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 Members: 81960
  • *Latest: Stella

  • *Total Posts: 491770
  • *Total Topics: 14473
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 5
  • *Guests: 58
  • *Total: 63

Facebook

Author Topic: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed  (Read 48133 times)

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2007, 12:02:37 PM »
AS, I haven't seen those patents, but I'm quite familiar with the incoherent babble that goes with all of his patents. How practical in reality is it to use de-ionised water in a wfc?  Not very, as this immediately eliminates all the other everyday sources of water which would really make a water fuelled car super-practical. Not to mention the fact that the government would immediately impose heavy fuel taxes on de-ionised water.

Irrelevant of what the patents say, in the video when he is actually demonstrating his Buggy, he states its using tap water.  Now whether he means tap water that he has de-ionised, I don't know, but he doesn't say anything about processing the water first.

Here's something to make you laugh. In Meyer's Hydrogen Fracturing Process, technical brief on page 7-8 Meyers states, quote: 'The dielectric property of water (being 78.54 ohms at 25 C) permits storage of the 'electrical charge' when a potential difference exists between the electrical voltage-plates'

He also writes on page 3-16, quote: 'The established resonant frequency is most generally in the audio range from 1KHz up to and beyond 10KHz and is dependent upon the amount of CONTAMINANTS in natural water'

It's no wonder really why scientists could not take him seriously with blatant errors like this. The dielectric property of water is a constant, it is not measured in ohms. And if it was, did he not realise just how low a value 78.54 ohms is in terms of resistance. As for the water, well there you have it in black and white. It really is laughable.

Incidentally on page 7-1 he states that the VIC assembly... well here's the quote, make of it what you will:

'The "mode-of-operability" of VIC Coil Assembly allows Voltage Potential of opposite voltage polarity to increase and be attenuated up to and beyond 20 Kilovolts while inhibiting and restricting amp leakage in the milliamperes range... establishing operational parameter of utilizing "Opposite Electrical Attraction Force" of "high voltage intensity" to "instantly" releases thermal explosive energy (gtnt) from natural water.'

That is exactly as it is written, including the bad grammar. Complete and utter jibberish employing jargon designed to sound very technical and impressive to the layman.

On a more positive note, Dave Lawton really seems to be onto something with that bifilar coil that he has introduced into his cct design. The more load, the smaller the current flow?? Definitely has a ring of a possible radiant energy source being tapped. This is where we all should be focussing our attention if we want to progress.

Farrah Day

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2007, 12:02:37 PM »

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2007, 11:59:37 AM »
Some of you might be interested in this modification to the Lawton cct.

Open attached file.

Instead of using the Buz350 and associated components on the output of the 2nd 555 timer chip, you can use this variation to power a high voltage car coil. The 'output' is pin 3 off the timer, while the 'con' is pin 5. The rest of the circuit remains the same, although that said, the car ignition coil probably won't work well with very high frequencies and so some additional component changing to reduce the pulsing frequencies might be called for.

Be careful though, 20Kv does rather make you jump!

Farrah Day
« Last Edit: November 10, 2007, 12:23:14 PM by Farrah Day »


Offline twohawks

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #17 on: November 14, 2007, 07:42:02 AM »
Hi All,
I do not wish to cross-post, but I wonder if I should have posted this
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,3549.msg59098.html#msg59098
in this thread instead?
Anyway, I think it may be pertinent (if there's anything to it, of course).  Any insightful responses would be most welcome.

thanks,
TwoHawks

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #18 on: November 20, 2007, 01:50:19 PM »
Thought some of you might be interested to know that I will shortly be doing some wfc tests which will hopefully allow a little more insight into the workings of the resonant charging cct in respect to our wfc arrangement.

I'm trying to acquire a EHT power supply that will provide up to 5KV.

I also have a function generator which I can use to accurately pulse a mosfet switch with various waveforms.

As the EHT power supply will provide extremely high voltages at very low currents, basically I will be replacing the various components of the resonant charging circuit, as known, with electronic equipment that will do the same. Now I can achieve very high voltages at various frequencies (and waveforms), using the mosfet to pulse the eht power supply across the cell.

This may or may not work as expected, but it will no doubt at least offer a little more insight into what's happening.

Will keep everyone posted.


Offline robbryder

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2007, 02:17:46 AM »
Hello all, I'm new to this site, and too chasing free energy. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think the idea of the resonant circuit is to resonant the "water", not the cell.. what ever the value is... (in fact if you know it, please post it)..

A capacitor is just 2 conductors separated by a dielectric. Water has resistance and  you can easily use it as the dielectric in a water capacitor. Test it, put your ohm meter leads in water.. there is resistance, and therefor put water between two steel plates and you have a capacitor.

The cell itself does not resonate, you are trying to resonate the water by pulsing the plates. From what I've seen it looks like you want to not only pulse, but ramp up the voltage as you pulse. This peaking,and drop off of the voltage will limit energy loss. At the same time, the high voltage spikes will put extra energy into the water molecues that you already have a resonance.. literally pulling them apart. 

I think the problem is that the capacitor value is constantly changing as you produce more gas. I'd think the gas/water mix would have even less resistance and change the value of the capacitor. Either way as more gas is mixed with water the capacitance is going to change.

Anyone have an idea on how to monitor the changing capacitance and then change the inductance to keep at waters resonant frequency? I think if you could, you would see alot of extra production.  (Maybe some type of motorized ferrite core). If you know the frequency of water, and can measure the capacitance, a simple controller should be able to change the inductance. The more you stay as resonance the more hydrogen you make. 

Anyway thats my story and I'm stick-en with it...

RobbRyder

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #19 on: November 22, 2007, 02:17:46 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #20 on: November 22, 2007, 09:55:41 AM »
Hi Rob

The problem here is that you are covering the same ground that most people have already done many times over.

The thing about a capacitor is that it should possess capacitance and does not conduct dc.  This is true if you use pure water, which has an extremely high dielectric constant.  Unfortunately, tap water conducts very well, makes for a very poor dielectric and hence what we really have is a non-linear resistor.  If we put an ac signal across it it would no doubt possess some capacitance due to close spacing of the plates, but the main component would be resistive.

The other thing about 'literally pulling the molecules apart', is that it is not enough to simply say or assume this. Any reaction in the water needs to obey the laws of physics and hence form a balanced equation. A statement like that needs to be backed up by a scientific explanation. 

If you haven't already, take a look at the other thread: 'Meyer's wfc concept analysed'

Farrah Day


Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2007, 12:36:08 PM »
At this stage I'm not going to worry about the actual design of Meyer's resonant charging cct itself, but rather try understand its action, or what exactly it is supposed to do. In that way I can replicate it in my own fashion.

Its all very well going at it bull-headed, and just trying to replicate Meyer?s WFC, without worrying yourself with the complicated science behind it. But, unless you do some real in-depth initial research you will never understand exactly what you are doing.

It's all very well people simply reciting Meyer's technical briefs and patents, but this is not good enough as it does not in itself imply understanding of the process. Furthermore, Meyer's science is appalling, as indeed are some of his statements. I know I've said this all before, but let me just give you a prime example of the problem Meyer can cause if you take his word as gospel.

Over on the OUPower forum, I've had a very heated debate with someone convinced that water is made up from 31% Oxygen, 62% Hydrogen and 17% Nitrogen, and that the same percentages are given off during electrolysis... and yes, I know it adds up to 110%.  Now, no amount of discussion with this guy will make him see reason, no explanation is good enough to open his eyes. He is absolutely convinced that I'm a 'dimwit' and that he has it right, and, that I should take note of his 'knowledge' if I want to learn anything.

When I asked where he got these strange ideas from, he provided a link to ... yes, you guessed it, a Meyer technical brief.  It's a shame really as this guy has built a D14 cct and an impressive looking tube wfc, but thanks to Meyer's bumbling scientific errors, this guy is now unable and/or unwilling to be put straight on the incorrect technical points.  Furthermore I don't think he is alone, there are far too many 'Meyer fanatics' out there that see old Stan as a saviour that could do no wrong.  This is a shame, as it will severely hinder, if not halt further progress.

Farrah Day

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #21 on: November 22, 2007, 12:36:08 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline robbryder

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #22 on: November 24, 2007, 03:46:33 AM »
Hello Farrah Day. Thanks for the input. Its always good to hear others thought and ideas.. but we are going to have to agree to disagree on somethings..lol.

Two steel plates insulate from each other and submersed in water, is a capacitor... waters resistance is much higher than the steel, and is then by definition a dielectric. 2 conductors separated by a dielectric makes a capacitor...  Now I read this out of a Boylstadt electroinc text book... so I'm go with that for now..

Since we now have a capacitor, if we add the correct size inductor we can tune into any frequency we desire. Boylstadt again.. I'll agree that depending on the condition of the water the value of the capacitance will be different, but it will be a capacitor..

If we can tune the circuit at waters resonant frequency, and match it with a voltage spike (at the same frequency) just short of breakover for the capacitor, the maximum amount of the energy available to the water is going to break it up, tear it apart.. what ever you want to call it.. all I know is it looks like alot more energy is available then is used.. and really for me thats all that matters... 

Someday soon, someone is going to claim to have figured out the  science.. probably post it on this site, and when they do I'll gladly read about it because I am curious... but for now.. I just want the Power...lol

But what Myers did "is" the science..

If Myers didn't have it exact before his "demise" he was awful close... and I don't believe he put on paper all he knew.. but apparently what he had on paper was worth a lot of money.. and ultimately his life..

RobbRyder..


Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #23 on: November 24, 2007, 12:49:35 PM »
Rob

A lot of speculation there with reference to 'Meyer'. For all we know he could have been killed by one of his many personal creditors. He had afterall encouraged many people to part with thousands of dollars to fund his project, ensuring them it was a very good investment, and of course he was eventually (rightly or wrongly), declared to have committed fraud by the government.

People seem to have their own set ideas on this, which doesn't change the fact that either Meyer's was the genuine article or he was a fraud. If his dune buggy worked as he demonstrated, then he was not 'nearly there', but he had succeeded. Either way, I'm not too bothered by this as that's all in the past now, and I get the feeling the real truth will always be obscured by uncorroborated science and speculation.

Anyway, back to the water capacitor. You wrote:
Quote
Two steel plates insulate from each other and submersed in water, is a capacitor... waters resistance is much higher than the steel, and is then by definition a dielectric. 2 conductors separated by a dielectric makes a capacitor...  Now I read this out of a Boylstadt electroinc text book... so I'm go with that for now..

I agree, two steel plates in close proximity do form a capacitor. However, what you are failing to see is that tap water is not a very good dielectric.  Pure water is great dielectric... tap water is a conductor.  In essence, putting tap water between two steel plates is a capacitor of sorts, but tap water conducts so readily that the capacitance would be negligible  ie, the dielectric effect of tap water would break down with only a few volts applied.

Think about it, you would not call one metal a dielectric just because it is not as an efficient a conductor as another... would you?

Put pure water between the plates you have a great capacitor, put tap water between the plates you have a poor capacitor, a good non-linear resistor.

Quote
If we can tune the circuit at waters resonant frequency, and match it with a voltage spike (at the same frequency) just short of breakover for the capacitor, the maximum amount of the energy available to the water is going to break it up, tear it apart.. what ever you want to call it.. all I know is it looks like alot more energy is available then is used.. and really for me thats all that matters... 

How is this energy breaking the water apart?  Is it ionising? How are the charges moving? There has to be a balanced equation for this reaction.

If we were tuning the water to it's resonant frequency (I believe this is somewhere in the microwave range), what effect does this have?

If you search through various posts on various forums you'll see that there now seems to be a direct link to wfc efficiency and the conditioning of the electrodes, which strongly indicates that we are enhancing the dielectric chromium oxide layer on the anode.

If this is so, then the pulsing takes on a different task to what most people think.  If we completely dismiss (for the moment at least), resonating water, and concentrate on the dielectric oxide layer, we have a good capacitor that can hold a charge.  What then is required of the pulsing. Well, ideally we need to step charge the capacitor until the dielectric oxide layer breaksdown. During the step charging, the water will align and no doubt there will be polarised water molecules at the cathode and at the dielectric.  Once the dielectric breaks down, the water molecules ionise in great numbers as charges are exchanged until the dielectric reforms.

However, we need the dielectric to keep reforming and breaking down in order to maintain a high electrical charge on the electrodes, so there needs to be a frequency of pulses that allows this to happen at its optimum (the sweet spot). Ie. if pulses are too slow then it takes a long time to reach dielectric breakdown, too fast and the dielectric has no time to reform, the charges on the electrodes quickly and continually leak away effectively producing inefficient high current normal electrolysis.  In this scenario, pulsing the voltage has nothing at all to do with the resonant frequency of water or altering the angle of the OH bonds, but perhaps there is a frequency at which this effect can be capitalised on for further efficiency.  Meyer did claim to have been getting around 1700% over Faraday.

You'll note that most pulsing ccts have two frequency timers, one high frequency pulse being modulated by another lower frequency pulse. Perhaps, a combination of the pulse frequency and it's modulation frequency is a key to further efficiency.

For anyone looking in, I must emphasise that this is my current thinking on the subject and by no means conclusive or correct.  It just seems to tick a lot more boxes than many ideas, theories and assumptions out here in cyberspace.

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #24 on: November 25, 2007, 05:33:39 PM »
Assuming our Meyer type wfc is a 'wet electrolytic capacitor, and we require the dielectric oxide layer to at some point breakdown in order to cause ionisation of the water, then how do we ascertain what voltage is required to do this?

Well, ideally, as Meyer stated, some form of step charging would work well, in that once this voltage is reached, the dielectric would give, allowing rapid ionisation of the water.  This way, the correct voltage is at some point automatically reached. This I would assume to be much better than simply pulsing a voltage well above the dielectric breakdown point, for two reasons. Firstly, there is a time for the water capacitor to step charge up (energise) before breakdown, and secondly I would expect it to be more energy efficient in just exceeding the dielectric breakdown threshold, rather than exceeding it, by possibly, many thousands of volts.

This I think is where old Tesla can be helpful. I don't think Meyer ever mentioned Tesla, but I think his VIC assembly was probably based on a Tesla coil. Specifically the Tesla Magnifier. Employing this design and given the correct design and construction, I think we should be able to achieve a steady build up of potential across or water capacitor.

Again only my thoughts at present, though I'm now actively looking into the design of such a coil to give the desired result.


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #24 on: November 25, 2007, 05:33:39 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline twohawks

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #25 on: November 26, 2007, 12:29:41 AM »
@FD ...I find your musings quite stimulating.  I have been very interested in the idea of possible relationship(s) of this water tech to/with Tesla Coil tech, so I am excited to see you questioning that.

Please forgive that I am so bogged down in my own work-a-day life that I have little time for catching up on the documentation (which I am endeavoring to do, albeit slowly), and on upgrading my understandings in the fields of electronics and some water - chem.... reviewing your post it makes me wonder if there may be easily created some sort of feedback sensor for tuning the voltage you are musing over.  For instance, maybe taking a current (or some other) reading(s) in the water for feeding back into the pwm somewhere in order to allow it to self adjust the voltage you are speaking to.

I know that's very general (and looking at your writings I bet you have already thought some about this), does this relate and if so how would one envision that to be structured?

Cheers,
HTH

Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #26 on: November 26, 2007, 01:08:29 AM »
Hi TH

If I'm correct in my theorising, then there will not be any need for a feedback loop.  Once the voltage builds up to the dielectric breakdown threshold, it will simply start doing so again once the dielectric reforms. The critical frequency will be the one that allows the voltage to build up quickly, but also allows the dielectric time to reform.

This of course would explain also why everyones wfc would be most efficient at different and specific frequencies, and why there is not one common frequency... everyones cell would have different capacities and dielectric layers. 

If, as many people seem to think, we were pulsing the water itself at waters resonant frequency, then anyone using the same water should be using the same frequency irrespective of their design of wfc - I don't believe this is the case.

The other key thing for my is the wfc's running cold. With normal electrolysis, ion charge carriers travel through the electrolyte physically knocking into other ions and molecules, and being much bigger than the electrons that carry the charge in metals, they create much more resistance and hence heat in the solution.  By contrast with Meyers wfc, we don't exploit ions in the water to carry a charge, we develop a large electric field that polarises the water molecule, but then rapidly ionises the water molecule itself when the dielectric breaksdown. It can't be a coincidence that the cell remains cold when ionisation is an 'endothermic' reaction.



Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #27 on: November 26, 2007, 11:46:12 AM »
I've got another theory.

This is, that for maximum efficiency of a Meyer like wfc, the pulse frequency needs to tie in with the effective LC relationship of the cell and inductor/telsa coil.  And, the sole reason that this frequency is modulated by another much lower frequency, and hence providing an 'off' time, is precisely to allow the dielectric to reform.

To my mind, a lot of things are now making sense for the first time, and I feel the true science behind the wfc is now within grasping distance.

Offline twohawks

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2007, 07:53:27 AM »
I know it doesn't mean much, and especially coming from my limited understanding of the greater body of details [as yet], but I was reading up a little more today and then saw your post tonite... I have to say I continue to find your thinking on the subject quite compelling.

So the question that strikes me is how would qualifying/quantifying the Cells' Capacitance part of that equation be approached and figured? (Is this a good question or is it obvious?) 
   As an aside, I am still trying to wrap my brain around the water not being a/the dielectric yet being present inbetween the cathode and the anode, said anode having its thin chromium oxide dielectric... it makes good sense in light of so many things, but then what of the space inbetween the anode/cathode that is filled with... what term would fit for the water (since its not a dialectric)?  I mean, that's not the idea of a wet capacitor actually, now is it?  {I am so parochial... 8YP}
     And does the size of that space/gap necessarily benefit from being as small as possible (as Meyers has indicated in his work)?

Anyway, with regard to the LC tuning, I came across something today ...I wonder if this may be helpful...
http://www.frontiernet.net/~tesla/html/tuneacoil.htm

Cheers,
HTH


Offline Farrah Day

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 556
Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #29 on: November 27, 2007, 11:58:15 AM »
The capacitance of the cells are a problem in terms of giving it a value. This is not only just because everyones cells will offer a different surface area to everyone elses, but also that the state of the dielectric layer will be different. I.e. how 'conditioned' the electrodes are in terms of the dielectric layer thickness.

Purely out of interest, I recently did a rough calculation of the capacitance of Bob Boyces 100 cell (6" x 6"), assuming 10 microns of dielectric and came up with a figure of 258nF.

The thing about the water is, that although it conducts (it is a non-linear resistor), it is far less an efficient conductor than metal. In water, large ions are travelling through the electrolyte, carrying their charges from one side to the other.  You can actually see the disturbance in the water that this causes. On the other hand, electrons are tiny (you can't see the metal moving) and effectively only have to travel between one atom and the next. A bit like a line of ballbearings in a tube, if you fill the tube and then push an extra one in one end, another will immediately pop out the other end. Hence electron flow is near instantaneous, where as ion current through an electrolyte is very slow.

This leads me to think that even 'unconditioned' electrodes will show some capacitance, as the ions are physically so much slower than the electrons that they will not be able to keep up with the charge exchange in order to balance the circuit when faced with a near instantaneous squarewave pulse. Electrons then will tend to pile up on the cathode with every pulse, while the same can be said about the +ve 'holes' on the anode.

Initially I thought that the size of the gap between the metal electrodes might become irrelevant if the dielectric was the oxide layer, but on thinking about this further, the closer the two metal electrodes the more intense the electrostatic field across the water before the oxide layer breaks down. 

All good stuff!

« Last Edit: November 27, 2007, 01:06:28 PM by Farrah Day »

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: Meyer's Resonant Charging Circuit Analysed
« Reply #29 on: November 27, 2007, 11:58:15 AM »

 

Share this topic to your favourite Social and Bookmark site

Please SHARE this topic at: