwidth limitation. This feature can be used for measuring currents in the audio bandwidth or low noise measurements.

The shunt resistor is negligible small. The large output dynamic range makes it possible to read very small current from any standard oscilloscope.

The delivery includes: - Labdevice current Probe - Measurements cables - USB cable

### Where to Probe VIC

the voltages are measured between points D and E (webmug notation).

may i suggest to always note and publish those D-E voltages produced because they are the real stuff looking at the WFC dynamics. of course all other measurement points are also POIs for overall operations dynamics but D-E is where the rubber meets the road ..

May I suggest to design an own resonant frequency simulation so that experiments and forecasts can optimise in steps of iterations.

I re-linked. Tell me if you can see it OK now.
Here too is a version that has a nice time scale with a well balanced charge flow speed:

ps Did say this...

(The positive choke will resonate with the cell as long as the reactances of the coil and cell cancel each other out. The negitive choke is smaller because it is below the resonate frequency and will limit current.)

Looks like the Pos choke must be just the right size to match the cell or were DOA.

If we knew the exact size of L1 we might have a chance at the other 2 coils.
We could try to use the known numbers from the cell and match them to L1?

Note: Just got my SS tubes in and will be making a new cell this week....and thanks Russ for the bobins there great.

so Stan even stated that yes the cell and L1 are the LC circuit. indicated by a diagram in the tech brief. now this LC is just all dependent on the frequency.

i think this is the ezy part...

the other cols are where it gets tricky. theses have to " do there job" something im still pondering over but me and alex explain what we think " there job" is in our video / blog Post.

more testing / information is needed. one day at a time!

================

webmug, interesting thoughts.. i did some calculations but did not get the same out put. can you do the math and show mw that there the same? i was off ( 73.81mH to 96.44mH)

OK so close but not all there... mabet i need to adjust it till it dose match.

but there are still some problems. there needs to be more calculations done  on this on to p of those... still looking at what.

~Russ

After re-thinking about those calculations my conclusion is that they are wrong!

If even number of cells are connected the chokes has to be wound with the same wire length.

So the factor is always

1. Why the measurements from dynodon excell sheet have not the 1 factor are a question.

looking at one WFC the surfaces have unequal charges so maybe this is why the choke coils had different wire length.

But I still don't know for sure if one WFC can work with one VIC transformer? I think it won't work, because it has too low voltage potential!

the design is 10 cells  and than 10 vic in parallel than it works

~webmug

I think the VIC and WFC are very sensitive devices...

For example the WFCs connected in series..(2,4,6,8,10 etc) .

If two exciters are connected in series and the plates are not exactly equal in areas (+-+-) what will happen if you connect equal chokes at both sides?

Same question but different chokes and different plate areas?

So if you connect 10 WFCs in series, then what happens if they do not have equal plate areas? This creates leakage!!!
If we want current restriction all of the areas must be equal and chokes must be equal, or not?
Even the wire lengths are a part of the circuit?

How do we see this with the Injector Design?

Are the areas (anode, cathode) equal in charge?

If the chokes are wound bifilar they must be equal in charge and areas, right?

with the choke 's being even...

but the injector is not the same too. the injector is not really submerged like the WFC resonant cavity? could play a roll?

Maybe the Injectors fired in even pairs or at the same time?

So charge area's where the same?

I did some new VIC tests (trial and error), I cut my 3D printed bobbins to create separate coils and tried coils with different windings on them. I hope this can be useful!!!!

I did find a possible solution trying to match the equal but opposite voltages...no WFC array connected yet!
First I want to solve the Mutual Induction part with all the VIC coils on a core.

I use a LCR meter set on 1kHz test signal;
Connect the Secondary Finish end wire to the LCR probe;
Connect the Secondary Start wire to the Start wire of the Choke2 (negative);
Connect the Finnish end wire choke2- to the other LCR probe.

Measure the L inductance, write this down.

Disconnect the LCR probes;
Connect LCR probes to Choke1+ Start and Finnish wires.

Measure the L inductance, write this down.

Explanation:
Choke2 is opposing the secondary coil, so the Mutual inductance is subtracted from the series connected secondary and choke2 circuit. Lt = L1 + L2 - (2M)

To get he same but opposite voltages from the VIC, the outputs of choke1+ has to be choke2- equal but opposite voltage potentials...
So inductance of the choke1 has to be the same value as the series (secondary + choke2 - 2M) inductances!!!

But there is a catch, when we use a different test frequency (100Hz to 10kHz) those inductance values will change on my LCR meter for reference values so I use one 1kHz only. (there is one freq where inductances are matched, this is also the LC choke1,WFC resonance frequency)

(using a differential HV probe)
I noticed that the secondary coil has the same frequency as the choke1 and choke2!!! If the VIC circuit is all connected, except the WFC and I measure over the secondary coil we see a nice (linear) rising AC voltage. If I measure over the Choke1 it has the same (linear) rising AC voltage but higher amplitude. Choke2 generates the same voltage equal but opposite. Measuring over choke1+ and choke2- generates DC unipolar pulses never go under ground level. I see rising voltage amplitude.

Work in progress, more work is needed connecting the WFC changes the characteristics of the coils. So the LC of choke1 with the WFC is the matching frequency Xl=Xc where the series (secondary and choke2 -2M) has to be resonant with.

~webmug

Webmug, It took me a few rereads before I was able to get at what you were describing. Your saying that because the secondary and the negative choke are in series, their inductance adds together. With that inductance value it should match the inductance of the positive choke, right?
I can see where your going with this. Before we thought that the difference between the size of Stan's choke were to adjust for the difference in the surface area of the tubes. This is another idea that needs some looking into. I will take a look at my readings I made of Stan's coils and compare them to this idea of yours.

======================================

======================================

Yes, the inductances of the secondary and the negative choke are in series,

but are magnetic opposing (C core back to back), we want current restriction.

So if both voltage amplitudes are equal but opposite from each other there is maximum current restriction! Yes? {Lt = (L secondary + L choke negative - 2M) = L choke positive}

You need to know the core material, because this changes the Mutual inductance between the coils. That's why I build a couple of coils first with more and less turns and found a good match with the inductances.

And guess what, all the coils resonate on one frequency simultaneous. That's why a feedback coil can work and pickup the voltage phase from the swinging magnetic field in the core through all the coils and compare it with the primary gated/pulses.

I grabbed a couple of scope shots today and want to make a new diagram how the signals look with the new approach.

When looking at my signals I noticed my secondary frequency is a little off resonance so it has not the maximum voltage amplitude so I need to tune I a little more... It's pretty difficult to get the coils to match.

Now the most difficult part is when we want to connect the WFC... The resonance frequency is found from choke positive inductance and wfc capacitance (plate). We can't tune on one frequency if the plates are different, my understanding, then it has a different charge (voltage) at the plates. And the resistance, not sure yet.

Regards,
~webmug

Webmug, I guess I'm lost when it come to the value of 2M. Where is this value coming from? Can you give me the math of your test. I mean what are the values of the secondary, chokes and 2M so I can see the Lt as an answer.

Also the value of L1 to see the match when done with the calculations.

================

I used my LCR meter set at 1kHz test frequency and measure the (secondary and negative choke) inductance in series connected.

This value is the total Lt inductance. So measuring the two coils separate( L sec) and (L negative choke) it follows the Lt = L sec + L negative choke +/- 2M. The + or - 2M depends on how the coils are connected and configured on a core.

I use a C-core, following Meyers circuit they are oppose each other (negative) correct me if I'm wrong.

Mutual-Inductance
For example I measure 5H over both coils, they are in aiding configuration. And Lsec=1.568H, LnegChoke=1.726H.
Using formula mutual inductance: 5=1.568+1.726 + (aiding) 2M -> M=0.881H.

We want oppose configuration - 2*0.881 gives 1.533H

And the positive choke must have 1.533H to generate equal but opposite voltage amplitude.

M (mutual inductance) depends on core specs and distances of placing the coils on the core. Different coil inductance, changes the M between other coils. So I found it by testing and making different coils more or less windings etc.

I don't know if my diagram is helpful but you can see the voltage waveforms (c,d) and (a,e) and have equal but opposite voltages... I also added an overlay waveform, so you can see the equal but opposite voltages from both chokes.

Update: attachment with the voltage amplitude across the chokes.

~webmug

found a site with the formula you posted and did the math for your setup.
Lt=5H,   Lsec=1.568H,  Lnegchoke=1.726H
Lt= Lsec + Lnegchoke + 2M
Lt= 5H + 1.568H + 1.726H + 2M
2M=Lt - Lsec - Lnegchoke
2M= 5H - 1.568H - 1.726H
2M=1.706H
M= 1.706H/2
M= 0.853H

So your mutual inductance of the secondary coil and the negative choke is 0.853H

That's how to use that formula you posted. 2M is found by subtracting the inductance of the secondary and the negative chokes from the Lt value of 5H.

That gives you 2M and then you divide that by two to get M.

Don

One more point. If the negative choke and secondary coils have a mutual inductance of 5H, shouldn't the positive choke match 5H?

That's what I would expect. Plus your answer for the positive choke is smaller than the negative choke. 1.533H vs 1.726H. The positive should be larger, right?

Don, if you follow the connection circuit diagram you provided on the USB stick, how to connect the coils...

The secondary and negative choke in series are connected so the M mutual inductance is oppose each other...not aiding!

Lt = L sec + L choke neg + ( -2*M ) oppose and not L sec + L choke neg + (2*M) aiding.

If it was in aiding configuration it can never restrict current! My opinion...

~webmug

Yes I looked at the drawings to see how Stan had his, and I see they are opposing. I was just running your numbers that you said were in aiding.

I also went and measured my coils set. In both aiding and opposing mode. In aiding mode my coils measure over 37H. In opposing they measure 986mH.

My negative choke measures 8.65H and the secondary was 6.33H. So I need to figure out what to do with them.

Don, and what is your positive choke?
37 = 8.65 + 6.33 + 2M -> M = 11H. Aiding. Oppose is -7.04H ??? Doesn't look good? You have a k coupling factor of 1.48???? Max=1
k = M / (sqrt(L sec * L neg choke))

Did you disconect all the coils and, then only the sec and neg choke in series, oppose each other?

~webmug

### Notes on Impedence values

Webmug, My positive choke is 9.71H. All the coils were disconnected when I took these measurements.

Only the secondary and negative choke was connected together.

All others were open.

This is an interesting idea, so I'm trying to see where it leads.
Would you care to talk?

I have a Skype account or if you are located in the states we can talk on the phone.
Don

Webmug, took some better readings and my aiding is 29.18H, opposing .989H, neg choke 8.62H, sec 6.31H.
So running the numbers I get an Lm of 7.04H and a K of .955.
I used the Grob book from page 587 to get the answers.
Don

Don, I think the inductances are way too high! Because you can't match the .989H with the positive choke inductance now 9.71H.
You can alter the k coupling if you make a core gap. Just measure the coils again after changing the gap. Just and idea...
When the coils have the right mutual inductances, I found out we can interchange the chokes...positive choke should be bigger in the end.
Also the pick-up and the primary coil have mutual inductance, remember that, so those alter values of the M.

Now what to do on matching the WFC, any ideas??
~webmug

think this is a good example why Meyer used flat cores to adjust the k coupling and match the inductances without a gap between the cores. Because the coils are positioned opposite adjacent to each other (space between them) on a C-core the mutual inductance is matched differently, that's why the chokes have different inductances and are not the same as the Injector VIC configuration.

The Injector VIC coils are on the same core leg (middle) on the E-core and the mutual inductance between them is the same. Because the chokes have the same wire lengths and also same inductances and resistance.
What you have to do is match the secondary inductance with the chokes...

~webmug

, The opposing Lm of .989H is the difference between the chokes. The actual mutual inductance is like you posted earlier @ -7.04H. If we take that number and subtract that from the positive choke, the difference is @ .989H. The positive choke, we believe is larger because of the difference in the surface area of the tubes. There is a imbalance in the capacitor because of this difference in surface area. So it is believed that the positive choke need to be larger to match the larger surface area. So if I make my positive choke inductance the same percentage of difference as in surface area size of the tube set, then we should have an opposite and equal voltage charge on both tubes. Right now if theses numbers are accurate, my chokes are very close to what I need. Only need to reduce the positive choke by a small amount. I'll need to get a good measurement of my new tube sets when I get them built. I plan on making a cell with ten sets of tubes.

As for my chokes being too large in inductance, I don't think that matters. I am still able to tune into resonance at a low frequency, less than 10kH, and I have been very close to hitting 1kv across the cell. When resonance is hit, the resistance across the cell goes way up and we are then able to see the high voltages we are looking for.
Don

Don, lets run the number one by one...

L aiding= 29.18H; L opposing = 0.989H
L cn =8.62H; L sec=6.31H; L cp=9.71H

(Based on Grob book from page 587)
Lm = (L aiding - L oppose ) / 4 <=> (29.18 - 0.989) / 4 = 7.047H [This is the Mutual Coupling]

Calculating the total series inductors (secondary and negative choke) with measured aiding and opposing configurations:
L opposing  = L sec + L cn - (2*Lm) <=> 6.31 + 8.62 - (2*7.047) = 0.8345H [Almost 0.989H]
L aiding = L sec + L cn + (2*Lm) <=> 6.31 + 8.62 + (2*7.047) = 29.0255H [Almost 29.18H]

k = Lm / (sqrt(L sec * Lcn)) <=> 7.047 / (sqrt( 6.31 * 8.62)) = 0.956

Now lets see the Lm [Mutual Coupling] again:

L aiding = L sec + L cn + (2*Lm) <=>  29.18=6.31 + 8.62 + (2*Lm)
<=> Lm = 7.125H [Almost 7.047H]

L opposing  = L sec + L cn - (2*Lm) <=> 0.989=6.31 + 8.62 - (2*Lm)
<=> Lm = 6.97H [Almost 7.047H]

almost 7.047H for Lm,
but the Inductance of the positive choke must become 0.8345H or 0.956H because it's the total Lt total opposing inductance of the secondary and the negative choke. Nothing more I can make of it? But you can always try and test other configurations...

~webmug

I have been thinking about this too...differences in charge at the cell. If this is true using the chokes to match the voltage of the exciter areas then the voltages are not equal? Meyer wrote they are equal but opposite in voltage amplitude. Restricting is done in the magnetic field. I don't know if this is for matching the areas or for matching the mutual coupling. I think the last one.

I have one cell and don't have the skills or resources to build a exciter array. It very cool you are planning to build one!
So I'm suck with what I have for my research...

~webmug

Webmug, your doing the math twice. First off, the math formula from the Grob books is the same as the math formula you're using. You are taking the answer from my formula and putting it in your formula. The two formulas are the same, just use a different approach to get to Lm.

The answer from the Grob formula, you are calling mutual coupling. The answer is Lm mutual inductance. Probably the same thing. The 7.047H is the mutual inductance of the negative choke and secondary coils. The inductance of the positive choke is 9.71H. So we have our inductances of the positive choke at 9.71H and 7.04H for the negative. The answer of .8345H or .989H should be the difference in inductance between the positive and negative chokes. The negative choke has a -7.04H and the positive choke needs to be .8345H/.989H larger. So the positive choke needs to be @ 7.874H/8.029H to match the different area of the tube set.

Not trying to argue any of this with you, just posting how I see it, compared to how you see it. I think that you were onto something here, that's why I jumped in on this topic. the math is looking good to me as I'm interpreting it.

Good interaction taking place here
Don

The inductance of the positive choke and the negative can't be the same. The positive chokes is larger than the negative, that can be seen in Stan's very own coil packs. All of the coil packs I saw were the same. This difference in size is believed to match the difference in surface area of the tubes.

Webmug, I see that you replied before I finished my post. If we use your math to size the chokes, our positive choke would end up smaller than the negative choke. We know Stan's where not that way. Yes Stan say's that we need opposite but equal voltage across the cell's plates. That I do believe, but Stan said the negative choke was adjustable to balance  the voltage fields across the cell. I think because the secondary and the negative choke share their inductance, we need them to be different in size at the very least to get them equal. Again with your thoughts, the positive choke will end up smaller than the negative as far as the total inductance.

I also only have a single tube cell to work with, but will build a multi tube soon. I still think it will work with one tube set in the end.

we are talking about two different things, Lt and Lm and those are not the same.

Mutual coupling or Lm is not the total series inductance measured with the LCR meter. It's what is added or subtracted with to total series inductance. Both chokes can't be the same but the series sec and neg choke resonate at the same frequency as the positive choke.

I'm gonna test the chokes by flipping them over, so pos is bigger...

Even if you can match, the other coils , feedback, primary have a effect on the Lm! Don't forget this important part.

I'm not arguing with you...there is something important going on with these formulas applied to the Vic...????

And I want to get to the bottom of it and find out!

Btw did you measure the signals at the VIC chokes, secondary without the cell attached? I'm curious how they look like at resonance...

~webmug

Webmug, Ok I see what you are saying now. If the secondary and negative choke are aiding, the total inductance is too high, over 29H.
If the secondary and negative choke are opposing, the total inductance is too low, under .84H.
Both of these cases are way out of line for us to match up to the positive choke.

It's been a while since I made any measurements across the coils. Right now I don't have my system up and running yet. I just pulled out the last set of coils to measure the inductance. But I remember the signals being almost the same no matter where I measured. I'll test again once I get it back together.

@all,

The primary coil has a resistor in parallel of about 220ohms in Meyers setup. This I have incorporated in my setup as a variable resistor. The feedback coil has also resistors on the PCB, so I also put a variable resistor at the feedback coil.

Meyer wrote that the WFC is only seen as Resistance (Re) so I also put a variable resistor in the VIC circuit as (Re).

Adjusting the Primary (Rp) resistance has effect on the inductance (Lt) and (Lpos) but the Feedback resistor (Rfb) does more! You can adjust (Rp) and (Ffb) so Lpos=Lt by changing the Lm.

Adjusting the (Re) has no effect on the Mutual Inductance!

I can fine tune the inductances with my variable resistors. As example I use (Rp)=300ohm, (Rfb)=746ohm and
have (Lt)=1.448H, (Lpos)=1.4441H my only concern is the (Lsec) now at 923.5mH! This should generate our voltage to the chokes, which should be high enough.

Also flipped my chokes they still can be tuned.

More testing is needed...

Webmug, That's interesting results. Using just a resistor for the wfc, maybe misleading with the results. There seems to be a lot more to the wfc than just a resistive element.

Have you tried taking those readings with you wfc hooked up? I've got some ideas to test myself today. Will let you know what happens.

Also I did some test with a set of tubes to measure capacitance.

I wanted to see if the length of the negative tube had any effect on the capacitance.

What I mean is, if the length of the negative tube is longer than the positive tube, does the capacitance change? In other words, does the length of the negative tube that sticks out past the positive tubes ends, have any effects on capacitance.

What I've found is, the capacitance is only there where the two tubes are directly over each other. Any part of a tube that is longer than the other doesn't have any effect on it's capacitance. I did this test so I could better determine the difference between the surface area of the tubes.

This then will be used to size the difference in the chokes.
Don

Ok did a quick test of the mutual inductance of the secondary and positive choke with diode in place. Turns out the two do have some mutual inductance taking place. Now I tested the coils just like the other two. Both in aiding and opposing. This is what I got. In aiding the mutual inductance was 2.85H. In opposing I got 2.70H. So it seems the diode has an effect of balancing out the readings. Probably because of the way the meter takes it's readings. It is probably only able to read it on one side of the AC test signal, that's if the meter uses AC. It would make sense.

So something more to consider in our work.
Don

The feedback coil

has also resistors on the PCB, so I also put a variable resistor at the feedback coil.

There is also a continuous 5 volts supplied to the feedback coil.

I would think this would have an effect on your results too.

What Happens if Capacitance is increased
I just have a feeling whatever the WFC does, the VIC compensates for instantaneously.

And does it without the need for a major frequency change.

Only when something wildly out of normal happens in the cell would you need a PLL to compensate by adjusting the frequency.

Some say's it does, and some say it don't.
Some say's it increases and Some say's it decreases and a few say's it stay's the same.
This is critical to know.
I remember many people saying it was a moving target years ago.
When I was doing my research on this, I made a few experiments.

1: Checked the cell's capacitance dry with no water just air.
2: Checked the cells capacitance full of water.
3: Checked the cells capacitance with different levels of water within the cells.

For those that think it stays the same, do these three experiments.
Once you do these experiments I think you will find the capacitance does indeed change.

For those that say's the capacitance does change, Can we all agree we have a variable capacitor?

Don, I hooked up my WFC and has the same operation. I thinks it's really is a resistive element (Re) see attachments.

Still tuned at the same inductances...

Quote

So it seems the diode has an effect of balancing out the readings. Probably because of the way the meter takes it's readings. It is probably only able to read it on one side of the AC test signal, that's if the meter uses AC. It would make sense.

It's the mutual inductance what counts, the diode is there to prevent a short to the secondary coil.
So it only sees the magnetic flux on the core of the two parts combined.

@firepinto,
Yes, I need to test this too with +5V voltage at the feedback coil, but I think it's only for the op-amp circuit?
Not sure yet!
More work to do...more thoughts!!!

~webmug

I see your reading before and after the diode. I measured from the secondary isolated ground through the diode to the output of the positive choke.

I did this measurement in the aiding and opposing mode just like the secondary and negative choke. The pictures you posted looks like you are just measuring the positive choke with and without the diode. I wanted to see if the secondary is coupling with the positive choke like it is with the negative choke.
Don@all, Don

Don, I post this (attachment) because I have no idea how to interpret the measurements. Maybe you have some values from your VIC so we can compare? I've used my LCR meter set at 10kHz test signal.

At what frequency do we tune the VIC? :huh:

My thoughts: :huh:

1.The blocking diode is there so it blocks current in one direction, so if you want to resonate the coils there are two sides in the VIC?

2.One side is the positive choke, and the other side is the (secondary plus negative choke opposing), right?

3.Both sides should resonate at the same frequency, or not?

4.There is still a part where there is double pulse frequency in one side, where?

5.Secondary inductance is four times less than positive choke and (secondary plus negative choke opposing)?

6.Secondary frequency is two times higher than positive choke with WFC capacitance?

7.Where does the WFC capacitance resonate with or is it a resistive element or both?

8.If both sides have the same inductance and impedance do they have maximum equal opposite voltages?

=========================================================

Webmug, I haven't tested to the extent of what you just posted. I did at one time think that it would help to have the chokes and secondary sized to resonate at a order of frequency they all are in sync with. It helps generate more voltage. To answer your questions
1 Stan states that the LC resonance takes place between the positive choke and the cell. I just read that this past week in the tech brief.
2 I would say yes to that.
3 I don't believe that to be the case, I'll explain at the end.
4 I have never seen that effect yet.
5 That is what I get as well.
6 I have never tested that one.
8 That I would say is no, for the same reason as 3 I'll explain below.

I just uploaded a new video of my set up to You Tube earlier. It is only to show where I am starting from this time around. I plan to build on this setup.
If you notice the difference in voltages across the chokes, you see that the negative is higher than the positive. Even though the positive choke is larger. That is where my answer to 8 comes from. The inductance of the negative choke side is like you said 4 times smaller, but yet I'm getting more voltage with a smaller choke. If you haven't seen the video, I'll link it below. The positive side is at 900 volts, and the negative size is at 1000 volts.
I am going to equate to this as an imbalance of my chokes sizes to the difference in size of the tubes surface area. I am going to remove some wire from the negative choke until the voltages are equal.
As to the answer to number 3, I didn't show it in the video, but in my test I disconnected the cell from the circuit, and was able to retune the circuit into resonance. Without the cell in the circuit, you could see the positive choke side and the negative choke side needed different frequencies to hit resonance. Each one needed a different frequency to hit resonance. But when hooked to the cell, they both worked together at one common frequency. You can see that effect of each side of the circuit some when I take it out of resonance. You will notice the voltage difference when out of tune between the different chokes.

Here's the video  http://youtu.be/AQeZ9EgpgXw?list=UUABKcKjlb3f4AXJd-wo_1uQ

Don

Webmug,

4. Tech brief section 7-2

Don, the inductance of the secondary coil is four time less than the positive choke. Secondary plus negative opposing is the same as positive choke. Why? I dont know...

I see you connected the gnd between the secondary and negative choke...i see some bubbels in the WFC ... did you got those when you disconnect the gnd and scope probes? Im currious... And how do the signals look on your scope without the WFC connected?

What's the WFC capacitance and R at 1khz and 10khz? Do you also use rainwater?

More thoughts...

Thanks for the reply and making a new video...

Webmug, Don't know the answer yet as to why the chokes create the same voltage with the mutual inductance is so low on the negative side.
Not sure what you mean by me connecting the ground between the secondary and choke together. Of course they are connected to close the circuit, but if you were talking about connecting the scope grounds together at that ground point, The scope probes are connected there so that they have the same reference point. You always have to connect the ground wire of the probe somewhere for it to reference to. If you leave the ground off, your readings are useless.

The cell makes gas without the scope connected. The ground of the scope is isolated from earth ground, through the isolation transformer. So the ground wires in the coils are still isolated from earth when the probes are connected.

Without the WFC connected to the coil pack, you first see an out of resonance condition. Then when you retune the frequency, you are able to tune into resonance again. But the resonance for each choke is at a different frequency. You are able to find resonance because the chokes have capacitance as well. So they will resonate all by themselves. The peak voltages are so close to the readings before with the cell, that it's hard to see the difference.

As for the cells measurements for R or Capacitance, I haven't measured them lately. Will give it a try tomorrow. Right now I just have city tap water in my cell. It has more conductivity than rain water.
DonDon, okay, I use a HV differential probe. I wrote that, because if we introduce a gnd at the coils you change the operation of the circuit. When I connected my old probe with gnd between the secondary and negative choke I get more voltage out of it, so this has an major effect. The VIC has never any gnd connected.

Very good thing is that you can produce tiny bubbles without any scope probes connected to the VIC. I can not?

I wait for your WFC readings (L,C,R,Z)...so I can compare my single WFC to find a frequency.. also need the values of your coils at the same LCR test frequency...1khz and 10khz.

I hope you have some time left to do measurements...

Webmug, I double checked the gas out put without the probes connected. It still makes gas but less than half than before.
Took some measurements this morning of my cell and coils.

Cell @1khz C=2.39uF,  R=11.82 ohms   @10khz C=99.5nF,  R=9.62ohms

Primary @1khz C=.64H,  L=36.43nF,  R=.111mohms   @10khz C=108.8mH,  L=2.44nf,  R=.035mohms

Secondary @1khz C=3.6nF,  L=6.87H,  R=1018.8ohms  @10khz C=227.4pF,  L=N/A,  R=404.5kohms

Positive choke @1khz C=2.283nF,  L=10.8H,  R=1589kohms  @10khz C=128.27pF,  L=N/A,  R=911.2kohms

Negative choke @1khz C=2.645nF,  L=N/A,  R=1320kohms  @10khz C=1.372pF,  L=N/A,  R=1018kohms

Don't know how to get Z readings.

Also switched negative choke wires and retested, makes half the voltage as before and still adds them together with scope setting at ADD function, like in my video.

Let me know what you make of these numbers,
DonDon, I hope you made a new negative choke and kept  one as a reference...!
My WFC capacitance is now 3.3nF 18ohms at 10khz I cant understand why your cell has capacitance in the microfarads?
I also used tap water...less resistance when using rainwater. Btw makes no difference I still see no tiny bubbles, at least not yet. Strange you can see some appearing.. Did you also have some with gating the pulses ?

Also my Vic resonates at 14.7khz, and cant figure out where its resonating with...my voltage is about 570V so bit to low. I measure over , after diode positive choke voltage output with wfc connected. And over, between secondary and negative choke and negative output.
Voltages are almost balanced...but I have zero voltage over pos and neg from chokes...? Wfc connected.

If you bring down the inductance of the negative choke it lowers the positive choke inductance too due coupling! So unwind carefully!

So yes, when it is possible to get the opposing inductance (secondary and negative choke combined) and the positive choke inductances equal i think you have equal and opposite voltages.

@Gpssonar,
how did you match your coil with your wfc? Are you also using LCR meter to match them?Don, btw I short my feedback coil and connected the primary to a resistor to do the measurements. Balancing the coils must be done with winding or unwinding of the coils. Using a resistor in the feedback isn't needed. But only for the primary.

I think it's better called "tuning the mutual inductance" which balances the voltages? :cool:

Still working on it!

already posted in my excel sheet : as posted here under the Russ 6 single cell mesurments TAB

using the cheep meter that seems more correct...

with out water:   =  16.69pf
with water:         = 1393pf

and if you take 16.69 x 80.1 you get...  1336pf
16.69 x 78 = 1301pf

so i can trust that measurement...

and everything else in that sheet... individual, series, inside out, ect.

series measurements of 6 cells...

with out water: 2.20pf
with water : 239.8pf

lower frequency  the higher the capacitance. in my testing...  but that meter seems to give measurements that i do not trust...

so yes its changes.

~Russ

i would call it a variable in our math, aka we need to know theses as even frequency play's a BIG roll on the capacitance.

~Russ

Exactly, Now you and other wanted to know how to tune the system.
What I am about to say and show is for manual tuning only, with no feedback coil or phase lock loop device.
I have stated many many times you have to start out at a couple volts and work your way up a couple volts at a time while tuning until you reach full voltage.
What I am about to show everyone is how to use a fixed L  to tune into a variable C It is all done by frequency.

As you can see at different voltage levels at different frequencies with a fixed L as the capacitance changes we can use a different frequency with a different voltage and still tune into resonance.

If you do the inductance reactance and the capacitance reactance at each levels you will find it is still at resonance through out. Not only that you can see how the step charge is formed.

(notice the five frequencies and five pulses) Those number of pulses is determined by the water gap. they can be more or less, all depending on the water gap.My hunch is the rate of this change you just showed in the chart is controlled by the turns ratio.yes

High turns ratio <--> Touchy to tune.
Low turns ratio <--> No longer touchy,

but you hit a limit and the VIC can no longer react fast enough to the WFC.

What I've seen all along is people throwing 12 volts to the primary and trying to tune to resonance. Can you see the problem why you can't do that?

Your using all the voltage you have to tune into the first level of resonance and not allowing the capacitance to change. It's just like doing the same thing at 1 volt but you've use up all the voltage before anything changed.

You have to take it through the different voltage levels and tune to resonance at each level

. At each level an amount of gas will be released changing the capacitance.

As you take it through each level more gas will be released until you reach the last level of resonance by that time gas is in the cell and water is removed and voltage will take over and go to infinity and amp drops.

It's as simple as this Matt, If you take a dry cell and tune it to resonance where the inductance is fixed and the capacitance is fixed you can throw 12 volts to the primary and tune it to resonance no problem. When you do this do all your probing and measurements and take notes.

You should end up with the same measurements give or take with a wet cell once it goes through the resonance levels and voltage levels.The only other thing that is taking place at resonance, the current is at it's highest and the two chokes tries to restrict the current between each choke and that causes some oscillation within the cell.

I have a quick question.

You once told me that you can... After the system is tuned... Just flip on 12v and the system will start. However. This kinda gose agents the voltage frequency step tuning process.

So your implying that the system will just start of its tuned already.
Can you give me your best guess why this is?
Thanks. ~Russ
The water bath will hold it's charge as long as there is gas pressure in the cell. Once the pressure is lost and the gas is released the cell will discharge. That's why Stan's gas management card and pressure sensor will never let the cell drop below a certain pressure. If you remember also, i said no one would stick their finger in my cell without getting the piss knocked out of them, even with it off. Because we have increased stable capacity of the cell.

Another thing I might add, If your using a plastic see through cover for the water bath, check the capacitance of the cell without touching it and then check it with your hand on it. If it changes the capacitance then never touch the plastic cover when the cell goes into resonance, there my just be enough change in capacitance to burn up the VIC. Stan took extra steps even with a thick delrin cover for this not happened. Just look at his cell that is inside the red gas tank and also even in the metal tank.

So if one was to keep the cell discharged when shut off, maybe for safety reasons, the voltage build-up process would have to be initiated at each startup correct?  You would have to do this on your cell right Ronnie, if for example you dumped out all the water and refilled it?

And roughly how long does this startup process take?  Does it depend on the size of your water bath?

Thanks Ronnie for the information,That makes a lot of sense.
So I understand correctly that the capacitance of the cell changes with  the change in ratio of water to gas at a certain pressure in the cell.

Stan has a gas pressure management system to maintain a certain gas pressure in the cell which would help maintain a certain capacitance in the system.

Does Stans set-up have a pump or a way to add more water to the cell under pressure?Or does he use the ambient air pressure to fill the cell with gravity?Or pressure differential valve?

Hmm. Then if the pressure gets higher the capacitance might chage? I wonder if having a second vic with higher potential would be something worth while turning on once above a certain point. To excite the gas to a higher level?

Almost like start and run winding on a motor. Once up to speed switch over and let next winding take over but in this case a second higher output vic. Just a thought. I would imagine the voltage of stans vic is close to insulation limits of most plastics. Just a thought. I am still chasing copper windings.

Ronnie this is what happens on the upper resonant cavities stacked , it can explain what happens if you got the gas and then tune into resonance and rise the voltage:  It sounds to me like the gas pressure in the cell is a critical part that needs be taken into consideration when running the system. Is it not also critical for the tunning process too.

I would think regulating the gas pressure while tunning the cell would be a must to help regulate the capitance No your not wrong, gas pressure in the cell is what stabilizes the capacitance. The polarization of water water molecules are aligned, therfore can store more charge because of the pressure, we have more molecules per unit area which also causes increased capacity. stan says 4 to 5 onces of pressure is needed.

===========

Well was Russ right...Do we need our cell to have 16.7 PF?
This is a very small number to tune with the the VIC.

Here is where I'm am at.............
We have 12 numbers we need to know...
L1-L2-S1-P1-C-1Cell-1(C-1)
Most of us are not smart enough to do the math to get this correct
Cell=?
L-1=?
L-2?
S-1?
P-1?

=======================

Dan there is more to it than just a capacitance value. Voltage plays a big role in this. If you look at this photo of Stan's, the first level is the polarization process.

You want this process to take place with around 2 volts on the primary. If you tune to resonance at 2 volts and you see no gas being produced at all then you know there is something wrong.

By leaving it at resonance at 2 volts, raise the voltage from 2 volts 4,6,8,10,12 somewhere in that voltage range you should see some gas being made. What ever that voltage is that you see the gas being made let's say 6 volts. That should tell you, the turn ratio is off on the secondary, because you want it to take place at 2 volts to the primary not 6 volts.

This is where everything gets tricky to adjust. In order to keep the impedance match, what you have to do is take turns off the chokes and add them to the secondary to increase the voltage. By doing this you change the inductance which will change the resonate frequency.

So it's a balancing act that your shooting for. Again if the polarization process takes place at 6 volts and it's suppose to start at 2 then you've lost 4 volts in the process that you can no longer do anything with.

Russ is right, It's not a matter of slapping things together and hope for the best. The hardest thing for me to do is get other people's cell working. One mismatch of anything will keep it from working.

That's the reason i put the disclaimer "Don't blame me" as my first post here. All I can do is show how the math adds up in Stan's vic and how it is matched. If you don't have Stan's cell to go along with his vic don't expect it to work. It's all a tuned and matched system that makes it work.

Can you post the impedance matching , LC matching , and the tuning process. And the match of each part in one post.

What I'm asking is for you to give the values you calulate along with the math you used. This way we can get a better feel for where you start, and how you get the numbers matched. Its going to bee a deep and long post. So make it on word then post in it here.

e i can do that but before I do, I have another Question: Does people understand the polarization process? Because that is where it all starts. I would like to hear peoples thought on this first.

you guys, there is some interesting things going on with the numbers.

One example is trying to build the VIC like a typical step-up transformer where the primary windings are thicker wire than the secondary and chokes.

You simply can't do it with the formulas Ronnie has shared with us.

In fact, it is actually far easier to match the impedance with the secondary and choke wires having thicker wire than the primary.

It's all about the ohms and how they converge under various turn ratios.

There is something going on here in this VIC that is completely contrary to normal understanding.  I can't put my finger on what it is yet, but I will say it seems to expose what resistance truly is.

It's kind of like a Universal Force that keeps things in balance and you can design around either side of that balance, either the normal way like most electronics, or the inverted way like this VIC seems to be designed.

My comprehension of this process is that you are targeting a molecule that is not neutral.  This gives us an advantage of not having to shake it apart; instead we can apply electrical polarity to orient the molecule, then increase the strength of this polarized field in accordance with how the molecule reacts.  It appears to me that we slowly (relatively speaking) tear the molecule apart instead of brute force smashing it apart.  We let field intensity create the force necessary.  This is my understanding of letting voltage do the work.

Matt or anyone, would you say the polarization process is used in Brut force electrolysis?

we know the "step charging" is not quite the way Stan means, in your way of thinking its not really the cap charging in a short pulse duration.  like in the resonance attachment .jpg its the voltage it takes to get to resonance in the gas phase.

the steps are the tuning process,

the "polarization process" this is the first part of aligning the water molecules. orientating them for the next phase.

This is voltage controlled.

This not the same as brought force electrolysis.

brought force electrolysis is a surface phenomenon.

the "polarization process" is soothing that happens in between the plates.

like in figure 7-4

My idea of the polarization process is that the water molecules are being aligned between the inner and outer tubes due to the ever increasing voltage across the cell tubes, which leads to more and more molecules "pointing" in the same direction the higher the voltage is, with the Oxygen atoms facing the anodes and the (2) hydrogen atoms facing the cathode tubes.

I don't think polarization of the water molecules takes place in a Faradic brute force electrolysis cell, atleast not on the same level as compared to a Meyer WFC.

As you can see the polarization process is started when a voltage is applied to the capacitor plates.

It don't matter if it's brute force or not. When you apply a voltage to a capacitor the water molecule will align since we are using natural polarized water as the dielectric.

It's just the nature of a dielectric to polarize in a capacitor.

If you took notice in the video it showed once aligned it cancels out charges. As you know the water molecule has two hydrogen and one oxygen so there would be two cancels on the neg plate compared to one cancel on the positive plates.

Question again: if the battery is left on, would they be more charge accumulate on the neg side than on the positive side?

So by the logic in that video (Good find Ris), if we have a dry cell (K = 1) that measures 10pF, without even taking another measurement, we know immediately when the cell is filled with water (K = 80), the capacitance has just increased to 800pF.

That much is pretty easy and it completely defines the working range of our cell.

====================================

As you know the water molecule has two hydrogen and one oxygen so there would be two cancels on the neg plate compared to one cancel on the positive plates.

Question again: if the battery is left on, would they be more charge accumulate on the neg side than on the positive side?

Yes, I agree, more charge would accumulate on the negative plate.

The tougher question is what happens with the voltage in this unbalanced system?

And where do you place a reference point?  It's like an asymmetric capacitor where the two plates are of different dimensions.

I think T. Townsend Brown was probably the only one that really comprehended such a scenario.

the tube cell is also asymmetric.

You can see the calculations in my spread sheet. (thanks webmug) So their is also a factor that the charge can be less asymmetric according to how you connect the cell!!But one thing i do know is oxygen is one of the only atoms that is reactive with magnetic influence. In a liquid state compared with hydrogen and other gasses it is the only one in liquid form that will form a bridge across two earth magnets with an air gap.

Other gasses pas through and do not bridge. So with polarization i often  wonder brute force or not what is actually happening seeing as hydrogen is not as magnetically affected as oxygen is.  I also wonder what all happens when the two gasses are brought to a higher energy level The charge MUST remain = on both plates

However that's also if the plates are the same area. Unless the charge gets more or less dense on those non = area s.

------------------------

Matt the tube cell is also asymmetric.

That's true it is, but...

Ronnie explained to me the tube sets have to be in pairs--one plus/minus and the other minus/plus.

So to me that means the tube sets are balanced.

Also why Ronnie told me plate cells can be used--they are naturally balanced. but 3.5 times less gas if plates  the + need to be more in general that is why tubes yeild more

The asymmetry to me means the imbalance with the environment, not the conditions you have setup in the circuit.  Bearden was all over this asymmetry stuff.  So think for a minute guys.  Ronnie gave us clues...

If he ran his cell for ten minutes and shut it off for an hour and stupid me stuck my finger in there, WHY would it knock the piss out of me?

I'll tell you why I think it would beyond Ronnie saying that it would.

It would zap me because I'm at a different electrical potential than the water in the cell is

.  My body is charged one way in a neutral state with the earth and the cell is charged in a much different way, like a cloud about ready to rock a thunderbolt.

Like a thunderbolt.   Could be a clue...

Nature figured it out a long time ago.

The charge MUST remain = on both plates

And you would be right, but the that equal charge doesn't have to be the same as the environment around it.  In effect, running that cell just tore a hole in the local space, charge-wsie.  It's not balanced to the environment at all any more.  It's gone way out there into la la land.  Then the coils start crackling like bacon cooking.  Another clue...

You don't suppose the environment is trying to find a way to plug that hole you just tore do you?  "Voltage heading off to infinity if the electronics allow for it."

Talk about opening an aperture to Universal Energy.  Ripping electrons out of stable atoms is bound to open some kind of aperture.

# Fly Wheel Effect

About 1000v+..after C1 charges there is no longer a load to hold the feild on L1 and it will discharge into C1 Got to get something right.....
Note: GPS Twin core bobbins all cleaned up now time to make a new cell I lost my tubes from last year! Sorry for being grumpy last night guys just wish I had 1 solid number for the twin core.

i ask this question because when Ronnie gets to explaining the diode, i think this simple idea will come in to play.

it just shows you the effects of a charging inductor and cap. using a DC source, and the effect of the Diode.

the inducter is like a fly wheel, so once the switch is closed you get the flywheel going and once the potental is = to the sorce, the "flywheel" dose not want to stop. so it keeps its momentum and gives even more than the supply delivered.

the voltage is Double  the input. this works with out the diode as well. but what the diode dose is KEEP that voltage in the cap, this is an important thing to remember.

i just thought this was extremely relevant and if everyone here has already seen this or knows this, well good lol but i wanted to post it anyway.

its thses simple things, knowing what each part dose of the system..

# ​

My 2c: A variable gap leaves the ability to either strengthen or to weaken the magnetic field induced by the primary, which indirectly then should be inducing a current to the secondary coil(s) depending on the gap distance, which could mean that by using a variable gap the voltage in the secondary coils can also be varied I also think that voltage is controlled by the primary/secondary coupling but also the inductances of the 4 coils

if all the coils has a piece of core in them already the inductance can not be change, unless you move the core in and out of the coil which that is not the case here.

The only thing that can change the inductance of the coils is the AL value of the core material. This is why this needs to be discussed,

I think they are other people that thinks the way Ady15 does.

Yes Gunther you are correct, but as we all know both cores is together whether tight or lose coupled but they are coupled. So therefor the whole magnetic path is directed thru the ferrite. So therefor they are 100% coupled.

Looks like it is experiment time:
1: Place a Primary coil and a L2 coil on a rod, pulse the primary and take measurements on L2.
2: Place a Primary coil on one rod and a L2 on another rod side beside and pulse the primary and take measurements on L2 while moving the coils away from each other horizontally and back again.
3: Place a Primary coil on one rod and L2 on another rod and put them in front of each other and pulse the Primary and take measurement of L2 while moving the coils vertically from each other and back again.
4: Place a Primary coil and L2 coil on one core and place another core like in Stan's so the magnetic path is directed around the cores and pulse the Primary and take measurements of L2, move the gap back and forth and take measurements.

Do your own experiments don't take my word for anything,
That's what solves problems.
It may take a little time to do experiments, but it will put facts in your mind that you can see for yourself.

Positioning of the bobbin on the core is (can be) responsible for the phase shift you talked about earlier.  Luc (gotoluc) Choquette and Brad (TinManPower) did extensive experiments with this phenomena. this is not a big variable at all. Just trying to get people to understand the gap of the cores and what effect it has. The main important thing here is what effect does the gap have on the primary and Secondary. It is just common since what the Primary and L2 and the secondary and L2 does and how they work.

Try this as an experiment:
1: Take a primary coil and place it on one core like in Stan's and place the secondary on the other coil pulse the primary coil and move the gap back and forth at different gap distances and take measurements of the secondary. See if changes voltage or what!

They are so many different opinions on this, and that is why I can't just tell them and get anyone to believe in what I say.

So you will have to do all these experiments yourself and see what takes place on your own. Hell they are some people thinks the gap, stores energy, controls core saturation, some thinks it changes inductance and some thinks it's is a spark gap. LOL

Common since tells me that the circle on his cores being where they are tells me what coils are 100% coupled and what coils are not. If the primary and Secondary was 100% coupled they would be a circle drew around both gaps of the cores also. In other words there is nothing you can do to the Primary and L2 choke that will change anything as long as they are on the core and don't move off that core. The only changes you can make to those two coils is changing frequency or taking turns off the coils or adding turns to them. Just common since. Same goes for the secondary and L1.

Come on people, you know the primary voltage controls the magnetic field strength of the core it's on, and placing another core with other coils on it like Stan has, the gap controls the magnetic field strength of that set of coils.
If you increase the voltage of the Primary from 2 volts up to 12 volts your increasing the magnetic field strength of that core.
So the question is? what does a week field strength or a strong field strength do the the secondary coil and L1 coil due to the gap between the two cores?

Watch this video that has been posted a thousand times already starting at 30:00. He tells you exactly what I have been talking about how to switch off the covalent bond of the water molecule. Notice the two hydrogen and one oxygen and listen to him. He uses the voltage on the B+ to switch it off. Question is how does dial in the B+ voltage?
What set of cores is the B+ on?
Would the Gap of the two cores adjust the fine tuning of the B+ voltage?

Guy's I've told you how the math works to get watts in and watts out on the VIC. You should know that you can divide the coils up into three coils or 4 as long as you keep the same resistance in the secondary side circuit.

You can take from one coil and add to others and vise versa. You know now that the two hydrogen atoms will place more charge on one plate than the one oxygen atom will due to cancel of charges.

You should know how to raise the B+ voltage by taking turns off the L2 and placing them on L1 in order to control it's charge on the plate and how to fine tune it with the Gap of the cores.
So what do we have left?
1: Core material
2: Diode on primary side
3: Diode on Secondary side
4: LC circuit
5: Tuning the LC circuit to the Fuel cell

"if all the coils has a piece of core in them already the inductance can not be change, unless you move the core in and out of the coil"

I say.... If you take a coil and place it on half a core than connect a VOM it will show a low inductance.
Drop the other half of the core on and...boom the inductance is 2-5 times higher?
You can also gap the cores to get most any number in between.

Wish I could help on the coupling question..
All I know is Tesla used loose coupling on his high voltage coil.

you are correct if your saying the core material is only half way through the bobbing and you slide in another half. But the example I am using throughout this thread is Stan's vic. It already has the core material completely through the bobbing.

ust wound my first twin core bobbin...69.5 Ohms, 3001 Turns
Henries = 3H-16H  depending on tight core gap or just drop it on
Hmmmmm.
Thinking the inductance is not the big deal it's the Ohms.
We will to adjust the math from Dons numbers to the twin core.

That what i was saying Dan.I also had that high inductance...and to have 1.2H you have to have a 5mm gap so you loose all the coupling

still feel like the super high inductance chokes are nothing more than current limiting devices that when run at frequency above their cutoff point do not allow current to flow.  They do nothing to the voltage potential available though.  So you have electrostatic potential sitting at the plates of the WFC, but because the source is oscillating, no current can flow through the circuit.

I'll continue on, But to be honest with you. I don't think anyone is getting anything thing out of all this if you ask me. I don't know if it is me that is trying to teach this or what. I can't keep people focused on Stan's vic and not mine. Until you understand Stan's there is no way anyone can understand my dual core vic. I just wrote 2 pages on how the coils is coupled on Stan's vic and I don't think i got anywhere with it. Trying to rethink what to do next! My dual core setup has up to 5 adjustment on it not including the coils just with gaps and spacing. So how is anyone going to understand that if they don't understand Stan's?

=========================

What I want to do is understand the way you think Stan's Vic works. the important part for me is getting my head wrapped around what's happening. I'm the kind of guy that likes to watch videos and learn from them. Reading a book sometimes isn't helpful unless I do the experiment in the book myself to physically see what's going on.

So what I'm asking is continue describing the way you think stands VIC works because this thinking will help me think clearly and understand what to do next. I've been through the scenario that Matt is doing right now.

He is building and testing I've been there I've done that and I will continue doing that once I have enough information to really fully understand what I actually need to do. I have little pieces of the puzzle but I don't think I understand the whole puzzle. So yes we are actually getting a lot out of what you're doing.

For me I've looked at what you said and put a new perspective on some of the ideas and ways that Stan says stuff. It's actually been very helpful.  kind of like a new Fresh thinking on an old idea that I studied for so many years. So with that said just do what you're doing continue speaking how you understand the system and slowly one at a time through cooperation we will understand it too. I haven't asked many questions about how you're VIC works. I'm interested in how you understand stands Vic and how to tune it and the parameters that need to be correct.

In my perspective there is a really big list of things that have to be just right for this system to function correctly I know this because some of the things you speak of I've already achieved and I've seen in my own lab however there was a few things that weren't correct which did not allow me to successfully tune the VIC.  So for me I need to have all the pieces so I can think about them the way you think about Stan's VIC so I can move forward. This is just how my brain works. I don't want to start testing anything yet,  I want to understand everything so I can tune and build everything correctly.

I have a lot to learn but I also understand a lot and I know the things that need to be done to achieve this goal however there are things that I still don't understand of which one little piece at a time you would help all of us understand.

keep going. we are learning...

=============================

And now I know why we have been making a mountain out of mole hill.  Ronnie is 100% correct, this isn't difficult if you actually know where you are trying to go and forget all the chaff that doesn't matter.

We'll get together and put some information out here people can make sense of.

In the meantime, everyone brush-up on electrostatics.  You'll need this in order to go any further with Stan Meyer technology.ou guys are right...It's difficult because we all have our strong and weak points of understanding.

Over the years many people have posted 'Stan's secret, including myself....then I realized what I thought was the secret was common knowledge for others....and vise versa.

Brad there is only one secret to Stan Meyers, If you figure out how to turn off the the bond that holds the two molecules together then you will know the secret.

### Spilling the Beans

First NEW KNOWLEDGE prototype.

Coils wound to the specs seen here and positioned as Ronnie has shown us.

After talking with Ronnie earlier, please guys, ditch the dual-core concept for the time being.  It's is not needed, more complicated and different enough from Stan's original setup that it will only cause confusion to even talk about it.  Once you have mastered Stan's original VIC, then you can pursue all sorts of hybrid type circuits.

If I hadn't stayed up all night and sliced my fingers making the bobbins, I would probably hook up a driver circuit and show more, but for now, it's time to KISS it good night.

:offtobed:

One other thing to read and ponder--the attached PDF.  I think you will find it helpful as Ronnie proceeds.

It's not that I don't want people to build anything I want people to understand what they are building, so they can teach others.

I built this once and had no clue what I built and could not answer not one question that was ask of me if I had to, of how I got it to work. I just don't want people to be in the same shape I was in when I got it to work the first time.

As far as asking question, I'm all for that! It's like Russ and others have stated, people are at different phases in all this, but what we all can agree to, is everyone is stuck at whatever phase they are in.

If people wants to know the end results of all this no matter what phase they are in it's this: It's not just placing a charge on each plate, It how to control the charges on the plates in order to break the bond of the water molecule.

The Vic together with the water fuel cell does this, but without knowing how every part of the Vic and water fuel cell works, no one will be able to get it to work, unless it's by luck.

=============================

My dual core setup has up to 5 adjustment on it not including the coils just with gaps and spacing. So how is anyone going to understand that if they don't understand Stan's?"

Thats what i thought,the 2 core vic being 10 times more complex than Stans vic.No wonder i could not get anything out of that setup...I will trow that in the garbage tomorrow,after  countless hours of frustration,

seeing 12v on the output no matter what i did,polishing the cores by hand to fit the bobbins...etc etc...and not build anything before i have the proper core.Ronnie i dont know others but i learn and understand better when i test and build something.I test something and when i read and learn i understand where and why i got wrong..

.Reading theories about a transformer that i will built after 1 year or two or never(because the frikin core)would get me no were.Its like in school if you learn for example ohm's law without building a circuit and learning the same time after 2 days you forget it entirely.

No offense to no one but I'm more a technical guy and thats  only my point of view.

Ady15, don't throw it in the garbage, Just put the primary close to the secondary and you will see a increase in voltage. That's the only way the primary will couple with the secondary. You only wasted time because you don't know how it is coupled. That's what I been trying to teach here for the last 5 pages. Just watch this video of Don's he shows moving a coil close to one another even without a core in either of the coils. As you can see they couple together when they are moved close to one another. So just try putting the primary and secondary close together in your setup. I bet you will see a voltage increase.

=======================================

First thing he needs to do is put the primary and L2 choke on the same core, and the secondary and L1 on the same core. place the primary and secondary close to each other as he can. then be able to move the primary back and forth from the secondary to do the fine tuning of the voltage in the secondary.

Getting back to Stan's Vic, Can everyone see how the gap between the cores controls the coupling from the Primary to the Secondary which in return controls and fine tunes the voltage in the secondary and L1. And if you follow through with this to the positive plate, it also fine tunes the charge on that plate.

Ady15 because it is you, I will tell you all the variables you can control with the dual setup like you have.

1: on one core you have the primary and L2 choke coupled together.

You can control the inductacne of L2 by grinding one of the legs by a thousands or two and even more if you need to. But don't grind the leg the primary is on. what ever you grind on the L2 leg place a brass or copper spacer of the same thickness as you ground off. That is one adjustment you can make to control the inductance of L2. Then you have turns you can take off or add to on the L2, that is another adjustment you can make.

2: you can repeat the same on the L1 choke leg by grinding some off and placing a spacer of the same amount you ground off but don't grind the secondary leg That allows you to control the inductance of L1. You can also add or take turns off the L2 choke.

3: place the primary close to the seconday move them as close to each other as you can. pulling them apart from one another is another adjustment you can make.
4: taking turns off the secondary and add turns is another adjustment you can make.

So now do you see what all you can do with the two core setup?
Now with that being said we need to get back to Stan's Vic in order to see what all these adjustments do.

### The Understanding Phase.

i would like to start a new phase in this thread, this is called the understanding phase.  i spent in to the wee hrs of the night making my understanding.

i would like to ask Ronnie one question at a time.

if you agree with my question / understanding, say yes,
if you disagree say no, BUT then answer it the way it is correct. or explain it the way you see it.

i have a LONG list, most of them are the things you already tried to express in this thread, i will get back to them shortly but first i want to start with a few things on the list you posted

"1: Core material
2: Diode on primary side
3: Diode on Secondary side
4: LC circuit
5: Tuning the LC circuit to the Fuel cell"

i want to start with #3.  you haven't got to it yet... but i wanna give i a go.

here it goes,

UNDERSTANDING 1

when in resonance mode*

The diode between the Sec and L1 (Positive choke) is acting as a one way valve, letting positive voltage go through but not back.
note the "DC resonant charging" when L1 is charged as it discharges it will charge the "cap" up to 2X the voltage of the input "source"

That is 100% correct Russ

The diode on the primary gives it a flywheel during the off time to suppress voltage spikes getting back into the driving circuit.

The core material must meet or exceed the required frequency your going to be using without saturating the core material. It also needs to be able to raise the inductance into the range needed for the LC circuit.

The other two I will have to get some material together to talk about them. If you have something together already you can discuss them and I will weigh in on it if I need to.

Understanding 2

There needs to be more negative "charge"
(charge is defined by the idea of having potential difference we can call it "voltage" but that gets confusing, so we use the term "charge" just to help us understand this,

like Matt was saying "electrostatic" )

the ratio 2:1 due to the fact that

H2O Having two positive H charges and one negative O charge.

(opposites attract) we must "match" the water charge differential.

2:1, in the cell. ANSWER  = More B+ voltage

Understanding 3
Next understanding.
The primary and L2 (negative choke) are connected on one half of the "core", this gives "100%" flux transfer between the choke and Pri

The Secondary and L1 ( positive choke ) are connected on one half "core", this gives "100%" flux transfer between - choke and Sec
those 2 things above are considered "closely" coupled inductors

adjusting the core gap of the cores will adjust the ratio of charges on the plates. this is a "fine tuning" parameter for the 2:1 charge ratio.
this is considered  "loosely" coupled inductors.

Understanding 4

a bigger tuning parameter for the 2:1 ratio is :

To raise the negative voltage, take turns off the L1 (positive choke) and placing them on L2 (negative choke) in order to control the charge on the negative plate. This works both ways, less on L2 less voltage on the negative plate.

We "move" turns from one choke to another to keep the impedance matching. You could also keep the impedance matching via changing the primary Resistance or doing it by adding a resistor across parallel or in series depending if its high or low.

we need to worried about resistance. more on this later but its all about impedance matching.

Answer = Correct Yes that is right, you can move turns from any coil as long as they are put back on somewhere. You must maintain the resistance in the secondary circuit in order to maintain the impedance match.

Keep in mind the Stan Meyer VIC is accomplishing two tasks in one device.  You need to keep things straight in your head which task you are hoping to adjust/optimize and do it in a way that least impacts the task you already have working (hopefully).

Task 1.  You must create enough amp leakage to start basic electrolysis.

Task 2.  You must create a condition on the plates where there is a two to one charge ratio.

Because you are building one device that accomplishes two tasks, things become a minefield if you don't understand the relationships.  One component can contribute to both tasks, so if you adjust it and you already had one task working, you probably just screwed it up.

So there is some complexity here and to overcome it, you must do things in the correct sequence which Ronnie has been walking us through.  Once you get your hands dirty, it will become apparent this is an iterative process--a little adjustment here; a little adjustment there, then on to the next step.

I posted earlier the PDF about electrostatic measuring techniques.  What I want you all to glean from this is in the first page or two.  You will notice there is no mention of amperage, unlike what you will find elsewhere on the Internet when you search the word charge or Coulomb.  It says quite plainly:

"When we move one coulomb of charge from one point to another in an electric field, we are doing work on that charge.  The term we use for this is electric potential or voltage."

"Again, a volt is the amount of work it takes to move one coulomb of charge a certain distance through an electrical field E."

Voltage does do work, just like Stan said and the people that know how to measure electrostatics know this.  Now you do too.

You must think about charge and the VIC as a creator and distributor of charge, charge which you will separate in the proper proportions and put it where it needs to go.

What I found very confusing to me until it finally clicked is this unbalanced (two to one) charge ratio.  The reason for it being so confusing is because you have no reference point.  I think you actually could though by center tapping the secondary, but suppose you don't.  So what do I mean...

If you measure voltage across the two plates, you get a voltage differential.  Let's say for example the value is 200 volts.  Now look at this algebraically:

200  =  A  -  B

A and B have limitless possibilities to satisfy that equation.  If we add another equation:

A  =  2  *  B

Only then can we find values for both A and B that actually work--that actually "switch-off the covalent bonds".

We can do this because we can adjust the gap between the two cores and more fundamentally, we have complete control over what charges the VIC produces and where they go.  Let's look at this closer by referring back to the image Ronnie posted.

As you can see, the primary and L2 (negative choke) are fixed on the same core.  So we know immediately the negative plate will collect the maximum negative charge possible coming from the input signal.  It has to because it is directly coupled.  Now let's look at the positive plate...

As we can see here, the only way to get positive charge to the positive plate is to get the secondary to produce more voltage.  So let's place the two C-cores tightly together so that maximum coupling is achieved.  What do we get charge-wise?

Well, with 100% flux flowing through both C-cores, we can see the charge ratio between the two plates is pretty nearly one to one.  You'll get a voltage differential, but the ratio is no good.  This won't help us with water.  We need two to one charge ratio.

Okay, I glossed over this pretty quick didn't I?  I said one to one with the cores tightly pressed together.  Let's look closer...

L2 is outputting full negative charge; L1 is outputting full positive charge and the secondary is outputting half-and-half, equal positive and negative going each direction.  Let's forget about the diode for a moment and just think of it as a valve making sure charge is only moving in one direction on the rising impulse of magnetic flux.  On the decaying side of the magnetic flux, everything just sits still because the valve opens and stops any charge movement.  Hopefully now you can see one to one charge distribution when the cores are together.

When the cores are apart, again only negative charge is pushed out of the L2 choke; the L1 and secondary are no longer participating in the conversion of magnetic flux to electrical charge.

So we want a two to one charge ratio.  I'm hoping you guys are already ahead of me now that I have set the two possible limits, cores far apart and cores tightly together.  Now let's look at when the cores are separated apart by just the right distance...

As stated above, the L2 choke will always produce the maximum negative charge since it is stuck on the same core with the primary where the input signal is coming from.  Now go slow here, another minefield awaits.  What is it?

You're thinking turns ratio right?  Yes, you should because the turns ratio between the primary and L2 is slightly different than the turns ratio between the primary and the secondary.  Or I should say, it could be.  But don't get too tripped up here and fall off the wagon.  Here's another reason why Ronnie mentioned the secondary coils should all be similar turns count of similar wire.  If you took heed of this, you're still okay.

Now when you bring the cores together with a small gap, the L1 and Secondary begin to kick-in their contribution to the positive charge on the positive plate.  As stated above, there must be a spot where the negative charge produced at the negative plate is exactly twice in absolute value or strength as the positive charge produced at the positive plate.  This is your goal--task number two.  What's going on here with the gap is the manipulation of the coupling factor to achieve the desired charge ratio.  I can't tell you how touchy this adjustment might be, because I haven't done it yet, but I'm sure you will want to fill the gap with some kind of a sturdy material that will not compress, so once you have things dialed-in, they will stay that way.

yes i agree, i call this the "mode change"
This is the mode where we go from starting the electrolytes mode to the resonance mode.

also on your task #2 you forgot to add that when in this mode of operation everything must match "resonance"  Xc=Xl
but during Task 1 or mode 1 this is not the case.

this is why we tune the VIC with no water in the Cell!!!
( i think we understand that)

good stuff. i'm gonna keep posting things for Ronnie to agree with or disagree with. I have a few more things to post but a lot to think about still.

after i'm happy with MY understanding of Ronnie's prospective of the VIC,
then we can talk about the math. because the math and the mode go hand and hand. but it all starts with what we are trying to achieve. ( and understanding it so we can engineer it along the way!)

Understanding 5

( you already kinda answered this in the above post... but... )

keep in mined that we always need to keep a "DC" impedance match.

This is between the primary and the rest of the VIC
Sec,L2,L1,C = Pri   we can say "DC" resistance.

Because its when its in resonance, that is reatance in the cap and inductor cancel each other out.
Xl=Xc, so the only thing left is resistance... kinda like we remove "impedance" the Z. impedance is normally AC resistance...

i have a follow up question on this but first... yes / no ?

Answer = Correct Yes Yes if I understand you correctly.

basically I'm asking how to impedance match.

so we know that to impedance match we want the source resistance and the load resistance to be equal.

and we know that in an LC resonant circuit... the Xc = Xl . this is dependent on frequency, at this frequency where Xc=Xl the only resistance left is the "DC" resistance. ( the wire)

so this resistance must be = to the primary. to have an impedance match.

if the primary is 10 ohms the load needs to be 10 ohms
to my knowledge that is how an impedance match works???
so that brings me to something i don't quite understand, ( a few but ill ask them one at time)

Q. we need to have the primary = the Sec+L1+L2+ resistance in the cell. correct?? ( this is of coarse at resonance) OK i'm editing this post due to the understanding of the "power matching" and not necessarily " impedance matching"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem

i was stuck on matching the resistance, however we can fix that by looking at the link above. and the attachment in my post 2 down from this one.

Answer  = use the watts-in equals watts-out power formula.  This will take care of your turn ratio problem you are missing.

NOTES on Understanding 5

Using Stan's VIC and the numbers Don gave us as an example, I will attempt to show how to impedance match it all.
Question is what is the purpose of Impedance matching?
The answer is Watts-in must equal Watts-out.

It is calculated by:
Line(Primary) side = 10 ohms
12 volts / 10 ohms = 1.2 amps
1.2 amps * 12 volts = 14.4 watts

Next we use a transformer (Amplifier) to match the Load side.
we need to know the total resistance of the load side.
Secondary side = 72.4 + 76.7 + 70.1 + 78.54 (Re) + 11.5 = 310 ohms

That is the DC ohms of the secondary, the positive choke, the negative choke, the feedback coil and the dielectric property of water all summed together.

Now that we have a total resistance of the line side of 10 ohms
and a total resistance of the load side of 310 ohms

Next we take the 310 ohms and 10 ohms and use this formula to get the turn ratio.
Ns / Np = sqrt(Zs / Zp)

sqrt (310/10) = 5.567
So we need a turn ratio of 1 : 5.567

Take the sum of the secondary divided by the primary, then square root it to get the turns ratio.

We know our line voltage is 12 volts.  We can times this by the turn ratio of 5.567 which is 66.816 Load Voltage
Now we have our load voltage.
Next we calculate the load watts
using formula (66.816 ^2) / 310 ohms = 14.4 watts

Start with the input voltage and multiply by the turns ratio, that gives us the secondary side step-up voltage.  Take this voltage and square it, then divide by the secondary side DC resistance.  This gives us power in Watts.  The power value on the secondary side must equal the power value on the primary which is easily calculated by multiplying the voltage times current.  The current is calculated by knowing the resistance of the primary.  Power in must match power out.  This is what creates the equalibrium point at DC or simply DC impedance.

That's how you do it.

So we see there are interdependant variables here.  Ronnie's approach it to fix one of these values to start with to simplify the calculations; this starting point is the primary resistance.  The primary coil DC resistance must be at least 10 ohms.

If it is more than 10 ohms, then a resistor can be placed in parallel with it to make the primary resistance fixed at 10 ohms.  The goal would be to wind the primary coil with just enough wire to have a solid 10 ohms.

This is the preferred solution.

When this is done, your starting turns ratio is now fixed--the ratio can be altered only on the secondary side.  Also fixed is the dielectric property of water; this cannot be changed.  What is left are the three secondary side coils; each of which must all have the same number of turns (and DC resistance).  We will leave out the feedback coil for this exercise.

So if for example the primary has 240 turns to get exactly 10 ohms, we can deduce using the same bobbin form factor, the turns per ohm is approximately 24.  On the secondary we start with no less than 78.54 ohms.  We also know the turns ratio will be no less than 1 : 1.

The sum of the secondary coils will be no less than 30 ohms.  So the minimum secondary base DC resistance must be at least 108.54 ohms.  Using a goal-seek spreadsheet, you will find the needed turns ratio to be 1 : 4.6788.

Now as far as I know, 10 ohms is not any kind of magic number, it's just a starting point in Ronnie's method.

My spreadsheet shoots for whatever turns ratio you want and finds a workable impedance match for the wire/bobbins you physically plan to use.  So you may very well end up with a primary resistance of some crazy thing like 3.587 ohms, but it will match and the watts-in/watts-out will be spot on.

Some may find this version of my spreadsheet useful or interesting.  It handles primary / secondary wire of different gauges and you can adjust the bobbin parameters and exact wire specs as needed.  The chart is just a baseline, so put in the numbers that match your actual physical components.

The numbers currently in there are what I am targeting at the moment.  What you will notice right away is that the 78.54 Re is much larger than the resistance of the coils.  Will this even work?   The heck if I know without trying it.

the reason Ronnie picked 10 ohms is due to the fact that stan did the same... 10.5 ohms of wire,  220 ohms of resister in parallel = 10.02 ohms.

i need to dig in to the math a bit before i can ask more questions.

Thanks!!

HIGH VALUE RARE EXCEL  HERE VIC COILS MATTS ONE

Using the goal-seek in Excel makes is possible to not have to start with a fixed primary resistance.  You could spend days trying to match something up without that feature.  So I'm sure that's why Stan just picked a number and worked everything forward from there.  I'm also pretty sure that's why Ronnie did the same thing.  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Also, you still have the option of connecting a parallel resistor across the primary, but only if it turns out the primary resistance is too high to match up with the secondary coils.  If you start fiddling with taking turns off, you'll get things so balled up you'll end up starting over.I'm not so sure that the water in the cell will have a fixed resistance. if we start the bubbling... we change the resistance and capacitance.

so we do the calculation for 78.54 ohms????
in the end we should do the calculation for the amount of gas we want... rying to improve Stan's formula already are you.   Not such a good idea me thinks.

I think this is more accurate way to show the water capacitor than what stan has given.
There seems to a great deal of research into the interaction of electrolytes with electrodes, it also seems that the capacitance is formed by a very thin layer of water molecules/ions ( only a few  hundred angstroms thickness) i.e. one or two water molecules thickness, right next to the electrodes. If anyone is trying to simulate the circuit I suggest they try as per picture below, i believe its a more accurate way to visualise the water capacitor. I'm convinced its a double capacitor, not acting as a single capacitor.