PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-08-19, 17:50:47
News: Forum TIP:
The SHOUT BOX deletes messages after 3 hours. It is NOT meant to have lengthy conversations in. Use the Chat feature instead.

Pages: [1]
Author Topic: parametric pumping of L's and C's  (Read 27205 times)

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
Thanks for the English Translation paper Tinman

I have uploaded a copy, this paper was mentioned in the McFreey Paper

   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
AFAIK, having read the English translation of the paper by Mandelstam & Papalexi, they were using mechanical input power from a motor to vary an inductance and thus cause an oscillation to grow in amplitude, whereas normally it would remain at a steady state condition.

This was tested with active oscillators using vacuum tubes and with purely passive LC circuits with a motor driven variable inductor.

I think what we are missing here is that it takes some mechanical work to vary the inductance of an L in an LC oscillating circuit.

Even if just a tiny bit of work in the form of mechanical input, an unloaded LC circuit will grow in amplitude of oscillation (if the oscillator circuit is unloaded) leading to high voltage buildup and eventual insulation or capacitor failure.

If the oscillator circuit is loaded as they did with lamps, then considerable mechanical input power was needed to pump the inductance to supply the lamp load.

At one point they reached the limit of their motor's capability as stated in the highlighted excerpt attached. If motor power was not an input why would they come up to the limit of it's rating?

Has anyone seen in the paper where total input power and total output power were compared and produced OU? I have not seen this.

If I am wrong in my interpretation of the paper, I would be happy to yield to a more correct interpretation.  I don't claim to understand the math in the paper, but the real meat for me is in the experiments. I get the concept without the math.

I don't mean to say that it is not interesting to me, as it certainly is. I have always wanted to carry out a few experiments along these lines with a dual parametric setup, pumping L and C in the same unit.





---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
Thanks for the summary ION.

How bizarre.
Quote
I think what we are missing here is that it takes some mechanical work to vary the inductance of an L in an LC oscillating circuit.

Seems to operate the same as those diagrams that were posted in the Russian device thread, the ones where L is switched in series.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 104
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
Here is the image from the patent which we can discuss.

At first glance and without a thorough read of the patent it appears fairly simple.

Looks like a blocking oscillator providing switching gate pulses for the SCR's which then alternately change the capacity in the circuit by switching in either C1 or C2 at precise points. A timing diagram for the switching was not included nor were waveforms.

Zener diodes keep the output from soaring under no load by providing a small load to the system.

Output is shown looped and charges the start up battery as well as supplying a load.

Would it be possible to get a complete English pdf of this patent?

Anyone know of an attempted replication?

Edit: re-upload schematic from patent showing error.
« Last Edit: 2013-11-21, 12:08:50 by ION »


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 104
« Last Edit: 2013-11-16, 19:04:35 by wings »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1631


Buy me a cigar
Here is the image from the patent which we can discuss.

At first glance and without a thorough read of the patent it appears fairly simple.

Looks like a blocking oscillator providing switching gate pulses for the SCR's which then alternately change the capacity in the circuit by switching in either C1 or C2 at precise points. A timing diagram for the switching was not included nor were waveforms.

Zener diodes keep the output from soaring under no load by providing a small load to the system.

Output is shown looped and charges the start up battery as well as supplying a load.

Would it be possible to get a complete English pdf of this patent?

Anyone know of an attempted replication?

Dear ION.

I spent about a month tinkering with this circuit. I would first like to point out there is an error down at the bottom RH corner. You will notice that the supply is effectively shorted!!

I tried with both SCR's and Triac's but could not get them to turn on or off properly. Instead I used a pair of 12 V automotive relays driven by a pair of RMC PWM's !!

The upshot was that very occasionally I could get a rise in output!! I used a 300 turn 0.9 mm ECW in a Ferrite half pot core. The low resistance of the wire seemed to be better than 500 turns of thinner wire.

I gave up with it due to my lack of electronic knowledge but IMO it did show some promise!!

Perhaps, if you were to try this you might have more luck?? Than I.

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
Grum:

Thanks for your input on the circuit.

As it is drawn, it seems a bit messy.

I would not have done it that way, but then again it is difficult to understand all constraints and everything the designer may have had in mind, also I haven't done a thorough read of the patent yet, just a fast read over.



---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   
Group: Guest
Here is the image from the patent which we can discuss.

At first glance and without a thorough read of the patent it appears fairly simple.

Looks like a blocking oscillator providing switching gate pulses for the SCR's which then alternately change the capacity in the circuit by switching in either C1 or C2 at precise points. A timing diagram for the switching was not included nor were waveforms.

Zener diodes keep the output from soaring under no load by providing a small load to the system.

Output is shown looped and charges the start up battery as well as supplying a load.

Would it be possible to get a complete English pdf of this patent?

Anyone know of an attempted replication?

In the circuit you show in your post seems to have a grave error.  Look at the far left bottom corner below the bridge rectifier. The output of the bridge is shorted with connections below it. ;)

Mags
   
Group: Guest
oops, grumage caught it first. ;)   Good eye.


Mags
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
Donald smith showed 2 devices, one had rotating veins, the other he was pumping high Mu rods.
In one of his work shops someone stood up and said can you draw a simple circuit of an OU device, he drew a single transistor pumping a coil which was wound on a high Mu rod.

I think this almost definitely shows that Don smith was well aware of NMR and in fact if you take Don smiths brief case device this is an exact replication of the McFreey device in figure 6 apart from the gain material is missing, ie a 1 or 2  turn ring sandwiched in between both resonant coils La/Lb

Here's my build


   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1150
Nice!   O0
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
In the circuit you show in your post seems to have a grave error.  Look at the far left bottom corner below the bridge rectifier. The output of the bridge is shorted with connections below it. ;)

Mags

Yes, it is surprising this got by the patent attorney, who, as I remember, go over every trace in a circuit. I guess the patent examiner didn't catch it either.

I re-uploaded showing the error.

Peter: As always, a nice build. What did your final schematic look like and the results?


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
Hi ION
This is an old build of Don smith's brief case device, but definitely worth digging out the cupboard and sticking a ring in between the 2 HV resonant coils, maybe it doesn't need a ring for NAR and instead uses NMR

Here's a quote from a post i made in the build thread
Quote
So going back to the signal generator and sweeping for max amplitude on my primary i get a frequency of 152.44Khz, but when i do this on my secondary coil with the 47nF i get max amplitude at 148.81kHz, so it looks to me as though my coils are not tuned right now.

Note that i did a calculation on what frequency my primary coil should work at se this quote from the build thread.
Quote
Primary Coil

Wire Length 128.3 Cm
Inductance 3.912uH
Calculated Res Freq = 179.993kHz
Wire Diameter= 18AWG 1.02362mm
Number of turns 5

Michel Meyer used 172 kHz but used iron wire, you see how close Don's build is to this, maybe the fuel in Don's device is the primary 5 turn coil and was using NMR instead of NAR.

So i am wondering if the secret to Don's build is just tuning to a sub harmonic of the NMR of the primary metal, because the device uses a spark gap it has rich harmonic content, see a plot i took at the time of the harmonics across the primary coil


   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1616
Hi Peter

Now I am going to explain a very simple thing and you can take it or not, it does not worry me, but it works, and I have demonstrated this to a group of people.

Tesla's 3,6,9 is no joke, it is real when implemented in the right way.

Harmonics will look after themselves, what is needed to start with is mixing Two frequencies, yes hetrodyning, but mixing in the item you want to alter in some way by electro magnetic waves (RF).

The most important is the frequency split, it should be eg.  120khz and X6 this frequency which is 720khz, as long as it is a 6 X difference it does not matter what frequency you start with.

Here is an example in khz:-

120          720
600          840
240          1440
1200        1680
480          2880
2400        3360
960          5760
4800        6720
1920        11520
9600        13440
3840        23040

and so on,  now look if the split was say X4 below

120         480
360          600
240         960
720          1200
480          1920
1440        2400
960          3840

I have blackened the blocking frequencies, the X6 does not have any blocking frequencies, so this split will create a full spectrum of frequencies

With harmonics, as they go up and down, the power of the harmonics is less than the original, with hetrodyning you get a straight line with peaks greater at certain points in the spectrum

As with all RF you need a matching network for the frequency, so as to stop reflective power, so it is not just connecting to a coil. This system combines in "free space",  there is no direct coupling, the item to be irradiated has to be between the two radiating coils, then you can hit what ever frequency the material being irradiated needs for whatever reaction required, be it to break molecular bonds or change atomic state. The latter I have never worked on, but breaking molecular bonds yes.

Hope I have given food for thought, and as I have said, take it or leave it.

Regards

Mike
« Last Edit: 2013-11-23, 08:28:17 by Centraflow »


---------------------------
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

As a general rule, the most successful person in life is the person that has the best information.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
Hi Mike

I will listen to any information given to me and bear it in mind, wether i remember it or not is my biggest problem.

Thanks
Peter
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1616
Hi Mike

I will listen to any information given to me and bear it in mind, wether i remember it or not is my biggest problem.

Thanks
Peter

Tell me about it C.C at my age I have to write everything down and even then I foreget where I put it afterwards ???

On a serious note, think about what I have said in the previous post, I think it will help a lot. There are various threads here and in other forums that all can be related to RF and tuning in one way or the other, like reactive power is in fact reflective power, standing wave ratio (SWR) if controlled in the right way can produce some amazing effects, blowing your TX final apart :D

I was lucky to know and was a good friend, the son of the inventor of single side band (SSB) who lived in oakhurst road in Oswestry, shropshire, my home town. Like his father he was a great radio ham, his other passion was flying his own plane of which I spent many an hour with him flying over the Welsh countryside. Alas he is no longer with us, apart from in memory, those were the days.

Regards

Mike


---------------------------
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860

As a general rule, the most successful person in life is the person that has the best information.
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 160
Hi Peterae, Ion,

Pretty interesting thread on Mandleshtam and Papaleksi.  I know this hasn't been posted on for a while, but I'd like to start it up again, since I have some bits and pieces to add in this area.
First I've attached an M&P paper that I don't think has been put here before. I especially wanted to attach this to discuss pg. 37 of this doc, where in a footnote, M&P diss another researcher named W.L Barrow.
Ion said,
"I think what we are missing here is that it takes some mechanical work to vary the inductance of an L in an LC oscillating circuit."
and M&P further this in their critique of Barrow when they say that he derives energy from switching alone, which violates conservation of energy. Barrow shunts a capacitor in and out of an oscillator circuit containing a regenerative element to cancel resistance. The circuit behaves as a parametric oscillator, with peak currents at harmonics of the shunt speed, etc. M&P attribute the gains to the tube regen circuit, but I'm not so sure.
I will send the Barrow paper in a separate mail because of file sizes.
As a result of reading this paper and some others on amplification by stochastic noise, I decided that a switched inductor circuit would be worth trying, and JLN tested it in 1997.

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/tep62par.htm

Later I did private experiments with another guy, using an optoelectronic switch designed for high isolation of switch noise, and repeatedly got measurable cyclic mV in the tank circuit, at high harmonics of the switching frequency.

As a result of these considerations, I think the garnering of even small amounts of energy from a purely switched circuit as in the Russian invention is worth a look. I have a hunch that energy is cohered from heat when the electric circuit is switched to simulate a parametric dl/dt.
 
orthofield
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 160
Hi All,
Here is the paper by W.L Barrow that shows a device using only shunted capacitors to generate energy.
The pages to look at are pg. 4, which shows a tank circuit containing two capacitors, one of which is alternately connected and disconnected by a motor. More explanation on pg. 5
 Barrow assumes that this is identical to rotating plates or inductors to vary the C or L, which is what M&P attack.

There is a tube regenerative circuit to provide just enough amplification to maintain the net resistance of the loop at zero.

Pg. 6 shows typical waveforms, where the square wave on top is the switch waveform, and the bottom curve is a parametric oscillation at 2F.
Most important is the graph on pg. 8 which plots the switching speed of the shunted cap to the current seen between the caps (black line), the tank circuit current (dashed line), and the plate current of the regen circuit (dotted line). At 2wo when the cap is shunted at twice the tank resonance, the capacitor current is 160 mA, while the plate current is about 18 mA.
The total energy input is the energy is needed to shunt the capacitor plus whatever is supplied to the regen circuit. It's hard to estimate, but since the motor could be replaced by a modern semiconductor switch, one can basically put the input energy from this route at zero, leaving only what is actually consumed by the regen circuit.

I'm unsure whether this is OU, but along with the other tests I mentioned, and the Russian patent, there does seem to be something there...
orthofield

   
Pages: [1]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-08-19, 17:50:47