Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eric Dollard

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    The work of Dr. Stiffler; Relavent to the CRI?

    Wow! I honestly about shat myself when I came across Dr. Stiffler's work on his SEC circuits! Those YouTube videos are priceless and have opened my eyes to some alternative uses for the Tesla Transformer and a general overview of one-wire circuit topologies.

    Call me out of the loop, but I hadn't the slightest awareness of his existence and work until three days ago. I want to point out that I don't particularly agree with his theory of the "energy lattice" let alone the vibrating Bose condensate / phonon stuff Frank Znidarsic has come up with. Although, they seem to be in agreement in experimental results / theoretical explanations, which says a lot. Also, Dr. Stiffler seems to have a working theory as to how and why, that's backed up by all his various experiments, which also says a lot. However, I'm not here to say he's right or wrong (nor am I qualified to even give an opinion), I just wanted to point out that there is a lot that he has shown and done which parallels whats going on here in this thread on the CRI.

    I think he has done much good in, inadvertently, showing the general principle of what I believe to be an alternate mode of excitation, the one-wire inductive discharge mode as opposed to the two-wire mutual induction (through a primary loop to the secondary).



    I believe Mr. Dollard had called this arrangement the "Steinmetz Coil" connection. I never could quite grasp this circuit arrangement until I watched the YouTube videos that Dr. Stiffler had put up.



    If one were to shrug off all the explanatory details of Dr. Stiffler's circuit, and just examine the circuit for what it is, you would see a transistor passing a pulsed current through an inductance coil, with a second coil connected at the junction between the two. This is in essence an inductive impulse circuit, there is no mutual coupling as far as I'm aware. The collapsing field of magnetic induction is directed towards the transistors collector terminal, it just so happens this is where the other coil is connected. I believe this collapsing induction, as a time-variant E.M.F., is what actually triggers the second coil into oscillation from its distributed constants. If the first coil were to discharge at the proper frequency the second coil would go into a resonant state.

    If we examine the second coil as a one-wire transmission line, when driven at its natural resonant frequency we would see a large E.M.F. developed at the end-terminal or free end. Now insert an "AV plug" (at the end-terminal) and some sort of DC load (on the "plug"), and boom! You have a one-wire back to two-wire transformation, and you now are charging a capacitor or powering a neon or LED. Cool stuff indeed.

    I honestly believe that the coils Dr. Stiffler uses ("cardboard coils", long skinny solenoids) are limiting his performance. If you were to use the coil design outlined by Mr. Dollard (equal width to height, spaced windings, etc.) you would see an immense increase in performance of the SEC circuit, due to higher magnification ratios seen from better coil design. So for anyone who has built a model coil based on Mr. Dollard's engineering plans you might want to look into Dr. Stiffler's SEC and give it a whorl and see what you can achieve.

    A method to turn up the power level, to dangerous, would be to build a resonant inductance coil triggered by a thyratron, this would be a Steinmetz coil type connection to a Tesla coil. This arrangement has the possibility of very high energy operation and is much more immune to damage than semiconductor switches, however it is limited to low frequency operation. You might be able to see new effects that just aren't present at lower power levels. Although, you could most likely achieve the same results with properly designed vacuum tube or even transistor based circuits.

    On another note, the use of a Guillemin Pulse Forming Network (PFN) could also be used to drive the Tesla coil, I don't think anyone has really talked about this method of connection. I'm foggy on the details, but I believe this network, when designed properly, acts as a transverse to longitudinal converter so you would be driving the Tesla coil longitudinally and thus with a one-wire inter-connection between the two. This is similar to, but not the same as, the Steinmetz coil connection.

    I believe there are a few more interesting methods of excitation, but the Guillemin Line and Steinmetz coil connection are the modes I'm going to investigate, this of course, after I finish construction of my Secondary / Extra coil. Also, from watching Dr. Stiffler's videos, I found a very interesting one where he shows how two capacitors that have the same effective values, but huge differences in mass, have different effects. I think this corroborates what Mr. Dollard has been saying about matching the mass of the primary loop and its attached resonant capacitor. This is definitely something worth looking into.

    *One more thing, I would be thrilled to see someone get the "concanted" configuration working between their secondary / extra coil. From what I understand this results in a half wavelength spanned across the entire setup, whereby each coil is operated at 1/4th wavelength. Curiously, instead of the half-wave spread across the two coils as a single wave node (rise to fall), you have two 1/4th waves nodes (rise to maxima) that are in the same direction, or the node polarity / phase is the same across each coil. This means that the voltage across the entire transmission line is doubled, and is additive like batteries in series! I don't think any ordinary configuration can actually do this, so this is definitely something to strive for. Also, I would be interested in seeing a concanted configuration hooked up to a SEC circuit, I dare say the effects would be magnified immensely.

    Garrett M
    Last edited by garrettm4; 08-06-2012, 05:26 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Garrett,
      Very strange you should bring that up because I too have been thinking about DrStiffler's SEC technology and how all the stuff we're doing in this thread relates. I'm not sure if you're aware but I did a bit of research into Stiffler's SEC and found some very interesting things (you can watch them on my youtube; Question on the Measurement of Spatial Resonant Frequency - YouTube) Must admit I didn't think of it as acting like a Steinmetz coil and now I can see what your talking about, very interesting indeed! I was going to retry this experiment (SEC 01 - Coils importance in SEC - YouTube) with a few different coils of varying magnification factors and to see what I could find and now that you've posted this I will definitely be giving it a go. I'll start winding the coils tonight and give you an update soon

      Raui
      Scribd account; http://www.scribd.com/raui

      Comment


      • #18
        [QUOTE=dR-Green;201852] Are you also going to make another extra coil with shorter wire length?[/QUOTE
        Yes dR-green, that is the plan. I will also use the same wire dia as for the secondary coil and lets see what happens.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Raui View Post
          Eric,
          I don't know whether or not you saw my post on the extra coil lengths but as I was reading through your coil calculations I came across something I haven't been able to come to any sort of conclusion on. You gave the coil length as being


          You said in an earlier transmission;


          So if I interpret what you're saying correctly you want the secondary to be pi/2 smaller or roughly 63% of electromagnetic wave length and you want the extra coil to be pi/2 longer or roughly 157% of electromagnetic wave length. Therefore from my reasoning the secondary length is actually equal to;

          The extra coil length is equal to;

          Notice the last term. If you multiply your given equation for secondary length by Pi squared on 4 then you end up with roughly 39% electromagnetic wave length for extra coil wave length I would expect it to be greater than the electromagnetic wave length because the extra coil is apparently exhibiting a velocity greater than light.
          I don't see where you got that first equation from? All I see is

          ls = 4.8 x 10^9 / F

          From "CalculatingPropertiesforaTeslaTransformerSecondar yCoil001.jpg"

          Since the tests determined that the extra coil frequency was much too low my "le" or extra coil wire length is now

          = λ / 4 / 1.24

          [edit] Where λ = c / F

          Corresponding to the 124% measured velocity. Eric only gave me a wire length to use so this is how I see that he calculated it. No actual calculations were given so this could be wrong.

          Originally posted by T-rex
          Extra Coil

          Dr Green;
          I believe that another extra coil needs to be made for a higher frequency, that of your secondary, 3670. So an extra coil for 3700 with some terminal loading. The extra coil that you have now is too large/long and many turns would have to be removed, best to keep this one intact. Since now you can see the actual extra coil relations from the one you made, now it can be scaled to any frequency. Break, more to follow...

          Originally posted by T-rex
          Dr Green Extra Coil

          3670 Luminal Wavelength
          81.70 Meters

          3670 Luminal Quarter Wave
          20.4 Meters

          Empirical Extra Coil Velocity Factor
          124%

          Extra Coil Wire Length
          16.5 Meters

          Wind your width equals height extra coil with 16.5 meters of 18 to 22 gauge transformer wire
          Thanks for posting the books btw.
          Last edited by dR-Green; 07-16-2012, 09:38 PM.
          http://www.teslascientific.com/

          "Knowledge is cosmic. It does not evolve or unfold in man. Man unfolds to an awareness of it. He gradually discovers it." - Walter Russell

          "Once men died for Truth, but now Truth dies at the hands of men." - Manly P. Hall

          Comment


          • #20
            Doc,
            The 4.8*10^9 / F comes from the simplification of;

            Since;

            We can say that;

            Or at least very close to.

            The reference to the first equation comes from;


            In the figures Eric gave you you'll see that the extra coil wire length is smaller than quater wave at luminal velocity. The way I think about it however is if you have more meters covered per second and your frequency in per seconds stays the same, which it does since we know the specific frequency we're tuning for, the wavelength will naturally have to be longer not shorter. Here's another way to think about it get your hands and move them a certain distance apart in one second and take a quarter of that distance. Now compare it to moving them further apart than the first time and take a quarter of that, assuming it was covered in the same time the distance is longer and not shorter than the original since the time is the same. At least that's how I'm seeing it

            No problem about the books, Garrett was the one that pointed me in the direction of a digital copy of Introduction to Circuit Theory and I found Theory of Linear Physical Systems while I was on the same website (Hathi-trust) so he is to thank for it as well. The only thing I did was 'extract' the images from the digital library and combined them into a pdf

            EDIT: Btw just a quick update on the SEC/Extra coil experiment, I want to make sure that I reduce the number of variables I'm dealing with so I'm having to make a coil form for each coil. I don't have the right drill bit I need. Dad said he'd pick me one up from the hardware store of the way home so hopefully tonight I'll be able to start winding the coils.

            Also, Aaron this isn't my forum and I truly mean no disrespect but I'm finding it really frustrating having to navigate through 3 topics instead of one. I don't know if anyone else is in the same boat but I'd like to see all 3 topics merged into one. I know that you're trying to stop posts getting deleted but when posts are getting deleted it's the authors of those posts who are deleting them. Also why is it that it's only this topic which is getting continuation topics while the others which have just as many people posting, if not more, aren't?

            Raui
            Last edited by Raui; 07-17-2012, 02:13 AM.
            Scribd account; http://www.scribd.com/raui

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Raui View Post
              In the figures Eric gave you you'll see that the extra coil wire length is smaller than quater wave at luminal velocity. The way I think about it however is if you have more meters covered per second and your frequency in per seconds stays the same, which it does since we know the specific frequency we're tuning for, the wavelength will naturally have to be longer not shorter. Here's another way to think about it get your hands and move them a certain distance apart in one second and take a quarter of that distance. Now compare it to moving them further apart than the first time and take a quarter of that, assuming it was covered in the same time the distance is longer and not shorter than the original since the time is the same. At least that's how I'm seeing it
              Yes that's true, but if

              c = 299792458
              F = 3670000
              λ = 81.68
              λ/4 = 20.42

              Then

              124% <

              /1.24 = 16.469
              Luminal frequency = 4550.8 kc
              = F*1.24

              124% >

              *1.24 = 25.323
              Luminal frequency = 2959.677 kc
              = F/1.24

              The extra coil would then need to operate at a minimum of 124% with no terminal capacitance. However the frequency of the secondary is certainly brought up through being connected to the extra coil, and the results from the old extra coil tests I believe, as far as I can interpret it, shows that the maximum possible velocity of the extra coil in operation with the direct connection to secondary is 124% luminal even with the effect of the frequency being brought up, excluding any terminal capacitance.

              If a coil of λ/4 = 20.42 metres wire length was made, then based on the results shown of 124% the measured frequency would be approx

              4550.8 kc

              Which = λ/4/1.24

              = 16.469 metres extra coil wire length luminal frequency

              Therefore, tuned to 100% luminal frequency of this 16.469 metres wire length, the extra coil would theoretically be operating at the so-called "F*1.24" or 124% velocity of the fundamental F. Excluding any effects of being connected to the secondary.
              Last edited by dR-Green; 07-17-2012, 05:41 AM.
              http://www.teslascientific.com/

              "Knowledge is cosmic. It does not evolve or unfold in man. Man unfolds to an awareness of it. He gradually discovers it." - Walter Russell

              "Once men died for Truth, but now Truth dies at the hands of men." - Manly P. Hall

              Comment


              • #22
                Conductor Skin-depth Equations

                I was reading Jim Williams excellent book, The Art & Science of Analog Circuit Design 1998, and came across a chapter by James M Bryant, which had some engineering expressions regarding skin-depth of a conductor. They seem to be close to what Mr. Dollard had presented and I thought that people might like to see them as a reference.

                Without further ado, here's the relevant pages of interest (pgs 104-105). Also, I highly recommend reading the book, its relevant with what everyone is doing here, seeing as how we are dealing with analog engineering after all.




                Garrett M
                Last edited by garrettm4; 08-06-2012, 05:28 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Garrettm4, I recall the discussion over skin depth and frequency, though it's a ways back in one of the threads. The thing to remember is that skin depth is frequency dependent and not linear. as the velocity of propagation changes so does the skin depth effect, another moving target.

                  I really need to collate the design and results data I have on the 4mHz coils, I only strayed a bit from Erics calcs in relation to wire ga and surface area. I really went on a 'hunch' from the patterns in the equation results and built the coils based on that.

                  There's a lot to be learned from the CRI.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Skin Depth

                    Hi garrettm4:
                    Thank you for the information on the skin-effect. Previously I have done some research into this subject and posted my findings on the "Eric P. Dollard" forum, #343, dated 05-05-2012. It seems both your and my conclusion supports what Eric published in the first place, except our findings show how the equation was derived.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by garrettm4 View Post

                      In general, in a reactive circuit, if there is no resistance, there is a phase angle of exactly 90 between the vectors of voltage and current, this represents Circulatory Energy and not necessarily Power as we usually understand it. To describe this specific situation, we use the term called "Reactive Power".

                      With instrumentation, this is visually seen as a distortion of one or both of the vectors of current and voltage. This, as a displacement of the node maxima of the affected quantity. Curiously, the zero crossings of the respective vector quantities remain in quadrature relation but the displaced node maxima can either return more energy than stored or alternately, store a portion of energy that won't ever be returned, where this energy goes is unknown. These actions cause the wave of the electric field (power) to be distorted and asymmetric, thus denoting the excess return or excess consumption taken. Here, energy is either converging into the circuit from an outside source or is diverging into an unknown sink, presumably not as thermal radiation.

                      Arguably, this action is seen as a negative resistance in the circuit because, reactive elements can only store energy and cannot impart energy to themselves. If they are merely storage elements, the energy source that filled the time-variant storage medium cannot be the storage medium itself, and cannot be the original source due to the energy increase happening on the falling quarter period, or return of stored energy. Furthermore, despite the quadrature relation of the zero-crossings, the node maxima are displaced causing the constituent waves to align asymmetrically, either with opposing signs (negative power factor) or same (positive power factor).

                      If a positive resistance was seen as a voltage drop and a divergence of energy from the circuit into the ambient, seen as a load. By the law of duality, a negative resistance would have to be seen as a voltage rise and a convergence of energy into the circuit, seen as a source. If we return more energy than was stored, a negative resistance would be seen as a negative power factor. Whereby the source becomes a sink and the load becomes a source for a select portion of time.

                      Garrett M
                      Oh Garrett - how pleased I was to read these words of yours.

                      This is something I studied 20 years ago in relation to loudspeaker crossover systems and audio power amplifier distortion.

                      Yes, exactly as you write, audio transients arising within music time, but coincidental with reactive loudspeaker system generated back-EMFs generated in loudspeaker time totally unrelated with signal input can cause the (amplifier output) 'source to become a sink'.
                      When the NFB loop phase is not coherent with input and output (as is so often the case with SS power amplifiers in order to guarantee amplifier stability, often with phase turnover wrt output commencing from 100Hz upwards), whereupon the output voltage can momentarily leads input prior to current correction, the crossover artifacts which 'expert' designers claim to be completely non-existent due to NFB, become clearly audible due to NFB phase delay.
                      Only amplifiers where output terminal sensed NFB error potential is controlled fully in phase with input at all audible frequencies do not generate crossover distortion, and there are precious few of them in existence.

                      The dynamically induced return of reactively stored and released energy is something which is simply ignored and not tested for on the audio workbench, and this explains why amplifiers supposedly having 0.001% distortion specs still do not sound good beside low or non feedback designs.

                      I should however like to comment upon your words -
                      "can either return more energy than stored or alternately, , where this energy goes is unknown."

                      The return of reactively stored energy is always displaced in time with respect to source/ input.
                      That return from the reactive circuits, relates to how many phase changing circuits coincidentally become simultaneously energised before there is reflection/ return event. The greater the number of phase changes prior to reflection, the greater the reactive return boost.

                      At LF in loudspeakers there can be air spring motion as well as L-C crossover reactances, potentially causing dynamic impedance dips as low as 2 ohms on 8ohm LS systems, and yet the true loading of these dips will not (cannot) be revealed by steady sine testing - this exactly as you suggest Garrett, with your complex dynamic current/ voltage phase shift waveform observations.

                      However "store a portion of energy that won't ever be returned" is not something I have observed to be correct, for that energy is always returned/ dissipated the moment that the energising source input is either switched off or disconnected, this in the form of a reactive settlement tail which can be recorded with respect to 't'-off at the input.

                      Surely it is only photonically/ electromagnetically radiated energy, or the electric/ magnetic field transduced portions doing work, which won't ever be returned ?

                      Cheers ........... Graham.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by dR-Green View Post
                        If

                        c = 299792458
                        F = 3670000
                        λ = 81.68
                        λ/4 = 20.42

                        Then

                        124% <

                        /1.24 = 16.469
                        Luminal frequency = 4550.8 kc
                        = F*1.24

                        124% >

                        *1.24 = 25.323
                        Luminal frequency = 2959.677 kc
                        = F/1.24

                        If a coil of λ/4 = 20.42 metres wire length was made, then based on the results shown of 124% the measured frequency would be approx

                        4550.8 kc

                        Which = λ/4/1.24

                        = 16.469 metres extra coil wire length luminal frequency

                        Therefore, tuned to 100% luminal frequency of this 16.469 metres wire length, the extra coil would theoretically be operating at the so-called "F*1.24" or 124% velocity of the fundamental F. Excluding any effects of being connected to the secondary.
                        Furthermore, taking the luminal frequency as 4550800, the measured frequency would be approx

                        4550800*1.24 = 5642992

                        5642992/3670000 = 1.5376

                        So theoretically extra coil with no terminal capacitance = almost 154%

                        Although ultimately this may be a load of useless rubbish, I'm just putting my thoughts on it out loud as I establish various relationships through numbers so make of it what you will
                        http://www.teslascientific.com/

                        "Knowledge is cosmic. It does not evolve or unfold in man. Man unfolds to an awareness of it. He gradually discovers it." - Walter Russell

                        "Once men died for Truth, but now Truth dies at the hands of men." - Manly P. Hall

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          The square root of Pi divided by 2 is 1.25; could this be related to the empirical 1.24 through a longitudinal excitation not involving transverse transduction ?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Thoughts on the Overall View of a Tesla Transformer

                            I may most likely be wrong, but here are some thoughts I had on the Tesla Transformer as given by Mr. Dollard.

                            The Secondary Coil is intentionally designed with extra capacitance present in the solenoids distributed constants. I believe, this is to counteract the "loading inductance" attributed to the grounding system.

                            Conversely, the Extra Coil is intentionally designed with extra inductance present in its distributed constants. Similar to the Secondary Coil, this is to counteract the "loading capacitance" attributed to the end-terminal beer can, dome, sphere or whatever is used.

                            In both cases the increased parameter (L or C), distributed throughout each distinct coil, isn't wanted but is needed to counteract the parasitic elements seen in an actual system. Therefore, they are necessary "evils", needed to make an actual working system.

                            Here, the grounding system acts as a one-wire "thru-the-earth" connection to the receiving units, by use of telluric transmission. The end-terminal capacitance, if I'm not mistaken, may act as a "reflecting capacitance", but more importantly, it is used to lower the dielectric gradient around the end-terminal of the extra coil. Here, the end-terminal beer can, or other voluminous metallic object, distributes the flux lines around the surface of the beer can, as opposed to the tip of a wire, thereby lowering the density of the flux to safe levels. This is done to prevent arcing, due to dielectric saturation of the air surrounding the coil. I would think, to achieve the best performance, you would want the end-terminals metallic object to have the LEAST capacitance with the GREATEST surface area. This, to minimize loading and also to reduce dielectric flux density.

                            When actually testing a built unit, the end-terminal capacity is increased and reduced as a parameter to help bring the whole unit into resonance. Here, the choice for shape isn't necessarily important, but when you tune for maximum performance it becomes an important aspect to address, especially when operating at high voltages. Also, a delay line, a certain length of wire between Extra Coil and end-terminal capacity, may or may not be needed for proper operation, this in itself would impose a certain amount capacitance and its value would need to be taken into account if used. The ring condenser, between the top of the secondary and bottom of extra, capacitance is also a very important parameter to aid in tuning the whole assembly. Last but not least, the primary loop capacitance is yet another parameter to adjust for proper operation.

                            Now, as for the velocity of the coils, the coil forms and wire jacketing permittivity were not taken into account when you derived your dimensions for construction. These impose extra loading capacitance (from non free-space permittivity), which was not intended. This is the primary evil of a working system. I believe Mr. Dollard has stated that he was able to get a coil to operate at the 157% velocity of c, also Madhatter has stated that one of two coils, that he built, was nearly at that velocity, the other was close but seemed to be loaded by some extra capacitance.

                            Thus the 124% isn't an absolute value, its only a statistically relevant figure. It would seem almost everyone who builds a coil has about the same parasitic loading capacitance distributed throughout their coils resulting in a figure that is ~124% velocity of c.

                            I will admit that I haven't done a thorough examination of the subject, and I'm not even remotely qualified to give even an opinion on it either, but I thought it couldn't hurt to give an outline of how I see the whole operation of the Tesla Transformer.

                            Garrett M
                            Last edited by garrettm4; 07-19-2012, 03:09 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by garrettm4 View Post

                              I believe Mr. Dollard has stated that he was able to get a coil to operate at the 157% velocity of c, also Madhatter has stated that one of two coils, that he built, was nearly at that velocity, the other was close but seemed to be loaded by some extra capacitance.

                              Garrett M
                              There again that Pi divided by 2 ratio = 157%;
                              the unique longitudinally polarised photonic radiation, as opposed to normal transverse electromagnetic transduction.
                              The coil photonically excited longitudinally and not electrically as an electromagnetic inductance.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by garrettm4 View Post
                                When actually testing a built unit, the end-terminal capacity is increased and reduced to bring the whole unit into resonance. Here, the choice for shape isn't necessarily important, but when you tune for maximum performance it becomes an importance aspect to address. Also, a delay line, a certain length of wire between Extra Coil and end-terminal capacity, may or may not be needed for proper operation.
                                It's a little more complicated than that. You could tune it that way, but then, what do you tune your secondary to? If you tune the secondary to F, then add the extra coil, suddenly the secondary frequency has gone right up and you need to add more secondary capacitance, otherwise you'll need a massive terminal capacitance. Physically I mean, I've had a bit of a Tower Of Babel coming along which was not practical at all Eventually I ran out of metal objects so could proceed no further, and had to take it down for safety reasons in case it all came crashing down through an accidental knock.

                                [edit] But either way, I was only bringing the tandem frequency down which was relatively high because the secondary had no capacitance and I was instead doing the tuning through the extra coil terminal. My conclusion is that the secondary needs to be tuned to a relatively low frequency, exactly what I don't know yet.

                                A "delay line" also constitutes some of the terminal capacitance whether insulated or not. The fact the piece of wire is there at all reduces the frequency, as well as its arrangement or direction and distance above the extra coil. The distance of the terminal itself from the top of the extra coil/TMT as a whole has an effect, as well as the length of wire leading to the terminal at any given distance above the coil. So a 15cm sphere for example 5cm above the coil would be very different to the same 15cm sphere 20cm above the coil.
                                Last edited by dR-Green; 07-19-2012, 12:33 AM.
                                http://www.teslascientific.com/

                                "Knowledge is cosmic. It does not evolve or unfold in man. Man unfolds to an awareness of it. He gradually discovers it." - Walter Russell

                                "Once men died for Truth, but now Truth dies at the hands of men." - Manly P. Hall

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X