PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-11-21, 23:01:29
News: Registration with the OUR forum is now by invitation only.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23]
Author Topic: Investigating "anomalies" in Bifilar coils  (Read 22889 times)

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1154

PM,

Thanks for the info about the current probe.
Since i know about its delay and the minimum deskew posibilities of my scope (3 May 2017) i did not use it in any Pin / Pout measurements.
All current measurements where done using a 1 Ohm csr on CH2 (blue).

Itsu

   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 396
PM,

Thanks for the info about the current probe.
Since i know about its delay and the minimum deskew posibilities of my scope (3 May 2017) i did not use it in any Pin / Pout measurements.
All current measurements where done using a 1 Ohm csr on CH2 (blue).

Itsu

Itsu,

Thanks for that input as I assumed you were using your current probe for the measurements.  Normally, if you were using the P6139A 10X probe, any induction from the DUT (and there will be plenty) into the probe and cable will have an effect of advancing the phase angle as if there was too much negative deskew.  This will vary with probe placement and whether a ground clip or lead is used.  So, it makes no sense as your test IMO should have indicated COPs at least in the 90% not 66% area even on a bad day!  Puzzling ????

Pm

Edit:  I see you were using a 1x probe on the CSR so the current measurement  should be reasonably accurate.  Still puzzled about the low COPs however!
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1154


Yes,  sorry,  these latest tests i use, like you do, a x1 probe for the current (Blue) measurements.

Itsu
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 187
....
I am working on an optical current probe based on a technology I developed years ago for an IR feedback potentiometer to replace the mechanical pot in servos.  It would extremely linear and should be good to 50MHz and perhaps higher.  We shall see.
...

Hi Partzman,

I have come across a fiber optic isolated scope probe circuit design, with >30 MHz bandwidth capability for around $50 component cost:
https://hackaday.io/project/12231-fiber-optic-isolated-voltage-probe 
with downloadable files (PCB Gerber, Bill of Materieals etc)
Perhaps gives you further ideas.

Gyula
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 29
I always found it strange that many say they believe that energy is conserved and cannot be created or destroyed and yet use terms like wasted or consumed as if it simply vanished into thin air. As such the argument is always one sided in their mind. They say they believe energy is conserved then in the next breath say every star radiates energy but space is empty or energy is radiated away into nothing but we cannot get something from nothing. As such it is always a one sided argument which contradicts itself.

I found the easiest way to understand all Free Energy devices is to truly believe the Conservation of Energy holds in every case universally and in no way can it ever be created or destroyed only transformed. If they truly believed Energy must be conserved in every case then the only reasonable answer is that we must be swimming in a sea of energy.
There may be no free lunch but we are swimming in food.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy   "In physics, the law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant—it is said to be conserved over time"

I do not claim that there is OU, but I claim that the problem with the theory of "conservation of energy" is the idea that there is an "isolated system".

Nobody ever lived in an "isolated system" und nobody knows how to create an "isolated system". So, you can say what ever you want about the non existent "isolated system", nobody will ever be able to prove it or to disprove it. "Conservation of energy" is a hypothetical idea based on the mainstream understanding of nature.

Every system is part of a bigger system and may receive energy from the encircling system or may transfer energy into the encircling system.

The bigger system for earth clearly is the sun. For us humans the power of the sun is eternal and OU, because the sun will out-power and out-live every human. The human scale is very much smaller than the scale of the sun.

And for every conceivable system you will find the bigger system encompassing it.

A solar cell is OU in the sense, that the sun shines for free on the human scale. A super nova (if near enough) will destroy the sun, so a super nova is OU for a sun. And a massive black hole is OU for a whole galaxy.

An OU machine is a machine that uses energy from the bigger system encompassing the system in which someone builds the OU machine. And it might be impossible to see the energy influx, because we are not aware of the encompassing system.

So, "conservation of energy" might hold or not, but we can never prove or disprove "conservation of energy".

And yes, we are swimming in a sea of energy and its source is the sun. Most people can not see that, but nature on earth uses the sun (ultimately as its only energy source) since at least 4 billion years. And we can use the suns energy at least for 100 million years more. Oil and natural gas also were created by the sun, because the dead creatures and plants which formed the oil and gas once lived (million years ago) on earth because of the sun.

Greetings, Conrad
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 396
Hi Partzman,

I have come across a fiber optic isolated scope probe circuit design, with >30 MHz bandwidth capability for around $50 component cost:
https://hackaday.io/project/12231-fiber-optic-isolated-voltage-probe 
with downloadable files (PCB Gerber, Bill of Materieals etc)
Perhaps gives you further ideas.

Gyula

Gyula,

Thanks for the link above.  Certainly most interesting and worth a try particularly for use in CSR low voltage sensing applications.  I am amazed at the cost of brand named scopes and probes with high bandwidth and when asked to measure low voltages at say 1MHz in the presence of inductive fields, they fall flat on their faces regarding accuracy.

Pm
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1154
PM,

to rule out any confusion, looking at your drawing, it could be interpreted that L1 and L2 are not similarly wound, like L1 is Clockwise, while L2 looks Counterclockwise.

I gathered that that would be NOT the case and both coils are wound the similar way (like CW) and that is how i have hooked up my bifilar pancake coil, both windings are
clockwise and the outer 2 wires of the pancake coil are connected to C1 and C2, while the inner 2 wires are connected to R1 (100 Ohm).

Please confirm.

Itsu
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 396
PM,

to rule out any confusion, looking at your drawing, it could be interpreted that L1 and L2 are not similarly wound, like L1 is Clockwise, while L2 looks Counterclockwise.

I gathered that that would be NOT the case and both coils are wound the similar way (like CW) and that is how i have hooked up my bifilar pancake coil, both windings are
clockwise and the outer 2 wires of the pancake coil are connected to C1 and C2, while the inner 2 wires are connected to R1 (100 Ohm).

Please confirm.

Itsu

Itsu,

I can see that the schematic could be taken to be counter wound coils but they are wound together as you assumed and you have them connected correctly.  If you wish to give it another go, try this configuration: Remove C1 and C2, connect Rs to the end of L1 and leave the other end of L2 open.  With this arrangement, adjust the frequency range until the current lags the input voltage and check for a small COP>1.  This removes any effects the caps may have had on circuit function and induction is now fully dependent on displacement current.  All measurement connections remain the same as the previous test.

Pm
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1154

PM,

ok, good to know.

I have dug out my Arie de Geus Bifilar solenoid coil and put it into your circuit, but this one is way under COP=1 all the way.

I will remove C1 and C2 etc.  later today to do some tests on the TBF coil.

One question still,  do you have all 3 scope probe ground connections at the FG black lead point?    Or should i leave Ch1 and CH3 ungrounded?


Itsu 
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 396
PM,

ok, good to know.

I have dug out my Arie de Geus Bifilar solenoid coil and put it into your circuit, but this one is way under COP=1 all the way.

I will remove C1 and C2 etc.  later today to do some tests on the TBF coil.

One question still,  do you have all 3 scope probe ground connections at the FG black lead point?    Or should i leave Ch1 and CH3 ungrounded?


Itsu

Itsu,

I have tried all the combinations of ground connections.  The recommendation by most is to have a single ground from the circuit to the scope so the most logical in this case is to only connect the ground of the probe connected across the CSR.  All other grounds would be left unconnected.  Using a spring clip ground and probe tip placed directly at the body of the CSR is the most accurate IMO.  Even at 100khz the 2-3" ground lead acts like an antenna as you well know.

Also, I hate to be so insistent about this but if you are not using cursor measurements, then you must be sure you have precise complete cycles (zero crossing to zero crossing) from side to side on your screen.  Any deviation from this while using your Math channel to calculate input power will result in a lower COP.

A reality check could be done using your current probe since the current probe is far less susceptible to induction than the hi-Z scope probes.  Having all your channels set to 0.0 deskew and assuming your probe/amp combo has a delay of 30ns (may not be correct) you would then do a phase measurement between the input voltage and the probe current.  This reading would then be corrected by d = td*360*f where d = degrees of correction, td is the delay is seconds, and f is the frequency in hertz. For example, at 500khz with a 30ns delay,  d = 30e-9 * 360 * 5e5 = 5.4 degrees.  This would be added to the original phase reading and then do cosine math with the input voltage and current rms values.

Pm

Edit:  Although I appreciate your effort in this, I wouldn't recommend spending more time as the gain is so small at this point to be of any use if it is real.
« Last Edit: 2017-05-13, 17:54:09 by partzman »
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1154

PM,

i understand that the gain is very small, if any, but just to show that even with some finer adjustments in measurements protocol it will not
show anywhere near COP=1 i toke another set of data using the MEAD schematic, so WITH C1 and C2 still in.

Changes made are:

Ch1 and CH3 probes ground leads DISCONNECTED
CH2 (x1 probe) using an RF tip, directly connected over Rs (csr)
Pin was calculated by using math data between its vertical cursors



Pout was calculated as normal using CH1 - Ch3 / 100.

Not sure if i will do another run without C1 and C2 like suggested.

Regards Itsu
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1154
Here the both runs combined in one Graph


Itsu
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1154
Itsu,

I can see that the schematic could be taken to be counter wound coils but they are wound together as you assumed and you have them connected correctly.  If you wish to give it another go, try this configuration: Remove C1 and C2, connect Rs to the end of L1 and leave the other end of L2 open.  With this arrangement, adjust the frequency range until the current lags the input voltage and check for a small COP>1.  This removes any effects the caps may have had on circuit function and induction is now fully dependent on displacement current.  All measurement connections remain the same as the previous test.

Pm

i presume you meant "current leads the input voltage" on the above sentence.


 
Anyway, i set up the circuit as described above using my TBP coil, but looking for the correct 87° phase shift relationship between voltage and current (current leading)
it leads me to around 17Mhz.

At this frequency all things interact with each other and a sensible measurement is practically impossible.
The results i got did not make much sense:   17.4MHz   Pin 730uW,  Pout 82uW.

Perhaps i can use my Arie de Geus bifilar solenoid coil which has a much lower resonance frequency.

Itsu
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 396
i presume you meant "current leads the input voltage" on the above sentence.


 
Anyway, i set up the circuit as described above using my TBP coil, but looking for the correct 87° phase shift relationship between voltage and current (current leading)
it leads me to around 17Mhz.

At this frequency all things interact with each other and a sensible measurement is practically impossible.
The results i got did not make much sense:   17.4MHz   Pin 730uW,  Pout 82uW.

Perhaps i can use my Arie de Geus bifilar solenoid coil which has a much lower resonance frequency.

Itsu

Itsu,

Actually I did mean current lagging the input voltage.  It all depends on the configuration of which there are many.  I've attached a paper on a test of a coil that is similar in specs to yours but layer wound and not like a TBP so maybe this will help if you wish to continue experimenting.  I have stopped my research in this area and am pursuing the unique properties of the series connected symmetrical transmission line which I believe is being overlooked.

Pm
   
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-11-21, 23:01:29