101 plate cell, G board and Toroid ..........
Started by unknown · date unknown · 88 posts
-
#76 · date not recorded
That's okay as he has shared information.
We are after the subtle nuances of this setup concerning the 101 and toroid anyway.
I'm sure there are variations of the 101, just like I want to make my variation.
I do not like the Boyce method of filling the cell.
Steve has a variation also.
The various methods have included hole through plate and I don't like that either.
Personally want flow through bottom to top, and want to check with different levels of electrolyte.
I still believe if there is any hole in plate or flow around plate then there will be electrical losses, the plate needs to be as isolated as it can be.
So the 101 in a Holdgate container is isolated, and there can be only a few variations that can retain isolation from current loss bypassing around a plate.
I may be wrong but have this written in my thoughts, the possible paths of electrical current loss and what I want out of a cell. -
#77 · date not recorded
Some thoughts I want to post this early morning I woke up.
There is just a tiny small window of the perfect adjustment to find when tuning into a coil setup for the resonant effect we are all after.
Over the years we have been tuning rebuilding electronics and winding coils and not had a good story of success of a over abundant reaction.
There are only a couple of success story's.
Those positive story's the person found the right tuning and coil setup and in many respects it could have been by mistake.
If by mistake it was persistence of building and tuning and didn't happen by overnight.
This is totally relative to Meyer Boyce Puharic Cramptom Freddy and whoever else.
Point is in order to find this place and use equipment that has the ability to prove the concept there is only a tiny spot, a perfect adjustment, a wire coil that's just so close to the perfect wind by one turn, the temperature of our system maybe, the electrolyte (ohmic value of solution), the size and material of the core, the amplitude of voltage, the frequency(s), the width(s), the plate (tube) and material, this list goes on and on.
Its going to need to be right on or very close!
It can be found I believe with persistence, after all these years I still won't give up.
Hopefully in this Boyce setup I will see something positive.
Same in the Meyer setup, that perfect point of adjustment will eventually be found.
There is a bunch of us still searching for it.
I hope that one day I could look back at this and laugh about it.
Keep on trucking, building and adjusting!
To whomever has found this point of reaction, SHAME on you for not sharing. -
#78 · date not recorded
Some paragraphs out of the Boyce PDF, just trying to get this information correct:
Rotational mode, where channel 1 is pulsed, then 120 degrees later channel 2 is pulsed, then 120 degrees later channel 3 is pulsed, then 120 degrees later channel 1 is pulsed again, etc. NOTE: This phase is related only to the pulses that are common amongst the 3 phases. IE every fourth pulse on channel 1 (42.8khz), every other pulse on channel 2 (21.4khz), and every pulse on channel 3 (10.7khz). The in between pulses of channel 2 will also be about 120 degrees behind the center pulse of the off-time pulse group of channel 1. This creates 2 nested RMFs at X and 2X, and a pair of bi-directional impulses every X cycle. In this mode, phase is the twist, or offset, in true 120 degree timing per primary. There is not a very pronounced phase-locking effect as there is in pulsed mode. The analogy for this mode is like a "tropical storm", to a "mild hurricane". This is a higher energy mode, which can tend to lose stability, and as such is more difficult to maintain control. Timing for channel 1 would be at 0 degrees, channel 2 at 120 degrees, and channel 3 at 240 degrees, then repeat. Channel 1 is never changed in phase, The twist is slight variations of channel 2 in reference to channel 1, of no more than 1/10th of a degree, and matched by twice that at channel 3, i.e. no more than 1/5th of a degree. This is assuming that the primaries are placed exactly on 120 degree centers. Each primary winding is like a particle accelerator for the toroidal ring, they must be fired at the right times or they will buck the rotations instead of reinforcing them.
Question: What does he mean about the 1/10th or 1/5th of a degree?
Let me try to initiate an example: 42.8khz @ 2.5% on time, 21.4khz@1/10th of a degree more 2.75% on time?, and 10.7khz@1/5th more 3%on time?
Does this example appear correct?
Suggested pulse width 500ns: 0.0000005seconds = 500 nanoseconds, 42,800hz = 0.0000233 seconds per pulse
A later PDF I uploaded stated to adjust the frequency's, then adjust 42.8Khz to its minimum width and adjust the other 2?
1 Hz resolution is fine for bench test applications where you're just looking for proof of concept. Is it a fast
and powerful enough microprocessor to monitor all the feedback points while maintaining tuning on the resonant reaction? It will require at least 0.01 Hz resolution to maintain a good phase control system for higher performance operation. This can make the difference between a 200 - 300% power efficient vs. a 500 - 1000% power efficient system.
Notice, the fine point of resolution stated that is needed. (tuning to the 100th is very fine).
Rotational mode is where the timing of the pulses are about 120 degrees out of phase. These are
driven in a Wye configuration.
Regardless of the mode, phase angle between drive signals can be used to create repeatable
interference patterns in the EM field. Try to think of these interference patterns as EM holograms,
that given the right conditions can interact with dominant energy. When the dominant energy is
kicked, it can kick back - hard! Normally, the three states of dominant energy are in balance, and
no net energy flow occurs. When unbalanced, energy flow can be initiated. Our goal is to create
controlled imbalances, and maintain this control while we make use of the tapped energy to power
loads.
extremely fast switching times
very sharp and narrow pulses
Longer duration on times are just wasted power
accuracy of primary coil mounting
Even assuming that we are able to get our primaries precisely located in exactly the right places, a perfectly balanced 3 phase field rotation is not going to put out much like that. That is where a null in the response is, and minimal output occurs. If it were a case of just needing simple 3 phase output, then we would just need to drive all 3 primaries with a common 3 phase motor controller. As I am told quite often by those that do not understand the precision phase requirements, I could just buy a 3 phase motor controller chip. When I ask them if a chip like this provides precision phase control, of course the answer is no.
When tuning for resonance, the first resonant frequency of the coil will be Transverse resonance. About 1.5 times that frequency will be the
longitudinal frequency.
This next statement on tuning is interesting:
Suggested method of tuning: a. Build a Faraday Cage b. Place your coil within c. Place a SECOND coil of some type outside of the box. d. On finding the first transverse resonant frequency, there will be no signal picked up on the SECOND coil. e. When you think you have found the longitudinal resonant frequency (about 1.5 time the frequency of the transverse) you will pick up a signal on the SECOND coil that is outside of the Faraday cage.
This is hard to understand why elevation would suggest to change polarity?
For the lower performance and more stable toroidal power systems, only the secondary bias is used. That is the DC potential bias only. This secondary bias is what creates the dipole charge separation I spoke of. The dipole can be of either polarity, but for some reason one will work better than the other depending on the local environment. For this high altitude location and the replicator in a high altitude location in Colorado, it works better with + applied to the secondary and - applied to ground. For the replicator near sea level in Florida, it works better the other way. I have not yet figured out for sure why location makes a difference in which works better.
The DC bias is two-fold in my system. Primary function is to provide a relatively high voltage dipole charge separation between the core and earth/ground. The RMF which occurs during 3 phase drive of the toroid takes place while contained within the electrostatic field of this DC bias. Secondary function is
specifically related to the application of this system as a power source for the hydroxy gas system. It
provides a source of free electrons for canceling charge, which is required by my resonance drive system. You are 100% correct in that the higher the DC bias potential, the greater the energy gain possible. The only reason I limit to the 160 VDC region in that common unit is because it is the voltage requirement of the load that unit was designed to power. By the way, I had that same replicator run a test by installing a DC blocking capacitor in series with a 120 volt load, raise the DC bias potential, and watch the output climb while no additional load was placed on the power supply. I think he finally may have learned something about the potential of DC potential ;-)
You will likely find that with 16 gauge silver plated, Teflon insulated wire, you may end up near 140 turns if you keep it tight.
NOTE: I kept this tight and ended with 130 turns and in order to create a perfect space between turns I had to remove 1 turn (total 129 turns).
The three primaries are equidistant on 120 degree centers
same care for even winding spacing as the secondary
Each primary MUST have the same exact number you choose
This is an excerpt from another PDF:
For primary winds around coil.
Primary to produce voltages of about 25% of the measured secondary voltage.
For example only: secondary voltage 155 divided by 4 = 38.75 divided by 12.5 (primary voltage) = 3.1 which is the turns ratio.
My secondary has 129 turms divided by 3.1 = 41.6 so instead of 42 I ended with 41 on my primary.
Lets try a variable: 157 divide 4 = 39.25, 39.25 divide 13.6 = 2.88, 129 divide 2.88 = 44.8 turns (now my electronics can't compensate because I have 41 turn primary).
So according to the math relationship written in the PDF the effect of resonance I want can't be found using the second example above using my battery on automotive GM charge system.
According to this math above in order to get the right response I need to be able to provide a primary voltage adjusted properly to the secondary voltage.
I say this because some vehicles have a higher battery voltage from the regulator if used in an automotive application.
It appears you need to compensate the voltage in an appropriate fashion.
So a bench test application would suggest an adjustable primary, and a variac on secondary to compensate for coil windings.
Now somewhere it was posted that Patrick Kelly came up with this formula after talking with Bob.
This information is important in the respect that there is only a tiny window to get the correct reaction.
It would be nice to hear about any other variations.
-
#79 · date not recorded
how bout a picture of youre G board scope shots to start with? -
#80 · date not recorded
Newguy I see your very interested.
Wish we had others here that could share stories, from what I understand many have tried and failed and it sure would be nice to kick up the old Boyce experiments.
Personally I'm still in the construction phase, on my new cell.
Its going to take a while, I'm still in the drawing phase. All materials are here and ready except for the CNC machining.
Still some preliminary is getting done before I find the machinist.
On the electronics side, I'm trying to nail down from what I have read the approach to the adjustments that must be made (as in the PDF).
Right now its rather one-sided, not tested by me.
Maybe one day soon we'll attract others already experimenting.
Trying to make as much sense from the information available as I can.
These details take time.
Some things are still puzzling to me.
If you have read the adjustment procedures, they are rather vague in many respects but are enough to get a person started.
-
#81 · date not recorded
thats cool Komtek,
I found one person who still has his project pictures up on oupower.com with his try at Bobs stuff from 5 years ago.Im not sure if Kumaran is still expierimenting or not but he did find that the TL494 is more stable than the 556 with the 42.8 pulse.
( http://oupower.com/index.php?dir=_Other_Peoples_Projects/kumaran&DrillDown=yes )
His combined waveforms at the secondary are not good..
When you get around to tunning your board it wont seem as complicated once you see how the waveforms are suppost to look.You will understand the slight phase diffrence is whats required to get the disired waveform.Openning up the 10.7 1/5 from its fastest rise and fall time allows the next one to do its thing and then openning up the 20 somethin 1/10 of its fastest rise and fall times allows it to do the same,by then the 42.8 has plenty of room to do its thing without adjustment.
I -
#82 · date not recorded
That's nice to be able to look at someone else's project.
Although its pretty far off the recommended (wire) material and size this is something to take a look at.
Thanks for posting the link.
Yes I have heard or other timers that seem to be more stable.
I have 3 cells that are the same 13 plate cells, maybe I could connect some power supplys and alter the voltage variables and connect these in series and start experimenting a little.
I'll look into this.
-
#83 · date not recorded
Hi folks,
A part of the Boyce build is the famous toroid.
For those who are not really well educated in electronics, i have here for you a NOMOGRAM.
If you want to have the most optimum G factor in your coils or LC circuits, this is your guide.
Find your frequency, then you know which Henry's and or Farads you need...
Stevenomograph.jpg
-
#84 · date not recorded
Nice Steve!
Thanks for posting the graph.
Merry Christmas all! -
#85 ·
Yes Steve, Thanks for the graph. This addresses some of the questions I have been asking. Maybe now I can take some readings from my setup and learn how to apply some of this. I started this thread to get input on tuning and modifying this circuit and have not been disappointed. Many good ideas here already. I could use some suggestions on taking measurements without the benefit of a lot of expensive equipment. At this point I`m more interested in tweeking what I have before I add any else to the equation. Many thanks to all who have chimed in so far. -
#86 · date not recorded
Here's another file that has good explaination of the Boyce cell/stack and toroid.
b_hex_emails.pdf
-
#87 · date not recorded
NickRanger,
Here is a link to a nice forum post at Rwg, it contains info on impedance matching and resonance.
I'm thinking this would be helpfull to make your 101 plate cell a resonant system rather than the Boyce LEM system.
My first thought is the total resistance of your cell would be a starting point.
Next a choice must be made of the frequency which also could be a harmonic number of your choice.
From here it starts getting deeper, wire size/turns core material.
So far from what I have read maybe start with only impedance matching on this circuit.
Maybe later you/we can add in capacitive portion of resonance.
There are a couple video's I liked on youtube referenced from that rwg post.
This gives some understanding to get you started:
-
#88 ·
Hi NickRanger,
I do have some input regarding the choke and capacitors if this may help you a bit. The circuit is a low pass filter, 12db per octave as used in audio systems to limit upper frequencies from running into the circuit. From my experience, I am seeing that the cell has wired into it, going to the cell, one coil in series, and one cap of 470 microfarads. I tested the cell, with the exact amount of electrolyte in it and I am coming up with 1-2 ohms. This means nothing. We need to obtain the actual impedance of the cell , and this has to be done with an impedance meter, which test the impedance while the circuit is powered up. Plus, a 12dB low pass filter circuit for a 1 ohm load that uses a 470 Microfarad capacitor would be filtering out every frequency above 150 Hz at 1 ohm, but, would change by double the frequency at 2 ohms. The cell will not perform as expected, nor could the pwm even work with this type of circuit because all of the high frequency harmonics would be filtered out.
I am having the same difficulty getting the FETs not to fry, but, if you have wired the tpu's secondary coil in series with the cell or load, you should have a massive output of 15-18 liters per minute, and 4.9-5.9 amps at 120 volts AC at your rectifier, or even less on the dc side of the rectifier. The coil doesn't even have to have the primary side of the coil energized to get a massive output. I am pretty confident that the schematic isn't correctly showing the primary coil lengths, because the fets are not in saturation on my pwm3g, and they smoke out instantly, especially if i wire them directly with no fuse, the board's traces burn off instantly.
20 windings is what the diagram shows, and if you double this, there still isn't enough resistance in the primary coil to allow the circuit to be energized without a blatent short circuit, heat release from tpu, or FET frying happening. My calculations are showing a bare minimum of 60 turns on the primary, and 600 turns minimum on the secondary coil. If you look at SM's primary coils, his FETs dont burn up like this because he has to have a bare minimum of 300 turns to create a high enough resistance to allow the FET to operate correctly and remain energized. I am seriously looking into replacing the mosfets with IGBT's due to their liking of high amperage and high frequency. MOSFET's are terrible for the high frequencies at a heavy load and are nearly impossible to drive the loads necessary to get this to work. The key here I think is to get the primaries energized and turn on the secondary feed at the same time. What Bob I think is implementing here is a small "AC" high frequency pulse over the dc to give the circuit the " Battery Charger" effect. This is easily obtained with the rectifier, without the pwm circuit and the Toroid, but, to make much more sense, I am leaning more toward the SM 9xb circuit to get merely the same result that Bob is trying to show is possible here. I truly believe that the circuit that Bob is sending out to the public is shown completely wrong and we must figure this all out ourself without any help, and it is difficult to figure out the things that are wrong here.
I believe the toroid needs to be wired in parallel on the secondary to obtain a low amperage output at a high frequency, but, the chokes need to be changed, as well as the caps. The filtering out of the low frequencies completely eliminates the process that is being given from the pwm3g if you look at it from far away, because anything over either 150hz or 300 hz is being filtered out by the coil and capacitor on the positive side. We also have this on the negative side, so, we are filtering on both ends, and I am not sure what this accomplishes, maybe even limiting that very same frequency range from the other end of the spectrum.
I noticed that if we just rectify the ac 120 volt mains voltage, and then add the low pass filter to the pos and neg of the cell output, we change the amperage in my experiment from 15-18amps ac down to 5.5-7 amps, from 1.3rd to 1/2 of the amperage. The cell still rocks out 5 liters per minute, but I am not using a BB 101 plate series electrolyser in this test. So, in the end, the output if wired as said in his documents, series through the secondary coil will give full rated output just as if it were plugged into the wall, because there is nothing additive to the circuit that I could find due to the output filters. I found the value of the choke for the cell in a crossover chart, and it happens to be 1.8 mH if you have a 1ohm impedance, as well, the cap will be 470 Microfarad. I had trouble obtaining a 450 microfarad at 200 volts, because nobody makes this, so, I used two 470 mfd and 2 .8 mH coils in series to get 1.6 mH, since I have had trouble locating a 1.7 mH inductor choke that is anywhere near the ampacity desired.
I ordered a bulk order of chokes from EBAY, which come from China. They are open coil, and shouldn't be covered as HydrogenGarage sells because they heat up. If these heat up, the field and inductance changes. The Toroid certainly will not be able to obtain any "environmental" energy if it is kept in a Faraday Cage, so I have left all of the coils open to absorb energy, but, I really don't think this is what happens anyway. I am quite certain that the Toroid is taking free electrons from the air surrounding the toroid, this is why Bob leaves the Faraday enclosure vented, so air could come in instead of creating a vacuum inside once the additional free electrons have been absorbed. The air will move anyway due to the heat the Toroid produces. I am thinking that the cell wilol have to be a series electrolyser with no electrolyte when starting so we do not overheat the FETs from the start. I also think the cell should be conditioned using the toroid and not any other source due to the miniscule output that could be obtained if we vary the ac voltage with a variac or similar.
I have seen a post by Bob that states that the Peak to Peak voltage of the pulses should be 30 volts peak to peak. We wont obtain this with 12volts dc input to the pwm3g. This will have to be raised, so, a variable dc power supply must be used to obtain this waveform, which I think is critical to stop the FETs from overheating or being driven to saturation. The FET's are close to their limit at the frequency because he says we have to dial the pulse width down as far as possible. On output 1, I get 22,400 hz from the 556 if I go all the way in with the width. If I back it out a hair, I am able to obtain the frequency desired, but, the output is just at the edge of saturation. Once a load is added to the FET at high frequency, it goes into complete saturation and smokes the FET very easily. I think the load is way too much from the primary coils, so, if we put many more turns on the primary, it will not do this, but, we still have to have the correct turns ratio for the secondary to obtain the desired output. Our secondary coil still has 120 volts-150 volts dc coming through from, the rectifier, so, we do not need to have to match this voltage but, the turns ratio should be 10 times. He says 20 turns primary and 140 turns on the secondary. This would give you a 1:7 ratio, which would turn a pulsed 14 volts into 98 volts. I have built the toroid 3 different ways. I have taken the time to do what I think will work, and that is 300 turns per primary coil, and then secondary is 3000 turns. If you watch Bob's interview on Youtube which is over 1 hour long, look at the thickness of his toroid. It is huge. Also, it doesn't matter what type of primary wire you use, just as long as it is enameled and wrapped tightly. Spacing is not critical per turn just as long as we have 300 turns per phase. The secondary only needs the proper amount of winding in different layers, which will either need to be insulated between layers, or use a ptfe jacketed solid core wire as he does, we just need to be sure the primary coils could handle the ampacity because the pwm will be driving the coils pretty hard. If we have 14 volts driving the system, and the coils built as I stated, the load will be split because the secondary is in series. So this eliminates 1/2 of the calculated load from the FETS. The FETS would absorb 40-50 amps if the secondaries were in parallel with the cell. This isn't the case, so, some of the load will be eliminated. What the public doesn't see is that there are 2 sources of load in this circuit. They are only seeing 4-5 amps driving the cell from the rectified feed (ac mains) There will also be an additional 20 plus amp load if the pwm powers the primary coils effectively because they are driving the secondary as well with 1/2-1/3rd of the normal rated load it should normally put out if the secondary was wired in parallel to the cell. Basically what I am getting at is the fact that we are driving a transformer that has a load on it. If the primary was say 10 volts, and the windings were a 1:10 ratio, we would get 100 volts out. If the secondary was built as a standard transformer, we would only get ac voltage out of the transformer unless we rectify it, but, we would absorb 100% of the load of the cell if wired in parallel from the secondary to the cell. I am stating we have two separate feeds here on Bob's system, and it isn't looking like power is coming from anywhere other than the pwm (1/3rd to 1/2 of the power) and 50 -75% is coming from the rectified and filtered AC mains.
Where else is theToroid supposed to be getting it's energy? It doesn't have a massive antenna coming from it, nor does it have a big open coil that's grounded on one end to obtain voltage from the clouds, or anywhere else. The Bias is basically just making the magnetic flux flow in one direction to make the system more efficient as Charles Flynn's invention does. Let's not look too deep here because I have a feeling there isn't the correct data left here for anybody to build this correctly. I have been working on this for quite some time now, and nobody has offered their assistance. If Bob had the ability to help,. we would all be in governmental jeopardy .
Try my windings with a smaller, maybe 24 gauge wire for the primaries, and then wire the secondary to give 10 times the input and i bet you will obtain some sort of effective result . The low pass filters (chokes and caps) will still reduce the amperage, but, they will reduce the out put due to the higher frequencies being completely filtered out.
Oh, BTW, avalanche is absolutely normal with transistors, so, when having a high voltage bias and a low voltage bias, be sure to wrap enough windings so you have a low enough load, and keep the cell or a dummy load wired into the circuit so you do not get this. I have driven mine into avalanche and no lightning occured other than the bolt that comes out of the toroid due to the heavy magnetic vortex that was created. The transformer will output 3 times the load, and 3 times the voltage using a High Bias, so, you may get 600-1000 volts, which will feel like lightning, but, it can be very dangerous since it will have 3 times the current, and be just like being hit by a high voltage power line. Mine discharged to the ground behind my station, so, I was very fortunate. I didn't see clouds being manufactured or anything of the sort. The magnetic field will be very weak at a heavy load, at merely 38 turns as Bob states, so, you will only load up the power supply and it will not do a thing. . Look up online how to build an electromagnet. The videos will prove that you will need hundreds if not thousands of turns to make this very effective and have nearly no load, creating a very strong field. This is nothing new, Charles Flynn has created this, and applied it to his transformer's magnetic core to make them 3 times as efficient as they normally would be. (source: ) Thane Hiens, Charles Flynn, and others have done this, which their ouputs differed a bit in similar ways. Thane used two cores in one unit to eliminate the flux from the primary coil, and flynn used the magnet to make the flux resistance free. Magnetic flux has resistance just like an electric circuit, but, of course our laws of physics that were do9cumented must have left this out whenm they wrote the books because they make it look like we are breaking the laws of physics when we use a magnet to a core, it is really only allowing 100% of the power to be released, and we normally see massive 70% loss in this situation without a magnetic bias. Bob didn't invent this, he saw this in his research from guys like Flynn, Hendershot, and many others, and there is another fellow named Zeeman who built the magnetic bias for substation power, which is still used till this day. (called Zeeman's Energy) There are all sorts of methods out there, but, I don't think this circuit will consist of "Longitudinal Energy", or power from the skies. The word Longitudinal merely means it is acquired "length wise", and i think this was made up to rename the energy gained by the magnetic flux efficiency that's created by the electromagnetic winding or "bias winding" that's all!!
Regards,
AdvancedH20Okay, Let me say from the start a lot of this is over my head already, but I will tell you what I have done and my results so far. First at 160vdc [1.6v per plate] and no leaks or bypass you have no production. Zero, zzzzillch. 50% duty cycle is about the best you could hope for on the g board with out frying the fets, but this is opposite of what you want. According to Bob and others a very fast,sharp rise and fall times is what is needed to tap the ZPE. To achieve this, the duty cycle needs to be between 90 and 95%. Since this board switches neg.this is 5 to 10% on time. At these settings, the output of the board is about 12.5 to 13vdc and about 35milamps. Absolutely no production at these low voltages. I have sat for hours on end slowly turning the fine trimpots, going thru the complete range on all 3 freq. at many different duty cycles. As you said earlier, many different things going on here. On one hand we are to believe that this fast ,sharp rise in switching times is what is needed to disturb the zero point energys and to get our gain, [many at this site agree with this]. At this low power I can not see how the freq. can have any effect on the cell. I have seen nothing yet. I have went the 50, 60% duty cycle way as well, burning up many fets and caps . Even tried replacing them with heaver ones with no different results. Back to the chokes. I have tried solid copper, stranded and even bifiller with several different cores. [in the early D9 docs. there was no specs given]. Shouldn`t the chokes help contain the freq. to inside the cell to get resonance ? I can see my 3 freq. behind the bridge and have seen it at the battery as well.
Sign in to reply, or ask for an account.