Skip to content
Stan’s Legacy

WFC VIC

Started by unknown · · 434 posts · last reply 2 May 2014

  1. ali

    #251 ·

    Quote
    I made the core out of a microwave transformer core..
    IMHO this core is not really usable for this application, for the laminations are way too thick (as it's designed for 60Hz). You will get too much eddy currents at the proposed frequencies and therefore will have too many losses, which will result in a small q-factor.
    As I already mentioned before: If you wanna take a laminated steel core, the laminations have to be thin. Just look at Stans steel-core: There the laminations were also thin. But I think also, that a Ferrite-core is probably a simpler solution. The main difference is, that the steel-core has much higher saturation values, but a smaller permeability, whereas for ferrite, this is usually the opposite (high permeability, low saturation)


    Quote
    How much energy in watts  per hour (or joules) needed to spend to convert 1 liter of water in gas? I am interested in the efficiency of the cell.
    Ahh, BTW. I just remembered, that Stan himself calculated the efficiency of his early cell in the independent evaluation report. There he calculated something like an efficiency factor of 300 times (input vs output).

    Quote
    I used 3 4007 diodes in parallel and work fine in the vic...
    I absolutely wouldn't recommend using any 1N400X in any power switching supply. They are intended mainly as rectifier diodes for mains applications (60Hz). Their switching time is about 1000 times slower than that of a MUR.
    Why not using UF400X diodes, if money is short. They are also quite cheap, and much faster. Or did you already use the UF-types?


    EDIT:

    I finally found now some time to have another short look at the original VIC-board.
    A few things are interesting.
    First, it is really exactly the circuit from the patent (WO9207861).
    Second. The designer of the board made a layout error. The primary driving circuit, as it is in the patent is correct. But the board layout is wrong. The two resistors for the first transistor are connected the wrong way around. Therefore Stan had to wire the VCO-Out directly to the correct resistor.

    I already thought it very strange, that Stan added these dividers for the PLL-Signal in the patent circuit. As this wouldn't make any sense, to divide the signal here, as the pickup-signal and the driving signal have the same frequency. But as can be seen on the original board, he didn't use them. He just used them to divide the signal down for display on the LED, for nothing else...
    One thing is still strange. Namely that he wired the neg of the primary over an RC-damper to the comparator input.  First I thought he wired it to the VCO-out, but it only looks like that on first sight (quite hard to differentiate the two blue wires).
    Finally one could say, that today, one would really just replace almost the complete board by just one microcontroller. Only the Pickup-Signal, and some driving circuitry would be additionally needed. The driving of the primary one would most probably do with a FET and some special FET-driver-IC (much simpler, than this cascade of transistors).

    SIR,
    from my analysis of the control circuits figs 2 thru 11, i have used multisim student edition to try and determine the component values that were in the circuits... i came up with some very interesting scope simulations at the WFC.

    the figs 2, 3 &4 would take the variable duty cycle input from the accelerator and produce a variable voltage from a configurable low value for idle , say 3 volts to a maximum of say 12 volts across the range of the throttle pedal. this was done using a darlington pair at the high side of the primary

    the clock cycle was the interesting part as to how it timed the high side of the coil as well as the low side thru the pll

    the result was the q9 (tip120) would fire at the same time as the darlington pair on the positive side of the coil...made for some interesting waveforms...i have those files if anyone would like to view them...

    could never really figure out the scanning circuit.... got a triangle waveform that would give a gradually increasing voltage fed to the vco of the 4046 to vary the lock in frequencies...

    also the pickup circuit could be eiether a opamp or a comparator... i guess the comparator would stabilize the signal to something useable for pin 14 of the PLL chip

    any thoughts?

     FIG_9_LM339J_COMPARATOR.ms11

  2. ali

    #252 ·

    here are some of the circuits that I have almost complete and ready for testing. Pictured below are the Resonant Scanning Circuit and Pulse Indicator Circuit.


    would you mind posting the schematics for those boards??

  3. TonyWoodside

    #253 ·

    yea look at this thread, i have the schematic posted for the pulse indicator circuit and the signal and how it works.
    http://www.ionizationx.com/index.php?topic=1943.5

  4. Kali_ma_Amar

    #254 ·

    Quote
    also the pickup circuit could be eiether a opamp or a comparator... i guess the comparator would stabilize the signal to something useable for pin 14 of the PLL chip
    any thoughts?



    The OpAmp is just used as a Schmitt-Trigger. If the voltage from the pickup-coil is positive, it will output a high signal. If it's negative, it will output a low signal for the PLL. With the 1M/100K feedback you adjust the hysteresis.

    Edit:
    It's interesting. As I looked again at the original VIC-PCB, I discovered, that not even the LED is connected to the dividers. The LED is directly connected to the signal (the orange/white wire on the bottom left). This actually means, that the 3 divider chips were not used at all.

    It's also funny to note, that it seems the Inhibit signal, that's coming in from the external control, seems to have a different voltage level. Therefore he needed to add a level translator (Pullup with a germanium diode, in the lower left).

    Edit2:
    Seems like the server is having some real problems, the last few days, or is it just me?

    I thought again about the strange feedback wiring into the comparator of the PLL, that Stan made (the second blue wire). IMHO there's only one good explanation for this workaround, and why he didn't connect the output of the VCO to the comparator input (like it is usally done, and like in the patent pic). He uses quite a transistor cascade. If the driving delay is too big, then the comparator would already see quite some phase differences between this signal and the pickup-signal. Like that e.g. the Lock-in detector could then detect a not locked-position, although the resonance frequency is hit. If you connect directly the driving voltage of the primary to the comparator, then you certainly get rid of this transistor driving signal delay.
    But on the other hand, one must remember, that the voltage on the primary can get quite strongly negative if the VIC is in resonance (it can't get a high positive voltage, due to the freewheeling diode). So this voltage would somehow have to be clamped. Surely the CDs do have internal clamping diodes, but I'm not sure if they could withstand this amount of current, as there's only a quite small resistor in series.
    So either the green thing, which looks like a capacitor is a capacitor and is just filtering the input a bit, or it is a varistor. In the first case, the CDs internal diode would have to clamp the signal, but the signal is filtered. in the other case the varistor would do the clamping, but there wouldn't be a filtering.
    It's also to mention that this workaround is not really very proper, as it can in some circumstances yield quite some problems in the working of the comparator, as the voltage on the primary could also have some higher harmonics. If he really did it because of the delay, then an usual delay network would probably have been the better solution.


    Edit3:
    As I thought again about it, I came to the conclusion that it's most probably is a capacitor. For if he really wanted to clamp it additionally he would've taken a diode.


    Edit4:
    After having some more time to look at the VIC-PCB and do some power-routing coloring I finally realized, that there was no layout mistake. I just thought this at first, but it misled me, that Stan used to wire the gating signal over the connection port and not directly on the PCB. But not to have to wire it externally it seems, that he decided to wire it directly on the PCB by the blue wire.
    I'm still asking myself, where exactly the red wire is connected (the one which is connected to the RC-Damper which is the input for the comparator). But it's now past midnight...I will look again at it tomorrow.
    If anyone is interested, this is my "modified" version of the VIC-PCB-pic. I take no responsibility for any errors  ;D   (especially the power routing around the driving circuit and the analog voltage is a bit weird, there could well be some errors in my pic, and overall the coloring of the power routing is not yet complete!)
    (http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/9059/meyerspics69powerroutin.jpg)

  5. ali

    #255 ·

    Here is the complete figure 8 as verified by signal analysis in Multisim based on components from the photo
    ( it puts out the required sawtooth waveform... accept NO substitutes... this part is LOCKED DOWN folks!)
    Yahoo !

    working on a complete multisim circuit for Vic Card photo will post work in progress soon

     Control Circuit Figure 8.pdf

  6. Dynodon

    #256 · date not recorded

    Ali,the VCC for Stans VIC circuit was 12 volts and VDD was 5 volts.The first two resistors are 220k and the cap is 10uF.
    Don

  7. ali

    #257 · date not recorded

    Ali,the VCC for Stans VIC circuit was 12 volts and VDD was 5 volts.The first two resistors are 220k and the cap is 10uF.
    Don

    OOPS !
    my oversight is acknowledged, thank you sir!
    I will make the changes and correct...

    as far as the cap on pins 6 & 2 i think 1.0 uf makes more sense because it allows a higher frequency for the scanner to lock the VCO in less time, thereby following resonance more closely
    Any opinions from anyone else on this?

    @Don... ? are the photos you post allowed to be shared with others on the net or do you frown on sharing this stuff ?
    thanks for all you did and are doing... our country needs to be free from Oil Addiction ASAP !

    EDIT:
    fixed the VCC issue
    went back to the original 10VDC at the top of the resistor dividers for pin 3 of the LM741 on fig 8 as well, the result was a sawtooth wave with a peak of about 5 volts and a valley of about 2.5 volts. I hope this is what we need for the VCO input on pin 9 of the 4046

    see images below regarding the 555 timing
    with the scope set at 1 second per division horizontally the difference is very noticeable
    I vote for the 1.0uf cap for a closer tracking of the WFC resonance
    the 10uf takes too long to charge resulting in a huge delay...

     Fig 8 rev1.0.pdf  fig 8 1.0u cap.pdf  fig 8 10u cap.pdf

  8. TonyWoodside

    #258 · date not recorded

    That capacitor is a polarized 10uF, the scan time is set to 0.219 Hz. Also here's how you decode the precision resistors that Stan used.

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/res_prec.gif)

  9. Dynodon

    #259 · date not recorded

    Ali,I don't care if you post my pics anywhere else.They'll get around sooner or later.
    Don

  10. ali

    #260 · date not recorded

    Ali,I don't care if you post my pics anywhere else.They'll get around sooner or later.
    Don

    Here is a photoshop edit of the VIC card to help with figuring out the backside...

     VIC rotated.pdf

  11. ali

    #261 · date not recorded

    That capacitor is a polarized 10uF, the scan time is set to 0.219 Hz.


    May i ask if we are speaking of the same component? im looking at the dark blue electrolytic to the right of the 555, the glare does not allow us to determine exactly if it's a 1.0 or a 10 u... how did you get that value for the scan time?
    My multisim scope shots in a previous post show a very slow scan time with a 10u
    please help?
    im confused
    can the resonance afford to wait over a few seconds to readjust the lock in?

    Thanks for your posts and your excellent web site!

  12. TonyWoodside

    #262 ·

    Yes sir, Thats the cap Im talking about also. if you close you can see that its a 10uF 25v polarized cap. The scanning circuit has an on-time of 3 sec. and an off-time of 1.5 sec. this will cause a modulation of the frequency and coincides with what Puharich says about the voltage modulation of 3 sec. or 0.125 Hz - 0.250 Hz, which is the Nuclear Magnetic Relaxation time of the water molecule. The 1.5 sec. off-time allows the water molecule to recover. Heres what i have together as of right now, one photo has the component values and the other has the bottom traces overlaying the component side of the board.

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/stanmeyer/VIC_Card_values.PNG)

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/stanmeyer/VIC_Card_com-side_with_Trace.PNG)

  13. ali

    #263 ·

    Yes sir, Thats the cap Im talking about also. if you close you can see that its a 10uF 25v polarized cap. The scanning circuit has an on-time of 3 sec. and an off-time of 1.5 sec. this will cause a modulation of the frequency and coincides with what Puharich says about the voltage modulation of 3 sec. or 0.125 Hz - 0.250 Hz, which is the Nuclear Magnetic Relaxation time of the water molecule. The 1.5 sec. off-time allows the water molecule to recover. Heres what i have together as of right now, one photo has the component values and the other has the bottom traces overlaying the component side of the board.




    i thought the scanning time was required to be very fast so that the PLL could find the resonant frequency that gives lowest amps and that frequency was related to a range of frequencies between 1 and 10 khz, therefore the VCO (voltage controlled oscillator) needed a range of voltages to scan for a lock frequency, this is why the waveform from the scanning circuit has a ramp voltage from 2.5 volts to 5 volts and then back again until the PLL locks, it should happen as fast as possible because the cell may go out of resonance within 1/2 second.

    the scan time has nothing to do with the nuclear magnetic relaxation time of water and everything to do with the voltages required at pin 9 of the 4046 chip
    Am i wrong?

  14. TonyWoodside

    #264 ·

    all the voltages from the output of the gated pulsed via the transistor (vee/vcc) are 12v. The scanning range is set by pin 4 and the 4017, so for example the pulses that come out at pin 4 go to the 4017 which will be divided by 10 and are then sent back into the PLL via pin 3 and also these pulses are being fed back in with the gate pulse via pin 5. but the pulses coming straight out pin 4 could be 1khz -10khz and then once they go through the 1st 4017 its range is 100hz - 1khz and so on.

  15. Dynodon

    #265 ·

    Ali,the scan from this circuit took about 3 seconds like Tony says.I seen it working first hand.And the scan didn't go from 0-10khz.It had a center adjust pot on the board,that allowed you to raise or lower the frequency range.For example the the scan may go from 2khz to 8khz,then if you adjust the pot up so it starts at 4khz than it will go to 10hz.So it could go as low as 0kz and up to 10khz,but not in one setting.
     
    Tony,the 4017 weren't even hooked up on this board and they don't effect the output in any way.
     
    Ali,the cap is a 10 uF.I have a better picture of it.
     
    Don

  16. TonyWoodside

    #266 ·

    yea I noticed that there was no connection to the 4017's....My guess based on Stan and Puharich's writings is that the center frequency is 3980 Hz. So if you have the frequency set to scanning a range of +- 2000 hz from this center frequency it would be 1980 Hz - 5980 H. By setting it up this way you will have waveform that would look like the image below and it would peak at the center frequency.
    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/Freq_Burst.png)

  17. sebosfato

    #267 ·

    I think the scanning circuit can work much faster than 3 sec.


    I think that i drop into something here check this out and tell me what you think.


    What if we make tx2 + tx4 (mutual coupling) = to tx5 coil


    (tx5 is field adding too)


    So now we have two coils of equal length.


    they converge where the tx5 meets tx2 and in the tubes.  (a diode could be used there to block the discharge in reverse polarity but maybe is not needed, however stan used this in the vic sink circuit.


    If you make the outside capacitance to be connected to this point where tx5 meets tx2 you close a unipolar resonant pulsing core. And i explain to you why.


    When the pulse is first applied there will be B+ in the cell and a B-  But the outside container will be at 0v relative to both potentials. Obviously will be more positive than the negative and more negative than the positive. Now if you think of the diode you will notice that when the pulse terminates I think that the positive will become negative source of electrons so they will go toward the 0v... creating another pulse of same polarity...


    Would be useful to add another coil in a separated induction core between the vic and the outside of the cell so you can reduce the frequency while not changing the ratio between the tx coils. i think that would be what stan call the amp inhibiting coil. Also in the alternator.


    I noticed some similarities...


    I think that both chokes and the secondary acts not only as secondary but as a primary also during pulsing operations, inducing and being induced, the diode and the configuration allow the field to be unipolar therefore never changing direction if at resonance, varying the flux still by the pulses and resonance itself but never changing direction.


    would be clear that a way to detect if there is bipolar pulses would be a good way to detect resonance. But i still think that this could be only used as a reset, cause the best way to have a nice feedback would be to get it from a current transformer, or a coil wounded in the bipolar resonating coil tx6 amp inhibiting coil.


    The tx5 i supposed that should be little bigger than the other two cause this would encourages the discharge to come thru the other electrode. Well, i don't know, need to do more experiments. Tomorrow i will try some other things. Maybe thats why he talked about acomodating to the contaminants of the water. Maybe depending on the water the tx5 coil must be bigger or smaller than tx2+tx4 and also both this could maybe need or not other coil configurations....




    So
    tx1 primary
    tx2 secondary (having its positive connected to a diode D1 and the negative connected to the positive of the tx5 choke thru a diode or not)
    tx3 pulse indicator coil
    tx4 resonant changing choke, (the diode D1 coming from secondary positive is connected to the negative side of the tx4 choke, the positive side is connected than to the outer tube )
    tx5 resonant charging choke (have its negative side connected to the inner tube, and its positive connected to a diode D2 witch is than serially connected to the negative side of the secondary and to tx6 coil.
    tx6 amp inhibiting coil (in a separated core) connected between the point where tx2 negative side and the diode D2 meets and also connected to the earth ground.
    tx7 tuning variable coil (connected between tx5 coil and the cell)
     
    The cell must have a copper foil around it to form the resonant capacitor. This copper foil is connected to earth ground to complete the resonant circuit. 


    The tx6 coil could have a section of the primary wounded on it, this would help to neutralize the voltage for the next pulse.


    thats all folks


    BR


  18. Dynodon

    #268 · date not recorded

    Heres another pic
    Don

    attachment_6860 meyers pics (68).JPG

  19. ali

    #269 ·

    Figure 9 Pulser Indicator circuit verified using multisim 11
    See attached circuit:
    enjoy
    (@ don, @ tony...hope it meets with your approval)

     Fig 9 Verified via Photo lm318M.ms11

  20. TonyWoodside

    #270 ·

    Figure 9 Pulser Indicator circuit verified using multisim 11
    See attached circuit:
    enjoy
    (@ don, @ tony...hope it meets with your approval)

    Hey Ali, try this one out. only half the feedback coil was being used.

     Fig-9_Pulse_Indicator_Circuit.ms11

  21. hydrogenmask

    #271 ·

    Hi Tony,
    can you upload the file in multisim 10 format because I can not open it with version 10 ?
     
    Hm

  22. Newguy

    #272 ·

    Figure 9 Pulser Indicator circuit verified using multisim 11
    See attached circuit:
    enjoy
    (@ don, @ tony...hope it meets with your approval)

    Hey Ali, try this one out. only half the feedback coil was being used.

     
    I wish i knew electronics cawz ive been searching this week how to get the waveform u made with that adding em together :)

  23. ali

    #273 ·




    Hey Ali, try this one out. only half the feedback coil was being used.


    why did you add the cap?

    what was the reason for the am wave ?

    on the real VIC coil, do we need the 5 volts center tap or even the 5 volts at all?

  24. TonyWoodside

    #274 ·

    The cap is in VIC circuit, its there to block the straight lying 5v DC and to allow the pulsed DC to past so that it doesn't short out. The reason I also added the AM signal is because at resonance that's the wave you should get.

    Yes I have this file in Multisim 10 also, here it is below.

     Fig-9_Pulse_Indicator_Circuit.ms10

  25. TonyWoodside

    #275 ·

    Here are some prototype pics of the 5 coil VIC bobbins that I had made today. I used AutoCAD to draw them up and then transferred the drawing to a 3D printer which made them out of ABS Plastic. It took about 8 hours for these to be made.

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/5vic_bobbin_1.jpg)

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/5vic_bobbin_2.jpg)

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/5vic_bobbin_3.jpg)

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/5vic_bobbin_4.jpg)

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/5vic_bobbin_5.jpg)

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/5vic_bobbin_6.jpg)

    (http://www.globalkast.com/images/tonywoodside/5vic_bobbin_7.jpg)