WFC VIC
Started by unknown · · 434 posts · last reply 2 May 2014
-
#101 · date not recorded
can someone share the math approach for converting the air core value of a inductor to one with a core? something to do with permittivity.. i think me and ancientmist were discussing at one time.. is it that you multiply the inductance value of a air core by the permittivity value of a core? -
#102 · date not recorded
Hello owtlaw, there is a formula witch i don't remember very well that i found in a book. However you can find it on wiki too...
Would be 4pi× 10^7 * ur * (N^2*r^2/D)
ur is the relative permeability of the core
N^2 stands for number of turns squared
r^2 is the radius of the coil winding squared in meters
and D is the diameter
4pi × 10^7 is the permeability of free space, it is multiplied by the relative permeability of the core so you have the absolute permeability.
There are other formulas in witch you input the core cross section witch i think could be more precise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductor
You could use the short air coil calculation witch i found is great even if bit complex-
Man the coils are an art.
I use to make like 10 turns than measure the inductance, than i divide this value by 100 (turns squared) and i get the inductance per 1 turn squared. Than i calculate for the number of turns i want. For me this is the easiest way.
I have a nice news, yesterday i made the inscription in the fei institute of electrical engineering. I had to sign something like a NDA contract saying that any idea or patent or anything i have in the next 5 years will be their possession, except of this i'm very happy. hehe I just made this to assure that i will be doing an university next year, i still making other exams for trying the physics university... -
#103 · date not recorded
OK I mesured my coils tonight.All of my wire is 30 gauge .010" diameter.
Don,
Primary inductance= 200mH , 200 turns
Secondary inductance= 3H , 1000 turns
Chokes inductance= 6.5H , 2000 turns
Ferroxcube U core,the largest one they make
again my LC resonance is @10khz at @ 1kv at the cell
Don
I try to replicate the VIC coils in the BOX (3-23 VIC).
Is this the core you are using a: Ferroxcube U core U126/91/20?
When Relative Permeability ?/?0 for a U126/91/20 core is 2050.
The choke inductance (no core) should go down from 6.5H to 3.17mH, correct?
It would be nice to know each coil resistance.
Are you using the coil dimensions in the (3-23 VIC BOX) picture?
I'm having difficulty to find the resonance frequency. Not in range 1 - 10kHz.
My sec and chokes are: 48.8Ohm / 153.6mH / 0.25mm2 / 2000 turns (core) 31.7mH (no core)
br,
Webmug -
#104 ·
my cores are UR64/40/20-3F3
I've changed coils so often since that post,I don't know where I'm at now.My latest coils resonate @ 30khz.
My coils are made to fit the window area of each side,can't make them any longer.
Don -
#105 · date not recorded
my cores are UR64/40/20-3F3
Ok, thanks for the update
I've changed coils so often since that post,I don't know where I'm at now.My latest coils resonate @ 30khz.
My coils are made to fit the window area of each side,can't make them any longer.
Don
I'm thinking about winding choke1 (bifilar) and choke2 (bifilar).
The one generating the highest voltage to charge the cell?
1. Parallel- wound, series connected?
2. Parallel-wound, parallel connected?
3. Counter-wound, series connected?
4. Counter-wound, parallel connected?
br,
Webmug -
#106 · date not recorded
All my testing shows that seperate choke coils get higher voltage than bifiller.All wound in same direction,and all of their poles aligned in series around the core.
Don -
#107 · date not recorded
All my testing shows that seperate choke coils get higher voltage than bifiller.All wound in same direction,and all of their poles aligned in series around the core.
Did you connect a bifilar choke like this: http://www.k3hkr.com/images/Baluns/BiFoWOUND.jpg and make two of them separate on a core?
Don
br,
Webmug -
#108 · date not recorded
No I haven't,and I never see Stan do that method either.
Don -
#109 · date not recorded
No I haven't,and I never see Stan do that method either.
Ok, we are talking only about the Resonance WFC system . It was only a thought.
Don
So normal coil as a choke should work best?
Stan mentions DUAL RESONANT COILS/ BIFILAR SPIRAL WRAP COILS for the Injector VIC (580)
The Injector was the successor of the resonance WFC...I don't want to mix the two.
br,
Webmug -
#110 · date not recorded
Webmug I have tested (tested meaning measured the inductance of...) that winding pattern, it's the same as teslas bifilar as shown down below
(http://www.k3hkr.com/images/Baluns/BiFoWOUND.jpg)
If you measure only the Black coil at say, 1 H (random value), and then only the Red coil, will be 1 H as well, and then if you connect as shown, you will measure 4 H from A to B
so this can be used to increase inductance of a given coil for less turns, note that this considers A to B (red and black) as a single choke
This is worth more investigation. here is something i though of trying a few years ago, but still havent tried...
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v81/bigbuba/collected/Picture27-3.png)
for this you could have those two chokes next to each other on the same core or try different things... -
#111 · date not recorded
http://www.mkmagnetics.com/
@ donaldwfc
you documents collection is excellent
could you fix the broken document wfc news 1984 (8 pages) it stops downloading at 30.2 mb
attachment_6682 DSCF7516.JPG
-
#112 ·
Could it be a different core material than Ferrite. That core material for VIC 3-23 looks way too shiny.
What about Supermalloy or Permalloy?
Magnetic permeability is much higher than Ferrite? Why use a flat core in the VIC 3-23?
Magnetic permeability of Ferrite is low with those dimensions.
Any ideas?
br,
Webmug
-
#113 ·
I would go for what stan said, oriented grain electrical steel laminations. This is made to work at high frequencies.
Otherwise you could use amorphous laminations witch is even better. -
#114 · date not recorded
That's right Tony, also, the core is of ferromagnetic material and will act as a frequency doubler, so that should help in the 10kHz question using 5kHz as a base FR.
This paper appears in: PGMTT National Symposium Digest
Issue Date: May 1961
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/PGMTT.1961.1122355
Date of Current Version: 06 januari 2003
"In experiments on frequency doubling using ferrite slabs in a rectangular wave guide, planar ferrites consistently had much greater conversion efficiency than isotropic ferrites. The principle results are shown in Fig. 1. The geometry used is also shown in Fig. 1. The primary frequency was in the range of 8.5 to 9.1 kilomegacycles. The reference power level (0 db) was one watt peak power. The duty cycle was 10-4. The material properties are given in the append -
#115 · date not recorded
that photo above is a wound core with blue epoxy coating... nanocrystalline... they had a couple left from a batch that was just off spec... something tom bearden used for his MEG... at least thats what the chief of operations told me... i think they have a few of these left.
they were going to gap one for me because if we do it in a garage with a hacksaw the result will be shorted laminations and both halves need to be polished to a fine straight line across both halves so a hand saw would cut a crooked gap... wont work
also if the fine chips from the blade end up between the wound laminations the turns will short out then you need to put both ends in an acid bath to clean out the shorted turns.... very high tech cores !
-
#116 · date not recorded
Hi,
I'm new on this forum and just read through this topic. But some questions/comments arrived:
@Dynodon:QuoteThe core was two flat U cores about an 1/8 inch thick and about 1/2 wide
Jesus, was the core area really that small on this 5-Coil-VIC? Is that a screw in between the 2 choke coils on the pic, or is this the core? If it's the core, then from the picture it looks definitely gapped. This would be for me actually the only explanation, how a core with such a small core area could have been used without being saturated. Although if only a small current is flowing, with that many windings (from the pic and AWG size I would guess about 2'000 per bobbin), it would certainly saturate any ungapped Iron-powder or ferrite core. I would even have doubts if a steel core could handle it with such a small core area.
If it is an ungapped core, then the only conclusion I could draw is, that he intentionally let the core go into saturation.QuoteAlan,you can use a voltage divider.Get 10 each 1megaohm resistors and hook them up in series.Hook one end to the cell positive and the other end to ground.Then hook the scope probe between the 9th and 10th resistor.That would be closer to the ground end of the resistor dividers.This will give you a divide by 10 output to the scope.With a probe set on 10x and this divider,you'll get 100:1 ratio.
Just a little correction. I think you accidently made here a mistake by saying only 1MOhm instead of 10, for at the beginning of the thread you explained it correctly. To get a 100:1 with a 10:1 probe you need 9x10MOhm resistors. That means actually a resistance of 90MOhms. Your 10:1 probe has internally a 9MOhm resistor. The oscilloscope has a 1Mohm input resistance. So you will now have in total 90MOhm from your resistors+9Mohm from your probe+1Mohm from the oscilloscope=Total of 100MOhm. As the scope has a 1MOhm input, it will see only 1/100 of the total voltage.
So again in a short version: You need to place 90MOhm (eg. 9pcs of 10MOhm resistors) in between your 10xprobe and the cell to measure at 100:1. Voilà!
Did you actually really exactly look, how the coils were interconnected, or is this just a guess. As I understand you say, they were all connected in series with the WFC in between all in the same orientation. This means: If the primary gets current, then: The pos side of the secondary goes to the diode. The pos side of the first choke coil goes to the WFC. The pos side of the second choke coil is again at the secondary.
Additional question, which I think could be important. Did you see, if he electrically isolated the circuit, or was it grounded. Was the neg side of the secondary anywhere connected except the second choke coil, or was there any other ground connection (E.g. was the diode in the 5-coil-VIC mounted with isolation)?
Additional question: Somewhere here in the forum you state, that the "8XA-Circuit" wasn't a resonance circuit. How did you get to this conclusion?
I don't want to offend you, but I think it actually is. If you simply connect and drive it in the way Stan did, you will clearly see, that at a certain frequency you will get a resonance.
(I attached a small pic of my scope which shows the resonance condition. Unfortunately I could only drive the circuit with 20Volts, as my frequency generator surely cannot output more. I also only made very few windings, therefore the resonance frequency is a bit high (25 KHz), but I think the basic principle remains the same.
If one does look at how he connected the choke coils in this "8XA-Circuit", it is obvious, that if he really connected them like that, then they surely do not limit current in any way, as they cancel each others field out and are only seen as a resistance by the input voltage. But due to the capacitance in the system (and I don't mean the WFC capacitance, as this capacitance is at least for this circuit almost completely neglectable), the system is able to start to resonate and the voltage of the coils rise.
(http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/5135/yellowonwfcbluefgsignal.gif)
Blue: Input Signal after the Diode
Yellow: Signal on WFC (first choke coil side)
Red: Voltage over first choke coil
If this is really how this "8XA-Circuit" worked. Then it would make sense, that he introduced the primary/secondary (in a forward converter usage) as a replacement for the direct connection of the input voltage. But if the 5-Coil-VIC really would also have worked on the same basic principle, then the choke coils would have been wired differently (namely the same way, as in the "8XA-Circuit"). Therefore my above question about the wiring and orientation. If you say, that the choke coils in the VIC you saw were definitely (100% sure) not connected like that (same polarity to WFC), then that's OK, but I just wanted to be sure about that.
I would be really grateful if you could shed some light on these points, as you are the only one I know, who actually really saw Stan's originals.QuoteI would go for what stan said, oriented grain electrical steel laminations. This is made to work at high frequencies.
Just to mention: The most important factor, when it goes about laminated steel cores and frequency is lamination thickness. If you go by the frequencies here used, i would say, the laminations should be <= 0.25mm. And to get cores with such thin laminations is not that easy. Audio-Transformers usually have them, as they also operate at these frequencies. -
#117 · date not recorded
I'm planning to create an extreme version of the color-taped VIC, using 38AWG (ex. coating size) for secondary and chokes and for the primary a thicker wire on a modified EI to UI core.
Turns:
Primary: 50-100
Secondary: 30k-40k
Chokes: 30k-40k
Ratio Pri:Sec for 50:30000 = 5:3000. input 12V -> 7,2KV
Never wound a coil before, but I definately won't do it by hand
Am researching the coating for the available wire atm (7KG 38awg bobbin)
any suggestions? -
#118 · date not recorded
kali,
The cores for the vic coil were as stated.They did touch when put into coils.That's just a hole in the bobbin to see that the cores are together.The picture of the vic coil,the coil pack wasn't bolted down,so they may not have been touching.
As for the explanation of the 100:1 resistor divider you give makes sense and explains some things to me that I have seen in testing with mine.An electronics engineer gave me those numbers and a spice file showing a dived by ten using the 10 1meg ohm resistors.I measured my probe on 10x and it does measure 9meg.I will have to correct my resistor divider.Thanks for that info.
The coils were wired and hooked up just as I said.That info was taken directly from the vic coil.
The negative connection was isolated,not connected to any ground plane.And the diode was isolated mounted to coil case.
As for the plate cell resonating,I never saw it with a scope.Your test looks like you were driving the coil with a square wave only.The 8xa circuit drives the choke coil with a rectified ac wave and square waves.It gives a totally different output to the coils.You get unipolar humps with a frequency riding on top of it.Your wave is totally different.With my vic coil setup like Stans,I get the same waveform output that your scope shot shows.
Don
-
#119 · date not recorded
First: Thank you very very much for your answers, really!QuoteThat's just a hole in the bobbin to see that the cores
Could it be, that maybe he made the hole to be able to insert anything in there, so that the core gets a little gap?
For this is surely an important fact for me. If it was really ungapped, I would bet my left hand and right foot, that the core goes into saturation. This would actually mean, that suddenly all the resonance frequencies would drastically increase in the middle of every half-wave, which means the dU/dt values would rise a lot.QuoteThe 8xa circuit drives the choke coil with a rectified ac wave and square waves.It gives a totally different output to the coils.
Actually if you test it, it doesn't really make any difference in this setup in relation to the resonance if you use a square wave or a rectified AC wave. You can see this very clearly if you modulate any wave pattern from the frequency generator with the overlaying on off timing. The only important thing would be to correctly time them on and off (namely at the resonance frequency). The kind of wave pattern you switch on and off is actually not really that important (although a square wave pattern can surely boost your resonance to the highest voltage, for obvious reasons). In this crude setup, which was surely one of his earlier ones, IMHO he just still needed the unfiltered rectified AC Signal to be able to switch it with a SCR.
At least this is the conclusion I drew, by experimenting with this early circuit setup.
Surely this is only true in relation to getting the resonance (the coil part). The actual wave-pattern itself is additionally seen directly by the resistance of the WFC. If it then makes a difference in the overall functioning , I don't know, but I don't think so. But as long as not anyone is really able to replicate a working VIC, which yields more hydrogen than it should, IMHO everyone is allowed to have his theory, as how exactly these circuits split water more effectively than "generally allowed" .
I personally would currently have 2 main suggestions how he did split the water:
1.) He used the uneven E-Field distribution in a water cell (Helmholtz-Layer) to get the necessary high E-field for splitting water. The needed E-Field is quite high. According to the Tay-Hee Han patent (US patent 4427512) at least an E-field of 20kV/mm is needed. IMHO he manipulated the Helmholtz-Layer with the help of the "choke coils" in a basic circuit very similar to Dr. Stifflers circuit.
2.) He used a system, as described by the professor in the evaluation report. Namely, that he does let the normal brownian movement do the work to ionize the water, and then separates these ions from each other with the help of an E-field. If he then neutralizes them again (collapsing of the E-Field), you will have an electrolysis which is much more efficient than usual, as the additional energy is coming from the heat energy of the water. But if this system was used, then the WFC should have substantially dropped in temperature. In the smaller 3inch cells, it would have frozen the water, if it would not have been continuously run through the cell to prevent this. But as this is not the case, as I understood Stan, this hypothesis is not that solid. -
#120 · date not recorded
I can not see there being any gap in the cores once the coils are bolted to the case.The end caps on the coil pack has to be squeezed in on the U cores in order to bolt the assembly down.At that point there is no gap.
Here's a picture of the pulses at the cell from the 8xa circuit.This should help you see what I'm talking about.
Donattachment_6726 DSC_0107.jpg
-
#121 ·
Thank you very much.
I guess this is the voltage over the WFC? It seems a bit strange, as the top ripples, which should come from the AC-wave look more rectangular than tops of sines, but this could well be due to parasitics. It looks like the SS wasn't in such a good shape anymore, as the base electrode potential is quite high.
Interestingly I just woke up and thinking about why he isolated the circuit and came upon the idea, that in the "8xa circuit" he didn't made the switch on/off at the resonance frequency, but rather the rectified AC was already on the resonance frequency of the circuit.
For what I stated above is surely only true if the Ton/Toff is at the resonance frequency. But it surely also works, to have an unrectified AC to get the coils into resonance. To get them into resonance it is only important, that the input voltage gets higher and lower exactly at the resonant frequency. Surely a square wave would be best, but maybe too complicated for Stan to produce in this early stage.
But this would have been a total pain in the a s s to make the circuit so, as to exactly hit the resonance frequency with a fixed frequency input.
Why did I come upon this?
I was lying in bed and asked myself: Why did he isolate the circuit. There must be a reason for this. The only reason I could get was, that the overall potential might change during a Ton-Gating sequence, but this you could only measure if you don't make any earth connection with your scope to the cell.
I came upon another functional Hypotheses:
Actually this one, I already had a long time ago, but threw it away as I just couldn't image how one could make the corresponding circuit (if it is doable at all), but it now resurfaced. It is interesting to note that in an electrolysis process the splitting of the water molecule needs a different amount of energy at the 2 electrodes. The final reaction at the cathode (Hydrogen production) needs almost no potential and is therefore actually very "cheap" to produce. But the anode-potential is the real bugger, the oxygen atom in the final OH- molecule just wont let go the last hydrogen atom. There a lot of energy is wasted. This is why in optimizing conventional electrolysis processes, one focuses a lot on minimizing this potential.
But what if one creates a process which just focuses on making an asymmetric electrolysis. Namely we just actively try to get a cathode reaction. But this would obviously result in a rise in potential of the water. And here's the problem. Usually if I still try to get even more cathode reaction, I need more and more voltage (which means more energy), as the water already has that voltage. But if there would be any way, that the actual circuit would also rise in potential together with the water bath, it would work. You would get very cheap hydrogen. But there surely would be a point, where the potential cannot be heightened anymore, due to losses to the environment (therefore with this process it would be extremely important to heavily insulate the WFC). When one then does finally Stop the process, the water potential would come down again, and the anode reaction could now take place (for free, as no energy is needed in this step). This could be the reason for gating.
But I don't think this is really a reasonable idea, as if it would be really possible to make such a circuit you would additionally easily be able to produce electricity out of it for free (at the final anode discharge). Strictly speaking this would be a charging of a capacitor with only a linear dependency to voltage, in relation to the actual energy in the capacitor itself which is square to the voltage. I wouldn't see where here the energy should come from, therefore I don't think it's a reasonable theory.
Sorry, this got a bit offtopic in here. But hey here it's now 5 o'clock in the morning... -
#122 ·
Kali, basically what Stan's input waveform to the cell is suppose to look like is a full-wave rectification of an AM signal like the 3rd image in the picture below.attachment_6731 DSB-SC.jpg
-
#123 ·
QuoteKali, basically what Stan's input waveform to the cell is suppose to look like is a full-wave rectification of an AM signal like the 3rd image in the picture below.
This is at least like that in the Puharich-Patent. The question remains, if Stans WFC worked the same way as Puharich's. I doubt that, as the amplitude modulation frequency from Puharich was very very low.
Puharich himself actually never claimed that his process has an overunity which defies current electrolysis laws. And, what maybe some people here might astonish it is theoretically possible even for conventional electrolysis to have more than 100% efficiency (related to electrical input). The remaining energy is coming from the heat of the water. the hotter the water the less electric energy I need for splitting the water. The extreme side to this is the thermolysis of water, where the water splits due to the high temperature without any electricity involved at all.
So as Puharich himself stated, his process is an extremely efficient electric electrolysis process, so that with the help of the additional heat energy one is able to get above 100% in relation to electric input at room temperature. I think he mentioned something like 110 or 120%, don't know exactly anymore. -
#124 ·
All my research has lead me to the conclusion that Stan was doing the same as Puharich, except Stan refined the method and made it produce a lot more gas output. -
#125 ·
quote:
I was lying in bed and asked myself: Why did he isolate the circuit. There must be a reason for this. The only reason I could get was, that the overall potential might change during a Ton-Gating sequence, but this you could only measure if you don't make any earth connection with your scope to the cell.
I came upon another functional Hypotheses:
Actually this one, I already had a long time ago, but threw it away as I just couldn't image how one could make the corresponding circuit (if it is doable at all), but it now resurfaced. It is interesting to note that in an electrolysis process the splitting of the water molecule needs a different amount of energy at the 2 electrodes. The final reaction at the cathode (Hydrogen production) needs almost no potential and is therefore actually very "cheap" to produce. But the anode-potential is the real bugger, the oxygen atom in the final OH- molecule just wont let go the last hydrogen atom. There a lot of energy is wasted. This is why in optimizing conventional electrolysis processes, one focuses a lot on minimizing this potential.
But what if one creates a process which just focuses on making an asymmetric electrolysis. Namely we just actively try to get a cathode reaction. But this would obviously result in a rise in potential of the water. And here's the problem. Usually if I still try to get even more cathode reaction, I need more and more voltage (which means more energy), as the water already has that voltage. But if there would be any way, that the actual circuit would also rise in potential together with the water bath, it would work. You would get very cheap hydrogen. But there surely would be a point, where the potential cannot be heightened anymore, due to losses to the environment (therefore with this process it would be extremely important to heavily insulate the WFC). When one then does finally Stop the process, the water potential would come down again, and the anode reaction could now take place (for free, as no energy is needed in this step). This could be the reason for gating.
But I don't think this is really a reasonable idea, as if it would be really possible to make such a circuit you would additionally easily be able to produce electricity out of it for free (at the final anode discharge). Strictly speaking this would be a charging of a capacitor with only a linear dependency to voltage, in relation to the actual energy in the capacitor itself which is square to the voltage. I wouldn't see where here the energy should come from, therefore I don't think it's a reasonable theory.
end quote
HI Kali
You are right about Your hypotheses. Stan also talked about water as source of electrical energy and calculated amount of electrons coming from wfc to 10 kw of electrical energy. I see it in one of stan's vid. ( new zeland meting vid )He was speaking exakly like You .You are on the right track keep going. sorry for my english
Thank andy