COP 17 Heater | Rosemary Ainslie

[Michael John Nunnerley]

working on this

@Armagdn01

We are thinking on the same lines, I am working on this type of model at the moment and I will post a diagram when I have ironed out the bugs. I never really like to post things until I am satisfied that it is as correct as I can make it. Will post my theoretical diagram later today, but all must be warned that until I have fisically tested this, build it at your own risk.

Mike

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Circuit Not Tested

Here is the circuit, which I think will need more work with experimenting. How it works is the heating coil and C1 is an LC circuit, the pick up coil controls the mosfet at the frequency of the oscillation of the LC circuit, VR is for the set point of the mosfet. Between VR and the positive rail should be a resistor of about 10K, which is not shown, to protect the mosfet. When the mosfet is off, C1 supplies the current, when on the battery supplies the current. There is no switching of polarity on the heating element coil, no diodes are needed.

THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL

Mike

[Peter Lindemann]

Excellent

Here is the circuit, which I think will need more work with experimenting. How it works is the heating coil and C1 is an LC circuit, the pick up coil controls the mosfet at the frequency of the oscillation of the LC circuit, VR is for the set point of the mosfet. Between VR and the positive rail should be a resistor of about 10K, which is not shown, to protect the mosfet. When the mosfet is off, C1 supplies the current, when on the battery supplies the current. There is no switching of polarity on the heating element coil, no diodes are needed.

THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL

Mike

Michael,

Yes, your circuit idea should work. There is also the simplest version of the circuit, which is just the Inductive Heating Element in a tank circuit with a corresponding Capacitor, driven by a variable AC sine-wave Power Supply at the natural frequency of the resonant tank. Also, if the components were large enough, the system could be tuned to run at 60hz. Then, there would be no local electronic components at all and the Heater Coil would simply run as an "idling" inductor with a local power factor correcting capacitor.

Peter

[Michael John Nunnerley]

Michael,

Yes, your circuit idea should work. There is also the simplest version of the circuit, which is just the Inductive Heating Element in a tank circuit with a corresponding Capacitor, driven by a variable AC sine-wave Power Supply at the natural frequency of the resonant tank. Also, if the components were large enough, the system could be tuned to run at 60hz. Then, there would be no local electronic components at all and the Heater Coil would simply run as an "idling" inductor with a local power factor correcting capacitor.

Peter

Thank you Peter for the encouraging remarks. I was thinking, for this circuit, as a test bed only at the moment, as I posted a little bit before, my concern is the the goal posts move as the heating coil warms up and this is a form of tracking this, all be it very basic.

@Dr. Stiffler

I hope you do not mind me saying this, but I have been playing around in my mind about using your SEC, I think this would be very interesting but I will leave that up to you as I am sure you can see the possibilities more than this novice. If and when we have a good sound working model then the rest would be my forte in heating something other than water and gain real power for your money

Mike

[Armagdn03]

Michael,

Yes, your circuit idea should work. There is also the simplest version of the circuit, which is just the Inductive Heating Element in a tank circuit with a corresponding Capacitor, driven by a variable AC sine-wave Power Supply at the natural frequency of the resonant tank. Also, if the components were large enough, the system could be tuned to run at 60hz. Then, there would be no local electronic components at all and the Heater Coil would simply run as an "idling" inductor with a local power factor correcting capacitor.

Peter

YouTube - Energy Propagation

Regards,

[DrStiffler]

Thank you Peter for the encouraging remarks. I was thinking, for this circuit, as a test bed only at the moment, as I posted a little bit before, my concern is the the goal posts move as the heating coil warms up and this is a form of tracking this, all be it very basic.

@Dr. Stiffler

I hope you do not mind me saying this, but I have been playing around in my mind about using your SEC, I think this would be very interesting but I will leave that up to you as I am sure you can see the possibilities more than this novice. If and when we have a good sound working model then the rest would be my forte in heating something other than water and gain real power for your money

Mike

@Michael John Nunnerley
I have to admit that before I try here circuit I felt compelled to try one of my higher power Exciters. I have added some of the results to the web page I am using, but all is not on as yet. I have with what I am using obtained 96% +/- 10%, not as good as a plain old resistor heating element so far. But I have seen something I need to follow through on, then I will move onto the original circuit as posted here (or others). I think there may be something to this, but until I can replicate with an assumed margin of error 0f +/-40% I'm not going to get to excited.

[Peter Lindemann]

So Good.....

YouTube - Energy Propagation

Regards,

Armagdn03,

Thank you for your recent posts to this thread. I hope others are learning as much from them as I am.

They are well worth any "mandatory donation" required.

Your YouTube video linked above is one of the best I've seen since the films we produced with Eric Dollard in 1988. Thank you for sharing them here.

Peter

[Altair]

Hello all,

I had some time to look in depth at the original circuit.
I have redrawn it differently just for fun. See attachment 1.

A bridge rectifier is now in place of the power supply, so consider the circuit being powered from AC . I removed the 2 shunts, and also removed D1 & D2 which are now replaced by the bridge.
The diodes are Shottkys, to be able to switch efficiently at higher frequencies.
I also added a coil in series with the heating element, because commercial elements I've got here are very low in inductance.
Of note is that the main difference between this circuit and a standard boost converter is that in the boost, the pulse of energy which is sent to the coil to magnetize it, is not available to the load. It is wasted to ground. Here however, that magnetizing pulse goes through the heating element.
Then of course, the flyback pulse continues heating the element further..

I then made another drawing, with a second element (HE2), that becomes active during the duration of the flyback pulse. According to armagdn03, additional impedance during the flyback pulse would be beneficial. If we make this impedance from an additional heating element, I assume the results would be increased efficiency. See attachment 2.

Of course, in this circuit, we're not running in resonance mode. It's just basic pulsing of a coil.
No tests have been made yet, I don't have all the parts I need right now. I would be interested in hearing what you think of this scheme.

The third drawing is the "What if..." option
Instead of the second element, I put another coil which is in fact the secondary of a transformer. The primary is L1, the first coil. This could be a bifilar wound coil.
The way it works (if it really does !) is that during the charging of L1, the current of L2 is blocked by D1.
Then, during the flyback pulse, L2 would be (supposedly) aiding L1, being of the same polarity. See attachment 3.

Would that really be worthwhile ? I have absolutely no idea ! Maybe there would be a way to integrate a capacitor to make it resonant, but I don't think it is possible to combine the 2 modes (switching & resonant) in the same circuit.

Anyway, do you think putting a coil in series with the heating element as I have done in the first circuit, is a good solution to transfer more energy with each pulse ? I understand that the coil should theoretically have the lowest possible resistance, however as the goal is to make a >heater< unit, thermal losses in the components are irrelevant aren't they ? Or maybe they are, because it would reduce the efficiency of the whole unit...

Questions, questions

Cheers

[Armagdn03]

Armagdn03,

Thank you for your recent posts to this thread. I hope others are learning as much from them as I am.

They are well worth any "mandatory donation" required.

Your YouTube video linked above is one of the best I've seen since the films we produced with Eric Dollard in 1988. Thank you for sharing them here.

Peter

Thank you Peter,

The video shows some interesting concepts that tend to go unnoticed by the traditional engineering crowd.

While it is known that a Parallel LC (tank) circuit has high impedance, what is not really ever mentioned are the ever important words "with respect to the source". Take for example the secondary tank circuit shown in the video, It is a parallel tank, and to the coil driving it (and the signal generator) it looks of very high impedance. However, if you were to only study this circuit, forgetting the primary and source, you would find that the circuit had close to zero impedance. Within the LC itself, you do not find the high impedance condition, if you did you could not light a bulb in it.

This is interesting, you have high impedance with respect to the source, and low impedance when you change your frame of reference.

I was reading an treatise on physical phenomenon the other day, when in big bold letters I read....

"There is the difficult concept of speeds relative to zero where the quality of zero varies." This was referring to the fundamental movements of the universe.

In the Murray video, Murray describes how he got different measurements on some of his concentric (meaning about a different center) spinning machines depending on where he referenced his readings.

this is something to give deep thought to, and correlates perfectly with this electrical demonstration.

Obviously this is a bit off topic, but eventually you will find.........its all on topic.

What did the aspiring monk say to the (vegan) hot dog vendor?

"Make me one with everything!"

[RAMSET]

Armagdn03

Quote:

What did the aspiring monk say to the (vegan) hot dog vendor?

"Make me one with everything"!

Very funny ,thanks [for a lot more than the joke]

Chet

[jibbguy]

R'gh, m8ey

Armagdn03,

While AC "Impedance" can only be calculated, and is a Variable dependent on the Frequency of the signal and many other factors such as material composition and specific design of the components (yet it is still a very "real" phenomena for sure); DC "Resistance" of course can be accurately measured and is generally a Constant (...Except sometimes for "temperature", lol).

So did you mean the "R" of the coils?

But it does not really matter at all what the R of a coil is, as the only interest here is when the AC signal is applied. Any two coils could possibly be of differing DC Resistance; yet can still Resonate at the same F (.. and when coupled with the same value Capacitor)... It depends entirely on how they were made: The number of turns, the distance between turns on the spool, the wire gauge, the wire's metal composition, the core, and of course the phase of the moon lol ).

When we make two coils ourselves, we do it the same way, with the same materials, core, and turn spacing... So the DC "R" can then matter as an indicator.

But i do remember having to hand-match auto-transformers before when working on old oscilloscope power supplies: Even though they looked & Ohm'ed identical (same P/N), they can still be different enough somehow to cause problems in a tightly balanced circuit (ahh, the bad-old days of Analog and continuous supplies.. I used to dream of getting revenge on the engineers lol).

But i fully agree with the rest of your post, and that the Murray stuff is fascinating.

What ever happened to this guy? Does anyone know what is he doing these days?

[Armagdn03]

Armagdn03,

While AC "Impedance" can only be calculated, and is a Variable dependent on the Frequency of the signal and many other factors such as material composition and specific design of the components (yet it is still a very "real" phenomena for sure); DC "Resistance" of course can be accurately measured and is generally a Constant (...Except sometimes for "temperature", lol).

So did you mean the "R" of the coils?

But it does not really matter at all what the R of a coil is, as the only interest here is when the AC signal is applied. Any two coils could possibly be of differing DC Resistance; yet can still Resonate at the same F (.. and when coupled with the same value Capacitor)... It depends entirely on how they were made: The number of turns, the distance between turns on the spool, the wire gauge, the wire's metal composition, the core, and of course the phase of the moon lol ).

When we make two coils ourselves, we do it the same way, with the same materials, core, and turn spacing... So the DC "R" can then matter as an indicator.

But i do remember having to hand-match auto-transformers before when working on old oscilloscope power supplies: Even though they looked & Ohm'ed identical (same P/N), they can still be different enough somehow to cause problems in a tightly balanced circuit (ahh, the bad-old days of Analog and continuous supplies.. I used to dream of getting revenge on the engineers lol).

But i fully agree with the rest of your post, and that the Murray stuff is fascinating.

What ever happened to this guy? Does anyone know what is he doing these days?

Hello, and thanks for the reply

Actually, im not 100% sure what part of what I said you are referring to but... I would define impedance as anything that impedes current flow, and many texts agree with this. There is ohmic impedance, and the complex impedance of Inductors and Capacitors, which do not dissipate heat the same as ohmic resistance, however the unit of measurement in both cases is the ohm. And in both cases, if the variables are taken into account correctly apply to ohms law, where impedance is the fulcrum of change.

You cannot interchange the use of complex impedance and ohmic impedance, however the "umbrella" word impedance can mean either or both.

As to your statement:

"But it does not really matter at all what the R of a coil is, as the only interest here is when the AC signal is applied"

I would not agree with this. Perhaps a little mind experiment will clear the air on this one.

Imagine two capacitors, both identical, filled to the same voltage. Each is on the verge of discharging into an inductor. One will discharge into an inductor of .000000001 ohms, the other will discharge into an inductor with a resistance of 1,000,000,000 ohms.

One cap will discharge rather quickly, the other will take a very long time.

One inductor will have a large amperage flow, and because of this, will be able to return much of its stored kinetic energy to the cap from whence it came.

One inductor will have an incredibly minute amperage flow, spread over a long time (much longer than the inductors time constant) and when the energy in the cap is zero, and the inductor collapses to return its energy, which is minuscule. One would have a very difficult time indeed trying to measure how much the inductor charges the cap on this collapse cycle.

(you might look up the coefficient of restitution)

Reality falls between the extremes, but its useful to look at them none the less.

The crap hits the fan when people read what we are discussing trying to make heads or tales of what were talking about. Our scientific terms seem to deviate from what we intuitively know to be true. A stiff spring has a great resistance to movement, however it doesn't meant that it dissipates more energy than its less stiff buddy. This we know intuitively, but to make the connection into other disciplines like electrical engineering is difficult, because so few spend their time connecting the dots.

There is a lot of error in what I said when strictly applied. There is never zero impedance, there is never infinite impedance, etc.... I simply outlined the extremes so that people who were not classically trained engineers or physicists could understand the concepts, and hopefully start understanding what the words are without having to run to a dictionary over and over.

Its almost like were still living in the tower of Babble............

[Armagdn03]

Its a shame more people are not looking into this, This is probably the Easiest build to test and trouble shoot as you have a relatively staqble load, few parts, easy measurement, etc.

I hope I didnt highjack this thread into oblivion!

[Aaron]

this thread

Its a shame more people are not looking into this, This is probably the Easiest build to test and trouble shoot as you have a relatively staqble load, few parts, easy measurement, etc.

I hope I didnt highjack this thread into oblivion!

No! Your posts are valuable and directly relevant to this thread.

I would very much love to hear from Rosemary Ainslie directly about this thread. I'm sure she is too busy to get involved here on a regular basis but it would be pretty cool if she could leave a few words of wisdom as it applies to her circuit replication attempts.

[Joit]

Well, i played a bit around with it with my Newman/Window-motor tube, and few Capacitors about 2200-4700µF, Pots and 12V in paralell.
At last, i can say, i did gain something, the Motor did run longer.
But It was not like even 2x more Energy for me.
And i think, it makes the Different, when you use a lot Amps, a Big Coil with Shunts, and another Inductive Coil, maybe the Result will be totally different.
But anyhow i dont agree with the Diode to Minus anyhow, but maybe its just for me.
And i think, anyone has maybe an old Waterheater anywhere, where you could use the Element from it.