Cookies-law

Cookies help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
http://www.overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please leave this website now. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

Poplamp

poplamp

CCTool

CCTool

LEDTVforSale

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

OverUnity Book

overunity principles book

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Statistics


  • *Total Posts: 493074
  • *Total Topics: 14500
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 177
  • *Total: 181

Facebook

Author Topic: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed  (Read 48348 times)

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« on: November 05, 2007, 12:50:03 PM »
Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit

I thought it would be a good idea to start a new thread to investigate Meyer's resonant charging circuit, in order to keep this discussion separate from the 'water capacitor' discussion.

What Meyer has is a series resonant LC (inductor/capacitor) charging circuit, which uses dc pulses to charge the water capacitor.  This circuit is often used in Tesla coil designs to produce very high voltages in which current is made to arc across a spark gap.

Initially looking at the circuit I had assumed that the charge on the capacitor would build and build until catastrophic breakdown of dielectric oxide layer would allow a current surge (effectively the spark gap). However, the blocking diode Meyer employs now limits the voltage across the capacitor to only double the supply voltage. So if, and I say 'if' we are relying on dielectric breakdown for the cell to work then the supply transformer would need to initially multiply the voltage by at least half the potential that would exceed the breakdown voltage of the oxide dielectric.

Although the dielectric could recover between high voltage pulses, this would mean frequent very high current flow between the electrodes which would surely, quickly heat up the water. As Meyers cell apparently stayed cool, I'm not 100% convinced that dielectric breakdown is the key.

I know many people are using low voltage dc pulses and it would appear that at maximum cell efficiency are exceeding Faraday gas output by 3x.  If figures are correct, this is a step forward, but still not enough to power an ICE. And, at low voltage levels would surely not be creating an intense enough electrical field to stress the water molecule.

If the wfc is indeed a capacitor in series with and inductor (a series LC circuit), what are the circuit properties?

Well the inductor would provide great opposition (reactance) to current flow at very high frequencies and low reactance at low frequencies. The water capacitor conversely, would do exactly the opposite.

Now, Meyer's circuit can't resonate, because the diode only allows current to flow in one direction. If this had not been the case, then at a specific frequency (the resonant frequency of this circuit), where both capacitor and inductor reactances were equal (due to the 180 degree phase differences in voltages and currents between the two components), then these reactances would effectively cancel each other out.  And, in theory, infinite current could then flow as the voltage across the circuit drops to zero. In practice, however, the resistance of the wire making up the inductor does limit this current from infinity.  This exceptionally high current flow would surely dissipate terriffic power and fry the circuit - very undesirable.

Anyway, Meyers cct can not resonate.

So could the answer be a combination of all the aspects of this circuit?

If we are relying sole on a specific frequency of voltage pulses to 'shake' the water molecule apart, then it would make sense that the higher the amplitude of these pulses, the better.  If we want as little current to flow as possible, then we really want the reactance of the inductor to be working for us by providing the maximum oppostion to current flow. This would indicate that the higher the frequency, the better, unless of course there is indeed a frequency at which the water molecules are caused to resonate and then this becomes our target.

Now the problem becomes something different. If the wfc is a capacitor, the dc pulses will charge the capacitor to twice the supply voltage. Once this has happened, unless the capacitor discharges or is caused to discharge, then the pulsing effectively stops. There is just a standing potential difference across the capacitor - pulsing becomes irrelevant.

What then, if the capacitor is a very leaky capacitor. While it can temporarily hold a charge, current will leak continiously from the plates until the capacitor completely discharges over a given time specific to the individual water capacitor.  However, as we would be continually topping it up with dc pulses, the capacitor would never completely discharge.  Get the specific values right and the capacitor would always be allowing a small dc current to flow through its electrolyte (the leakage current), while the continual pulsing would create a voltage ripple at the supplied frequency.

It seems there are a lot of possibilities and I don't think anyone quite knows what is occuring yet. If we did know exactly what was going on it would be much easier to design a circuit to enhance the effect. There is simply a lot of guess work and blind experimenting going on that, it would appear can be very 'hit and miss'.

More food for thought

Farrah Day



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline aussepom

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 45
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2007, 07:54:42 PM »
hi
 i am doing a l talk tonight on this very same thing and I do not believe in the so called 'oxide dielectric coating' I have been on electrolyisis for over 15yrs

........................................
quoted by faraday
What then, if the capacitor is a very leaky capacitor. While it can temporarily hold a charge, current will leak continiously from the plates until the capacitor completely discharges over a given time specific to the individual water capacitor.  However, as we would be continually topping it up with dc pulses, the capacitor would never completely discharge.  Get the specific values right and the capacitor would always be allowing a small dc current to flow through its electrolyte (the leakage current), while the continual pulsing would create a voltage ripple at the supplied frequency.
.................................................

 I am doing a l talk tonight on this very same thing and I do not believe in the so called 'oxide dielectric coating' I have been on electrolysis for over 15yrs
 It is just a big very leaky capacitor with a DC resistance and AC impedance.
So it could try and act like an AC non-polarised capacitor but depending how strong you make your electrolyte, it could see it as an 'AC short circuit' and as for the DC side well it is just a resistor.  Yes it may be possible to do as you suggest that is with the fast DC pulses. Remember a square wave pulse is only half the power if it is on 50% duty cycle.
After talking to my friend Ravvi, I have had a look at what he was saying, I do have a possible solution but I have to find out how to put a diagram on this web forum??
Ravvi so to concentrate on the BEMF not the resonance.
There was a diode put in one circuit and this is wrong not the one you are talking about it goes from the S on the Buz 350 to the positive supply, this is wrong.
 I have found out a lot and there is a lot wrong with the first 'original circuit known as Fig 1 with the transformer style and this I believe was NOT a Toroidal as some are suggesting , I stand to be corrected if some one can cut and paste it from the original.
 It I think was a standard  'o' core TX.  Also on this many of the coil winding and the voltages do not make sense, to see it you must redraw it.
Well that should be enough for now I have to go
aussepom


Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2007, 10:00:34 PM »
Hi aussepom

Read through your post a couple of times and I'm still not sure what you're talking about with reference to a diode and transformers. In fact I couldn't follow most of your post. Are you talking about Meyer's resonant charging circuit or Lawtons pulse generator?

You do not 'believe' in the dielectric oxide layer?!  Fair enough, you can believe what you like, but it's the only thing that makes any sense if you want a capacitor. Why does everyone assume you have a capacitor if you stick two plates in conductive tap water??  It's just a non-linear resistor. It's like saying that a component is a resistor if it has a low resistance and a capacitor if it has a high resistance!  Come on think, there's no dielectric!

Let me ask you this then. What do you think is happening when people are 'conditioning' the electrodes?

Forget about coil windings that do not make sense, not much about Meyer's diagrams do. Just use a transformer or make a coil to do what you want it to do.

You (or your friend, Ravvi) say concentrate on BEMF not resonance. What do you mean by this? Sure, Meyer's resonant charging cct can't resonate because of the blocking, but what relevance has BEMF on things?

Surely if you've been playing with electrolysis for over 15 years (and giving talks) you would know exactly what these circuits actually do and what they can't do. No offence intended, but I can't help getting the impression that you're a little out of your depth as far as electronic theory goes.

Farrah Day



Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #3 on: November 06, 2007, 09:52:25 AM »
I've just seen a version of Meyer's, so-called voltage intensifier cct (his VIC), that I have not seen before, which shows a bifilar seconday winding designating the resonant charging chokes.

Can anyone explain to me the purpose and action of this bifilar winding?

Please don't just guess at it.

Thanks, Farrah Day


Offline Amateur-Scientist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #4 on: November 06, 2007, 10:25:11 AM »
I too was wondering about the Meyer's circuit. I was surfing YouTube and found videos on WFCs. Lots of talk about OverUnity. A little Googling and found Meyer's patents The circuit in figure 2 of US patent 5,149,407 show a circuit of a fixed frequency of varying amplitude and some duty cycle. The capacitor uses stainless steel tubes, one inside the other of  3/4" and 1/2" with 1/16" for the water dielectric. The patent says to use pure water. Water has a dielectric constant of about 80 with a dielectric strength of 80 Volts per mil. This means the capacitor in the patent will have a breakdown strength of about 5,000 Volts. Since the patent didn't give the length of the tubes or how many are in parallel, I can't compute the capacitance.

As I read the patent, Meyers doesn't seem to be talking about an electrical resonant (Xl = Xc). He seems to be talking about the breaking the covalent bond of the dielectric through a series of steps as shown in Figure 1 of the patent. Since the water molecules are polar with a directional character, the oxygen end being negative and hydrogen positive, Meyers seems to be using the capacitor to create an electric field to align the dielectric. The first pulse of his circuit polar aligns the dielectric, the next pulse applies a larger electric field to attract each oxygen to the positive tube and hydrogen to the negative tube. Since water has two bonding properties, covalent and electrostatic, subsequent higher amplitude pulses break the bond. He doesn't say much about the duty cycle in the patent, but it might be to give time for hydrogen and oxygen gas to form bubbles before the next pulse train begins again. The frequency of the pulse trains for resonance was found to be 10kHz in the patent. This is the frequency applied as pulse train envelope to the capacitor to match the time to polar align the dielectric to the time to break the bonds.

The charging chokes only seem to be used to increase the applied voltage to several thousand volts to the capacitor. It would seem they could be eliminated by just designing a transformer to apply a higher voltage. It seems Meyers may have disassociation water by breaking the hydrogen electrostatic bond since he says the circuit doesn't use much current. This would imply the charging chokes do little since little current is flowing. At any rate, the circuit sees to work by applying a large electrostatic field accross the plates of the water capacitor in a series of increasing amplitude steps to give time for the water to align a disassociate. The duty cycle creates the dwell to allow bubbles for form. The rest of the patent has to do with a grid to capture excess electrons and a laser to ionize the gases prior to being combusted.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2007, 10:53:24 AM by Amateur-Scientist »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #4 on: November 06, 2007, 10:25:11 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Amateur-Scientist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2007, 10:35:47 AM »
Can anyone explain to me the purpose and action of this bifilar winding?
Yes, usually two lengths of wire are wound in parallel on the transformer core. Since the current flowing in a one wire creates a magnetic field, it is multiplied by the second wire next to the first. Tesla patented a bifilar coil to increase the capacitace of his circuits and eliminate the need for capacitors.

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2007, 11:49:24 AM »
Hi AS

This area is covered on the other thread, 'Meyer's WFC concept analysed'. However, firstly Meyer on numerous occasions states that the water used in his WFC is tap, rain or river water... not pure water.  So forget about the dielectric properties of water.  Pure water, yes, does have a very high dielectric constant, but pure water does not stay pure for very long. Gases in the air - particularly oxygen - amongst other things disolve readily in water.  Not only that, if this was the case you would have to go to the expense of producing this pure water and somehow trying to keep it pure until you needed it. No doubt you would be using fossil fuels to produce the pure water. No, it simply would not be cost-effective and in reality defeats the whole object of the exercise.  On more than one Meyer's videos he states that he is just using tap water! See Dune Buggy video.

In Meyers circuit with the blocking diode, voltage pulses across the capacitor can only be double that of the supply voltage so this would mean the transformer coupling the pulse circuit to the WFC would have to initially step up the voltage significantly.

Re: bifilar winding. I need to look into this as I'm unsure as to what purpose it serves in Meyers circuit and don't really understand your explanation. What role are you saying that this bifilar coil actually plays in the circuit... or don't you know?? 

That aside, the most obvious use for a bifilar winding would be to produce a wire wound resistor that had no inductive reactance to ac. When connected correctly the magnetic fluxes created by the BEMFs would cancel each other out producing no reactance and leaving just the resistance of the wire to oppose current.

Farrah Day
« Last Edit: November 08, 2007, 03:57:15 PM by Farrah Day »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2007, 11:49:24 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Esotericman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #7 on: November 06, 2007, 02:31:42 PM »
Seems to me that the term "capacitor" is erroneous.  I mean, clearly it resembles one in form, but in theory, it simply can't be.  In order to split the molecule an electron must be added, liberating one Hydro atom, then en electron must be removed, liberating the other Hydro atom.  Just like in every electrolysis process, the "capacitor" therefore must necessarily leak.  Actually that is the only requirement!  And since, as you say, a stored charge would negate the pulsed input, it should therefore work only as efficiently as running straight DC- which clearly, it does not.  The pulsed electron bombardment clearly improves the effect.
Just goes to show, sometimes brute force isn't the only way.

Offline Esotericman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2007, 03:04:15 PM »
Wow didn't see that there was more discussion to this!  I'm a tad new to this forum type :p 
As to the actual disassociation process, I like to describe it as "bouncing" the molecule.  Granted, it is a simplistic view, but it seems to follow.  If you consider the covalent bond to be elastic, then when it is flexed (or strained), it will "bounce" back past it stable point, and oscillate about that point with a given frequency (albeit, an incredibly tiny frequency).  By pulsing the current as some multiple of this frequency (resonance), you increase the magnitude of the "bounce" exponentially until it breaks.  Conventional electrolysis, by applying constant unidirectional current would dampen the bounce, but move the center of oscillation, until the repulsive force between the hydrogen atoms are sufficient to "pop" the oxygen off.

I dunno- maybe it's beating a dead horse, but it makes sense to me and I haven't seen it described before

Offline Amateur-Scientist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2007, 10:00:19 PM »
Quote
Pure water, yes, does have a very high dielectric constant, but pure water does not stay pure for very long. Gases in the air - particularly oxygen - amongst other things disolve in readily in water.  Not only that, if this was the case you would have to go to the expense of producing this pure water and somehow trying to keep it pure until you needed it.
Reverse osmosis can get pure water. In the patent, Meyers stated the dissolved gasses are released as the water is disassociated. The patent talks about small current flow, so the water needs to be deionized, otherwise the water will be a conductor a not a dielectric and he would have an electrolysis system (passing a current through an ionic substance dissolved in the water.)

Quote
In Meyers circuit with the blocking diode, voltage pulses across the capacitor can only be double that of the supply voltage so this would mean the transformer coupling the pulse circuit to the WFC would have to initially step up the voltage significantly.
The patent said the seconday was at 1,000 volts. The circuit would step it to 2,000 volts.

Quote
Re: bifilar winding. I need to look into this as I'm unsure as to what purpose it serves in Meyers circuit and don't really understand your explanation. What role are you saying that this bifilar coil actually plays in the circuit... or don't you know??

That aside, the most obvious use for a bifilar winding would be to produce a wire wound resistor that had no inductive reactance to ac. When connected correctly the magnetic fluxes created by the BEMFs would cancel each other out producing no reactance and leaving just the resistance of the wire to oppose current.
Bifilar winding are comonly used in toriod transformers. This might help http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifilar

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2007, 10:00:19 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Amateur-Scientist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #10 on: November 06, 2007, 10:38:59 PM »
As to the actual disassociation process, I like to describe it as "bouncing" the molecule.  Granted, it is a simplistic view, but it seems to follow.  If you consider the covalent bond to be elastic, then when it is flexed (or strained), it will "bounce" back past it stable point, and oscillate about that point with a given frequency (albeit, an incredibly tiny frequency).  By pulsing the current as some multiple of this frequency (resonance), you increase the magnitude of the "bounce" exponentially until it breaks.  Conventional electrolysis, by applying constant unidirectional current would dampen the bounce, but move the center of oscillation, until the repulsive force between the hydrogen atoms are sufficient to "pop" the oxygen off.
Meyers in his patent show an electrostatic field across the plates of his capacitor where he discribes the polar charge alignment of water molecules followed by stretching the bond to disassociation (no bouncing or oscillating). The pulses in Meyers circuit seem to help prevent hydrogen rebonding and bifurcated hydrogen bonds. The resonance frequency Meyers talks about seems to be the number of pulse envelopes containing some number of 100us (based on 10kHz in the patent) varying amplitude pulses applied to the capacitor per second.

Offline Amateur-Scientist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #11 on: November 06, 2007, 10:53:07 PM »
Seems to me that the term "capacitor" is erroneous.  I mean, clearly it resembles one in form, but in theory, it simply can't be.  In order to split the molecule an electron must be added, liberating one Hydro atom, then en electron must be removed, liberating the other Hydro atom.  Just like in every electrolysis process, the "capacitor" therefore must necessarily leak.  Actually that is the only requirement!  And since, as you say, a stored charge would negate the pulsed input, it should therefore work only as efficiently as running straight DC- which clearly, it does not.  The pulsed electron bombardment clearly improves the effect.
You can "split water" without adding an electron. Here is a link to salt water being disassociated and re-associated by burning:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo

Water is Meyers capacitor must not leak as stated in his patent. He is running pulsed DC to his capacitor where he states again in his patent to prevent breakdown and shorting out in non-pure water.


Offline Esotericman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2007, 11:12:37 PM »
Well ok, sure you can split water with high powered microwave radiation.  You can also induce a fusion reaction in a bubble with super high powered lasers.  For that matter, dumping high amounts of energy at most anything will cause its molecular bonds to weaken.  And while that has its place in research, it has little application in any viable energy alternative...

The "Leak" referred to is voltage leak across the dielectric.  As I understand it, that's referred to as capacitor leak.  Water dripping onto a circuit board is "bad craftsmanship."

And the fact that Stan wrote it in his patent application does not make something true.  He had no access to any electron microscopes or comparable imaging equipment, nor is there any record of testing to confirm what was happening inside his WFC.  His descriptions, while detailed, are still conjecture.  All I'm saying is I'm not convinced he fully understood what was happening (nor do I)- we're just trying to analyze it for ourselves...

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #13 on: November 07, 2007, 12:49:45 AM »
Blimey, you guys all just seem to be going around in circles here.  How long have these debates and squables been going on while producing no results?

The first thing you must do is decide what water Meyer's was using!  AS, why do you insist it was de-ionised when Meyer, in his videos, clearly states its just tap water, rain or river water???

If it is just tap water, as Meyer says, the dielectric must be the oxide layer that gets deposited on the anode during conditioning or current would flow freely through the cell. Why is this so hard to accept... or at least consider?  If you don't agree with my oxide dielectric then you must assume to use de-ionised water - it costs the same as petrol per litre here in the UK, so unless you're making your own cheaply.... Good luck.

Eso, its 'current leak' across the dielectric - voltage doesn't leak!

Moving on....

There are different ways to wire a bifilar coil depending on what you want to achieve with it. According to Tesla, if constructed carefully and wired correctly, it can be made to act as a tuned LC cct by utilising the capacitance between each coil of wire. Once we apply a frequency at which the capacitive reactance between the coils is equal to the inductive reactance produced by the coils, we have exactly equal current flowing through both. However, at this resonant frequency the current through the inductor will be 180 degrees out of phase with the current through the capacitor.  Hence, the net current drawn by the cct is '0'.  The resistance then of the cct is in theory infinite as would be the voltage.  So, Tesla's bifilar coil in this configuration is effectively a parallel tuned LC circuit employing the capacitance between the coils rather than another physical component. Very clever.

Also according to Tesla, in this configuration the coils can hold thousands of time more charge than a standard inductor can.  So we can produce massive voltages from this bifilar coil.  We now potentially have... great potential!

Farrah Day



Offline Amateur-Scientist

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #14 on: November 07, 2007, 01:21:33 AM »
AS, why do you insist it was de-ionised when Meyer, in his videos, clearly states its just tap water, rain or river water???
I'm not insisting on anything, I'm just stating what the patents say. To prevent current to flow in the Meyer WFC, patent 4,936.961 used an insulator between the plates so you could use tap water. In another patent (5,149,407), no insulator was used so you would need deionized water to prevent current flow between the plates fo the capacitor.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #14 on: November 07, 2007, 01:21:33 AM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: