Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube REGISTER NOW*** 2018 ENERGY CONFERENCE ***


Monero XMR


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 08-01-2009, 05:00 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Wink Inductive Circuits - The "Classical" Approach

Before discussing anything directly about this subject, I would like to ask any individuals that have a "new age" slant on these topics, a question pertaining to "Capacitive Overunity Circuits".

To start, surely all would agree that inductors and capacitors are true opposites, or as one person says "mirror images of each other". Also, check out his circuit half way down the page....looks quite familiar. Odd he hasn't discovered any overunity in his testing

Here's the question:

If inductive circuits (particularly the inductive kickback type) are perceived and apparently metered to exhibit COP>1, then please illustrate an example of a complementary capacitive circuit that does the same.

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #2  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:17 AM
morpher44's Avatar
morpher44 morpher44 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 926
coilpacitor

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
If inductive circuits (particularly the inductive kickback type) are perceived and apparently metered to exhibit COP>1, then please illustrate an example of a complementary capacitive circuit that does the same.
.99
I was just ranting about this in my coilpacitor thread.

It seems to me that if the capacitor is built INSIDE of the coil,
that it can benefit from the charges that move back and forth
due to the influences of the alternating magnetic field.
Some of those charges spinning around the coil will LAND
on the plates and enter the circuit.

It seems to me that coils and capacitors should be married as it where.

Or, if you can create a magnetic vortex that SPINS charges,
Lamor precession, down to the plates of your capacitor,
the charge Q can grow w/o the influence of the closed circuit
the capacitor is attached to. This would have the affect
of making the reactance XC drop a bit in ohmage -- like
a negative resistance.
But really what is happening is charges are arriving to the capacitor
FROM outside the circuit.

Here is an experiment I did with two coilpacitors. Very crude .. but
I could demonstrate a current flow between the capacitors.

YouTube - Dual Coilpacitor Experiment
__________________
 

Last edited by morpher44; 08-01-2009 at 07:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-01-2009, 08:10 AM
rave154 rave154 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 926
mind reader

you must be a mind reader ( or a dream-reader)!!!!


i just read your post on the "Inductive Circuits - The "Classical" Approach " thread where you said " if only we could make a coil inside a capacitor " ( or vice versa....welll guess what....

last night, before sleeping i was pondering coils & flyback & capacitors and how we use the cap to store the flyback to then DO something with it... i thought "if only the coil were actually PART of the capacitor (and vice versa ) "....in other words..... not a coil wrapped around a cap.....or a cap connected to a coil.......but both part of the same device...

i dreamed the following...

what is a cap?.... two conductors..1 insulator..in layers


what is a coil?...well....its a coil of wire in a spiral.....right?......yes.....but thats not ALL it is.... think about the wire...plastic coated wire... an insulator..with conducting wire inside.....the coil is already a cap....but how to merge the coil with an actuall hand built cap??

see attatchment...

the coil could be connected in series with the cap but it would also be PART OF the cap.... or in parallel..... any number of weird & wonderful ways.....could even put the whole lot inside a bigger spacier coil wound at right angles to the first coil....all sorts of permutations.

hope this helps

David. D
__________________
 

Last edited by rave154; 03-29-2010 at 04:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-01-2009, 11:16 AM
Inquorate's Avatar
Inquorate Inquorate is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sydney, Aus
Posts: 2,097
Send a message via MSN to Inquorate Send a message via Skype™ to Inquorate
Tesla pancake coil

YouTube - Comparison of Tesla Bifilar and Pancake Coils

If the pancake coil is Bifilar, it's magnetic field cancels itself out, and creates scalar waves.

What does everyone think?

Certainly it isn't explainable by 'conventional electronic theory'

Love and light
__________________
Ben Brandwood
Youtube - kinetic energy multiplier theory
Admin @
Heretical Builders
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-01-2009, 11:50 AM
rave154 rave154 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 926
INQ,

im not sure if what im about to say is relevent to what you just said.......but...here goes.....i just spit out my thoughts and people can make of 'em what they want.,..


i noticed, while using GOTLUCS recycling BEMF circuit.......while it was running.....if i inserted a core of welding rods into the middle of the coil, the "effect" ( for want of a better term ) was diminished.

Damn.... its making me wonder about what tesla said about "iron".....that it was to become more important than any other material.....im wondering if we should be using iron wire in our coils.......and not copper wire ( ED Leedskalnin anybody !?!?!!??!?!? )

Hope this helps

David. D
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-01-2009, 12:50 PM
MileHigh MileHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 140
David:

May I suggest some searching. Look for information on what the magnetic field looks like around a long piece of straight wire with a DC current running through it. Then go and look at how that translates into how a coil generates a magnetic field. Then look up permeability and saturation and how that relates to putting a piece of iron inside a coil.

What is an inductor? The simplest answer is that it is a piece of wire. A one mm piece of straight wire is an inductor.

If you spend some time doing this basic research you should come to the realization that it doesn't matter if the wire is made of iron or copper. On a deeper level you should realize that it doesn't really make sense to even pose the question.

MileHigh
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-01-2009, 01:21 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by rave154 View Post
INQ,

im not sure if what im about to say is relevent to what you just said.......but...here goes.....i just spit out my thoughts and people can make of 'em what they want.,..


i noticed, while using GOTLUCS recycling BEMF circuit.......while it was running.....if i inserted a core of welding rods into the middle of the coil, the "effect" ( for want of a better term ) was diminished.

Damn.... its making me wonder about what tesla said about "iron".....that it was to become more important than any other material.....im wondering if we should be using iron wire in our coils.......and not copper wire ( ED Leedskalnin anybody !?!?!!??!?!? )

Hope this helps

David. D
The inductance of the coil will be greatly enhanced by inserting something such as iron into the core. Any material with a higher permeability than air will do this.

Increased inductance also carries with it an increased tau (L/R), so you are going to have to increase the pulse width and/or lower the frequency accordingly to get your big spikes back again.

rave154, Inquorate, morpher44, Aaron, Rosemary, Harvey et al: if you subscribe to the new age (NA) view of inductive circuits and the belief that those such as Rosemary's exhibit COP>1, how could a similar circuit be built using a capacitor as the main circuit element, as opposed to an inductor? Please also explain the OU mechanism involved in a similar fashion that has been used to describe the "effect" in the inductive counterpart circuit.

Anyone?

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-01-2009, 03:10 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
The Inductive Circuit

Here's something to get it started. This is the inductive circuit.

Now, who can come up with an explanation for OU of this circuit, and also a circuit employing a capacitor as per the original question in the first post?

From the attached diagram below:

Quote:
- When SW1 is ON, Icoil = Iswitch. Idiode = 0.
- When SW1 turns OFF, Iswitch goes to 0, and Icoil = Idiode.
- During this OFF phase, Idiode can either recirculate back into the coil (SW2 = A) (creating additional heat), or it can be used to charge or power any external component located in place of "Bcharge" above (SW2 = B).
- If during the OFF phase SW2 is left in the middle OPEN position as shown, the voltage across the coil/resistor will "spike" to a large inverted amplitude then oscillate at the resonant frequency in a damped fashion until all the energy is dissipated within Rcoil. The resonant oscillation occurs due to the parasitic inter-winding capacitance (sometimes referred to as "self-capacitance) of the coil which forms a tank circuit with the inductor.
- The "tau" time constant of this particular inductor/resistor combination is 864ns. The inductor will be energized to about 90% after 5 time constants, equating to a total time of 4.32us. Any power applied to this circuit for longer than about 4.32us is wasted energy and is equivalent to DC heating of the coil/resistor. Using a pulse width of 15.42us (3.7% of 2.4kHz) as shown above, equates to about 72% wasted energy. If the goal is to utilize "reactive" effects only, then the pulse width applied by users of this circuit would need to adjust their drive circuits to achieve a pulse width of between 4-5us. This equates to about a 1.2% duty cycle at 2.4kHz.
.99
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Inductive_flyback01.jpg (139.5 KB, 60 views)
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-01-2009, 03:35 PM
wantfreeenergy wantfreeenergy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 177
I've wanted to say this and I suppose there could be better places to state it.

It is my strong belief that all the "inventions" that work today only work because the people that created them had a belief they would work.

Here's where it get new age, "or perhaps old age". If a person were to have the belief that they could pick up a battery, and lets say.... give it a shake over here....give it a shake over there.... then they could have that battery create energy that would shock non believers. And comparing that battery to other batteries of the same type this one would be noticeably different. What I am really wanting to say is, with the proper belief we could take a AAA battery and use it to produce the power needed to power any house or electrical device. Simply creating circuits and such is a medium or buffer or mediary or something in the middle, for our beliefs to attach to so that we can believe and get the results we want.

Not like that is gonna help, but I believe we need to start at the source and then we can have what we want.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-01-2009, 03:40 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Just the facts Jack

If we can folks, let's keep this technical ok?

Beliefs and philosophy isn't going to root out the operating principles of these circuits.

Facts and their backing empirical evidence is what truly counts here.

.99
__________________
 

Last edited by poynt99; 08-01-2009 at 03:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-01-2009, 03:43 PM
Michelinho's Avatar
Michelinho Michelinho is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Quebec, Canada.
Posts: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquorate View Post
YouTube - Comparison of Tesla Bifilar and Pancake Coils

If the pancake coil is Bifilar, it's magnetic field cancels itself out, and creates scalar waves.

What does everyone think?

Certainly it isn't explainable by 'conventional electronic theory'

Love and light
In the Tesla bifilar coil, the magnetic field cancels itself out? It cancels itself out if the two inner ends are connected together as the current is made to travel in opposite direction. As connected like Tesla patent, the magnetic field is enhance and it also gains capacitive properties.

morpher44:
Quote:
It seems to me that coils and capacitors should be married as it where.
The Tesla bifilar coil has capacitive properties according to Tesla own words.


Or did I get my facts wrong? Which formula is used for the Tesla's bifilar coil? I made a search last night and came up empty.

Michel
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #12  
Old 08-01-2009, 03:57 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
A Couple Additional Points

In the posted circuit diagram, we should not forget about the small dissipation in the flyback diode as well. Most of the energy will be dissipated as heat in Rcoil, but some in the diode too during the OFF phase when it is conducting.

Note also that even when SW2 is in the B position, i.e. the flyback energy is supplying power to an external load such a a charge battery, the return path is still at the +'ve side of the coil, which will again cause additional heat in Rcoil. Not as much this time, but additional nonetheless.

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-01-2009, 04:10 PM
gyula gyula is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 808
Hi poynt99,

Though I wait for any meaningful report on this inductive circuit, I do not think conventional EM theory is able to explain any COP>1 possibility should it occur...

Regarding a capacitive version, Bearden occurs to me, referring to a so called stepwise charging of a capacitor, see here:
Additional Information On The Final Secret Of Free Energy

quote
...Rigorously one can use a normal capacitor as the collector, if one step-charges it in several hundred small incremental rectangular voltage steps (stair-step-charging). The proof that this can freely charge a capacitor with energy, without having to do appreciable work, is already known in the literature. You can charge the capacitor without entropy and essentially without drawing electron mass current. [Ref 2,Ref 3,Ref 4,Ref 5]
unquote

I also refer to a thread on overunity.com where a member wrote: ...discharging a capacitor in a coil is the real source for free energy..., see here:
Real OU-Effect to Share with everyone!!!

Unfortunately he does not seem to share his findings (if they are real, I hope they are, lol).

rgds, Gyula
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-01-2009, 04:32 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
I would agree Gyula,

that conventional EM theory may not be able to explain "overunity effects".

However, if one does not possess an understanding of conventional EM, how dos one know the difference between conventional and unconventional effects?

Thanks, I had forgotten about Bearden's step-charged capacitor storage concept. He is correct in one regard, but also forgetting where the original energy came form. Yep, we can transfer energy from a battery or capacitor to another capacitor with almost no loss, but energy is still being used from the source battery or capacitor. Isn't that a huge oversight?

With Tito, I would not get too excited or worried about that one. It's the pattern/circumstance we've seen many times before.

What I'm asking about really, is an equivalent scenario to the inductive kickback circuit everyone thinks is so mysterious. The point is that there IS an equivalent capacitive circuit which complements it. I want to see if anyone can visualize and illustrate what it is, and explain how it works.

Capacitors and Inductors are truly inversions of each other, so logically there must be a circuit.

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-01-2009, 05:43 PM
morpher44's Avatar
morpher44 morpher44 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 926
coil-cap marriage

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michelinho View Post
The Tesla bifilar coil has capacitive properties according to Tesla own words.
Michel
Yes. All coils will have a bit of capacitance .. not just the bifilar variety.
There is a point of self-resonance which is the resontant
frequency using L & C where C is the implicit capacitance in the coil.

In terms of a marriage, though between coils and capacitors,
I was thinking more that a new design would EXPLOIT this relationship
much more seriously. Either a coil can be wrapped around a
capacitor that has inner plates that are LOW resistance
OR
the coil can be built INSIDE the capacitor with the plates OUTSIDE
the coil.

The advantages that may occur would appear in the form of
negative resistance. The frequency response at various frequencies
might show that the capacitance side of the reactance is NOT
following the traditional inverse curve predicted by the capacitance,
but rather is BENT a bit by the extra charges conveyed --
van de graff -like- on to the capacitor.

It would be ideal if you could go to your neighborhood electronics store
and buy a coilpacitor with a known resonant frequency and Q
and other specifications CLEARLY identified so that you could
design with it.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-01-2009, 05:52 PM
morpher44's Avatar
morpher44 morpher44 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 926
belief

Quote:
Originally Posted by wantfreeenergy View Post
It is my strong belief that all the "inventions" that work today only work because the people that created them had a belief they would work.
I think if you actually go try to invent something that you believe will work -- you will rapidly discover that it does not work the way you believe it works.
Edison & team believed they could make a light-bulb. It wasn't as easy as they thought -- taking many many man hours, experiment after experiment ... with lots of materials, etc. Here is a dramatic case of belief NOT intersecting with reality.

I suspect success with invention has more to do with "intuition" ... or that ability to get messages from your more brilliant unconscious mind. But more than that you also have to TRY to make something work ... and probably fail hundreds of times before succeeding.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-01-2009, 07:56 PM
Harvey's Avatar
Harvey Harvey is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
Here's something to get it started. This is the inductive circuit.

Now, who can come up with an explanation for OU of this circuit, and also a circuit employing a capacitor as per the original question in the first post?

From the attached diagram below:



.99
So it is your belief then, that if two switches existed on each side of the inductor, and you opened both switches simultaneously, that the inductor would still ring?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-01-2009, 08:08 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
So it is your belief then, that if two switches existed on each side of the inductor, and you opened both switches simultaneously, that the inductor would still ring?
I didn't say at all that it was my belief; I stated it as fact.

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-02-2009, 12:53 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Some Comments

Harvey Post: http://www.energeticforum.com/63036-post1486.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
The image I have in my mind is the diagram found in the datasheet Fig 12a. labled Unclamped Inductive Test Circuit (which is nearly identical to Rosemary's diagram in Quantum)1

So, our circuit is ON, Voltage is present across our load and current begins to flow...what comes first? Well, if the voltage comes before the current, how long do we have to wait before current starts flowing through our IRFPG50? 2 Fig. 12b. gives us a clue. It all depends on the inductor and the Vdd value. But you can see it ramping up there, but what is happening at the peak? That's where we turn OFF the HEXFET, and notice all the activity that is still going on. 3 That's the test circuit, which is designed to fully deplete the stored energy of the inductor. But Rosemary's circuit doesn't do that. In her circuit, the current stops flowing through the IRFPG50 before the field is fully drained and the Vds < V(br)dss, now we have a voltage on the junction of the inductor and transistor that is higher than the voltage on the junction of the inductor and battery. So now we see a reverse current through the load. 4

What do you think, will the current going backwards through the load have any effect on the heating of it? 5 During the subsequent ringing that occurs, the over voltage causes repetitive passes of current through the inductor, and each pass adds heat as the excess voltage is exchanged for heat. 6

Since we suspect that the COP is a result of the ring energy, steps should be taken to enhance it. 7
1. Indeed the circuit is not unique, nor mysterious.

2. There is no delay--current begins to increase immediately.

3. As I mentioned in my diagram, the Ainslie circuit is being driven ON far longer than is required if only the reactive effects are desired--about 72% too long.

4. The reverse current pulse is about 1/3 the duration and 1/20 the amplitude compared to the forward current pulse in the Ainslie circuit with the 1N4007 in place.

5. There will be marginal heating added due to this reverse current pulse.

6. With such a low inductance to resistance ratio (i.e. low Q-factor) in this circuit, there is really very little ringing and it does not add much.

7. To enhance the ringing effect, you need to increase the Q of this circuit, namely by changing out the wirewound resistor for a real inductor with heavy wire.

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-02-2009, 01:22 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
More Comments

Harvey Post: http://www.energeticforum.com/63139-post1519.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post
From where I sit, it seems we want a higher amplitude ring if possible. 1 The frequency of that ring will depend on the battery and inductor combined resonance. Perhaps Hoppy or Milehigh can offer suggestions on methods of determining the battery capacitance so we can actually engineer a resonant circuit. My time is divided greatly over the next few days, but I will help where I can. 2

The Avalanche circuit inside the HEXFET serves to snub the ringing, but under certain conditions can actually exacerbate it when it encourages an increased current draw at the start of the spike but on the next cycles of the ring the Avalanche diode turns off for some reason. That would result in an increased field energy that dissipates in the ringing. 3

Rosemary, were any voltage measurements taken across the HEXFET? Did they ever exceed 1KV?

EDIT:
How can I measure the capacitance (NOT capacity) of a battery? - Yahoo! Answers
Chapter 9: Internal Battery Resistance
1. Commented on in above post.

2. The resonant ringdown frequency of the coil is mainly determined by its own self-inductance and self-capacitance. It is not logical to state that the battery is involved here because during resonant ringdown, the MOSFET is OFF and there is no path through the battery, except for the stray, parasitic and junction capacitances I have mentioned several times.

3. There is no purposely-designed avalanche circuit in MOSFETs. This is analogous to reverse breakdown of a diode. Avalanche diodes are in fact designed this way.

If the MOSFET should ever avalanche in the OFF state due to excessive voltage, I'm not certain it would enhance the ringing effect at all. This would be analogous to the MOSFET turning back ON for a brief instant.

Also, keep in mind here that the Ainslie circuit includes a flyback diode, and with this diode in place there is no big voltage spike at any time on the MOSFET.

.99
__________________
 

Last edited by poynt99; 08-02-2009 at 01:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-02-2009, 04:52 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harvey View Post

Keep in mind too, that as I understand Rosemary's claim, it has to do with conserved energy in the load resistor being stored at the point of manufacture, and that it would leak into the field and add to it resulting in a breakdown of the load resistor. Please correct me if I am wrong here.



What is leaking into what, and what is breaking down? Sorry, haven't a clue what you mean by all that.

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #22  
Old 08-02-2009, 05:57 AM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Give it a shot

So far there are no responses to the original question in this thread.

Anyone?

There's an equivalent capacitive circuit that behaves much the same way (taking into account the main differences between capacitors and inductors), and is still a simple circuit.

Can anyone get their mind around how it would look and work?

Come on guys, I know there are a number of you watching this thread. Don't be shy

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-02-2009, 06:13 AM
quantumuppercut quantumuppercut is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 406
Okay, I will try to answer as many questions as possible with my point of view.

First of all, is Milhigh your buddy? Your name is David, right? Anyway, he got a good point. A wire is an inductor, even if it straight. That lead to your point of view about an inductor is the opposite a capacitor is somewhat not exactly correct. An inductor and a capacitor are like springs with different stiffness. Pure capacitor is spring with high stiffness. That means it has a very high vibrating frequency, the opposite is true for inductor. A mechanical view is that they're pipes with differnt diameter. High pressure, low volumetric flow (inductor) or low pressure, high volumetric flow(capacitor). This is the opposite you're thinking.

OK, What's wrong with conventional EM theory.

It states that P=IV
it also state that P=I^2R

This is the mistake I spot in conventional theory. Those are different P. IV is electrical current while I^2R are EM waves. They're two totally different things.

What is the equilvalent OU capacitor? All AC capacitors are OU with EM waves feed back. The reason is as stated above about conventional theory.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 08-02-2009, 08:00 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,574
self-oscillation frequency

Quote:
Originally Posted by poynt99 View Post
There is no purposely-designed avalanche circuit in MOSFETs.
Maybe not but this sidesteps the fact that there are mosfets specifically designed to self-oscillate as there are mosfets that are designed to specifically not oscillate. When it oscillates, it may encounter avalanche.

IRFPG50 allows for oscillation and repetitive avalanche IF it should occur.

Since you want to stick to facts and empirical evidence, it would be a good idea for you to stick to the facts. I don't have much time for this thread but I do have to point out - a fact.

A very specific part of the premise to your argument for one is this:

"Using a pulse width of 15.42us (3.7% of 2.4kHz) as shown above, equates to about 72% wasted energy"

Now read this from the actual Quantum article.




That says:

The required level of oscillation is achieved by setting the duty cycle at 3.7% 'on' at a frequency of 2.4 kHz.

Reducing the gate current of the mosfet results in an oscillation that
overrides the predetermined frequency and duty cycle. The frequency
oscillates between 143 kHz and 200 kHz and the duty cycle defaults
to approximately 1.3% on.


So here is a fact. Does the circuit claim of 17.0 COP come from the circuit
running at 3.7% duty cycle and 2.4 kHz frequency. The answer is NO; it does NOT.

That is what the timing signal was set at when it was triggered into
self-oscillation - the circuit ran in self-oscillation and the high gains came from self-oscillation.

And what was the circuit running at when in oscillation?

143 kHz to 200 kHz at about 1.3% duty cycle. There is a big difference.

Take that all into account first, then re-edit your explanation based on
the 3.7% and 2.4 kHz because the fact above contradicts the point
you make about 3.7% at 2.4 kHz frequency.

You don't even discuss what the circuit was running at for the high COP claim.

You started this thread, do what you want, you invited me and I'm just
pointing out this one very important fact that continues to be sidestepped
by everyone that is skeptical of these claims.

In any case, the above is all I have to say for now.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 08-02-2009, 08:25 AM
Hoppy Hoppy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 241
Aaron wrote: -

Maybe not but this sidesteps the fact that there are mosfets specifically designed to self-oscillate as there are mosfets that are designed to specifically not oscillate. When it oscillates, it may encounter avalanche.

Aaron, you are getting very confused about this. Mosfets's are not designed to self-oscillate, this is nonsense! Repetative avalanche simply means that the physical build of the mosfet can withstand multiple high energy pulses to a certain rated level without breaking down.

Hoppy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 08-02-2009, 10:57 AM
Inquorate's Avatar
Inquorate Inquorate is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sydney, Aus
Posts: 2,097
Send a message via MSN to Inquorate Send a message via Skype™ to Inquorate
LC tank circuit v veljko oscillator

I've yet to see an LC circuit that is given a little push like the veljko oscillator pendulum - at the apex of it's swing. I've bought a cheap scope on ebay with which I intend to investigate the possibility of an LC circuit that mirrors a veljko oscillator.

As for a capacitive analogue to the inductive OU circuit, point 99, I think it's fairly clear that we don't know what you're hinting at..

Throw a dog a bone

Love and light
__________________
Ben Brandwood
Youtube - kinetic energy multiplier theory
Admin @
Heretical Builders
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-02-2009, 12:23 PM
MileHigh MileHigh is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 140
.99:

How about this:

Replace the resistor-coil with a capacitor in series with a 10-ohm resistor.
Replace the fly-back diode with a 100-ohm resistor.
Assume SW2 is connected to "A", the battery positive/cap positive node.

When the MOSFET switch closes, the cap charges fairly quickly through the 10-ohm resistor and some current flows through the 100-ohm resistor.

When the MOSFET switch opens, the cap discharges more slowly through the 10-ohm and 100-ohm resistors.

This at least is a look-alike for the charging-discharging of the energy storing element in the circuit. No OU in sight.

There is no easy way to get a charging battery setup going in the alternative circuit unless you add another timed switch to connect the charged capacitor to the charging battery and the charging battery is at a lower voltage than the source battery. No OU in sight.

MileHigh

P.S.: If you short out the capacitor you get a spike of high current with rapidly decreasing voltage. It's almost the same as open-circuiting an inductor giving you a spike of high voltage with rapidly decreasing current. So perhaps if you remove the 10-ohm resistor and then when the MOSFET switches on.........
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-02-2009, 01:06 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by quantumuppercut View Post
Okay, I will try to answer as many questions as possible with my point of view.

First of all, is Milhigh your buddy? Your name is David, right? Anyway, he got a good point. A wire is an inductor, even if it straight. That lead to your point of view about an inductor is the opposite a capacitor is somewhat not exactly correct. An inductor and a capacitor are like springs with different stiffness. Pure capacitor is spring with high stiffness. That means it has a very high vibrating frequency, the opposite is true for inductor. A mechanical view is that they're pipes with differnt diameter. High pressure, low volumetric flow (inductor) or low pressure, high volumetric flow(capacitor). This is the opposite you're thinking.

OK, What's wrong with conventional EM theory.

It states that P=IV
it also state that P=I^2R

This is the mistake I spot in conventional theory. Those are different P. IV is electrical current while I^2R are EM waves. They're two totally different things.

What is the equilvalent OU capacitor? All AC capacitors are OU with EM waves feed back. The reason is as stated above about conventional theory.
Well, first of all, I see MileHigh, as well as Hoppy, Gyula etc. as peers. I am familiar with Gyula from OU, but I did not "meet" MileHigh until I participated in Rosemary's thread. You seem to think you know me? No the name is not David.

Inductors and Capacitors are indeed true opposites. That I will try to show.

I'm not sure about your EM theory there...seems a little "off".

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-02-2009, 01:20 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
Maybe not but this sidesteps the fact that there are mosfets specifically designed to self-oscillate as there are mosfets that are designed to specifically not oscillate. When it oscillates, it may encounter avalanche.

IRFPG50 allows for oscillation and repetitive avalanche IF it should occur.
Aaron, first of all, thanks for taking the time to participate in this thread. I know you're a very busy guy.

Anyway, Hoppy pretty much nailed it. MOSFET's really aren't designed to oscillate. There are however some high frequency JFET devices designed to be used as RF oscillators (VCO's etc.), but that's about as close as it gets.

Quote:
The required level of oscillation is achieved by setting the duty cycle at 3.7% 'on' at a frequency of 2.4 kHz.

Reducing the gate current of the mosfet results in an oscillation that
overrides the predetermined frequency and duty cycle. The frequency
oscillates between 143 kHz and 200 kHz and the duty cycle defaults
to approximately 1.3% on.


So here is a fact. Does the circuit claim of 17.0 COP come from the circuit
running at 3.7% duty cycle and 2.4 kHz frequency. The answer is NO; it does NOT.

That is what the timing signal was set at when it was triggered into
self-oscillation - the circuit ran in self-oscillation and the high gains came from self-oscillation.

And what was the circuit running at when in oscillation?

143 kHz to 200 kHz at about 1.3% duty cycle. There is a big difference.

Take that all into account first, then re-edit your explanation based on
the 3.7% and 2.4 kHz because the fact above contradicts the point
you make about 3.7% at 2.4 kHz frequency.
I am aware of all that. My point was merely to state that should folks NOT be able to get their circuit to oscillate at the 143-200kHz range, and are relying only on conventional IK, then it would be prudent to reduce the Duty Cycle to 1.2% from 3.7% for better efficiency. This is indeed supplementing what Harvey already posted about this.

Quote:
You don't even discuss what the circuit was running at for the high COP claim.

You started this thread, do what you want, you invited me and I'm just
pointing out this one very important fact that continues to be sidestepped
by everyone that is skeptical of these claims.

In any case, the above is all I have to say for now.
Perhaps the HF oscillation does give better results, but for now since most have not been able to get the HF oscillation, I am going on the premise that Rosemary's statement about the HF oscillation not been required to achieve COP>1, is true.

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-02-2009, 01:27 PM
poynt99 poynt99 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inquorate View Post
I've yet to see an LC circuit that is given a little push like the veljko oscillator pendulum - at the apex of it's swing. I've bought a cheap scope on ebay with which I intend to investigate the possibility of an LC circuit that mirrors a veljko oscillator.

As for a capacitive analogue to the inductive OU circuit, point 99, I think it's fairly clear that we don't know what you're hinting at..

Throw a dog a bone

Love and light
Keep your eye on Luc's "Resonance effects for everyone to share" thread. You will soon have your "little push" circuit

The capacitive circuit is not too difficult, but it does require some thought. It is somewhat unconventional relative to what we are used to seeing and using, but it is possible to build and use. MileHigh gave his input on it, are there any others?

.99
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

For One-Time Donations, use admin@ this domain > energeticforum.com

Choose your voluntary subscription

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers