Your Basic Coil

[tachyoncatcher]

Great, now that we've settled all THAT nonsense, let's get back to work.

Faraday's law says: Any change in the magnetic environment of a coil of wire will cause a voltage (emf) to be "induced" in the coil. No matter how the change is produced, the voltage will be generated. The change could be produced by changing the magnetic field strength, moving a magnet toward or away from the coil, moving the coil into or out of the magnetic field, rotating the coil relative to the magnet, etc.

Questions for you....WHAT determines how much voltage (emf) to be "induced" in the coil????
I will go out on a limb here and say strength of the magnetic field and number of turns of wire on the coil. BUT Let's have a DISCUSSION about what we are SEEING on our benches, not what we have read in books. I climb out on the limb to give us a place to start that discussion, not so some idiot will come along and attempt to saw the limb off.

How are we changing the magnetic environment of the coil in the devices we are working on currently???
Here I would say that most of us are using a rotor with some kind of magnet on it to pass near a coil and induce (not CHANGE, which is all that is required, but INDUCE) the magnetic field. Would I be wrong to assume that?

If so, are we not PAYING a price to MOVE that magnetic device (for lack of a better term) into and out of the area where it will react with the coil? In other words, isn't there a COST to spin that rotor? Do we need to PAY that cost? Now using magnetic neutralization can significantly reduce that cost, but it does not eliminate it. It will probably get us to COP>3, but not much beyond. When you add recovery circuits, you REALLY get up there in what your system can produce, but I am greedy, so I always want more.

Why do we HAVE to spin a rotor to induce a change in the magnetic environment of the coil. Just asking. I have several thoughts on this matter, but I wanted to hear what YOU folks think. And here is a very, very, VERY (I would type it more times, but I hope you get how important this question is) point. Is the amount of electricity produced by the coil in direct relation to the magnetic field induced in the coil or the CHANGE in magnetic field in the coil. They can be very different things, can they not?

Dave

Dave,
With that question you now enter the realm of Floyd Sweet. No motion, but great magnetic change. Too bad no one can figure out the knowledge he took to his grave.
Cheers,
Randy
Randy

[Turion]

Randy,
I'm pretty sure we have some folks here who are as smart as Floyd Sweet was, but are working in different areas.

If I charge a coil that has an iron core of coiled wire around a solid piece of iron, that iron wire becomes an electromagnet, but there is also voltage induced in it because of the voltage in the main coil. The main coil is shut off and BOTH coils collapse. Then if the iron core was wound on a solid iron center, some voltage will be induced in it by the passing of the rotor magnet as well as in the main coil. Then the main coil is charged in the opposite direction, creating an electromagnet of the iron core but also inducing voltage in it because it had that solid iron core. So I get 6 events instead of just 3. Whether the output of these six strange events is greater than the original three, I do not know. Bench time required.

That's what I am looking at with rotary motion. For motionless, have you ever looked at the Permanent magnet holder of Edward Leedskalnin? If you charge two coils correctly with HIGH voltage you have continuous magnetic flux tha travels in a circle. Now according to Faraday, all you need to induce voltage is placing a coil in a field of CHanging magnetic flux. So in your circular path, you have two alternating routes. One goes through an iron wound coil in the center of your coil and the other bypasses the coil entirely. As long as there is a path the magnetic flux is maintained, but when the power coil is bypassed, it's magnetic field is altered, producing power. Or so the "Law" states. Continuous magnetic flux in a circle like with the PMH, but alternative paths that run through or bypass the power coil. Look at the self oscillating switches that folks like Bob have built that already could switch this for no power input.

[gotoluc]

That's what I am looking at with rotary motion. For motionless, have you ever looked at the Permanent magnet holder of Edward Leedskalnin? If you charge two coils correctly with HIGH voltage you have continuous magnetic flux tha travels in a circle. Now according to Faraday, all you need to induce voltage is placing a coil in a field of CHanging magnetic flux. So in your circular path, you have two alternating routes. One goes through an iron wound coil in the center of your coil and the other bypasses the coil entirely. As long as there is a path the magnetic flux is maintained, but when the power coil is bypassed, it's magnetic field is altered, producing power. Or so the "Law" states. Continuous magnetic flux in a circle like with the PMH, but alternative paths that run through or bypass the power coil. Look at the self oscillating switches that folks like Bob have built that already could switch this for no power input.

Dear Dave and all researchers.

As I have taken the time to demonstrate that AUL (acceleration under load) is an effect caused by inferior core material. Please allow me to direct your attention to a researcher that has also taken much time in demonstrating the true results when using quality tape cores compared to transformer laminations. Please don't forget that using steel bars, bolts and welding rods will give you effects like "Permanent magnet holder of Edward Leedskalnin" which again is caused by magnetizing steel (hysteresis) and if you add a keeper it will stay magnetized for years. Remove the keeper quickly and you will induce the cores magnetic flux back in the coils which can light an LED.
All this is misunderstanding and it is time to clear the air and move on.

Just trying to help here and I hope you find these video demos enlightening.

Luc

Part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHbQXnXK6Xc

Part 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsN2sr3U0PY

[Allen Burgess]

Core saturation.

Dear Dave and all researchers.

As I have taken the time to demonstrate that AUL (acceleration under load) is an effect caused by inferior core material. Please allow me to direct your attention to a researcher that has also taken much time in demonstrating the true results when using quality tape cores compared to transformer laminations. Please don't forget that using steel bars, bolts and welding rods will give you effects like "Permanent magnet holder of Edward Leedskalnin" which again is caused by magnetizing steel (hysteresis) and if you add a keeper it will stay magnetized for years. Remove the keeper quickly and you will induce the cores magnetic flux back in the coils which can light an LED.
All this is misunderstanding and it is time to clear the air and move on.

Just trying to help here and I hope you find these video demos enlightening.

Luc

Part 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHbQXnXK6Xc

Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsN2sr3U0PY

@Gotoluc,

Have you found time to consider my idea of adding an electro-magnetic coil to the core to regulate saturation? Imagine the effect opening and closing this seperate core coil might have on AUL.

[citfta]

Good videos!

Thanks for the videos Luc. They are very interesting. I appreciate your efforts to try and educate us about the importance of the core material.

Carroll

[OrionLightShip]

hope I got the translation right!

Nice work Luc.

[mikrovolt]

Magnetize the core wound with metglass ribbon.
Push the rotor and capture the flux in a capacitor in less than 11 mSec.
Design the core and rotor geometry going for least iron loss.
Thanks Luc

[gotoluc]

@Gotoluc,

Have you found time to consider my idea of adding an electro-magnetic coil to the core to regulate saturation? Imagine the effect opening and closing this seperate core coil might have on AUL.

@ Allen Burgess

Pre-saturation of a core has a value for certain applications and should always be considered.

However, as I have demonstrated, AUL is not a useful effect and is caused by either one of two conditions; inferior cores material or a high impedance coil at higher then normal generator frequencies (rpm) with its output voltage clamped down many times over.
Important information to note: In the second case (high impedance coil) you can test if you've reached this state. Just increase or lower the frequency (RPM) of your prime mover and if the coil still delivers the same power to your load, then your coil is in this state and wasting power as it's reflecting flux it can't deliver to the load back to the prime mover which is causing AUL.

Understand these effects and stop being fooled.

If someone can achieve AUL with quality cores with a low impedance coil please share as that would be refreshing to observe.

Luc

[gotoluc]

Thanks for the videos Luc. They are very interesting. I appreciate your efforts to try and educate us about the importance of the core material.
Carroll

hope I got the translation right!

Nice work Luc.

Magnetize the core wound with metglass ribbon.
Push the rotor and capture the flux in a capacitor in less than 11 mSec.
Design the core and rotor geometry going for least iron loss.
Thanks Luc

Thanks guys,

It's refreshing to get some appreciation.

Here is a video demo to update my recent build which should be fired up today.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9wh23H5lhE

Luc

[Allen Burgess]

Aul

@ Allen Burgess

Pre-saturation of a core has a value for certain applications and should always be considered.

However, as I have demonstrated, AUL is not a useful effect and is caused by either one of two conditions; inferior cores material or a high impedance coil at higher then normal generator frequencies (rpm) with its output voltage clamped down many times over.
Important information to note: In the second case (high impedance coil) you can test if you've reached this state. Just increase or lower the frequency (RPM) of your prime mover and if the coil still delivers the same power to your load, then your coil is in this state and wasting power as it's reflecting flux it can't deliver to the load back to the prime mover which is causing AUL.

Understand these effects and stop being fooled.

If someone can achieve AUL with quality cores with a low impedance coil please share as that would be refreshing to observe.

Luc

@Gotoluc,

That's what MarkE and Milehigh maintained the entire time. That confirms Thane's just been on a treadmill with it all the while.

[wantomake]

trifilar coil calculator

Does anyone know a website for calculation of a trifilar coil to find induction? This website shows how to find induction of a single or multilayer wound coil.


Coil Inductance Calculator - 66pacific.com

If any help would be great.
wantomake

[Matthew Jones]

Does anyone know a website for calculation of a trifilar coil to find induction? This website shows how to find induction of a single or multilayer wound coil.


Coil Inductance Calculator - 66pacific.com

If any help would be great.
wantomake

Good luck, thats pretty much manual math. Look for calculation for an inductor that does multi voltage flyback.

Matt

[wantomake]

hummmmm

Thanks Matt,
I will give it a Google or two.

wantomake

[gyula]

Does anyone know a website for calculation of a trifilar coil to find induction? This website shows how to find induction of a single or multilayer wound coil.


Coil Inductance Calculator - 66pacific.com

If any help would be great.
wantomake

Hi wantomake,

I am afraid you will not find such specific software. The reason is that due to the close magnetic coupling a trifilar coil has 9 times the inductance because the number of turns is 3 times as many than in the "singlefilar" case. Of course here I assume you connect the three windings in series aiding phase, (the same current flows in them in the same direction). Similarly, a bifilar coil has 4 times the inductance when the two constituting windings are in close magnetic coupling and connected in series aiding phase.
These results also come from the normal inductance formula in which you can find the L inductance depends quadratically on the number of turns. I tested this in practice (years ago) and found indeed that for a bifilar coil the series aiding connection of the two windings resulted in 3.8 times higher inductance compared to the inductance of any one of the two windings. The small discrepency (3.8 vs the theoretical 4) may come from the not 100% perfect magnetic coupling and from a small increase in the self capacitance of the bifilar arrangement (capacitive reactance reduces inductive one).

I find this coil calculator also good and versatile and free

http://coil32.net/multi-layer-coil.html

Gyula

[BroMikey]

Hi wantomake,

I am afraid you will not find such specific software. The reason is that due to the close magnetic coupling a trifilar coil has 9 times the inductance because the number of turns is 3 times as many than in the "singlefilar" case. Of course here I assume you connect the three windings in series aiding phase, (the same current flows in them in the same direction). Similarly, a bifilar coil has 4 times the inductance when the two constituting windings are in close magnetic coupling and connected in series aiding phase.
These results also come from the normal inductance formula in which you can find the L inductance depends quadratically on the number of turns. I tested this in practice (years ago) and found indeed that for a bifilar coil the series aiding connection of the two windings resulted in 3.8 times higher inductance compared to the inductance of any one of the two windings. The small discrepency (3.8 vs the theoretical 4) may come from the not 100% perfect magnetic coupling and from a small increase in the self capacitance of the bifilar arrangement (capacitive reactance reduces inductive one).

I find this coil calculator also good and versatile and free

http://coil32.net/multi-layer-coil.html

Gyula

Hello Gyula

In your studies with the Bifilar coils inductance maybe you also slightly
twist the 2 bifilar conductors like we were instructed with the SSG?
I would be interested to know if measurements
(if you did that experiment) show more or less inductance
for twisted bifilar vs just putting conductor side by side without
twisting them.
This reference takes away some confusion on which winding
pattern you suggest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bifilar_coil

Bifilar coil configurations

parallel-wound, series connected
parallel-wound, parallel connected
counter-wound (series)
counter-wound (parallel)





Depending on which arrangement selected seems like a new
value of self inductance and self capacitance is reached but
I have never done these tests.


Thank you in advance.