Bi-toroid Transformer of Thane C. Heins

[BroMikey]

Alternate Fux Paths

Nope, no fourth coil. Only three.

Video explanation: SFT Winding Variations on Vimeo

Hey Dog-One

Great vid and now I see what you mean. The bi-toroid works off a balanced twin secondary or altered secondary ratio's work of harmonics of the main frequency.

Try it and see.

Does everyone understand my statement? The more windings added to the primary bring about a more direct path back to the primary from the secondary. What we want is the create an impeded flux path back to the primary while the pathways between the secondaries be 100 times less resistance.

Increasing the number of turns effects impedance so the flux path is more directly connect to the secondaries, this will produce a greater draw on the primary.

However the shorter turns just on the primary windings do not increase direct coupling but might allow a higher input voltage to the primary.


Other factors are getting each set of coils identical. This is because we want oscillation equal and opposite in the secondaries at the split primary so tuning might be needed for the new coil arrangement.

Beyond that I don't know what else to say about the addition of the shorter windings with a variety of possible turn pattern vs ratio.

Yet when you think about it those extra coils as short and isolated as they may seem, store energy and induce a higher voltage that is accompanied by a greater density magnetic field.


Let's say normally the primary is 40 turns and you decide to try a shorter coil every other wind so the turns on the large core now drop to 20, instead of 40, so this would maybe lower the current and maybe the stored energy in the other portion of the coils might increase voltage.

Its worth a shot if we can get the thing working in normal operation, who knows THAT might give more control in other ways.

Thanks for the video that make everything much clearer.

Mike

[Dog-One]

No problem. But what I am wondering about is why you are talking about there being 4 windings? It is my understanding that Bill is showing 3 separate winding as designated by their inductance values.

Unless you are looking for other setup possibilities? Are you guys adding a fourth coil? Maybe to self loop?

Nope, no fourth coil. Only three.

Video explanation: http://vimeo.com/107858044

[BroMikey]

Tuning

Okay so Bill has a transoformer he thinks produces Cooper electron pairs


Cooper pair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




No problem. But what I am wondering about is why you are talking about there being 4 windings? It is my understanding that Bill is showing 3 separate winding as designated by their inductance values.

Unless you are looking for other setup possibilities? Are you guys adding a fourth coil? Maybe to self loop?

This is only a guess. We all saw Lasersaber leading the way along with Adula, Mr Clean adding coils of all kinds.

Is there something about the Thane and Bill setups that might use more coils?


The above sounded like two primaries and two secondaries. Did Bill tell you by email what he thought about the electrons?

It has been my understanding that the transformer consists of a single primary that becomes a high reluctance pathway by comparison the the double secondaries that oscillate between one another.

This never ending reflected wave oscillation has the ability to build up or magnify the energy that was initially pass to it by the primary (Single Winding)

When the primary electrically pulsates in the form of AC current and AC voltage THAT energy is passed to both secondaries (One on the right and one on the left) at the same time.

Also at the same time each secondary receives energy to charge wire coils mass. Both are now charged and ready for collapse.

Both collapse and both give back a spike in the form of back EMF Or other terms CEMF .

When the energy leaves both coils at the same time (Both Secondaries) the reflected kick back crosses paths over top of each other and cause possibly a stress as they pass to REFILL the empty coils simultaneously.

So I think this stress causes a vortex as the reflected energy quickly passes one another to REFIL themselves.. Finding the right voltage and frequency along with tuning capacitors should be all that is needed to optimize output.

In Bills video he had everything mounted to a PCB board. Maybe some tuning caps are on this board.

If a fourth winding is used for other experiments let me know how when you can.

Mike

Turns ratio of this SFT is a little confusing. You have the turn count on the primary (true primary) input side.

Then you have turns for the two secondaries, both the count around the primary core and the larger Back EMF core. Everything so far has this count 1 to 1. I'm suggesting that these secondaries also have ANOTHER ratio. That being the count of turns coming off the two primary cores and the count around the larger Back EMF core (calling this a secondary core is probably where the confusion is). From now on I'll call the single large core that couples the two secondary windings together the Back EMF core. So you have in the SFT:

One primary winding that loops around both primary cores. There should be no ratio here; always 1 to 1.

Two primary cores.

One Back EMF core.

Two secondary windings.

I'm suggesting Bill showed us a setup where the secondary windings are 1 to 1 around each primary and Back EMF core. We don't know if this is optimal for the secondary windings. It very well could be that having more total turns on the Back EMF core than on the primary core for each secondary winding is better. Or maybe having more total turns on the primary core than the Back EMF core gives better results. Either way, each secondary winding should be done exactly the same. The split flux should be symmetrical. Bill thinks this symmetrical split flux design creates Cooper electron pairs and he could be right, so we need each secondary winding to be built identical.

So I'm sure I have you really confused now right Dave? hehe

Lets review all these turn counts with just example numbers:

Primary turn count for primary winding: 50

Secondary turn count for one side: 75 around primary core, 100 around Back EMF core.
Other secondary is identical to first.

So lets look at the ratios. We have a 50 : 75 (2/3) step-up. We also have a 75 : 100 (3/4) Back EMF recovery ratio. This ratio is what we need to explore.

If it's still not clear, just hang tight until I get my new cores and I'll try to do a video showing what I'm talking about.

[Dog-One]

I plan on winding this next one with as many secondary windings as possible. Not sure how many I can get, but Bill had a small primary with BIG secondaries. I'm seeing that the dielectric side of the secondaries is the way to go. I also have that unbalanced secondaries core to modify since I'm not impressed with it. Maybe I'll strip off the secondaries and try a 1:1.

Are you suggesting I use one conductor to wind a turns ratio test? Kinda confused...

Turns ratio of this SFT is a little confusing. You have the turn count on the primary (true primary) input side.

Then you have turns for the two secondaries, both the count around the primary core and the larger Back EMF core. Everything so far has this count 1 to 1. I'm suggesting that these secondaries also have ANOTHER ratio. That being the count of turns coming off the two primary cores and the count around the larger Back EMF core (calling this a secondary core is probably where the confusion is). From now on I'll call the single large core that couples the two secondary windings together the Back EMF core. So you have in the SFT:

One primary winding that loops around both primary cores. There should be no ratio here; always 1 to 1.

Two primary cores.

One Back EMF core.

Two secondary windings.

I'm suggesting Bill showed us a setup where the secondary windings are 1 to 1 around each primary and Back EMF core. We don't know if this is optimal for the secondary windings. It very well could be that having more total turns on the Back EMF core than on the primary core for each secondary winding is better. Or maybe having more total turns on the primary core than the Back EMF core gives better results. Either way, each secondary winding should be done exactly the same. The split flux should be symmetrical. Bill thinks this symmetrical split flux design creates Cooper electron pairs and he could be right, so we need each secondary winding to be built identical.

So I'm sure I have you really confused now right Dave? hehe

Lets review all these turn counts with just example numbers:

Primary turn count for primary winding: 50

Secondary turn count for one side: 75 around primary core, 100 around Back EMF core.
Other secondary is identical to first.

So lets look at the ratios. We have a 50 : 75 (2/3) step-up. We also have a 75 : 100 (3/4) Back EMF recovery ratio. This ratio is what we need to explore.

If it's still not clear, just hang tight until I get my new cores and I'll try to do a video showing what I'm talking about.

[BroMikey]

Coil Winder

Are you trying to draw current from BOTH secondaries simultaneously? If you just try to short one, the input flux will avoid that particular secondary if the opposite secondary coil is open.

All of my coils are wound in the same direction. Looking at any coil from the front will be similar with all of the coils on my SFT, wire starts and finishes in the same relative places. I'm getting good results with my test setup.

Dave

Thanks man. I am going to wind one CCW and one CW first to see if I need a cap? Will a cap always be in the tuning? It makes sense of course.

Thanks for that fact that you have wound you coils in the same direction.

I am still in the winding stage of 120 turn or more plans gonna fill the area that is 5/8" high by 3/4 wide this maybe more like 150 turns for me and yes both the same is what I thought.

Down the road show the amp draw on the wall and see how much power pumps out on the other side and keep tuning great job.


In Thanes video he states that many companies have verified the transofrmer and are incorporating the Bi-toroidal transformer into electric bikes. One company is an amplifier company. They are good at building ac wave generating equipment so this is why it fits well with their corporation.


Unless you go into sales you are free to power things around the house obviously if you work hard generating ac waveforms at a good efficiency.


Even though we are only looking at a few watts this is a break though for the average Joe experimenter.

Thanks for being there and showing everyone with great ease how we all can do this 90 degree shift or even more.

This is so awesome.

People need to wake up, free energy is here.

Mike

[Web000x]

I plan on winding this next one with as many secondary windings as possible. Not sure how many I can get, but Bill had a small primary with BIG secondaries. I'm seeing that the dielectric side of the secondaries is the way to go. I also have that unbalanced secondaries core to modify since I'm not impressed with it. Maybe I'll strip off the secondaries and try a 1:1.

Are you suggesting I use one conductor to wind a turns ratio test? Kinda confused...

[Dog-One]

Since I am using a resonating secondary section, I can say that I don't like off balance configurations on the secondaries winding count. I've built two SFTs so far, one with equal number of turns on the secondaries and another with golden ratio proportioned unequal turn counts. The one with the unequal secondaries won't resonate and is less efficient in my preliminary investigations. Just hot glued a few more toroids together tonight. Maybe I'll get to winding another one soon.

When I mentioned turns on the secondaries before, what I was getting at is a fixed turns ratio between the primary and secondary cores, if you have room to do it. So for example if you used a 5P to 2S turn count ratio, you would wrap like so:

A turn around the primary only,
then a turn around both the primary and the secondary,
another turn around just the primary,
around both,
and again a single around just the primary.
Then repeat all of the above for the whole winding however many turns you are shooting for.

Do both secondaries windings identical. You may want to go the other way and do 5S to 2P instead, some ratio that is easy to remember while winding. 1:2, 1:3, 2:5, 3:5, 4:5 You get the idea right? Mechanically, you'll have to leave a gap large enough to loop the single core only turns, or do those loops off to the side. I'm thinking it best to not just do all the single core windings, THEN the dual core windings, or vice versa. It may work the same, it may not. Gut feeling is that following a pattern is better.

I'm really not sure what this will do. The idea is to adjust the Back EMF in such a way that you can tune the SFT to run the kind of load you anticipate for it. Normally, more turns means lower flux density, so would you want lower flux density on the small primary core, or the larger secondary core? I simply don't know so I'll have to find out myself experimentally or someone can try this and give us a field analysis of what it appears to do. It might become obvious right away 1:1 is best, but who knows until we try. Bill might have one in his lab set to the golden ratio that works wonderfully, but we haven't seen it and probably won't. My gut tells me the ratio should match the cross sectional area of the two different sized cores; that should make it so both cores would saturate at the same time, getting the very most possible from all the cores.

What I'd really like to see is to take the output, rectify it to DC and put a constant 5 amps through a load while holding 13.8 volts. All the while the input side sits at 90 degrees out of phase. The immediate application of this is a battery charger requiring minimal input power. It would replace solar cells overnight (pun intended) if we figure it out and can replicate it consistently. True I want to learn how to build one of these things and understand it, but with the investment made already, I'd like to put it to work as soon as possible too. OU is good, but OU finally paying dividends is better.

[Web000x]

I screwed up, twice. For one I have a step-down configuration and two, I'm using silicon steel cores. I think those cores are simply unable to transfer any power at 14kHz, which is where I see the highest voltage output and the best phase shift on the input. I have my secondaries wired in series to get the most voltage out that I can, which is still under 12 volts. I also have multiple taps on the primary but when I use any of the lower turn winds, the phase offset quickly heads to zero.

My AlphaCores will ship tomorrow, so maybe next week I'll have version 2.0 to work with.

For the moment Dave, you hold the reference architecture; anything you can tell us that will keep us on track, is probably the right way to go.

For one, about how much wattage can you get through your SFT? Does it appear to limit itself long before you would burn-up any windings?

I wouldn't use silicon steel. I've never seen anything good from it. Your success seems to be directly related to core material. I've used a few different kinds and don't get consistent results with my apparent success of the FerroXCube cores. My experience with my transformers may have no bearing on what your transformers might behave like if you use different material. Note that the BH curve of my material is highly square.

I only see good results when I resonate the secondaries with a series capacitor. However, I don't go into full resonance as it kills the effect completely. I stay on the lower frequency side of resonance and begin to see a negative power factor on the scope (ordering new probes as we speak so I can double check). You can feel heat coming from the dielectric in the series resonating capacitor and it will shock you with many volts if you aren't careful, don't use LV caps. I haven't calculated anything yet, but when I feel heat and see negative power phase shifts on the scope something makes me feel good about this. I claim nothing, just observations.

Since I am using a resonating secondary section, I can say that I don't like off balance configurations on the secondaries winding count. I've built two SFTs so far, one with equal number of turns on the secondaries and another with golden ratio proportioned unequal turn counts. The one with the unequal secondaries won't resonate and is less efficient in my preliminary investigations. Just hot glued a few more toroids together tonight. Maybe I'll get to winding another one soon.


Dave

[Dog-One]

RA

Are you trying to draw current from BOTH secondaries simultaneously? If you just try to short one, the input flux will avoid that particular secondary if the opposite secondary coil is open.

All of my coils are wound in the same direction. Looking at any coil from the front will be similar with all of the coils on my SFT, wire starts and finishes in the same relative places. I'm getting good results with my test setup.

Dave

I screwed up, twice. For one I have a step-down configuration and two, I'm using silicon steel cores. I think those cores are simply unable to transfer any power at 14kHz, which is where I see the highest voltage output and the best phase shift on the input. I have my secondaries wired in series to get the most voltage out that I can, which is still under 12 volts. I also have multiple taps on the primary but when I use any of the lower turn winds, the phase offset quickly heads to zero.

My AlphaCores will ship tomorrow, so maybe next week I'll have version 2.0 to work with.

For the moment Dave, you hold the reference architecture; anything you can tell us that will keep us on track, is probably the right way to go.

For one, about how much wattage can you get through your SFT? Does it appear to limit itself long before you would burn-up any windings?

[Web000x]

Right now my setup outputs some voltage, but absolutely no current--doesn't even spark.

Are you trying to draw current from BOTH secondaries simultaneously? If you just try to short one, the input flux will avoid that particular secondary if the opposite secondary coil is open.

All of my coils are wound in the same direction. Looking at any coil from the front will be similar with all of the coils on my SFT, wire starts and finishes in the same relative places. I'm getting good results with my test setup.

Dave

[Dog-One]

Dot Notation

You can not turn a CCW wound coil upside down and make it CW it is not the same thing.

Keep going Mike, I still don't understand. Pretend you are trying to teach a child.

I have never encounterd an instance where the simple dot notation hasn't been sufficent to determine the correct phase without the use of a scope.

Again, if I wrap a coil with one turn, is that turn clockwise or counter-clockwise?

[BroMikey]

Sweet Setup

I guess I don't follow Mike. So the coils could really be wound backwards? I wonder if I did that with my setup...

Please try to elaborate on this point--my simple mind says we are using AC power and the signal/flux is either in-phase or opposite. If that's not true, we need to get to the bottom of this. As an example, if you have a one-turn primary, there is no difference between CW and CCW. This should hold true regardless of the number of turns.

Right now my setup outputs some voltage, but absolutely no current--doesn't even spark.

Hey thats a sweet transformer you got there. Went ahead an spent the money hey? Plus your bench is awesome dude.

Well I hear people talking that these systems work on cancellation of self inductance like wire wound power resistors are built.

So the idea is that one secondary is wound CW on a ceramic tube then stop half way and wind backwards or CCW so as NOT to make the power resistor an inductor magnetically as well. The power resistor is wound this way to cancel each other so no magnetic field is induced.

Magnetically the two individual fields CCW and CW are ZERO!!!

Not then this is the way the Auroratek transformer is wound.

According to Bob in the other thread he found this out from Bill though he knew it already.

You can not turn a CCW wound coil upside down and make it CW it is not the same thing.

Mike

[Dog-One]

Right but I looked through all of Thanes stuff and I can't find CCW and CW anywhere. Then which way will the primary be wound?

I can hook wires up both ways but if the winds are CW and CCW and I wind them both the same? see what I mean?

Everyone thinks just reverse the wires, NO!! You can't if the coil is wound backwards.

I guess I don't follow Mike. So the coils could really be wound backwards? I wonder if I did that with my setup...

Please try to elaborate on this point--my simple mind says we are using AC power and the signal/flux is either in-phase or opposite. If that's not true, we need to get to the bottom of this. As an example, if you have a one-turn primary, there is no difference between CW and CCW. This should hold true regardless of the number of turns.

Right now my setup outputs some voltage, but absolutely no current--doesn't even spark.

[Dog-One]

Almost there. My mini BiTT/AuroraTek Xformer
I used an insulated copper tape and got around 25 turns on the primary and 15+15 turns on secondaries. Ferrite cores (3C90 material).

That looks really nice!

If you can find a high frequency and get some amperage in there, you may very well be powering your home from that device in the near future. I have my fingers crossed.

Please do keep us posted on your progress.

[kEhYo77]

Almost there. My mini BiTT/AuroraTek Xformer
I used an insulated copper tape and got around 25 turns on the primary and 15+15 turns on secondaries. Ferrite cores (3C90 material).