Tesla's Magnifying Transmitter "Replications"

[Farmhand]

Ah, that's what I feared would happen to mine, but it turned out to be ok. Have you actually tested whether they are connected? Because as far as I can tell, there's either a very narrow band on either edge, or at the cuts where you cut the tape (I used scissors) where there's no adhesive. And that's enough to make the contact so the whole thing is joined electrically.

The only solution I could think of if they weren't connected was to use folds - fold a small piece/corner of the tape over before sticking it down so they're all connected underneath.

Yes I see ! You might be right, I'll test and see later.
Thanks for that.

I've got some flashtak Stuff as well as the thin stuff, flash tak is like actual aluminium plate (very thin) with tar-tackky stuff on one side. Flash tak looks very heavy duty stuff and maybe no good for this. No problem if it's not.

Ta.

[dR-Green]

Here's a video clip.
Transmitter Test 3-1.wmv - YouTube

I noticed after making the video if I reduced the pulse width of the oscillator
and tuned some other things more carefully I could get a better effect with
more voltage with a bit less current.

I also noticed that if I put my hand near the receiver toroid terminal the
voltage went way up and the LED's lit up better too of course. Which could
mean a couple of things.

Nice demo. I think it strengthens the argument that the wireless has nothing to do with transferring energy through the air. If it does then it's not Hertzian/electromagnetic waves because the metal shed would make that kind of transmission/output impossible. If the terminals have any kind of remote effect, besides affecting the coil it's attached to and affecting the coil on the other end through that way, then it must be something else that's interacting between the terminals. I would think

What if you earth both the transmitter and receiver but keep the wire. Or just earth the receiver

[Farmhand]

Nice demo. I think it strengthens the argument that the wireless has nothing to do with transferring energy through the air. If it does then it's not Hertzian/electromagnetic waves because the metal shed would make that kind of transmission/output impossible. If the terminals have any kind of remote effect, besides affecting the coil it's attached to and affecting the coil on the other end through that way, then it must be something else that's interacting between the terminals. I would think

What if you earth both the transmitter and receiver but keep the wire. Or just earth the receiver

Yeah the shed the transmitter is in is almost like a Faraday cage, I think, the
ony big gaps are the windows and door the insect mesh on those is only
cheap plastic stuff and the aluminium security mesh door was open. But I
think it is definitely the wire doing the work.

If I connect a single ground to both, the output from the receiver drops right
off. If I take out the wire and ground connect both coils I get pretty much
nothing from the receiver but the transmitter waveform gets very big, which I
now know can be a not so good thing as well as good .

I think there could be several reasons why this happens.

I'll outline some of my thoughts. I'm thinking many possible causes.

1. With high and very high frequencies the intensity of each vibration is small
and the Earth is huge. So the effect would be similar to throwing a mosquito
at an elephant, not much would happen. I think earth connecting a high
frequency coil has inherent problems. Probably similar to, or to do with "skin
effect". It causes like an open circuit from too much resistance, type effect
from what i can tell.

2. With high and very high frequencies the propensity of the circuit to emitt
EMR from all conductors seems higher, so under no or light loads when the
potential builds more leaks.

3. Connecting both to ground changes the frequency of the coils. This makes
sense and I do need to retune the transmitter to get a big sine wave when it
is just connected to the ground stake.

Maybe one coil is changed more than the other so more tuning range is
needed. Dunno.

My Earth ground stake is still not the best either, conditions are rough here.

The coax I got to try next time is 8.5 ohms inner core 100 meters outer
shielding is two braids 1.8 ohms together. All wound up in a big coil the inner
core is 3.68 mH and the outer braids are 3.38 mH.

Cheers

[dR-Green]

Hi dR, Yes it is a very awesome book. I couldn't think of a better book to have
a good hard copy of. There is so much info. The hardest part is getting the
mind into olden time people speaking mode, however once I start to
understand what I read better things start to make sense.

I haven't found it to be too much of a problem since reading Walter Russell Thanks for all that info, I'll have a closer look tomorrow and read through the patents in bed now so I can better understand what you're talking about.

A quick update of what I've been doing: I changed back to the flyback transformer to give a demo to someone, and since I've now got a better idea of the 555 circuit, I'm starting to get better results. Input has gone up from 575mA [edit] with the 2 parallel ignition coils to 1-1.1 amp. Completely open loop/one wire filament lighting is much brighter than before, and pretty nice with the other end earthed to form a "closed loop" as far as the bulb is concerned.

The receiver output can now make the bulb (240v 15w) glow a tiny bit orange, and it also slightly lights a 12v 5w halogen. For some reason up until that point no other bulb has ever worked anywhere in the system except the 240v 15w, regardless of voltage or wattage. But even though it can do something with the filament it does nothing with a CFL on the receiver output. So now I'm not so sure about trying the LEDs on it

The 1k 3 watt resistor also got pretty hot within 3 seconds of use between the coils, and my neon bulb is turning black pretty quick.

Also curiously when I drive the transistor with more current, the current draw of the whole setup goes down and the flyback output (spark gap) gets stronger, which results in an overall better output. There is a definite musical scale to the spark gap and it follows these frequencies mostly regardless of the gap size, and for some reason at a certain frequency with a bigger gap it uses double the input with an useless output. So I don't know what's happening there.

And lastly, my plan to use a helical coil to charge a capacitor to go through a spark gap to power the spiral coil failed completely in terms of getting a higher voltage output The "higher voltage" I was hoping for barely sparks 0.5mm if even that. So we'll see where this goes.

[dragon]

Yes I see ! You might be right, I'll test and see later.
Thanks for that.

I've got some flashtak Stuff as well as the thin stuff, flash tak is like actual aluminium plate (very thin) with tar-tackky stuff on one side. Flash tak looks very heavy duty stuff and maybe no good for this. No problem if it's not.

Ta.

Maybe some conductive glue?

[dR-Green]

One of those problems would have been how to lower the frequency of a spiral coil
enough without the spiral coil ending up 150 meters diameter and with all the
turns far enough from the ground not to cause problem.

I get what you're saying about the skin effect and high frequency bouncing off the earth, but all I've read in the patent so far is Tesla talking about the highest frequencies possible. Where have you read about lowering the frequency?

This is just what I'm thinking so might not actually work out that way, but if you are replicating a small scale model of the actual transmitter, coil A and B of patent 1119732 are connected in series, so that would itself lower the frequency I would have thought?

Also I don't quite understand this paragraph:

A part of the improvements which form the subject of this specification, the transmitting circuit, in its general features, is identical with that described and claimed in my original Patents Nos. 645,576 and 649,621.

Can any modern minded person decipher this paragraph? I know what I'd like it to mean but the diagram shows something different in terms of coil arrangement/winding. So any idea which part is identical?

[Farmhand]

Hi dR, I'll see what I can find to help us understand this.

:Also I don't quite understand this paragraph:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikola Tesla
A part of the improvements which form the subject of this specification, the transmitting circuit, in its general features, is identical with that described and claimed in my original Patents Nos. 645,576 and 649,621.

Can any modern minded person decipher this paragraph? I know what I'd like it to mean but the diagram shows something different in terms of coil arrangement/winding. So any idea which part is identical?

This just means that the transmitting circuit does pretty much the same kinda thing just a bit differently and improved. Same principal.

Well the first copy and paste in this post #326 says low frequency, I'll find more.

http://www.energeticforum.com/156938-post326.html

Here towards the bottom. It's all a good read though.
Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents -- Chapter IV

A couple of copy and pastes.

Counsel

What would an engineer have to do to the wireless systems of today in order to produce very little radiation of electromagnetic waves and produce a large amount of these earth currents? What changes would he have to make in the system?

Tesla

He would have to construct and operate the apparatus described in my patents and in my lectures.

Counsel

He would have to get very much more inductance in the system than he has today, relatively?

Tesla

It is just like this: In an enterprise of this kind, you have to start with certain fundamental propositions. If you are to build a commercial plant, the question comes up how much money is it to cost. Now, you go to specify before your capitalists the various parts of the plant, and you will find that your machinery and the aerial structure will cost so much. If your capitalists are willing to go deep into their pockets, you can put up a tremendous antenna because, as you know, as I pointed out in 1893, that the effects will be proportionate to the capital invested in that part; but you will find great limits there.

I designed a plant [Wardenclyffe, referring to Fig. 83] years ago with a large capacity and put it before certain architects. They figured that the antenna would cost $450,000 and I had to modify my plans. As you see, you are limited by cost as to the size of the antenna; that is, you are limited as to the capacity and, furthermore, you have selected the frequency. In order to lower the frequency so that there would be no wasteful radiation of energy, you have to employ a large inductance. You have to employ a capacity as large as permissible, and you must use a large inductance in order that you may reach the low frequency which is economical.

Counsel

What low frequency is it that is economical?

Tesla

In a patent which appeared in April 1905, the application of which was filed on May 15, 1900, I have enunciated the law of propagation, which I have explained, and have stated that the frequencies should not be more than 30,000 or 35,000 cycles at most, in order to operate economically.

Counsel

And would it also be necessary to provide for the high potentials of the order of which you have named in order to insure maximum direct currents and minimum electromagnetic wave radiation?

Tesla

No sir. The currents are proportionate to the potentials which are developed under otherwise equal conditions. If you have an antenna of a certain capacity charged to 100,000 volts, you will get a certain current; charged to 200,000 volts, twice the current. When I spoke of these enormous potentials, I was describing an industrial plant on a large scale because that was the most important application of these principles, but I have also pointed out in my patents that the same principles can be applied to telegraphy and other purposes. That is simply a question of how much power you want to transmit.

Ok so here is a bit about using an alternator to do wireless work. Maybe not to drive the Magnifying Transmitter though, I think they are talking of just using the alternator to actually transmitt. I need to do more study.

Counsel

You have spoken of the fact that you could use either the alternator or the transformer, and you have illustrated in this diagram [Fig. 83] a condenser at G?

Tesla

Yes.

Counsel

And stating, I believe, that that represents to your mind any method of getting continuous waves. I think you said, previously, that you actually used either of these methods at Colorado and still had continuous generation.

Tesla

Yes.

Counsel

Was the method you used there [in Colorado], a spark? -- an arc? -- or what was the method where you got continuous generation?

Tesla

The method was this: I had a 550-volt current with which I charged the condensers. These condensers I discharged through a primary in the form of an arc, sometimes I also introduced in this arc a mechanical break of several thousand per second. And I obtained a perfectly continuous train of waves as has been described in my patents. The reason why I show the condenser here [Fig. 83] is that that is synonymous with undamped waves. If I had shown the whole apparatus as arranged there, then I might still have damped waves; but whether I use an alternator or some other way of getting energy to that condenser, the condenser is usually there. For instance, if I use an alternator, I shunt its terminals with a condenser in order to magnify the current in the primary. I then tune this circuit to the alternator, and magnify the current in the primary in the ratio of the inductance to the resistance. Therefore, this condenser here stands for either method, and simply means that in this system, as is obvious from the description in the patent, the waves are undamped because high rises of potential would not be obtained otherwise. Whenever I wanted to obtain a high potential, I had to observe these rules in order to force the potential up to that value.

Even though i forget where i read things I am usually fairly sure of actually
"what" I read as in the general meaning and context of important points. I still
do get quite confused though, I readily admitt that.

This is what I'm getting with the frequency thing. 35 Khz tops for ground
transmissions, lower is more efficient, higher is more power possible to transmitt.
Tesla understands that using high frequencies ( a lot more than 60 Hz) is better,
because more energy can be transmitted from a smaller station. But he also understands that too high
a frequency is a problem for efficiency as well ( radiations ) and
( to quick to shake the Earth well ). So he had found the best range to use,
as in towards the lower end of the range for better efficiency with less power
density
and towards the upper end of the range towards 35 000 Hz for more power transmission
with a bit more waste in radiations and poor ground "take up".



I was right about the tape I have too I'm afraid, the thin conductive tape I have 75mm
wide,does not join electrically, if I overlap two pieces and test them with the
multimeter they are isolated from each other, no contact. This is a bit of a
problem.

And my pool pole stuff is not working very well either. But I have designed an
adjuster for the terminals with the possibility of adding a second "floating"
terminal or disc for experimenting.

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Maybe some conductive glue?

Conductive glue would be good, I have some conductive grease for copper aluminium joins but that's not adhesive.

Any idea's were I can find some conductive adhesive that would be practical to use ?

So far I'm still thinking a contact ring to clamp down on the ends of all the
strips of tape or a foil jumper from each tape face to the next one somehow.
The only other way I can think of is to use one long piece of tape wrapped
around and round continuously, but that's not practical because the tape is
too thick and needs to be cut narrower.

I recommend anyone with a taped terminal to use a multi-meter on the
continuity setting and check for continuity between tape pieces.

Hmmmmm

[dragon]

Here a guy makes his own... Make Conductive Glue and Glue a Circuit . Here is a small container of wire glue...
CONDUCTIVE GLUE, 0.3 FL.OZ. | AllElectronics.com . I'm sure there are quite a few different brands of electrically conductive adhesives. It seems like JB weld might be conductive although I haven't tried it for electrical circuits, it has a metal filler and is magnetic. Maybe simply taping a bare copper ring to all sections would work, or a ring of alum foil taped in place....

I purchased some wire glue from DigiKey some time ago to add wires to some solar plates and it worked great. I'll have to give the above instructable a try to make some and see how it works.... lots of uses for that stuff.

[Farmhand]

Ok another C&P from. I've "Bolded" some parts I thought were noteworthy, there are lots of noteworthy parts though.
Nikola Tesla On His Work With Alternating Currents -- Chapter IV

I spent 30 years of my work in the design of machinery of all kinds, and have never yet designed a machine which did not do as I expected, and I cannot imagine why it should not because when one calculates the things out on the basis of experimental data, the machine has to work as intended. This is engineering.

Therefore, when my friends offered to back me up for a plant under my patents, I though it was best to devote some time to an investigation, to find out what I needed, in order to have all my data accurately and guarantee that the plant would work.

The law which I discovered in Colorado is wonderful, and it shows that results undreamed of before and of incalculable moment will be obtained as soon as a plant, embodying these principles, is established on a large scale.




Figure 81.
Diagram illustrating the mode of propagation of the current from the transmitter over the earth's surface.

To give you an idea, I have prepared a diagram [Fig. 81] illustrating an analogue which will clearly show how the current passes through the globe. You know that in a solar eclipse the moon comes between the sun and the earth, and that its shadow is projected upon the earth's surface. Evidently, in a given moment, the shadow will just touch at a mathematical point, the earth, assuming it to be a sphere.

Let us imagine that my transmitter is located at this point, and that the current generated by it now passes through the earth. It does not pass through the earth in the ordinary acceptance of the term, it only penetrates to a certain depth according to the frequency. Most of it goes on the surface, but with frequencies such as I employ, it will dive a few miles below. It can be mathematically shown that it is immaterial how it passes; the aggregate effect of these currents is as if the whole current passes from the transmitter, which I call the pole, to the opposite point, which I call the antipode.

Assume, then, that here is the transmitter, and imagine that this is the surface of the sea, and that now comes the shadow of the moon and touches, on a mathematical point, the calm ocean. You can readily see that as the surface of the water, owing to the enormous radius of the earth, is nearly a plane, that point where the shadow falls will immediately, on the slightest motion of the shadow downward, enlarge the circle at a terrific rate, and it can be shown mathematically that this rate is infinite. In other words, this half-circle on this side will fly over the globe as the shadow goes down; will first start at infinite velocity to enlarge, and then slower and slower and slower, and as the moon's shadow goes further and further and further, it will get slower and slower until, finally, when the three bodies are on the plane of the ecliptic, right in line one with the other in the same plane, then that shadow will pass over the globe with its true velocity in space. Exactly that same thing happens in the application of my system, and I will show this next.



Figure 82.
Diagram illustrating the law governing the passage of the current from the transmitter through the earth, first announced in U.S. Patent No. 787,412 of April 18, 1905. Application filed May 16, 1900. See also J. Erskine-Murray, A Handbook of Wireless Telegraphy, Chapt. 17, pp. 312-330, 1913 edition, published by Crosby Lockwood and Son, London, and Appleton & Company, New York.

This [Fig. 82] illustrates, on a larger scale, the earth. Here is my transmitter -- mine or anybody's transmitter -- because my system is the system of the day. The only difference is in the way I apply it. They, the radio engineers, want to apply my system one way; I want to apply it in another way.

This is the circuit energizing the antenna. As the vibratory energy flows, two things happen: There is electromagnetic energy radiated and a current passes into the earth. The first goes out in the form of rays, which have definite properties. These rays propagate with the velocity of light, 300,000 kilometers per second. This energy is exactly like a hot stove. If you will imagine that the cylinder antenna is hot -- and indeed it is heated by the current -- it would radiate out energy of exactly the same kind as it does now. If the system is applied in the sense I want to apply it, this energy is absolutely lost, in all cases most of it is lost. While this electromagnetic energy throbs, a current passes into the globe.

Now, there is a vast difference between these two, the electromagnetic and current energies. That energy which goes out in the form of rays, is, as I have indicated here [on the diagram of Fig. 82], unrecoverable, hopelessly lost. You can operate a little instrument by catching a billionth part of it but, except this, all goes out into space never to return. This other energy, however, of the current in the globe, is stored and completely recoverable. Theoretically, it does not take much effort to maintain the earth in electrical vibration. I have, in fact, worked out a plant of 10,000 horse-power which would operate with no bigger loss than 1 percent of the whole power applied; that is, with the exception of the frictional energy that is consumed in the rotation of the engines and the heating of the conductors, I would not lose more than 1 percent. In other words, if I have a 10,000 horsepower plant, it would take only 100 horsepower to keep the earth vibrating so long as there is no energy taken out at any other place.

There is another difference. The electromagnetic energy travels with the speed of light, but see how the current flows. At the first moment, this current propagates exactly like the shadow of the moon at the earth's surface. It starts with infinite velocity from that point, but its speed rapidly diminishes; it flows slower and slower until it reaches the equator, 6,000 miles from the transmitter. At that point, the current flows with the speed of light -- that is, 300,000 kilometers per second. But, if you consider the resultant current through the globe along the axis of symmetry of propagation, the resultant current flows continuously with the same velocity of light.

Whether this current passing through the center of the earth to the opposite side is real, or whether it is merely an effect of these surface currents, makes absolutely no difference. To understand the concept, one must imagine that the current from the transmitter flows straight to the opposite point of the globe.

There is where I answer the attacks which have been made on me. For instance, Dr. Pupin has ridiculed the Tesla system. He says,

"The energy goes only in all directions."

It does not. It goes only in one direction. He is deceived by the size and shape of the earth. Looking at the horizon, he imagines how the currents flow in all directions, but if he would only for a moment think that this earth is like a copper wire and the transmitter on the top of the same, he would immediately realize that the current only flows along the axis of the propagation.

The mode of propagation can be expressed by a very simple mathematical law, which is, the current at any point flows with a velocity proportionate to the cosecant of the angle which a radius from that point includes with the axis of symmetry of wave propagation. At the transmitter, the cosecant is infinite; therefore, the velocity is infinite. At a distance of 6,000 miles, the cosecant is unity; therefore, the velocity is equal to that of light. This law I have expressed in a patent by the statement that the projections of all zones on the axis of symmetry are of the same length, which means, in other words, as is known from rules of trigonometry, that the areas of all the zones must also be equal. It says that although the waves travel with different velocities from point to point, nevertheless each half wave always includes the same area. This is a simple law, not unlike the one which has been expressed by Kepler with reference to the areas swept over by the radii vectors.

I hope that I have been clear in this exposition – in bringing to your attention that what I show here is the system of the day, and is my system -- only the radio engineers use my apparatus to produce too much of this electromagnetic energy here, instead of concentrating all their attention on designing an apparatus which will impress a current upon the earth and not waste the power of the plant in an uneconomical process.

Counsel

You say radio engineers put too much energy into the radiating part. What, as a matter of fact, according to your conception, is the part of the energy that is received in the receivers in the present system?

Tesla

That has been investigated. Very valuable experiments have been made by Dr. Austin, who has measured the effects at a distance. He has evolved a formula in agreement with the Hertz wave theory, and the energy collected is an absolutely vanishing quantity. It is just enough to operate a very delicate receiver. If it were not for such devices as are now in use, the audion, for instance, nothing could be done. But with the audion, they magnify so that this infinitesimal energy they get is sufficient to operate the receiver. With my system, I can convey to a distant point millions of times the energy they transmit.

Counsel

To illustrate my question, take for instance the energy used at Sayville and the reception of that at Nauen. I want to know whether it is your idea that the reception there is due to the earth currents that you have described or to the radiated energy.

Tesla

It is far more due to the earth currents than to the radiated energy. I believe, indeed, that the radiated energy alone could not possibly produce the effect across the Atlantic. It is simply because they are incidentally sending a current through the globe -- which they think is their current -- that the receiver is affected. The current produces variations of potential at the earth's surface in Germany; these fluctuations of potential energize the circuit, and by resonance they increase the potential there and operate the receiver. But I do not mean that it is absolutely impossible to use my apparatus and operate with electromagnetic waves across the Atlantic or Pacific. I only say that according to calculations, for instance, which I have made of the Sayville plant, the radiated energy is very small and cannot be operative. I have also calculated the distribution of the charge on the antenna. I am told that the Sayville antenna is without abrupt changes of capacity. It is impossible. There are changes even in a cylindrical antenna; but particularly in that form at Sayville -- there are very abrupt changes.

Well I won't comment except to say that I think a lot of this stuff get's
cheery picked and taken and used out of context. Then all sorts of meanings
get ascribed to different phrases, supposedly to have been spoken by Nikola
and said to mean certain things they were never meant to mean "in context".

This one section linked above clears up a lot of things often argued about.

I bet if he came back Nikola would like this song. Ace Frehley/Kiss - New York Groove (Studio Version) - YouTube

Cheers

[Farmhand]

OK looks like I need this stuff. The stuff I've got doesn't have conductive
adhesive. But the stuff in the link does.

Buy cheap Aluminum-Foil-EMI-Shielding-Conductive-Tape Aluminum Foil EMI Shielding Conductive Tape from china cell phone repairing tools wholesaler and dropshipper

I'll go ahead with my current idea though for now and see how it go's.

This is the contact ring/plate idea. I just have to calculate how wide the
strips need to be. And how long. I can use aluminium discs I already have for
contact rings/plates.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

The pool pole stuff didn't work so well after all so I'm going to use this type of
arrangement.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I'm not too worried about the ridges around it because as long as there are no
sharp edges and all the bumps make up a bigger curvature or radius it should
be OK. As Nikola points out, even a lot of individual curved plates can be used,
as long as individual and overall radii are large enough, the accumulated
potential is contained.

My main concern is to have no sharp crinkled edges, like I have now with the
foil.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I guess another way would be to make a mold or press, then some small
curved aluminium plates could be cast or pressed. These could all "pin onto/into"
a toroid and all touch each other and or a conductive surface or strips under them.

Best thing of all is to get tape with conductive adhesive.

[Farmhand]

Here a guy makes his own... Make Conductive Glue and Glue a Circuit . Here is a small container of wire glue...
CONDUCTIVE GLUE, 0.3 FL.OZ. | AllElectronics.com . I'm sure there are quite a few different brands of electrically conductive adhesives. It seems like JB weld might be conductive although I haven't tried it for electrical circuits, it has a metal filler and is magnetic. Maybe simply taping a bare copper ring to all sections would work, or a ring of alum foil taped in place....

I purchased some wire glue from DigiKey some time ago to add wires to some solar plates and it worked great. I'll have to give the above instructable a try to make some and see how it works.... lots of uses for that stuff.

I like the home made option. I suppose we could design our own "brew" from what we have too.

[Farmhand]

Ah, that's what I feared would happen to mine, but it turned out to be ok. Have you actually tested whether they are connected?

The only solution I could think of if they weren't connected was to use folds - fold a small piece/corner of the tape over before sticking it down so they're all connected underneath.

dR, You're folded corner idea works well for me. I figured I would
try that as I was going about it and I think that will do the job by itself,
connection is good like that, looks like ! I tested with the multi-meter, continuity.

I started a bit rough-like but this is how I will fold it under the bottom for
contact to each other.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This just shows how I covered the whole thing with wider tape first, the bottom
one is totally covered.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This is the top, so far. It's a tedious job, but i'll know exactly how much tape is in each one.
Each strip is 24 mm x 220 mm.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

EDIT: Finished covering one.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

For some reason I kept thinking i should throw it like a frisbee.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Hi guys, I finished covering the second terminal, I've started the third and I
think I'll have enough tape to do the first four.

I'll end up with six two of each three different sizes.

I did a quick test and just having an unconnected "new good" extra terminal
just below the other "old crinkly" one the effectiveness is much improved,
even to the point that if I approach my hand to the terminal nothing happens
until about 10 - 20 mm away when the voltage drops off as I touch it. So this
appears to be good.

I'm glad the new terminals work good because they take about 3 hours each or
more to build.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

These ones I'll use as unconnected "idler" terminals to produce a similar effect
to the devices depicted in figure 10 and 11 in this picture below.

This is the text to explain it.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This shows the arrangements. Diagram 10 and 11, 10 has steel spheres and
11 has capacitor plates between the top of the secondary and ground to form
a "air gap".


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I'll use these just floating "not electrically connected" just below or above the
"real" terminal for now and see what happens. I'm recovering those now.
It'll all be adjustable heights.

In my earlier tests this produced startling effects. IT really made the setup
come to "life".

Cheers

[Farmhand]

Hi all, I decided to take a break from covering toroids, so I made some current
measurements with resistors. I did the same measurement calculations using a
0.8 ohm resistor as well and the result was the same.

At the receiver I used a 0.1 ohm 5 watt resistor in series with a small CD ROM
drive motor.

I measured .01 volts volts across the resistor while the motor was running from
12.05 volts. So 100 mA at 12.05 volts = 1.205 watts. Measured useful output (not just the resistor).

Also at the same time two 10 watt 300 mm fluro's
were lit up, by one end touching the secondary coil bottoms (ground connections)
one end free to air (standing in holders). One at each coil however there is
no way to measure the energy it takes to light them so, not counted.

So also at the same time I measured the input across an identical 0.1 ohm resistor at
.039 volts while the transmitter was running from 12.68 volts battery.
So 390 mA at 12.68 volts = 4.945 watts input

The connecting conductor has 8.6 ohms 10 watt resistor in series between the coils.

Incidentally the input current measured by resistor matches my analogue
current meter exactly.

Anyway as I said I'm just taking a break I still have improvements to do. I have had the motor spinning a bit faster before.

And I guess I must expect some losses in the operation of the transmitter in general
even before any transmission losses are calculated.

I don't think the transmitter running cost will increase much as I increase the
power in relation to the power use at the receiver. As in I think if I used
another 100 mA from the receiver then I would only need to input another 100
mA to do it, maybe a fraction more. Hopefully.



P.S. Oh yeah funny thing is, that before I powered up the motor the transmitter was using 650 mA at 12.68 volts so it went from 8.2 watts to
4.945 watts when I powered up the motor.

I think that equates to about a 40 % decrease in input power (3.25 watts drop) for applied load of 1.2 watts.

However all is not lost I can adjust the transmitter tank and cause more input again.