@all
A few months ago I posted a youtube entitled Half Coil Syndrome 1, so this thread is about that and all others in the series.
Half Coil Syndrome 1 https://youtu.be/S4hIxATfuU8
posted yesterday
Half Coil Syndrome 2 https://youtu.be/E9UyeZYW6uA
This thread will be locked for now since I will use it to prepare some more info on the subject on the next few pages, then I will unlock it. To bad there is no function that lets a moderator post without it being visible on the recent posts. I could have just reserved the first 10 posts for my present and future needs, but that would put 10 posts on the recent posts section, something I would not think of doing otherwise. hehehe
It is now started for me to open this up as well as I can. There will never be a right moment and yes, I may be totally crazy, disillusioned, misinformed or simply wrong, but from all I can see, this is right on the effect and will help us all make some nicer OU destined toys to play with.
Back soon.
wattsup
February 15th, 2016
OK, since post #1 I have put up some more HCS videos linked below.
Half Coil Syndrome 3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELto2eCr0PY
Half Coil Syndrome 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUdzhN99EYI
Half Coil Syndrome 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd3uOi0RVMU
Half Coil Syndrome 6 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PL9tmnst28g
I know this is somewhat repetitive. Starting with #6 I will be putting up some more videos showing concrete examples of HCS.
But the point is very simple. Your pulse will never "travel" through the complete windings of a coil. It will always stop half way inside the coil and this is one main reason why most motor windings blow in the center area of the coil.
So whatever you are doing now, if you are pulsing one coil, you will never get OU. You can choose the best core materials, the best wire, the best winding and alltogether you may get close to OU but because of HCS, you will never reach or go above OU. The only way we will ever "publically" reach OU is when we fully understand what is really going on in our coils above and beyond the Standard methods we have been taught to deploy in our devices.
wattsup
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
This post space is reserved. Sorry for the inconvenience of having to take up a slot in the recent posts on the home page.
Im guessing as there is now a reply button,the thread is open ?.
What are the last 9 posts about-this post space is reserved?.
Anyway,i found your video quite interesting wattsup,as i never had those sort of results. I have always found that the strongest electric and magnetic field are at the center of a coil.
I did not see this half coil syndrome in my testing?.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YFBs7DVqok
Brad
The use of a tape head as a B field magnetic probe is not a good idea as the gap is so small it acts merely as a gapped inductor, essentially a high pass filter across the probe, allowing the E field to be detected, but not so much the B field.
In Wattsup's test, he could substitute a shielded inductor of the same value in place of the tape head, and get the same results as it is the probe tip that is acting as the E field pickup device.
Naturally, the E field will be strongest at the ungrounded or "hot" end of the coil, as the scope probe is referenced to ground, as shown in Wattsup's test.
A small open ended coil as Tinman has shown makes a better B field detector than a tape head, which was designed to pick up only the tiny dipoles across the gap and reject external fields (to some degree), especially if it was the type shielded with mu metal.
Quote from: ION on 2015.11.29, 01:26:23
The use of a tape head as a B field magnetic probe is not a good idea as the gap is so small it acts merely as a gapped inductor, essentially a high pass filter across the probe, allowing the E field to be detected, but not so much the B field.
In Wattsup's test, he could substitute a shielded inductor of the same value in place of the tape head, and get the same results as it is the probe tip that is acting as the E field pickup device.
A small open ended coil as Tinman has shown makes a better B field detector than a tape head, which was designed to pick up only the tiny dipoles across the gap and reject external fields (to some degree), especially if it was the type shielded with mu metal.
QuoteNaturally, the E field will be strongest at the ungrounded or "hot" end of the coil, as the scope probe is referenced to ground, as shown in Wattsup's test.
In regards to this ION,why didnt i see the same as wattsup showed,as i used a tape head as well,and i also have the common ground?. The magnitude seem to be the same either end for me.
Also,in regards to the E field--are you saying that the E field is greatest at the hot end alway's,or is this only in regards to the test carried out,and what the scope see's due to the common ground?.
Brad
I agree with Ion, WU is actually seeing the E field. He could easily make up a small search coil of just a few turns with a twisted pair connection (see image) and insert this into his long coil. He would soon realize his mistake.
Smudge
author=TinMan link=topic=3206.msg53242#msg53242 date=1448802177
QuoteIn regards to this ION,why didnt i see the same as wattsup showed,as i used a tape head as well,and i also have the common ground?. The magnitude seem to be the same either end for me.
Carefully observe the subtle differences in your test vs Wattsup's test and the answer will be apparent.
QuoteAlso,in regards to the E field--are you saying that the E field is greatest at the hot end alway's,or is this only in regards to the test carried out,and what the scope see's due to the common ground?.
Brad
Usually to the first part and yes to the second part of the question.
I have some home made B field search coils, a few commercial units, and some expensive B and E field probes I can post some photos of later. Smudge is correct, a few turns with twisted lead wires will do the job, but not have very high output unless the turns are increased. Depends on what frequency and field strength you are sniffing. No such thing as a universal probe, different probes are used for different applications.
ION
@all
OK let's start this thread already.
The best painters in the world have had years of experience mixing their colors to better understand their final effects which they then apply to their canvas as ART. We, as OUers, in the search of overunity need to rise to that same level of coiling proficiency which means we need to understand all the different facets of coil pulsing, topology, differences of topology to coil pulsing results, where are the bugs, how can they be fixed, etc, etc.
The Half Coil Syndrome (HCS) I am showing is a simple test designed to investigate the actual dispersion of any energy pulsed into a coil and how this coil will respond either air core or cored. Our general method of winding coils is more of a pot luck method where we have this mental image of a coil and then we strive to reproduce it in real life then we start pulsing away to figure out if there are any favorable anomalies that could be taken advantage of. This process is slow, chock full of minuscule checkmates that are very difficult to realize once the coil is made, understanding that a builder could be 5 turns or a coil tap away from some very special results but will never know or learn more about any such new effect.
It is basically for primary coils since this is the main means of driving the coupling to a secondary, or destined for drive coils on rotary magnetic wheels, but I will also be talking about our secondaries and how we can test things to see how better to remove the impress as output.
Hopefully this thread will help is elucidating these effects (and differences of effects) and provide builders with new alternatives to maximize our present coupling challenges
@ION
Thanks for your comments. My bench tests were conducted with many types of pick up coils and under AC or DC pulses and the same result was seen. My decision to stick with the tape head model is because it provides a good sliding surface and it provides the same basis for pointal comparison whereas with a coil it will always depend on the surface area and angle exposed and the area of influence.
@TinMan
Well my friend I have to thank you for your time and effort in producing your video of your experiments.
I would have hoped that for a first baseline someone would try the same type of test on the same type of simpler primary coil (air or core) just to corroborate that the effect is in fact real enough to warrant some much closer scrutiny into the effect. But no problem since in your particular coil which is a basic Tesla secondary pulsed as a primary, in the three tests you have generously shown using three types of pickups, a MOT secondary around the primary, a tape head and a small coil with a core. Let me say that in the last two instances we still see the HCS although in your case with such a long primary, we see something new, which will be a great new part of the HCS puzzle.
In your first test with the MOT coil, what I need to ask is if you can please do it again, but this time, set up the MOT so that you can move it further and further away from one end, then from the other. See how far you have to go until you get to half the scope rise you had before when it was sliding on the primary. Why you may ask. Well this will show me the width of the influence of your MOT pick up coil. What I think is happening is the MOT has such a wide receptive angle that when it is on an end, it catches not only the end but up to 1/4 inward or more, so when the MOT is over the end, one side is empty and your reading is lower then when you slide to center which now has both sides extended over the primary so you have maximum then you slide it to full left and it went to the same level as the start. This for me seems very normal of what we see there but this is more like an RMS'ing test and cannot confirm or negate the HCS effect on its own. You would need to use a three turn coil around the primary and slide it for a more pointal reading of the energy spread with such a pick up. But I would suspect you will find again that only half the coil is responsive.
The phase issue could be relevant to the fact that your Tesla coil is usually used as a step up secondary that is being pulsed as a primary hence from the moment the pulse occurs, there is a delay in how fast the low voltage can permeate the wire and raise the current, as you see it all as off phase. When you take off the cap and see the jagged rises, that will be a clue since going up and down makes a delay in the total rise. If you tried a simpler primary, maybe it will go away. hahahaha
One of the reasons I call this a "syndrome" is because we almost have to make a diagnosis in every case, but in general then, call it E field, B field, H field, I just call it "magnetic influence" because for me right now, that's the only real proof on Earth. There is a magnetic influence but we do not know if there is in fact a field involved or not. Leaving it as influence means the cause is and will remain open for years to come. In my case, the cause and effect is due to spin conveyance but regardless, this does not have to hinder the advancement where if there is a positive diagnosis, then we can confirm there is in fact a coil sickness, and now we can work on remedies. Like Dr.Phil says " You can't fix what you don't acknowledge".
For me, the primary coil eats up prime real estate on our cores. Let's say you wind 10 turns of primary on the center of a gaped E core. 5 turns on one side, then continue over the gap with 5 turns on the other side and now you pulse the entire primary. So how is the energy dispersed across the 10 turns? If it suffers from HCS, the first 5 turns will dissipate about 75% and the last 5 turns will dissipate about 25% of the total pulse. If this is the effect you were looking for, great, but chances are it's not. We spend so much time on pulse circuits and so little time on the actual action in the coil that it seems very counter-productive to do so much, then to abdicate the coil to its own devices. So we need to find ways to increase the punch since losing here is not an option if you are looking for OU. hehehe
One remedy is to add a second (or third in @gotoluc's case) primary coil on a transformer but off the main device and whatever that coil produces as output can be returned to source so very little added overhead. You are basically putting back around 25%, working the device with 75% but now the primary has full dispersion over the core. This is were we need to be to move forward. I'll show a video on this soon.
So what @TinMan showed is it's easy to test these small things in your builds and discover the finer nuances for yourselves.
More soon but if any one has comments please do.
wattsup
Quote from: ION on 2015.11.29, 16:24:01
author=TinMan link=topic=3206.msg53242#msg53242 date=1448802177
Carefully observe the subtle differences in your test vs Wattsup's test and the answer will be apparent.
I have some home made B field search coils, a few commercial units, and some expensive B and E field probes I can post some photos of later. Smudge is correct, a few turns with twisted lead wires will do the job, but not have very high output unless the turns are increased. Depends on what frequency and field strength you are sniffing. No such thing as a universal probe, different probes are used for different applications.
ION
QuoteUsually to the first part and yes to the second part of the question.
OK,so here is where the problem lies.
Poynt told me(and many others)that it is the electric field that produces the EMF in the secondary-in this case,my MOT secondary. As the EMF across the secondary is greatest when at the center of my primary,dose this not mean that the E filed is also at it's greatest/largest at the center of the primary?,
Quote from: TinMan on 2015.11.29, 23:35:01
OK,so here is where the problem lies.
Poynt told me(and many others)that it is the electric field that produces the EMF in the secondary-in this case,my MOT secondary. As the EMF across the secondary is greatest when at the center of my primary,dose this not mean that the E filed is also at it's greatest/largest at the center of the primary?,
The two measurements are being made with differing frames of reference. All things are relative.
Hints: If the coil were driven differentialy with respect to ground, what do you think an E field probe with a ground reference would see? What would an H field probe see?
Quote from: ION on 2015.11.29, 01:26:23
Naturally, the E field will be strongest at the ungrounded or "hot" end of the coil, as the scope probe is referenced to ground, as shown in Wattsup's test.
Yes, the grounding of the coil and the scope have a major bearing on these results.
Change the grounding of one or the other ...and you change everything.
Quote from: TinMan on 2015.11.29, 23:35:01
OK,so here is where the problem lies.
Poynt told me(and many others)that it is the electric field that produces the EMF in the secondary-in this case,my MOT secondary. As the EMF across the secondary is greatest when at the center of my primary,dose this not mean that the E filed is also at it's greatest/largest at the center of the primary?,
Well there are two different E fields here and they have entirely different characteristics. There is the circular E field that creates the volts per turn in the secondary and that E field comes from the changing flux through the secondary. That is the E field that Poynt mentioned. We usually ignore this E field and simply think of voltage being "induced" by the changing flux, but there is this intermediate step involved. It is the E field that creates the force on the conduction electrons, so we should really say that it is the circular E field that is "induced", then the voltage we measure comes from that.
The E field that ION referred to is the electric field coming from any conductor that is at a potential different to ground, or the field between two conductors that are at different potentials. This is known as the Coulomb field. When dealing with coils driven at high frequencies connected to 'scopes you often get both effects present, and you have to be careful in analysing your results.
Smudge
@all
I put another small HCS video to answer more precisely @TinMans' video. It is here....
https://youtu.be/qUdzhN99EYI
OK, I think I am in a position to answer one very important question about Half Coil Syndrome and that is since it is a syndrome, it shows a major fault in how our coils work but it also shows how we as outside observers of a seemingly mundane event can be tricked into thinking that the energy dispersion in the coil is only caused by the pulsed wire length but this winds up being a pretty strong illusion.
In @TinMans' case, he is using a Tesla coil the topology of which is basically a fairly wide cylinder. It seems that the effect of using a wide winding increases the inter turn relationships since each pulsed turn is itself a transmitter and a receiver. A transmitter since the turn being energized undergoes a change in its atomic orientation because of the pulse but at the same time this change is also seen by the other turns thus increasing the other turn nearby that then receive the pulse in their turn and act in their turn as a transmitter and receiver from turn further down.
When this starts at the pulse left side, the MOT pickup is slid over the left side but since this is the start of the pulse it has the highest impress potential but left of the MOT is empty space without any coil turns so the MOT at left side can only measure the empty left of MOT, under the MOT and the energized right of the MOT.
When the MOT is in the center, it now receives from the left that is the highest impress, under the MOT where it is half and the right of the MOT that has only 25% wire impress but given the diameter of the windings, the actual range of inter-turn impress is still in total higher then when the MOT was on the left. The wide diameter winding of the Tesla coil is the reason it acts like a core, not from wire to core impress or reflection but by the turn to turn wider angular influences of the Tesla coil itself, making the Tesla coil a very special case since it is producing the same illusion of effect as if it was wound on a core. Pretty crazy and I was not expecting to delve into such an effect so soon.
I made a diagram to try and explain this using my own coil on the core as in my video 4 because I realize this will be rather hard to explain in a way that will not generate misunderstandings.
With the tape head , all I am seeing is the actual fine pointal stress at the skin of the wire that starts high on the pulsed side and goes down to nil at the constantly connected side.
But with the blue three turn coil I used as a pick up going all around the coil/core since the pick up coil is greater in diameter then the actual coil/core being pulsed, its angle of pick up influence is increased from a pointal, like with my tape head, to a wide angle thus more of the coil run is influencing the pick up coil. Since the left high side has received the maximum pulse impress up to 75% before the half of the coil winding, when the pick up is over the high side end, it has an open area further to its left that provides no impress to the pick up coil hence the level on the scope is at Low 1. When the pick up is in the center, it now has full coverage over the coil/core receiving the widest angle of influence from the left high side, the center half level, plus now the right low side that also has the core reflection so the output at center is the highest. When we slide the pickup to the right side, this side also has an empty space to its right of now effect so it only has under and to the left of it that is mainly a core reflection and the output shows Low 2 which is lower then Low 1.
OK, not bad. Let's continue when I was using the pick up coil and LED. Why did it turn off in the middle if it's on from both ends. Well the ends have the same explanation as above. Left high side, Right reflection side but now why does the pick up turn off in the middle. This is because of cancellation. Since the pick up is circular laid on the coil/core, when it is in the center it is getting as much influence from the left of center as it is getting from the right of center but they are cancelling out inside the pick up coil. WOW man. Next test is use two such pick ups each on a scope to see their phase relations when they are on each end and the same relation when both are on one side of the center line. This would confirm that cancellation is actually the case.
OK, all those who understand this, raise your hand. Hmmmmm.
Anyone that can make good animations, raise your hand.
OK, back soon with more.
wattsup
Hi Wattsup
Try flipping your LED pickup coil so that instead of perpendicular to the windings it is parallel. You should then see max output at the center, going down a bit toward the edges, but then bright again as the you pick up the curls entering the center of the coil, when the two coils are co-axial.
A scope probe tip alone is a good E field sensor with one problem, it tends to pick up a lot of ambient 50 or 60 Hz. To remedy that when working at higher frequencies you can place a toroidal inductor from tip to ground of the probe. Now the probe tip will reject low frequencies, and you will see more of the HF stuff at the probe tip. The toroid structure provides a shielding action to H field pickup, its inductance now acting as a high pass filter. Pot cores or other shielded inductors will work well for this.
Getting fancy, you could also mount the whole affair in a shielded metal box with with BNC connectors at either end. One end connects directly to your scope with a BNC cable , the other end has a BNC male with a short E field sniffer length of solid wire.
Add a switch to insert a variable capacitor across the inductor and you switch from wideband to tunable operation.
Various sniffer coils for H field pickup can have BNC connectors for fixing directly to the box, with a switch that disconnects the high pass internal inductor filter.
mmmm Adding a rectifier and a sensitive meter, the device can be made stand alone, completely passive and no ground loops to worry about. My next test tool for the lab? With a little patience I can calibrate the device to give meaningful data.
Quote from: ION on 2015.11.30, 01:26:27
The two measurements are being made with differing frames of reference. All things are relative.
Hints: If the coil were driven differentialy with respect to ground, what do you think an E field probe with a ground reference would see? What would an H field probe see?
So how would i go about making an E field and H field detector that i can hook up to my scope?.
Also,are you saying that if i use an isolation transformer that has no ground,but only a change in polarity,and use that to drive my primary,that i would see something different across my secondary on the scope to that if the primary had a common ground?.
Good question TinMan! Brings to mind a Sea Story:
In the days of short-wave radio communications where
"fading" or "destructive interference" was a problem we
used different types of antennae to receive signals based
on the E and H field components of the radio wave. By
using a whip antenna (E field responder) in conjunction
with a loop antenna (H field responder) and feeding the
two inputs into a comparator circuit to select the stronger
signal we could almost completely overcome signal losses
due to fading.
Quote from: TinMan on 2015.12.02, 00:25:07
So how would i go about making an E field and H field detector that i can hook up to my scope?.
Also,are you saying that if i use an isolation transformer that has no ground,but only a change in polarity,and use that to drive my primary,that i would see something different across my secondary on the scope to that if the primary had a common ground?.
We can get to the design of a combo E, H probe later, for now the question I asked was what would the E field detector see, and what would the H field detector see if the coil were driven differentially.
In this case your probe tip is the E field detector and your MOT coil the H field detector. Scope is considered grounded.
Driven differentially in this case means from an isolating transformer that has a secondary that floats or one that has a center tap that is grounded.
To complicate things, a floating secondary will have a different capacitance value to ground from each end, unless it is specially constructed. This becomes important depending on the test frequency.
(spell check does not like the adverb trying to modify a noun, maybe some English major can correct my spelling error, some call differential an adjective)
Quote from: ION on 2015.12.02, 02:38:17
We can get to the design of a combo E, H probe later, for now the question I asked was what would the E field detector see, and what would the H field detector see if the coil were driven differentially.
In this case your probe tip is the E field detector and your MOT coil the H field detector. Scope is considered grounded.
Driven differentially in this case means from an isolating transformer that has a secondary that floats or one that has a center tap that is grounded.
To complicate things, a floating secondary will have a different capacitance value to ground from each end, unless it is specially constructed. This becomes important depending on the test frequency.
(spell check does not like the adverb trying to modify a noun, maybe some English major can correct my spelling error, some call differential an adjective)
OK,so i done the isolation transformer test,where i used an isolation transformer as my P/in to the long primary. Now i see an even E field all along the length of the coil,but when i ground one end of the coil,i now see what wattsup see's,and as expected,the E field drops off the closer we get to the grounded end of the coil.
But in regards to the H field,where i use my MOT secondary as the H field detector,it makes no difference whether the primary coil has a common ground or not-the amplitude is always highest at the center of the coil.
This can only mean that it is the H field that gives rise to the EMF across the secondary,as it is the H field that creates the E field. Or is it the generated EMF across the secondary is due to the H field alone,and the EMF is what produces the E field?. If we have a stationary permanent magnet which means there is no associated E field,as the is no magnetic field changing with time,and we pass a loop of conducting wire through that stationary field,and EMF is still produced across that loop of wire,but yet there was no E field.
Brad
Quote from: TinMan on 2015.12.02, 15:20:08
OK,so i done the isolation transformer test,where i used an isolation transformer as my P/in to the long primary. Now i see an even E field all along the length of the coil,but when i ground one end of the coil,i now see what wattsup see's,and as expected,the E field drops off the closer we get to the grounded end of the coil.
But in regards to the H field,where i use my MOT secondary as the H field detector,it makes no difference whether the primary coil has a common ground or not-the amplitude is always highest at the center of the coil.
This can only mean that it is the H field that gives rise to the EMF across the secondary,as it is the H field that creates the E field. Or is it the generated EMF across the secondary is due to the H field alone,and the EMF is what produces the E field?. If we have a stationary permanent magnet which means there is no associated E field,as the is no magnetic field changing with time,and we pass a loop of conducting wire through that stationary field,and EMF is still produced across that loop of wire,but yet there was no E field.
Brad
The conclusion you can reach from these tests is that the Half Coil Syndrome is being mistaken as an H field measurement where it is actually an E field measurement, the coil acting as an inductive (and capacitive) divider network for the E field when the scope and one end of the coil share the same ground.
When driven differentially and the coil is not grounded, the E field has an even distribution, as you observed.
The true H field detector, your MOT secondary shows an optimum transfer of magnetic energy at the center with some small reduction at the ends of the long coil, as expected.
Your last question is answered by observing that there is no great diminishing of the transfer of H field along the length of the long coil when one end of the long coil is grounded. If the E field were responsible for the EMF we would see such a large reduction of output in the MOT coil at the grounded end of the long coil, at least equal to the reduction observed of the E field test.
Maybe Smudge could add his point of view to this.
Quote from: ION on 2015.12.02, 16:16:00
The conclusion you can reach from these tests is that the Half Coil Syndrome is being mistaken as an H field measurement where it is actually an E field measurement, the coil acting as an inductive (and capacitive) divider network for the E field when the scope and one end of the coil share the same ground.
When driven differentially and the coil is not grounded, the E field has an even distribution, as you observed.
The true H field detector, your MOT secondary shows an optimum transfer of magnetic energy at the center with some small reduction at the ends of the long coil, as expected.
Maybe Smudge could add his point of view to this.
QuoteYour last question is answered by observing that there is no great diminishing of the transfer of H field along the length of the long coil when one end of the long coil is grounded. If the E field were responsible for the EMF we would see such a large reduction of output in the MOT coil at the grounded end of the long coil, at least equal to the reduction observed of the E field test.
This is going to get a thread of it's own(so as not to choke up wattsup thread with a semi unrelated topic,as it will become very interesting i believe.
I had this out with Poynt not so long ago on OU,where as i claimed that it had to be the magnetic field that induced the EMF across the secondary,and Poynt say's that it is the E field that produces the EMF across a secondary. This test seems to show what i believe to be true,but another test platform i had setup seems to show that Poynt is correct,and it is the E field that creates the EMF across the secondary.
Should be a hoot,but also something that is taken seriously ,as we now have two test bed's that can deliver both outcomes,and give different answers<--how can this be?.
I will start to put all the relative info together tomorrow,and get the thread cranking Saturday morning.
Brad
As I said before there are two different E fields. It is the induced E circular field that creates the voltage across the coil (or to be precise across individual turns of the coil). There is also the radial E field from any conductor that is not at zero potential. Illustrated in attached image. So depending upon what you are sensing these fields with will decide what you actually measure.
Smudge
Quote from: Smudge on 2015.12.03, 15:19:38
As I said before there are two different E fields. It is the induced E circular field that creates the voltage across the coil (or to be precise across individual turns of the coil). There is also the radial E field from any conductor that is not at zero potential. Illustrated in attached image. So depending upon what you are sensing these fields with will decide what you actually measure.
Smudge
Smudge.
This is all well and good for the primary,but what field induces an EMF across a secondary?
Where in that diagram you posted will be the strongest part of the E field around the outside of the long inductor?
Brad
Quote from: TinMan on 2015.12.03, 23:18:11
Smudge.
This is all well and good for the primary,but what field induces an EMF across a secondary?
Where in that diagram you posted will be the strongest part of the E field around the outside of the long inductor?
Brad
Smudge's drawing shows clearly that the intensity gradient along the long coil for the circular E field bears a close relationship to the H field intensity, while the radial E field shows the reduction to zero intensity at the grounded end and maximum at the opposing end.
Now you might ask what causes what, and I would be inclined to guess that the circular E field causes the H field, but I am not trained in this area so may be entirely wrong.
@all
I'll keep saying it. Thanks for your comments to all and to @TinMan for your works. Let's please not jump to any conclusions on this because it's not over. Let's keep an open mind and press on.
First off guys I do not have all the answers but I know so far from SC perspective, all this falls in perfectly. I just need to take some time to reflect and do a few small benchies to see things.
Yes @Smudge showed a drawing with thanks and it shows how our guys presently understand this effect but again, my diagram shows it also and explains why HCS is producing the MOT effect, which in my book is a mirage. You cannot beat the tape head test because it does not involve any influences other then what's happening in that wire, at that turn. Since the wire is the one conveying the pulse, it would never be overridden by the core impress itself until it gets to the negative end and this is the only thing we need to know. The rest of it is only a mirage created by core reflections and does not depict the actual turn per turn performance of the pulse which is gradually going down to the zero point of the ground or neutral side.
So here is what I think I need to do to advance this further since I do not have all the answers but know that under this construct, whatever it is will be exposed on its own after calm reflection on the evidence.
I need to find 3 identical straight ferrite cores preferably of useful lengths or ratios of let's say 3", 4.5" and 6" and onto each is wound a coil of 3" in length all starting at one end of the core. Then do the same experiments with the pickups. These three results will say so much more since the first will replicate my tests and the two other identical coils will push the reflection further and further away from the low coil end to the core end thus permitting the coil to gradually show its true colors and better explain the reflection effect that passes off as a full coil. So imagine if Maxwell was exposed to this same phenomena, how did this influence his math. He probably used a compass so how could they even fathom such ideas as the base of the effect. hahaha
Researching proposal:
Is anyone or group able to take on this one crazy task. Span through EE formulae that have some relevancy to these experiments or coupling and flux, especially those that have a value in it of 1/2. List the formulae and define what the 1/2 is doing. Yes sounds crazy but it is only logical to assume that if coils have half of their windings doing basically junk work, and if our formulas were derived by tabulating and plotting empirical data, then there has to be a few of these 1/2's that are related to HCS. It already has to be in our books but it is unnoticed or not drawing the proper attention from the regular EE crowd but that maybe it should for the OU crowd. This one is more or less out of my hands if not for the relational considerations. However, I needed to mention it because this part of the query will be left open for those able to investigate the question far better then me, plus it's really a question of available time.
Back soon.
wattsup
Quote from: ION on 2015.12.03, 23:45:15
Smudge's drawing shows clearly that the intensity gradient along the long coil for the circular E field bears a close relationship to the H field intensity, while the radial E field shows the reduction to zero intensity at the grounded end and maximum at the opposing end.
Now you might ask what causes what, and I would be inclined to guess that the circular E field causes the H field, but I am not trained in this area so may be entirely wrong.
Ion
I am not worried about the the E field bringing rise to the H field within and around the primary inductor. What i want to know is what causes the EMF across the secondary-->the MOT secondary i used around the long primary.
Smudges picture tells me that the circular E field is contained within the primary coil,while the radial E field extends outside and around the long primary coil. This radial E field is strongest at the hot end,and drops to near zero at the ground end of the long primary inductor.
So 1- As my secondary(the MOT with resistor across it) gains the highest amplitude at the center of the long primary inductor,and the radial E field is strongest at one end and weakest at the other end of the primary,then it cannot be the radial E field inducing the EMF across my secondary(the MOT secondary)
2- As Smudges drawing seems to show the circular E field is contained within the primary coil,then this also means that the circular E field is not inducing the EMF across my MOT secondary.
3- If my MOT secondary is the H field detector as you stated,then that also means that that it is not seeing the E field.
4- This can only mean that it is the H field that gives rise to the EMF across the secondary,and not the E field.
But there is a problem with this,if this is the case,and it is the H field that gives rise to the EMF across the MOT secondary in my test.
I will bring that up soon ,along with a video showing you what i mean.
But first--is it the E field or the H field in my video test that is giving rise to the EMF across the MOT secondary?.
Brad
Quote from: wattsup on 2015.12.04, 06:14:47
@all
I'll keep saying it. Thanks for your comments to all and to @TinMan for your works. Let's please not jump to any conclusions on this because it's not over. Let's keep an open mind and press on.
First off guys I do not have all the answers but I know so far from SC perspective, all this falls in perfectly. I just need to take some time to reflect and do a few small benchies to see things.
Yes @Smudge showed a drawing with thanks and it shows how our guys presently understand this effect but again, my diagram shows it also and explains why HCS is producing the MOT effect, which in my book is a mirage. You cannot beat the tape head test because it does not involve any influences other then what's happening in that wire, at that turn. Since the wire is the one conveying the pulse, it would never be overridden by the core impress itself until it gets to the negative end and this is the only thing we need to know. The rest of it is only a mirage created by core reflections and does not depict the actual turn per turn performance of the pulse which is gradually going down to the zero point of the ground or neutral side.
So here is what I think I need to do to advance this further since I do not have all the answers but know that under this construct, whatever it is will be exposed on its own after calm reflection on the evidence.
Researching proposal:
Is anyone or group able to take on this one crazy task. Span through EE formulae that have some relevancy to these experiments or coupling and flux, especially those that have a value in it of 1/2. List the formulae and define what the 1/2 is doing. Yes sounds crazy but it is only logical to assume that if coils have half of their windings doing basically junk work, and if our formulas were derived by tabulating and plotting empirical data, then there has to be a few of these 1/2's that are related to HCS. It already has to be in our books but it is unnoticed or not drawing the proper attention from the regular EE crowd but that maybe it should for the OU crowd. This one is more or less out of my hands if not for the relational considerations. However, I needed to mention it because this part of the query will be left open for those able to investigate the question far better then me, plus it's really a question of available time.
Back soon.
wattsup
QuoteI need to find 3 identical straight ferrite cores preferably of useful lengths or ratios of let's say 3", 4.5" and 6" and onto each is wound a coil of 3" in length all starting at one end of the core. Then do the same experiments with the pickups. These three results will say so much more since the first will replicate my tests and the two other identical coils will push the reflection further and further away from the low coil end to the core end thus permitting the coil to gradually show its true colors and better explain the reflection effect that passes off as a full coil. So imagine if Maxwell was exposed to this same phenomena, how did this influence his math. He probably used a compass so how could they even fathom such ideas as the base of the effect. hahaha
I will take a guess as to what you will see.
Your 3 inch core with the 3 inch winding over that entire core will show what you have been seeing,in that the E field will drop to zero at the grounded end of your inductor.
With the 4.5 and 6 inch cores that have the wire wound over only the first 3 inches will show a different result. That result will be--> As you move your probe from the hot end of the windings toward the grounded end of the windings,once again you will see the E field drop to zero. !BUT!,from the grounded end of the windings,to the end of the core that is void of windings,the E field will invert,and once again begin to rise as you get closer to the end of the core that is void of windings. Why do i think this will happen?--well the core will carry the magnetic field to the end of the core-regardless of where the windings finish. As that magnetic field will be changing with time,then an electric field must also exist along with that changing magnetic field.
Anyway-that is only what i think,and makes sense to me :-\
Wattsup
Is there any reason we cant use a soft iron core or laminated core for this test,as i would be working in low frequencies anyway ?.
I may have the ferrit rods to do the test,but i doubt is.
Brad
Quote from: TinMan on 2015.12.03, 23:18:11
Smudge.
This is all well and good for the primary,but what field induces an EMF across a secondary?
Where in that diagram you posted will be the strongest part of the E field around the outside of the long inductor?
Brad
Brad,
The circular E field exists outside the primary and I really should have shown that. It is strongest just outside the primary at the coil centre, but as you create ever larger radii of your secondary coil the E field diminishes in magnitude because you get H (or B) field lines threading the secondary in the opposite direction to those in the primary. So the total flux threading the secondary diminishes. Note this is for solenoidal coils, in the case of toroidal cores there is no means for the primary flux lines to turn back around the outside. In your toroidal thingy you can get flux between the inner primary and the outer secondary induced there by the secondary resonance that magnifies the flux coming from the secondary current.
Smudge
Quote from: ION on 2015.12.03, 23:45:15
Smudge's drawing shows clearly that the intensity gradient along the long coil for the circular E field bears a close relationship to the H field intensity, while the radial E field shows the reduction to zero intensity at the grounded end and maximum at the opposing end.
Now you might ask what causes what, and I would be inclined to guess that the circular E field causes the H field, but I am not trained in this area so may be entirely wrong.
No, the circular E field comes from the time-changing H field (actually the B field). The flux in Webers is the B field multiplied by the area, and the volts per turn is the rate of change of flux. But that voltage comes from the circular E field which drives the electrons around that turn. The voltage you get from the E field is obtained from the value of the E field multiplied by the length of the conductor that lies along the E field, in this case the circumference of the turn. If you have N turns then you have a conductor length that is N times that circumference so you get N times the voltage
Smudge
Quote from: TinMan on 2015.12.04, 11:04:57
Ion
I am not worried about the the E field bringing rise to the H field within and around the primary inductor. What i want to know is what causes the EMF across the secondary-->the MOT secondary i used around the long primary.
Smudges picture tells me that the circular E field is contained within the primary coil,while the radial E field extends outside and around the long primary coil. This radial E field is strongest at the hot end,and drops to near zero at the ground end of the long primary inductor.
So 1- As my secondary(the MOT with resistor across it) gains the highest amplitude at the center of the long primary inductor,and the radial E field is strongest at one end and weakest at the other end of the primary,then it cannot be the radial E field inducing the EMF across my secondary(the MOT secondary)
2- As Smudges drawing seems to show the circular E field is contained within the primary coil,then this also means that the circular E field is not inducing the EMF across my MOT secondary.
3- If my MOT secondary is the H field detector as you stated,then that also means that that it is not seeing the E field.
4- This can only mean that it is the H field that gives rise to the EMF across the secondary,and not the E field.
But there is a problem with this,if this is the case,and it is the H field that gives rise to the EMF across the MOT secondary in my test.
I will bring that up soon ,along with a video showing you what i mean.
But first--is it the E field or the H field in my video test that is giving rise to the EMF across the MOT secondary?.
Brad
Just remember that it is an E field that creates force on conduction electrons, so if you measure an induced voltage there has to be a circular E field there. Where that E field comes from may seem obscure but it sure is there. I need to check your video to answer your question and I'll do that when I get home. At the moment I am sitting in our motorhome being buffeted by gale force winds.
Smudge
@all
I just ordered 4 of these ferrite rods. They were the cheapest price I could find for long enough ferrites. So I will simply cut one to the other two lengths and keep the others on hand. hahaha
http://www.ebay.ca/itm/NiZn-Ferrite-Rod-R40C1-200x10mm-for-High-Q-Amateur-Crystal-Radio-Coils-AM-SW-/151884949745?hash=item235d0c68f1:g:3QMAAOSwNSxU-kHM
@Smudge
I will answer about the fields on the Coils,Magnetic and Electric fields thread since you put up quit an elaborate description, with thanks.
@TinMan
Thanks for that all so boring event. hehehe I really appreciate it and will answer soon.
I should have emphasized that maybe doing it at the same input power level as your first to make that first center MOT comparison, but I really think the Tesla Coil needs its own set of rules. If you ever set it up again, try the MOT center and scope the MOT, then put the whole thing in vertical to the Earth plane and see if it does anything OOTO.
wattsup