PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2024-05-03, 22:59:36
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ... 48
Author Topic: Akula0083 30 watt self running generator.  (Read 932486 times)
Group: Guest
verpies,

In your estimate, how much leeway do you think we have in regards to the core specifications?  Can you determine if there are certain characteristics that would clearly push a particular core outside of a tunable range via the electronic components?
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 336
@All,

The 4 Akyla boards was snail mailed to the forum members (that requested boards) yesterday by Air mail.
The 8 "Breadboard" type boards will be Air snail mailed to forum members (that requested boards) this week.

Please ask Peter from now on, for those of you that want free Akyla boards.

GL.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
In your estimate, how much leeway do you think we have in regards to the core specifications?  Can you determine if there are certain characteristics that would clearly push a particular core outside of a tunable range via the electronic components?
I really do not know.  I don't have sufficient information what is supposed to happen inside that Akula transformer.
Given a working transformer, I can tell you what's happening inside it, but I cannot tell you what is supposed to happen unless I postulate some AdHoc operational principle ...or at least see a scopeshot of L2 current in a working device.
I don't want to postulate an operating principle without concrete data.  All I can write to you is that Akula's circuit is not OU with a conventional "transformer" behaving in the usual manner.

Generally, an E-core can form a parallel magnetic circuit while an U-core can only form a series magnetic circuit, since the flux can take only one path through a U-core (besides leakage).
Thus those cores exhibit very different flux distributions and you cannot expect one shape to behave as the other,

Faraday's power transfer efficiency will be always lower in an E-core if only one leg has a secondary winding on it and another has a primary ...but a Faraday's power transfer in a transformer is a conventional effect ...not what we are after.
If you ever see any hints of that R5/R7 junction going below ground, even for a microsecond, that will be your sign of an anomaly.  
The TL494 is wired to react to that, too...

Transformers are one of the most complex electronic components and worst of all, they are not standardized.
Anything can affect their operation, such as:

1) Core
    a) AL value (material and gap dependent)  
    b) Shape and size
    c) Conductivity
    d) Air gap
    e) Material in the air gap (e.g. hard mica or sound dampening paper)
    f) Frequency response (mag.viscosity)
    g) Coercivity
    h) Hysteresis loss
    i) Saturation value
    j) Crossection
    k) Permeability
    l) Magnetostriction
    m) Molecular configuration  
    n) Nuclear  configuration
    o) Villari permeabilty variability
    p) Mechanical compression of the core (or mechanical freedom to vibrate)
    q) Any embedded permanent magnets
2) Placement and orientation of the windings in reference to:
    a) the core (bobbin specs)
    b) the air gap
    c) the shield
    d) other windings
3) Winding technique
    a) single layer
    b) multiple odd layers
    c) multiple even layers
    d) winding direction
    e) winding pitch & advancement direction (can vary between layers)
    f) spacing between turns
    g) turn count
    h) wire composition (most are copper but not all)
    i) wire Litzing
    j) filarity (e.g. bifilarity, aiding, opposing)
    k) winding tightness/looseness/binding/gluing/varnishing
    l) size of the windings (localized/narrow vs. widely spanning)
4) Isolation material
    a) of the wire
    b) between windings
    c) between windings and core
    d) between windings and shield
    d) between layers
    e) between core halves
5) Shield
    a) material
    b) size
    c) shape
    d) placement
    e) connection
6) Pinout sides
7) External magnetic fields
8) External electric fields (see the IEEE article by Konrad & Brudny)
9) External vibrations (see this video)
10) Core and Winding Temperature

So keep the list above in mind, next time somebody says or writes: "Just wind a transformer - all the turn counts are listed on the schematic..."

It would be irresponsible of me to guess and mislead you on any of these points listed above without being certain of the M.O.
« Last Edit: 2014-04-02, 10:18:59 by verpies »
   
Group: Guest
Thank you kindly Verpies.  This is what I was interested in, determining how many dependent variables we are faced with--your enumeration is about double of what I started with.

Absolute attention to detail is going to be critical in getting a replication should someone set the bar.  We certainly do have OUR work cut out for us with this one.  I do think we are going to need most if not all of those values in that list accounted for as well as several different probe traces.  Two side-by-side replications are going to be needed, where the later one, the specifications are altered one-by-one to determine which elements are critical.

Let me take a deep breath...

Oh, I think you left off bobbin specs to make me feel better.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
verpies
Let's hypothesize that this is in fact a McFreey based device or at least similar functioning.

We have the core MnZn which would be the fuel.

We need to drive the core at half the cores Acoustic resonant frequency, the core being equivalent to the copper ring in the McFreey device.

If this is the case, a core can me made to exhibit large amplitude acoustic resonance by not gluing the core halves and just resisting them face to face, i know this because as an ex TV repair man, a common problem with Lineoutput Transformers is the the resin that glues each half of the ferrite core can break, or sometimes they use a clip which looses it's springiness, when it does all the youngsters in the house can find the noise unbearable @ 17KHz in UK.

I have repaired quiet a few in the past exactly for this by re gluing them.

Now if we have acoustic vibration at the interface surface of each half of the core then we would also have mechanical abrasion, although Ferrite is hard so noise is favoured over wear.

When the fet switches on, a bias flux is inserted within the core for our T1 period, although the flux is large and intense, i assume that the T1 time reduces with a strong magnetizing force, if we can work out the flux strength within the core during magnetization and we can find out the T1 time for MnZn ferrite then we would have a good idea of how long the fet needs to be turned on for(Duty %)

Then all we need is an equivalent La&Lb+C , so we need a resonant system tuned to fr/2 for energy capture which it looks to me we may have a series resonant circuit built into the Akula device, once we know the fr of the core by using a microphone then we can work out if the Akula series tuned circuit is viable, this should prove weather we are barking up the wrong tree so to speak.


If this device does use NAR then we will have to tune +--5Hz to fr/2 like the McFreey device i presume, so many wont get a device running unless they listen to the core while tuning the freq of operation, also duty does not want to be too much longer than the calculated T1 time.
   
Group: Ambassador
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4013
Perhaps a more "elementary" approach for starters as mentioned in post 333 ?

respectfully
Chet
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
Perhaps a more "elementary" approach for starters as mentioned in post 333 ?
I like it because I have not tried that before.  This approach is not "more elementary" - it is different.

I doubt that Akula's transformer is configured according to this principle because the wavelength of the stimulating pulse needs to be much shorter than the length of the coil in order to obtain standing waves in it ...and the TL494 gives up above 300kHz.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
Let's hypothesize that this is in fact a McFreey based device or at least similar functioning.
That's a large leap of faith ;)  What if we are wrong and we mislead others into a blind alley?

We have the core MnZn which would be the fuel.
Yes, both Manganese and Zinc can be "unwound" and used as fuel.

We need to drive the core at half the cores Acoustic resonant frequency, the core being equivalent to the copper ring in the McFreey device.
And what is supposed to generate the acoustic vibrations in such setup?  Magnetostriction, mechanical clapping of core halves...or something else?

If this is the case, a core can me made to exhibit large amplitude acoustic resonance by not gluing the core halves and just resisting them face to face
I know this because as an ex TV repair man, a common problem with Lineoutput Transformers is the the resin that glues each half of the ferrite core can break, or sometimes they use a clip which looses it's springiness, when it does all the youngsters in the house can find the noise unbearable @ 17KHz in UK.
I have repaired quiet a few in the past exactly for this by re gluing them.
I am familiar with the problem.  Just at the 15kHz horizontal frequency of the NTSC signal ;)
In order to maximize the clapping of core halves, they must repel and later attract at least once per cycle.  That necessitates two windings (one on each core half)... I don't see how two cores halves can be made to repel with just one winding (pushing against remanent field, maybe?)
If the cores don't repel, then perhaps they can bounce back after they slam into each other?  Seems silly, but if the ferrite can ring then it means that it can also bounce.  Note, that vinyl electrical tape and paper would dampen the bouncing...

Now if we have acoustic vibration at the interface surface of each half of the core then we would also have mechanical abrasion, although Ferrite is hard so noise is favoured over wear.
Note that the acoustic vibration at the interface of two core halves will occur at twice the frequency of the current flowing in the windings - not necessarily at the mechanical resonance frequency of the core (which would produce the highest acoustic amplitude).
The abrasion and/or clapping of core halves would be stressful to the core up to a point of breaking it ...or at least changing its mechanical resonance frequency with wear and time.
Incidentally did not one the Russian replicators report core cracking ?

When the fet switches on, a bias flux is inserted within the core for our T1 period, although the flux is large and intense, i assume that the T1 time reduces with a strong magnetizing force,
I cannot find the T1 time for the MnZn ferrites anywhere :(

if we can work out the flux strength within the core during magnetization and we can find out the T1 time for MnZn ferrite then we would have a good idea of how long the fet needs to be turned on for(Duty %)
That's sound reasoning. I think 5*T1 would be the upper time limit for spin pre-polarizing pulses.

Then all we need is an equivalent La&Lb+C , so we need a resonant system tuned to fr/2 for energy capture which it looks to me we may have a series resonant circuit built into the Akula device,
Which components do you have in mind?

once we know the fr of the core by using a microphone then we can work out if the Akula series tuned circuit is viable, this should prove weather we are barking up the wrong tree so to speak.
The fr proved to be hard to measure with a microphone, because of the dependence of the sound's amplitude on the position of acoustic nodes and antinodes.
Also my microphones are always jammed by the EM soup near the windings and cores.

If this device does use NAR then we will have to tune +--5Hz to fr/2 like the McFreey device i presume, so many wont get a device running unless they listen to the core while tuning the freq of operation,
Yes, if NAR or NMR is at play then the tuning of the magnetic flux density (B) and frequency will have to be razor sharp.
I was thinking that maybe that weird feedback loop to the TL494 accomplishes that tuning automatically by gradually increasing the current in L1 (and B in the core) and listening for a negative sharp beta pulse in the feedback path, occuring when the B & f conditions are satisfied.




« Last Edit: 2014-04-02, 11:36:55 by verpies »
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
Quote
That's a large leap of faith Wink  What if we are wrong and we mislead others into a blind alley?
Sure i understand that, but there is no difference, we still build as per the Akula device as everyone else is, the only difference is we listen with a microphone and look for acoustic resonance.

Quote
acoustic vibration at the interface of two core halves will occur at the frequency of the current flowing in the windings.
Yes that's interesting hence the LOPTX at 15 or 17KHz, so would that mean NAR will occur at any frequency just as long as the amplitude is high enough to cause grinding, maybe this is more like Meyer and his 142KHz which yfree seemed to indicate was still NAR but i would have thought more likely NMR

Quote
I cannot find the T1 time for the MnZn ferrites anywhere Sad
Ah yes sorry that's me being silly then,  we just use Zn or Mn which ever takes the longest  :-[ as they are considered individual constituents.

Quote
Which components do you have in mind?
I'm not really sure yet until i get a bench setup to investigate, even the Alu foil should exhibit a capacitive effect, then there's a 100pf in series with the load.

Quote
The fr proved to be hard to measure with a microphone, because of the dependence of the sound's amplitude on the position of acoustic nodes and antinodes.
Also my microphones are always jammed by the EM soup near the windings and cores.
Indeed, during my last tests, my La&Lb coils did indeed drown the ring noise while listening.


So maybe we need somewhere else maybe a sister thread to discuss how this might work using NAR.

« Last Edit: 2014-04-02, 12:04:12 by Peterae »
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
It's the interface of the ferrite that is the acoustic area, this is caused by the flux pulling and pushing
I don't see how one winding could generate a flux configuration that would "push".  Pull - yes.
Please reread the 4th sub-reply in my previous message.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
OK we dont need push pulling of the core halves then all we need is a changing flux, again hence the LOPTX noise.

EDIT
Yes noise in the LOPTX must be due to the surfaces grinding due to flexing of the ferrite.

Quote
not necessarily at the mechanical resonance frequency of the core (which would produce the highest acoustic amplitude).
thank you yes but what if enough amplitude can be produced from the core flexing, i mean what is enough, we can go all the way from no core chatter to self destruction of the core due to flexing if the currents were high in the transformer, so the question has to be can we start entering an area where the chatter from the core is enough to cause small scale NAR or NMR, i mean it's only a 30 Watt device, we dont need all the core to transmute it one go, we just need a small low conversion rate and maybe this can be achieved without reaching the mechanical acoustic resonant frequency.
« Last Edit: 2014-04-02, 13:18:00 by Peterae »
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2740


Buy me a cigar
Dear Peterae and all.

If you have no objections, I would really like to keep this thread as a whole. All the aspects kept in one place, so to speak !!

Thoughts ??

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   
Sr. Member
****

Posts: 336
@All,

Started to solder my Akyla board. :-)

GL.
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2740


Buy me a cigar
@All,

Started to solder my Akyla board. :-)

GL.

Dear Groundloop.

WOW that looks really nice, well done !!  O0

Now for the serious work !!  :)

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
Sure Grum, i was worried about filling it with discussions about NMR & NAR but yes i think we have confirmation enough to know it may well play a part  in this device.  O0

verpies thanks, your input here is mostly our only hope and is much appreciated.

Quote
"С учетам моментов времени в процессе работы которых создается ЯМР!
means: Taking into account the time points in the process which creates NMR!
Actually from the text conversion NerzhDishual did on that last diagram then we already know it's NMR not NAR DOH

i know this is off topic(Sorry) verpies you know my suspicion for the conversion of Nitrogen into Carbon we have previously spoken about RE welders being killed by Carbon Monoxide poisoning, any idea why the plasma would cause transmutation, is it NMR that is causing this, or is it a totally new form of induced Transmutation.?

PS Nice work GroundLoop, I am tracking my boards they are with a delivery courier as we speak.  O0
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
any idea why the plasma would cause transmutation,
Actually plasma is the only widely accepted method of artificially causing transmutation in hot fusion.
The atoms in plasma are bared and vulnerable.

is it NMR that is causing this, or is it a totally new form of induced Transmutation.?
I don't think that's a major cause although NMR can play a minor role in plasma.
If you study the new  nuclear model by M.Mathis, it becomes obvious that the atomic nucleus is not an aggregate of little balls as shown here but it appears like this.
You'll notice immediately that it is not nice and symmetrically round but it has internal structure.  This structure is more vulnerable to bombardment from some sides then others.  Bare neutrons are so vulnerable outside of the nucleus (when protons don't protect them) that half of them cannot survive for longer than 15min.  Chemical bonds, electric ionization and magnetism can orient the nuclei to vulnerable positions and change them in energetic collisions.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
Quote
Actually plasma is the only widely accepted method of artificially causing transmutation in hot fusion.
The atoms in plasma are bared and vulnerable.
Wow OK that explains a lot, so the boffins at the top are trying to maintain a plasma to maintain fusion using strong magnetic fields & billions of GBP, seems crazy expending all that energy to confine fusion, if it can be produced intermittently using an arc, and presumably a heavier atom of Nitrogen would release more energy anyway during transmutation into Carbon.

Anyway
Regarding the Meyer device below, we need 3 things
1) a bias flux, which we have when the fet is on and we set that once we know the flux strength with the fet on to 5*T1 this is set by our Duty.
2) NMR frequency, this will depend on the flux density within the core, our current is high and therefore our flux strength is high and our NMR for Mn will be lower( the lower the better to match our TL frequency range)
3) energy capture in the Meyer device this is seen as a 400Hz LF output

So the only thing i am not yet sure of is if we have a chance to run the Mn core at it's NMR and whether there's a low frequency capture path in the Akula device, we want to maybe see high frequency ringing for NMR excitation, and a low frequency component that can be filtered out for energy reclamation.

I would be most interested in any ringing that is seen when someone runs the circuit, we need a way of measuring our transformers peak flux so we can get an estimate for our target NMR frequency.

in the Meyer device why 400Hz what sets this frequency at 400Hz?
 


Is there anyway we can estimate the peak flux in our transformer, i think we can be sure we are seeing 10-20 Amps, if we can work the flux strength out for 10-20 amps, then hopefully we can work out our Mn NMR range, this will give us an idea what sort of frequency we are looking for, whether it's a HF ringing affect or within the TL setting range.?
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
in the Meyer device why 400Hz what sets this frequency at 400Hz?
Most likely you already know the answer.
f=1/(n*T1)
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
OK we dont need push pulling of the core halves then all we need is a changing flux, again hence the LOPTX noise.
It could be due to core halves bouncing or magnetostriction.  Nonetheless we know these vibrations are induced somehow from out TV repair days and videos like this or this.

what is enough, we can go all the way from no core chatter to self destruction of the core
AFAIR, the mainstream NAR experiments (Bolef, et al) used ultrasonic transducers around 50W range.

can we start entering an area where the chatter from the core is enough to cause small scale NAR or NMR, i mean it's only a 30 Watt device, we dont need all the core to transmute it one goty
If you'd managed to do that in one go, you'd vaporize before a nerve impulse would get to your brain.
The limiting factor is not the amplitude but magnetic flux density homogeneity.
Amplitude has to be only high enough to overcome thermalization.
« Last Edit: 2014-04-02, 18:22:36 by verpies »
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3537
It's turtles all the way down
I have tested a number of ferrite cores on hand and can easily tell the low resistance MnZn from the rest of the lot.

e.g. with the meter on the 20 Megohm position, the MnZn cores read 000 while other cores read 1 to 15 Meg.

When I switch to k Ohm, I get anywhere from 0.4k to 5k for the MnZn.

Probes are spaced about 1/4 inch and test anywhere on the surface.

It appears I have a few each of ring cores, rods and pot cores that are very low resistance, probably MnZn.

All of the EMI suppression slip on or clamshell cores were in the very high meg ohms.

Various ferrite rod cores from old radios were very also high resistance.

So it appears I have some MnZn ferrites to play with.

Further testing with silver paste on 1 cm^2 opposing cube faces usually would be a few hundred to a few thousand ohms.

Anything in the megohm range is usually not MnZn.
« Last Edit: 2014-04-03, 12:07:57 by ION »


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee

Quote
f=1/(n*T1)
Right indeed i do, thanks for the recap again i apologize for my dementia.

There seems to be a lot of Mn T1 times mentioned in biological studies, presumably these are valid for our T1 time, I'm still trying to find a solid value, again we may have been over this in the past and i apologize if we have, as soon as i track a figure i will post it in this thread, it's probably good you posted f=1/(n*T1) because not everyone would be aware of this in this thread.

Quote
AFAIR, the mainstream NAR experiments (Bolef, et al) used ultrasonic transducers around 50W range.
Depending on coupling, if they glued a piezo on to a surface i am wondering it that greatly reduces efficiency and therefore although there maybe 50 watts in the acoustic energy maybe a lot less due to the surface of the piezo being restrained from movement due to glue, i know the sound will travel due to mechanical coupling, but it just seems an inefficient coupling method to me, maybe i am wrong, hard grinding ferrite surfaces may well be quiet an efficient way to produce acoustic resonance, who knows it's certainly worth looking at.

We could estimate the acoustic power by listening to the core's noise and comparing to that of a glued piezo i suppose.



   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
Some data on MN55

http://chem.ch.huji.ac.il/nmr/techniques/1d/row4/mn.html
Quote
Property   Value
Spin   5/2
Natural abundance   100%
Chemical shift range   3000 ppm, from -3000 to 0
Frequency ratio (Ξ)   24.789218%
Reference compound   0.82 m KMnO4 in D2O
Linewidth of reference   5.6 Hz
T1 of reference   0.072 s
Receptivity rel. to 1H at natural abundance   0.179
Receptivity rel. to 1H when enriched   0.179
Receptivity rel. to 13C at natural abundance   1050
Receptivity rel. to 13C when enriched   1050
Linewidth parameter   350 fm4

Quote
T1 of reference - Longitudinal relaxation time of the reference compound at room temperature in a 400 MHz spectrometer.
I cant see any mention at which Flux density this is measured at, maybe there is a standard flux used for measurement, i will keep looking.

wow T1 is long at 72mS, man we need to get that down with a higher flux that's 360mS at our *5
   

Group: Moderator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2740


Buy me a cigar
Dear Peterae.

You and others may find this website of interest.

http://www.webelements.com/manganese/isotopes.html

This might also be of interest as it relates to NMR frequency with relation to magnetic field strength.    http://www.geotech1.com/cgi-bin/pages/common/index.pl?page=lrl&file=/info/nmr.dat

From there you can find many NMR analyses !!

Cheers Grum.


---------------------------
Nanny state ? Left at the gate !! :)
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3867


Buy me some coffee
Thanks Grum
OK i have the wrong way around, a stronger mag flux increases the NMR, this is interesting because it could mean we have a vast range of flux in that core, starting with the T1*5 period the NMR fr will be high, but as the flux decreases and so will our NMR.
I will try some calcs when i get some time.

PS my order for Groundloop's board have arrived when i got home, the quality looks really good at first glance.

I will start doing the packaging once at work tomorrow, ready to ship out, i will send 15 to Chet and keep 15 here for UK & Europe including 1 to Groundloop for inspection.

   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3365
Started to solder my Akyla board. :-)
I am curious which ones are the DTY OSC PHZ pots.
e.g.: OSC = R15, etc...
« Last Edit: 2014-04-02, 19:23:46 by verpies »
   
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ... 48
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2024-05-03, 22:59:36