This thread will attempt to derive a schematic from what is seen in the videos regarding the large TPU (LTPU) also referred to as the SM17.
I posted this a while back on OU but it was quickly forgotten and buried amidst the speculation. Hopefully that won't happen here and the subject can be revived.
I will try to adhere to an interpretation of the pictorial drawing supplied by Wattsup and my own observations from the video stills. He has done an excellent job of creating the pictorial. This probably was a formidable task for him and I welcome that he make any corrections so we can bring this up to date.
I will not engage in any wild theories of operation, just a "what you see is what you get" schematic.
While it would be nice to have a working theory as a starting point, sometimes you just have to go back to basics and get into the mind of the designer from what he actually built.
The arguments have all been made regarding diodes vs. resistors, CMC's or no CMC's etc.
Since everyone sees something different, I would hope they would start their own thread with their interpretation regarding what they see rather than argue on this thread.
Finally I will add some thoughts regarding what I think may be happening or some rationale for having drawn the schematic as I have.
First, here is Wattsup's excellent pictorial view and below that the derived schematic
SM17 pictures:
Thanks To Grumpy for posting these crisp screen shots.
We will use them as a reference for future discussion.
By the way, I must admit the schematic is incomplete. It also contains a few errors, but these will be corrected on the next rev.
Also there are no "feeds" or "returns" shown for some coils as these are unknowns.
@ION
Just to let you know on that schematic I made, the toggle switches (10) (11) presently show a small red wire going from one to the other. I now know that red wire from (10) should go instead to the potentiometer (9) thus one of the wires (34) or (35) is not required. So the left toggle switch (10) is in series with the pot (9). I wonder what type of power can go through that pot without toasting it?
Also on the toggle switch (10) is shown only two wires but there are three, two on one side and one on the other side.
Wattsup
Thanks for pointing out the corrections to be made, and thanks also for your effort in making this possible. I will make the corrections on the next rev, which may be down the road a bit as more is uncovered.
Is it possible to upgrade your pictorial so that all is in agreement? Thanks in advance if possible, but it is not a rush item.
Edit: Here is Wattsup's text description of his observations that accompanies the SM17 WD-1 pictorial diagram.
This will also be used as primary reference material.
Critical Observation #1
This is perhaps the single most important observation
We see four wires emerging from the center of the small toroidal inductor on the left. This is the left bundle (5) wound from the outside back of theTPU. Notice that it shoots straight up out of the TPU then arcs into the small toroidal inductor
We see four wires wound from the inside back (4) of the TPU going into another small toroidal inductor on the right. These wires again shoot straight up out of the TPU before arching into the center of the small toroidal inductor.
From the way the wires appear it is reasonable to assume these are the winding starts and ends of the same four wires. In schematic form this is shown as inductors L3, L4, L5, L6, (the TPU circumferential winding) terminated with transformers (the small toroidal inductors).
This observation is clearly seen in SM17 screenshots particularly SM17_06 and in Wattsups pictorial.
It is depicted in the central part of the schematic.
In summary, we have a winding of four adjacent wires wound toroidally around the TPU that enter the centers of the small toroidal inductors. A reasonable assumption would be that the four wires terminate the windings of the small toroidal inductors.
Yellow circles show the wires:
Critical Observation #2
Alongside the two taped bundles that arch up and out of the TPU and go into the small toroidal inductors are the singular wires marked 27 and 28 on Wattsup's pictorial and clearly shown in SM17_06.
Again these wires appear to be start and finish wires that are wound alongside or possibly over the groups of four.
What is interesting is the wire on the right goes under a bit of tape then appears to be soldered to lampcord, the outline of which can be seen under the tape.
The ends of the lampcord appear to be soldered together and to wire 28 which emerges from under the tape. We see this same motiff in the OTPU lampcord.
It is reasonable to assume that the wire that emerges on the left is terminated to the finish of the lampcord in the same manner. Whether or not a delay coil is applied to one of the lampcord pair cannot be determined at this time so we will leave that to speculation down the road.
Additional lampcord is seen to the right of wire 28 under the tape.
The main areas of interest are are circled in yellow in the drawing below:
QuoteJune 21, 2006 – PM from Mannix
Please post anything you have the desire to. I am growing somewhat tired of all the web site misgivings I keep reading. At least, however, they are no longer reminding you that they know for a fact that I rape little girls when I am not busy being a Moslem extremist. I can tell that a few of them are truly trying to learn something. They are doing something very strange to most, they are listening... When you listen you learn, when you say, yea but what I think is.... you loose.
Have you ever heard of the Geneses system? There is some fellow who is asking people for money to develop what he calls his Geneses system. He sounds very much like a fellow who tried to see one of our demonstrations a few years back. He was very upset and abusive when we refused him a look see. He told us he knew how it worked and that we should pay him for copying his discovery. We asked him to explain how our unit worked and it was very amusing to listen too. Suffice it to say, he never got a penny from us, or anyone else I ever knew about.
About the collector:
It is three separate coils of multi strand copper wire laid one on top of the other, not interleaved. Three is important. You can do many things with three coils. You can run them in parallel, you can run two in series and one in parallel, or etc.You can run a separate frequency into each coil for better control on large power units if need be. The control wiring is vertically wound in several segments around each of the horizontal collector coils. Other control wires are wound around all of the horizontal collector coils together.
Through the different control wire and coil wire arrangements you can keep complete control of the unit most of the time. However, you must have an emergency KILL switch. A way of cutting off all the control frequencies simultaneity. This kill switch must be, manual and also connected through a heat sensor buried within the collector coil. it should automatically stop the function of the unit before it self destructs on it's own. This is important for obvious reasons. Also the kill switch should also be connected to cut off whenever it measures over voltage. If that should ever happen, you would never have enough time to hit the kill switch before the inevitable explosion occurred.
You know, it is very similar to the idea of a long garden hose. Picture a hose with water in it. If you pick up one end and move along the length of the hose you will move the water constantly along in the direction you are moving. You could also squeeze the hose in the direction to move the water along as well. And you could do both to control the movement of the water more precisely. You can think of the movement of water as the movement of electrons through the collector coils.
I hope the things I share with you give you ideas about how my unit works. As you know, I am a great believer in understanding, not copying.
Sincerely,
SM.
QuoteAbout the collector:
It is three separate coils of multi strand copper wire laid one on top of the other, not interleaved. Three is important. You can do many things with three coils. You can run them in parallel, you can run two in series and one in parallel, or etc.You can run a separate frequency into each coil for better control on large power units if need be. The control wiring is vertically wound in several segments around each of the horizontal collector coils. Other control wires are wound around all of the horizontal collector coils together.
Yes this is an important quote from SM. I will be very interested in seeing where these three coils show up in our detective work. This would mean maybe six ends exiting somewhere if they are to have the flexibility of series or parallel connection available to the user.
Of course we do not know exactly which unit represents what is being described in the quote, as there were several of the toroidal designs.
Carefully reading the rest of what SM said, like the simultaneous kill switch for two frequencies, heat sensor, and over voltage protector.....these may have been implemented in the unit shown in the UEC video, but not all of these features are in this unit. In the UEC video we see what looks like an indoor/outdoor thermometer (white box) in one of the shots.
For now I would like to focus strictly on what is seen in the video footage that the captures are referenced to.
I don't desire that the thread fray into arguments over interpretations of SM quotes.
Here is a good list of Steven Mark quotes for those who haven't read them.
Critical Observation #3
Besides the two wires in #2, there appear to be two very thin wires connecting to the top of the fuseholders.
These wires appear to go straight down and it is not possible to tell if they are ducking into the core or are additional toroidal windings.
Interestingly, the TPU appears to be torn open in this area. I'm guessing that SM had a wire open from overcurrent i.e a solder joint heating up and letting go. The dual fuse holder is probably an afterthought added to protect against a recurrence.
These wires will be shown on an important update to the schematic coming soon, along with other updates and more critical observations.
To ION
Thanks for the inspiration
a couple of things you exposed make more sense to me now,
especially the double toroids, one for each freq maybe? in phase and out of phase,
will have an experiment when im next at the bench and l;et you know if it happens :-)
cheers R.
Hi Rob
Thanks for the comment and for taking the time to read this thread.
I plan on keeping this thread on target i.e. all observations will be from the videos. Any help in this area will be appreciated.
It is probably necessary to build as near a replica as possible to the one shown in the videos, since it has acoustic and gyroscopic properties that are intrinsic to the operation.
I have seen very few people build anything that even remotely resembles the SM17 (LTPU).
It is because of this, it my intention is to glean as many clues as possible from the visuals.
The textual information (or disinformation) will be considered down the road after all visuals have been exhausted.
Thanks for any help you can offer, very interested in your findings.
Are those speaker rings in the area where the TPU is torn open? There is a space between them. Aren't these generally made of paper (cardboard) or plastic?
QuoteAre those speaker rings in the area where the TPU is torn open? There is a space between them. Aren't these generally made of paper (cardboard) or plastic?
Hi G
Not sure what those support rings are made of. Yes, speaker mounting gaskets, the part usually glued to the cone / frame interface is stamped from dense paperboard, but that's not what these hoops are.
They are not to be confused with the plastic grille used on SPHERIC LABS speakers.
I found out from Jack Durban that they threw away hundreds of the plastic molded rings you see in the OTPU. SM probably grabbed a handful.
This confirmed my suspicions back when I was researching the OTPU. If you look closely at the SPHERIC LABS speakers you can see that the grille assembly was made from a number of molded plastic rings and spacers. Jack told me they always had a problem with the chrome overlays peeling away as is seen in the photos of the speakers.
Every once in a while there are SPHERIC LABS speakers on ebay. When photos are taken with the tops of the grilles removed you can see the rings.
It is a bit humorous to see people still arguing over the material composition of the rings in the OTPU. Is it metal,? Is it an exotic ferrite material? etc. I have to chuckle.
I'm guessing the material in the cutaway of the SM15 is probably wooden embroidery hoops or drum hoops. Or perhaps SM used his jigsaw to cut out some hoops from plywood or flakeboard.
This is rather easy to do if you use a circle guide.
Summary: Not sure...lots of speculation, nothing definite, but we will find out.
The outer wire appears to be continuous pair. Like speaker wire or lamp wire.
Collectors in parallel or series, depending on the requirements, or one is collector and the other is feedback or bias. Many possibilities.
The hoops - support structure. If HV was in any of the winding you would not want them to short to the other windings. Also the density will have a min and max at particular distance based on parameters, but the distance may have been arbitrary based on materials available or ease of assembly.
(09:20:19) Grumpy: anyone on?
(09:21:03) Grumpy: .99: I just tried an idea I had from last night when we were talking about the toroids.
(09:22:05) Grumpy: I took a small toroid with two windings on it and connected a very long coil (long wire length) to onse side and then ran a squarewave thru both windings with common ends connected
(09:23:01) Grumpy: This cause a very interesting change in the waveform. The sq-wv became compressed and also was divided into "bursts" with even spacing
(09:23:32) Grumpy: I think this is a form of compression similar to the bifilar method and this may be how SM actually did it.
(09:23:56) Grumpy: With more delay, the pulses should combine into one big kick
(09:24:17) Grumpy: where in the Hell is evryone!!!?!?!?!?!
And just like that...a possible answer...not only that but the type we have been looking for.....a simple one!
Are the windings on the toroid wound kicker style or something else?
This is very interesting G !!
have you added the extra delay yet?
Disregard that. Not compression just groups of pulses missing between pulses that show up. Strange in that it only happens with coils wound from 22 AWG and not with 28 AWG wire. Tried all sorts of crude delays and didn't see anything. Peter may want to give it a shout with controlled delay, but I'm thinking it is a dead end.
I came to my own conclusion a long time ago that those little toroidal things are probably only required if ou loop the output back to the controller - for whatever reason - and in a simple sense they could just be isolation transformers for that purpose. I don't think you need them for the effect or to get usable power.
The black thing under the toroids may be a HV power supply from a copier and that is very interesting.
Now , how is the damn SM17 wound?
Regarding the cutout area where the tape is peeled away:
The outer poloidal winding does not continue through this area, but the inner windings may be there - can't tell.
I commented yesterday on the shout board that everyone touches the SM17 - sliding it around on a table - so I venture a guess that the outer windings are not pulsed and may be bias (dc powered) or collector wires.
Lamp cord or heavy speaker wire or zip wire is easy to wind, heavy, and cheap. Connect in parallel and pass a lot of current easily.
Might be that the collector can be 1 inch long or all the way around. Spherics said two copper rods would work. Red/black wires on the OTPU could be collectors.
Wondering if the little toroids are for regulation of looped-back power to the controller:
Please compare to latest SM17 schematic.
Or the damn things are just common-mode chokes because of the noisy output fed back to the controller.
But look at how they are wired in the SM17. Looks to me like transmission lines terminated with toroidal transformers CMC's. I'm guessing this is a variation of a ring oscillator where isolation and phase reversal is required , hence the toroids. Normally the ring would just be cross connected.
The other winding is used for pulse injection.
Guess is the toroids serve the same purpose mirrors do in a laser or waveguides and cavities in a maser
Guessing wiring from a video is still guessing.
From a practical perspective: the older smaller TPU's had only one toroid - and probably one collector fed back to the controller.
Yes G, guesses from the video are just that, guesses.
Many can interpret what they see and the SM / Mannix text in anyway they like. I wish more folks would start threads to outline and develop their beliefs.
I'm coupling my guesses from the video with my intuition based on a long career as an electronic professional and hobbyist.
I may not agree with others interpretations, but I don't want to argue or disagree (unless asked for my opinion), because no one knows, and therefore everything is a possibility. But there are also probabilities to consider.
I lack the training in advanced physics or advanced engineering degrees to speculate in those areas.
So I will keep it simple, what I see, what I think may be true, what I have experienced in my 6 decades of tinkering around coils, caps, tubes transistors etc. all put together creates a direction.
That direction may lead no where, but I've got to follow my instincts on this one due to lack of better info.
I do a lot of testing of various ideas. I don't report anything unless it is an anomaly (to me at least).
Best of luck in your research.
Quote from: ION on 2010.09.10, 22:34:02
But look at how they are wired in the SM17. Looks to me like transmission lines terminated with toroidal transformers CMC's. I'm guessing this is a variation of a ring oscillator where isolation and phase reversal is required , hence the toroids. Normally the ring would just be cross connected.
The other winding is used for pulse injection.
Guess is the toroids serve the same purpose mirrors do in a laser or waveguides and cavities in a maser
what is reflecting back and forth? Why did the early tpu's have only one?
Must admit again, I'm just guessing, but even with a single toroid, the pulse can arrive on both ends of the transmission line, propagate around the loop and repeat the process, building each time.
I didn't put phasing dots on the CMC but it should be wired out of phase (worst case scenario)
This is not just the simple matter of a transformer whose output is connected to it's input, rather it is a long transmission line (delay element) terminated with a negative impedance because of the trapped energy in the line
The energy can't radiate away since it is an electromagnetic null, but must stress the space between the wires. Ohmic losses will eat some energy and cause heating of the wires.
The pulse injection scheme may be better if simply a turn or two through the center of the toroid, then the pulse will take off down the line from each termination point.
If the transformer was eliminated and the wires cross connected, you would miss out on the pulse sharpening effect as the core goes in and out of saturation.
What if you injected the compressed pulse from Peter's bifilar wires into this setup?
QuoteSo this coil is the output coil for sure, why? since we need voltage step down to not disturb the high quality resonant tank formed inside.
Voltage step down does not negate the fact that there is coupling between the transformer primary and secondary. A well designed transformer will have minimal leakage inductance and reflect what is happening on the primary to the secondary, much the way an automobile transmission transforms torque. The coupling does not disappear.
A resonant circuit on the primary will be loaded by the resistive load on the secondary and "Q" will be severely damped. This is well known in the art and anyone who has played with high "Q" resonant circuits can appreciate this.
If you can show how to resonate a high "Q" circuit from stray fields and pull appreciable power from it without having the resistive load damp the "Q", you get the next Nobel prize.
While I appreciate your work on the power line coupling theory, casting those assertions into this thread is misplaced. I urge you to start a thread showing how you were able to pull 1kw from the power lines with a high "Q" resonant circuit. I'd personally be satisfied with a 100 Watt bulb.
Not to be confused with lighting a few led's from stray fields around house wiring.....milliwatts of power...that is easy.
Remember these devices were also demonstrated in Dr. Schinzinger's lab, probably a steel frame building at UCI far from HT lines. The good prof thought it was a miracle. I must respect his judgment, having at hand the equipment to measure stray fields. He also does this in one of the videos.
If you make a claim to have the secret sauce, the burden of proof is now on you. I would enjoy it immensely if you would start a thread with step by step build instructions to support your theory.
This thread is about reverse engineering the LTPU (SM17) from the video evidence.
While I enjoy some of your assertions, I respectfully disagree with the power line coupling theory, but will remain open to the possibility. I hope as gentlemen scientific researchers we can agree to disagree and remain friends. I am very happy to find an intelligent person such as yourself on this forum and interested in the TPU.
regardless, thanks for your input.
QuoteI too want to reverse engineer the TPU, If you think my ideas don't belong in this thread I'll gladly move them elsewhere. I didn't mean to offend anybody.
No offense taken EM you are quite welcome to post here. I just don't want the thread to get derailed over the power line issue.
I'm very interested in your research, so keep up the good work. Could you kindly post a circuit that can resonate a few watts from overhead power lines. We've got some HT lines very close by that I can test out your theory.
Kind regards...ION
Quote from: ION on 2010.09.17, 13:22:44
Remember these devices were also demonstrated in Dr. Schinzinger's lab, probably a steel frame building at UCI far from HT lines. The good prof thought it was a miracle. I must respect his judgment, having at hand the equipment to measure stray fields. He also does this in one of the videos.
@ION
I do not think so that the good Doc was in his lab. He was simply present at one of SMs demos at SMs home. He was observing the demonstration like any other person present. He even says "he was not able to make any independent measurements" save those that SM allowed at the times SM allowed. In a nutshell, the good Doc's report is worth zero. I have written up on his whole report a little while ago on OU.
Wattsup: Your above statement reflects the October 28th 1995 test at Steven's home at which Dr. Schinzinger was present. The lab report was formally written Tue, Dec 12, 1995, day of actual visit to the lab was on Sat Dec 9 1995.
Regarding your above statements, here is the report by Dr. Schinzinger
QuoteSent to LM by SM :Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2006 22:35:31 EDT
Roland Schinzinger, PhD.
29 Gilman St. Irvine, CA 92715-2703
Phone & FAX: (714) 786-7691
Second report on Energy Device
At the request of Steven Mark I agreed to thoroughly test his invention of an energy device" toroid" at my laboratory at the UCI campus.
With me was John Sanchez who will act as an observer and Mr. Mark who will operate his device for the tests.
The device is reported to develop measurable amounts of electric power beyond any known battery or storage device.
In fact the inventor claims that his device will create electric power indefinitely as long as it is permitted to cool at intervals.
Mr. Mark arrived promptly at 8:30 AM and wasted no time in permitting my examination of two units.
The first unit was roughly shaped like a large donut. It measured approximately 4.72" across with an inside diameter hole of 3" making a core width approximately 1" thick.
The unit was exactly 2" tall, resembling a "Toroid". I did not measure the weight however the unit was extremely light when held in the hand.
Mr. Mark connected the unit directly to a 100 watt 120 volt incandescent light bulb and caused the unit to operate.
It did in fact illuminate the incandescent bulb quite brightly. I measured the voltage at 137 volts D.C. exactly, (ObS). See note*
I then measured the current flowing through the wires to the bulb at a steady one-ampere, (ObS).
We noted the time at 9:06 AM.,(ObS).
We next measured the light output from the bulb with a luminescence meter and noted that it read 2.5, (ObS).
Next we measured a similar incandescent bulb placed in a socket powered from the main 120 volt (as measured) AC power provided to the laboratory.
It measured 2.4 on the luminescence meter. This can probably be accounted for because the voltage as measured from the Toroid device is 137 volts and therefore 12 volts greater, generating a slight increase in light output over the incandescent light powered by the laboratory main power supply system.
The toroid device did indeed provide the standard voltage and current necessary to provide electric lighting for a 120-volt circuit.
The inventor then asked us for another bulb, which we provided him and he set about connecting the second bulb along with the first.
The second bulb was connected in parallel to the first and did indeed light just as brightly as the first.
I measured 137 volts now across the output just as before although the load had doubled and the impedance halved (ObS).
I measured the current flowing to the two bulbs at just less then 2-amperes, (ObS).
The inventor stated that the unit would provide the two amperes at 137 volts for several hours, if not indefinitely.
We were cautioned that the unit while in operation would generate heat leading to self-destruction if not shut down and permitted to cool.
He claimed that after cooling the unit could be restarted and used again over and over.
We permitted the first unit to remain in operation and provide power for the two incandescent bulbs while we turned our attention to the second larger unit the inventor brought with him for testing.
The second unit was again toroid shaped with a large hole in the center. It was approximately 15" at the outside and 13" inside with a core thickness of approximately 1". The unit was 4" tall. The unit was not measured in weight but could be easily lifted with one hand, (ObS).
The inventor started the second larger unit in operation and cautioned myself and Mr. Sanchez not to touch the output leads from the device as they were at lethal potential. The time was 9:39 AM.
The inventor measured the output leads and told us there was 600 volts potential at several amperes.
He connected the unit to five 120 volt 100 watt incandescent light bulbs as provided by myself.
The larger second unit did indeed brightly light the five incandescent bulbs brightly. These bulbs were wired in series.
I measured the current through the wire connected to the 5-bulbs at 1.1 ampere, (ObS). I measured the voltage at 614 volts D.C., (ObS).
The inventor then connected another five 120 volt light bulbs along with the first five making a total of ten 120 volt, 100 watt incandescent light bulbs lighting at equal intensity.
I measured the light output with a luminescence meter at 2.43 each light bulb, (ObS). I did not measure the current but calculated it to be 2 amperes at 614 volts.
I asked the inventor if this was the limit of the unit and he replied, "no way."
He provided a quick blow fuse rated at 50 amperes.
With two large electrical clamps and wiring, he shorted the fuse across the output terminals of the toroid and destroyed the fuse, (ObS).
There was only a slight flickering of the ten incandescent bulbs as observed although there was a tremendous discharge of sparks from the output terminals of the toroid unit.
The inventor then gave me the fuse for examination. It was warm to the touch and smelled acrid, (ObS).
It was a large 240 volt AC air conditioner disconnect fuse and designed for severe service duty, (OsS).
The inventor's claim that the large toroid output terminals were at lethal potential was no longer in question.
The time was 11:20 AM when the inventor removed the small toroid unit from operation because of heat build up.
I examined the small toroid unit and it was indeed quite hot to the touch.
The unit had been in steady operation for exactly two hours and fourteen minutes. Noted: 2-hours and 14 minutes, (ObS).
The load of 2- amperes at 137-volts did not change through the test period.
I can personally state that I do not know of any battery or storage device of this size or weight with this capability.
The time was 12:47 when the inventor removed the large toroid device from operation.
It had been in constant operation for three hours and eight minutes
.
Noted: 3-hours and 8 minutes, (ObS).
The load of 10-amperes and the voltage of 614 volts did not change throughout the test with the exception that the voltage did began to fluctuate at 12:03 and began a slight decline to 598 volts by the end of the test.
This could be due to heating of the unit while in operation.
I can personally state that I do not know of any battery or storage device of this size or weight with this capability.
I cannot determine how many hours the toriod units could potentially operate because of our limited time available for testing.
I can however state with relative certainty I believe the tests show great potential for this Toroid technology.
December 12, 1995 Roland Schinzinger
*note: (ObS) "also observed by John Sanchez".
Wattsup: could you provide the link or information that purports to discredit this as factual event. Other letters and statements by Schinzinger seem to support it as genuine. I have extensively researched and cross-correlated this, and my belief is that it is factual.
:o I've read this report before, but it still sends a strong message the second time around.
If this report is genuine, then any claim of the devices being faked by any means, or even operating by sucking energy off the mains, seems highly unlikely to prove.
.99
Collector:
verticle wires?
horizontal loop?
Toroidal?
Please provide hypothesis with response.
The hypothesis is in Dr. Schinzingers notebook, which SM wanted desperately to get his hands on.
In an email from SM to Lindsay Wednesday, 8 March 2006 06:20
QuoteIn fact I met with an associate of his who told me that Professor Schinzinger was so impressed with my technology that he began to write his own notebook about the technology. It included his thoughts about the first demonstration and what he thought about me. He apparently wrote some ideas about how he reasoned my technology worked and those thoughts were not too far from the truth. I would like to get my hands on that notebook now.
Sincerely,SM
Probably part of the professors estate, think we could get a scan of it?
The invitation to the lab took place Dec 1, 1995
QuoteRoland Schinzinger
PhD.
29 Gilman St. Irvine, CA 92715-2703, Phone & FAX: (714) 786-7691
December 1, 1995
Dear Steven,
Thank you for dinner the other night. I truly enjoyed the experience and the ride home together. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
When you get to be my age Stephen you have learned how not to ruffle feathers. If I were in your shoes I would do exactly what we discussed.
I have talked to my associate about the problems as you see it involving the heat created by your unit when generating power. He is willing to assist us in finding a solution and he does not feel it is an insurmountable problem.
The current involved no matter how slight must be a contributing factor, regardless. We must first consider all the working principles and decide how to go about solving the problem.
I look forward to seeing you and your unit at my laboratory around eight thirty on Saturday morning.
I will have only one observer and we will be otherwise alone.
I promise you that we will give an honest evaluation of everything we observe and will attest to what we find.
If you need to talk to me first you may leave a message for me at my office at the University of California Irvine.
Sincerely,
Roland
Wattsup: This is the phrase you referenced, it was over a month prior to the lab visit.
QuotePosted by Lindsay Mannix, February 07, 2006
ROLAND SCHINZINGER PhD.
Report on Test of Energy Device
At the request of Mr. Richard Mincherton I was present on October 28th at a test demonstration of a device that its inventor claims will produce electric power without measurable energy input except as derived from the earth'' magnetic and gravitational fields. The test was conducted at the inventor's home. I was allowed to bring and use measuring instruments, but because the inventor had to leave after1 ½ hours, I was not able to conduct independent tests on my own.
Based on my observations, I can attest to the fact that the three models of the device displayed and tested on that day did indeed light up one, two and six light bulbs (each rated at 100 watt and 120 volt) respectively. This was less then the figures quoted to me before the test, but still adequate to demonstrate that the devices function in some fashion. The smallest unit produced 140 to 150 volts unloaded and 60 to 90 volts when lighting one 100-watt bulb.
The mid-sized unit produced 250 volts unloaded, and was observed producing 142 Volts at 0.5 Ampere after 30 minutes of lighting two bulbs.
The largest unit produced 798 Volts unloaded. With a six-bulb load the voltage dropped to 420 Volts.
It was difficult to determine how many hours the devices may be able to operate because the inventor ended the demonstration after 1 ½ hours.
I could not detect any time-varying magnetic field that might have provided an external energy input.
After the test the inventor cut the toroidally shaped device into segments (though not the controller box located at the center of the device). These samples consisted of an array of circumferentially arranged coils and wires grouped around a core made of a cork like substance.
October 29, 1995 Roland Schinzinger
@ION
Thanks for putting up that second report from the doc. I had never seen that one since all this time. The first thing that jumps out is that in the first report he is always mentioned "unloaded" and "loaded" voltage readings and in his second report, there is no mention of a lowering of voltage when loaded.
But he does mentioned the following that I find puzzling.
"It did in fact illuminate the incandescent bulb quite brightly. I measured the voltage at 137 volts D.C. exactly, (ObS). See note*"
If SM lit a 100 watt bulb with a true 137 volts power source, that bulb would have been blindingly bright and he would not have written "quite brightly". This does not fit but it does fit if he had measured the voltage output of the TPU when loaded if the voltage dropped again to a lower "RMS" value. Just try to plug a 100 watt bulb and look at it straight on.
Frequency also plays a huge role in light output so where a 100watt bulb will light brightly running off 120v AC at 60hz it will look different running off 137vdc at 5000hz or whatever this thing was running on!
Homopolar generators have a little issue called "back torque" that offers counterproductive resistance when a load is connected. Just what you don't want.
If the TPU is related to a homopolar generator through it's rotating aether field, it may also exhibit back torque which would cause the voltage to drop considerably when loaded - depending on several things.
Combine crossed fields, get the field precessing and this back torque is not much of a problem.
Willie Johnson Jr. rules!
Steven Mark said that the voltage drops by 1/3 when the device is loaded.
Maybe this would account for the slight vibration....maybe
QuoteIf SM lit a 100 watt bulb with a true 137 volts power source, that bulb would have been blindingly bright and he would not have written "quite brightly". This does not fit but it does fit if he had measured the voltage output of the TPU when loaded if the voltage dropped again to a lower "RMS" value. Just try to plug a 100 watt bulb and look at it straight on.
Wattsup: Unfortunately light bulbs have a PTC, a positive temperature coefficient of resistance, therefore will not look a lot brighter at 137 volts than 120 Volts.
I don't use my eyes to make these measurements. The human eye has a pupil which is equivalent to the aperture in a camera, and closes down under bright light. I use a precision light meter calibrated at the spectra of the bulb for scientific measurements. In this way I can make scientific and meaningful assesments of brightness as DR. Schinzinger did.
When I get some time I will run a series of tests on bulbs .at the voltages, frequencies etc. to demonstrate how this works.
Grumpy: Please note that the output regulation of the TPU varies with the TPU being tested. Some have excellent regulation with 2:1 load increase, while others would lose 1/3 of their voltage. There is no hard and fast rule about this. Read the reports again.
@ION
Of course I disagree with you on the bulb lighting at 137 volts versus 120 volts because I tried it with a 60 watt bulb for which I made a youtube located here;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3uICYap92g
I also tried it with a 100 watt bulb and it does the same thing but I did not see the point of making a second video.
Wattsup:
I am not jumping into the TPU thread but am just here to make a technical comment about your test clip.
For the DC test, you are rectifying a variable-output transformer and putting a 330 uF capacitor across the rectified output. The load is a 100-watt lightbulb.
In this setup, the 330 uF capacitor is actually very small relative to the light bulb load and the 60 Hz line frequency. Therefore it has almost no affect on the output voltage from the rectifier. Therefore the light bulb on the right is not being fed DC voltage, it's being fed rectified AC voltage. For all practical intents and purposes that looks exactly the same to the light bulb as AC voltage.
Your multimeter on the left is measuring 120 VAC. This of course is an RMS voltage measurement.
At the start of the test the multimeter on the right is displaying 120 VDC. In this case the multimeter is averaging out the rectified AC voltage and displaying the average DC voltage.
When you compare the two readings, the left multimeter showing 120 VAC RMS, versus the multimeter on the right showing 120 volts averaged DC of a rectified AC signal, that means that you initially were putting more power into the light bulb on the right.
This is because the average DC voltage calculation will by definition show a lower voltage than an RMS voltage calculation for an AC voltage (or equivalent rectified AC) signal.
I know that was a mouthful, but it's worth understanding this stuff. I will leave it to others in the thread to discuss this if you need more information.
MileHigh
I see the HV field (DC) pulsed (hash) hitting the 2 sets of windings on the center toroid.
This would also match up with Don Smith's back charging the battery supply.
This also also matches up with Otto's wire wrapped around itself.
You guys probably have seen this but just in case..
http://amasci.com/tesla/tesceive.html
hi to all
@watsu good old link .
how you whill charge this cap 10pf whit 1000000v if you make like that like in this link. then youget the power free POWER FROM ENY CAP. IS AWAYS BIGER THEN YOU PUT THERE . if someone get lucky toget this then hemade free enrgy ;)
like tesla . if i say the tesla hv transform is first and oldest free enrgy device SOME one whill say that is no true ...
ilike to say heloo to <@tao
Quote from: ION on 2010.09.19, 13:59:07
Grumpy: Please note that the output regulation of the TPU varies with the TPU being tested. Some have excellent regulation with 2:1 load increase, while others would lose 1/3 of their voltage. There is no hard and fast rule about this. Read the reports again.
If we guess that the unregulated units lose 1/3 of their voltage, and that this is caused be a "back torque" phenomenon, then what causes back torque in the first place?
When current is drawn from the generator you also draw from it an electrical/centripetal force causing a back torque. i.e. You take away it's ability to rotate.
Darkspeed got me thinking, he mentioned he was testing an endless coil configuration.
See the TPU picture below it looks quiet feasible to me that the winding all the way around the toroidal form is continuous, now what if the ends were connected together at the small gap opening to form a coil that has no ends and makes a continuous winding.
How would you calculate the SRF of an endless looped coil?
If there is an endless coil, it would need to be driven, i am thinking that in the 17 inch device this is done by placing one of the little center toroid's in series with the main winding so that a continuous coil is still achieved, by doing this pulses can be timed and injected using the center toroid's, with 2 center toroid's it would suggest that 2 pulses are injected.
With the other large TPU that was cut open there was no sign of the center toroid's, so he had to drive the continuous winding in a different way, when the coil is looked at you can see wires connecting to each quadrant of the TPU, i suggest that these are being used to inject inductively the drive pulses.
Just to proove my point, there are 2 different drive methods, main coil induction and small Toroidal Injection
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1944827568401901581&q=steven+mark#
Here in this video he tests the functionality of the small TPU and the 17 Inch TPU, In the small TPU he places a magnet in 2 seperate spots on the main coil(Main Coil Injection Drive Points), but with the 17 Inch he does the same test but uses each small inner toroidal (Injection Drive Point)for the 2 tests
The test can be seen for the 17Inch @ 10:43 for the left inner toroidal coil, and @ 10:37 for the right inner toroid.
and with the small TPU @ 7:57 for the right driver and @ 9:40
See snap shots also below with him holding the magnet in each of the places i have mentioned.
Quote from: Peterae on 2011.01.04, 13:31:25
If there is an endless coil, it would need to be driven, i am thinking that in the 17 inch device this is done by placing one of the little center toroid's in series with the main winding so that a continuous coil is still achieved, by doing this pulses can be timed and injected using the center toroid's, with 2 center toroid's it would suggest that 2 pulses are injected.
With the other large TPU that was cut open there was no sign of the center toroid's, so he had to drive the continuous winding in a different way, when the coil is looked at you can see wires connecting to each quadrant of the TPU, i suggest that these are being used to inject inductively the drive pulses.
Endless coils like you suggest are called "ring resonators". SM17 and the Open-TPU probably will not work as ring resonators since they have a gap or gaps between the windings. Also, ring resonators resonate at relatively high freq AC and produce a traveling wave that goes round and round. I looked at these several years ago.
A close analysis of what Tesla actually discovered will prove more fruitful.
Thanks for the input G now you've pointed me to the Hubbard Coil as an operating principle.
http://www.scribd.com/Alfred-Hubbard-Coil-Designs/d/30525407
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14070044/Free-Energy-Hubbard-Coil
EDIT: and there's the pulsed DC Output ;)
EDIT AGAIN LOL: but with an endless coil
Quote from: Peterae on 2011.01.04, 16:22:17
Thanks for the input G now you've pointed me to the Hubbard Coil as an operating principle.
http://www.scribd.com/Alfred-Hubbard-Coil-Designs/d/30525407
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14070044/Free-Energy-Hubbard-Coil
Don't waste your time with a Hubbard approach to the TPU. There is not enough info on the Hubbard Device. Hendershot is documented better, and there is not enough info for it either.
SM told everyone how the TPU was wound. You know about the delayed bifilar pulse. We know we can use separate coils to achieve the same thing.
Bring it home.
The Cause of Wind:
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/wea00/wea00187.htm
QuoteThe basic cause of all winds can be traced to contrasts in temperature.
QuoteWind is the movement of air from a region of high pressure to a region of
lower pressure. These areas of high and low pressure arise from temperature
differences caused by the sun heating the earth, which in turn heats the
atmosphere.
Temperature is "scalar", by the way. It is quite possible that changes in a scalar field could induce electron flow.
QuoteSM told everyone how the TPU was wound
I am yet to see a TPU wound the way SM suggests.
We still have not established 100% that is was even SM that said those things, for all we know they could be to focus our direction the wrong way.I find it very hard to believe that SM would let slip any form of description of operation, he would be well versed in the possible lash back.
QuoteDon't waste your time with a Hubbard approach to the TPU. There is not enough info on the Hubbard Device. Hendershot is documented better, and there is not enough info for it either.
Surely only when all the information is know on a device can it be ruled out, how can you rule something out when very little is known about it's operation.
I'm just trying to make sense of what i see in the TPU's, right now from what i see the operating principle could be anything, until we forge some tests.
Quote from: Peterae on 2011.01.04, 18:35:50
I am yet to see a TPU wound the way SM suggests.
We still have not established 100% that is was even SM that said those things, for all we know they could be to focus our direction the wrong way.I find it very hard to believe that SM would let slip any form of description of operation, he would be well versed in the possible lash back.
Surely only when all the information is know on a device can it be ruled out, how can you rule something out when very little is known about it's operation.
I'm just trying to make sense of what i see in the TPU's, right now from what i see the operating principle could be anything, until we forge some tests.
Come on Peter. You may as well say that the entire TPU legend is a ruse. You are ruling out things that were never said or implied, rather than ruling out things that were said and implied.
TC one end grounded = 1/4 wave
TC no ends grounded = 1/2 wave
TC looped = a great number of harmonics
TC looped != ring resonator
Last one i did was driven by three individual primaries of just a few turns all spaced 120deg
1st / 12th / 35th - interesting mode sum
You can find the 1st with a small pickup coil on your probe near the looped secondary, driving one primary from a sig gen, its super narrow
I was not saying this is a tpu , just a neat device to learn from. so far.
http://amasci.com/freenrg/morton1.html
QuoteIn order to concentrate the force, I set up an experiment in which the spark fired at a grounded metal target.
(http://amasci.com/freenrg/mfig2.gif)
Quote
FORCE CONCENTRATION
The spark fired through a glass tube toward a metal plate with a hole in it. From the tube came a beam of energy unlike anything I had ever heard of. Plastic and glass ionized instantly, fluorescent tubes lit up, but unlike the VandeGraaff explosion, this beam of force passed through metals.
Some PhDs theorized I may have generated X-rays but the force was so powerful that it sent bits of paper flying. This would require millinos of watts power if it were radiative pressure. Other PhDs said the field was high velocity ions, but the field showed no response to magnetic fields. One sure test of an ion beam is that it bends in a magnetic field.
BEAM ATTRACTS MATTERAs the years passed, I developed better and better methods of producing the beam. Then one day it happened - instead of repelling matter, the beam attracted matter. Even radiation pressure could not explain this phenomena. Furthermore, a lot of strange discoveries were made. When the spark went through the glass tube, the air collapsed around it.
(http://amasci.com/freenrg/mfig3.gif)
QuoteThis led me to theorize that perhaps the field of matter may collapse at relativistic velocities. SO I tried several experiments in which uncharged bodies were accelerated at low velocity. sure enough, accelerating ball and tops attract each other while decelerating bodies repel.
QuoteTHE NEW PHYSICS
Eventually I, in desperation, turned to what is called new physics. Here I began to find some answers.
Matter is not stable; it continuously breaks down into photon-like particles and fires them into other matter around it. Matter is also absorbing other particles which are fired into it. This creates standing wave fields around matter.
This field apparently collapses and expands with changes in velocity. It also creates a strange kind of radiative pressure called relativistic waves, which consist of standing waves in motion.
RELATIVISTIC WAVES
These waves may be electrical or gravitational in nature. To define the force they create one can say hv/dt = Force. But the energy necessary to create this kind of photon does not come from the input energy. It comes by virtue of the uncertainty principle which allows matter to decay into photon-like particles.
To define its effect on a gravity or electric field, one can say:
F = static force plus or minus hv/dt
Please keep in mind that relativistic waves only move when matter moves; they don't radiate in the same way light does. But they have a fantastically high frequency even at low velocity.
But relativistic waves do expand or collapse with changes in velocity and this reate of change can easily exceed the speed o flight.
Sound familiar?
That leads to Morton's thoughts on traveling induction, doesn't it?
Already, I am convinced this is the method used in a TPU.
Sorry Ds didn't mean to infer you linked this with the TPU just wanted to mention you started me thinking this way ;)
Sounds like you have been doing some fun stuff :)
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2011.01.04, 20:33:43
That leads to Morton's thoughts on traveling induction, doesn't it?
Already, I am convinced this is the method used in a TPU.
I know it is, but this is just a part of the entire process. Without the rest of it, it is not so interesting, and the rest of it is not immediately obvious.
"Relativistic waves" are also known as "matter waves" and were first predicted by Louis de Broglie. They were actually confirmed to exist in 1927 by physicists Lester Germer and Clinton Davisson. They occur when matter moves. Guess what? When you pulse a coil, all of the little electrons freak out and produce a large matter wave, i.e. radial force. (They are momentarily accellerated very rapidly, there cloud shape changes.)
De Broglie waves are not mechanical, and are produced by matter in motion. Even uncharged matter will produce these waves, so the wave is not electromagnetic.
Cutting throught he BS: You apply pulses to a coil or coils or whatever other means to produce "matter waves", then you must get them to rotate. The force field must rotate to produce a force in the direction of rotation in addition to the radial force. Get this and you have two forces but no current in the collector. However, if the force field is rotating horizontally, then you have gravity as your third orthogonal force, and current will appear in the collector (assuming you oriented it correctly). Gravity is sort of weak, but you now have an entry level TPU that will reverse operation when it is flipped. So you add your own orthogonal force field via a solenoid coil (like in the AVEC) and produce a static magnetic field. It will not work if you use static fields to produce the force in the direction of rotation, or at least I never could get that to work. The inductive effect accumulates like ES induction. This matter wave force field is much like a moving ES field but mcuh stronger. The orthogonal field causes the electrons in the collector to precess, which is required for induction. As far as I know, cold curent is produced by this force. It is essentially induction via a scalar force in a rotating system, combined with an orthogonal force. Johnson explained it well, but did not say which forces to use, as all should work. I only have Johnson's take on rotating systems, but there may be a way to do without rotation.
Well, that is a little tongue in cheak, but it will check out if you give it the necessary time.
The drive pulse parameters will be dependant on the diameter of the endless coil, and the only shape i can think of is a toroidal one.
Quote from: Peterae on 2011.01.04, 21:12:25
The drive pulse parameters will be dependant on the diameter of the endless coil, and the only shape i can think of is a toroidal one.
You cannot achieve the first two requirements with an endless coil.
1. create the force field by moving a mass very rapidly (i.e HV fast rise pulse to a coil of high impedance)
2. rotate the force field
3. apply an orthogonal field to cause electron precession in the collector (i.e induced current)
You can use EM methods with an endless coil to make a ring resonator, and you can get a traveling wave to rotate around the ring. Big deal. If it induces a current, it is EM induction and no mechanism for gain.
If you drive a toroid with pulses, the field of each pulse is created from both ends of the coil at the same time. It is like you pulsed the entire coil in one instant (which you did) and there is no rotation. WW and I discussed this recently.
You have the bifilar and the delay, why not use that?
EDIT:
(oops) I mean tto say that you cannot meet the first two requriements with an endless coil.
Didn't you wind CCU coils for your tetrahedral unit? Pulse one with HV short, fast pulses and compare the force with a static HV field.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2011.01.04, 21:05:19
De Broglie waves are not mechanical, and are produced by matter in motion. Even uncharged matter will produce these waves, so the wave is not electromagnetic.
Well, if a De Broglie wave is caused by matter in motion or a change in mass, how does the wave propagate?
HERE: http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2575892
We find this response:
Quote
In a de Broglie wave, what is it that is waving?
Shripathee, it is the "quantum potential" (potential energy per unit mass) that is waving in a de Broglie wave. And the gradient of the quantum potential is the "quantum force" that acts together with the field forces on the particle to determine its motion. The complete description of the dynamics of a quantized particle requires that the quantum force be included in the forces acting upon it. See, for example, Feynman's Lectures on Physics Volume III, Section 21-8 ("The dynamics of superconductivity"), in which Feynman solves the Schrödinger equation for the equations of motion of an electron in a superconducting fluid.
Louis de Broglie wrote a series of papers in his latter years in which he revisited his earlier work and showed that the quantum mechanical equations have a "double solution", as de Broglie described it--see, for example, "The Reinterpretation of Wave Mechanics", by Louis de Broglie, Foundations of Physics, pg 5, 1970, see also his paper, "Theory of the Double Solution", by Louis de Broglie). On one hand, the square of the amplitude of the wave function represents the probability of finding the particle in a little volume of space (an interpretation first discovered by Born after Schrödinger discovered his famous quantum mechanical equation), but on the other, the wave function also describes a concrete physical potential field (potential energy per unit mass) in space-time. In these papers, de Broglie shows that when the quantum potential acts upon a particle such as an electron, the proper rest mass of the particle and the quantum potential fluctuate together. This fluctuating mass gives rise to a fluctuating force (the quantum force) on the particle according to Newton's law F = d(Mv)/dt, where the derivative is taken also on the variable M.
It is interesting to note, by the way, that the wavelength of the de Broglie wave of a rest mass particle is analogous to the modulation envelope wavelength of a standing wave set up between two mirrors that are moving together through space. And the particle's group velocity is analogous to the velocity of the standing wave apparatus--see, for example, "Moving Standing Wave and deBroglie Type Wavelength", by Walter Roy Mellen, American Journal of Physics, Feb 1973, Volume 41, pg 290.
(In case anyone was thinking that this force, if it even exists, has no effect on electrons.)
QuoteDidn't you wind CCU coils for your tetrahedral unit? Pulse one with HV short, fast pulses and compare the force with a static HV field.
I have tried pulsing one with my nS controller, i cannot remember exactly what the results were now as it was some time ago, but not a lot happened with the lower voltage i used.
If you are sure this is the way to go then maybe i need to shelve everything right now, and fill in the weak spots.
The weak spot being my output stage, i have the nS controller, i have always wondered why no progress has been made with the saturable inductor pulse stage, maybe it's time to get this working as it seems to be the most robust output stage, FET's just seem to love dieing.
yep
Quote from: Peterae on 2011.01.04, 21:12:25
The drive pulse parameters will be dependant on the diameter of the endless coil, and the only shape i can think of is a toroidal one.
Quote from: Grumpy on 2011.01.04, 21:28:44
(oops) I mean tto say that you cannot meet the first two requriements with an endless coil.
Picture this:
A string 4' long hanging vertically.
From the highest point, move 1' down and attach an alligator clip. Do the same at the 2' and 3' locations.
String a bead at the top and let it drop. It is stopped at the 1' clip. Remove the clip. It drops to the 2' clip. Remove the 2' clip and it drops to the 3' clip.
Replace the string with a single, closed loop of wire.
In general, a material cannot polarize instantaneously in response to an applied field.It is also true that in general, a material will not loose polarization in response to the removal of an applied field.
Even Coulomb knew this.
Replace the clips with something to create a localized, timed and controlled decrease in permittivity at the loop quadrants. (think about: Theories of passive electronic time-delay devices)
Replace the bead with an applied potential with length of t. It doesn't matter what t is in relation to the circumference of the loop. In theory, the applied potential could be DC continuous current when everything is timed correctly. (furnace fuel its own fire)
Replace gravity with the precession that will happen with properly timed initial-on, pulse rate-on or cyclic-on and clip removal/application. One loop will only provide one end of the dipole or potential tap for loads.
This is why I say the controls are only controls, not drivers or exciters. Somewhere in this saga's history was mention of the 'stopping' being important.
I don't think a single loop can be of any use except to demonstrate the above idea and show where a loop of very small circumference can be made to have a very high electromagnetic, sonic and vibrational/mechanical Q at the same frequency.
This also makes it possible to meet the first two requirements from Grumpy.
Look at the similarities between the small toroids and the containing TPU. Strip those quadrants of lamp cord outer wrap sections from the same TPU. What is left? A larger version of the small toroid times three, one stacked upon the other.
Those quadrants of lamp cord can't be drive coils, like a motor. I think they are better described as 'control coils' or 'controlled pinch coils' or 'controlled clap coils'
P.S.
The right 'combination of frequencies' that we could never find... What would be more difficult than to understand the needed frequencies were each a single frequency in different mediums and different types of waves :D
I don't see how a closed collector can work.
I am sure the closed loop is not the collector.
Quote from: WaveWatcher on 2011.01.05, 19:58:46
I am sure the closed loop is not the collector.
Ok. I misunderstood what you were saying.
Hi,
The most simple closed loop is a folded dipole. It contains all points of quadrature especially in the form of a square. Add positioned near to this another larger (off tune) by a small factor .1 or so wavelengths and the impedance drops dramatically.
I wonder what this creates if a further larger loop is placed on the other side of the central loop. By adding one the directional characteristics give some gain over a standard dipole regarding transmission, two however require some thought. I would expect the VSWR to be high and this is supposed to be a good thing. Who or where made this point escapes me at present.
thoughts.
Steve.
Well looks like i got you thinking then ;)
I shall try to concentrate on a saturable inductor stage, either way i need to be able to drive better.
For me avalanche transistors was pretty easy. They get cumbersome at higher voltages (long series stacks). I'm trying to find some higher voltage ones now.
Quote from: szaxx on 2011.01.05, 21:15:03
Hi,
The most simple closed loop is a folded dipole. It contains all points of quadrature especially in the form of a square. Add positioned near to this another larger (off tune) by a small factor .1 or so wavelengths and the impedance drops dramatically.
I wonder what this creates if a further larger loop is placed on the other side of the central loop. By adding one the directional characteristics give some gain over a standard dipole regarding transmission, two however require some thought. I would expect the VSWR to be high and this is supposed to be a good thing. Who or where made this point escapes me at present.
thoughts.
Steve.
Directional Arrays are thus fabricated.
The "loops" which are precisely spaced can exist in several
forms; circular, rectangular, square, etc.
Each "loop" which is some critical distance from the driven
element will both absorb and re-radiate energy to form a
complex directed beam pattern at any given frequency.
The individual loops will function as either "directors" or
"reflectors" as determined by their dimensions and their
spacings from the driven element and each other.
The VSWR (and also input impedance) may be high or low
depending upon how the standing wave patterns develop
at various frequencies.
The Array will, by reciprocity, become an efficient receiver
of energy as well.
Hi,
@ Dumped, Im aware of these, it was the double reflector part increasing the voltage at the source. I had a thought (wave superposition) but thinking more on it the rotational aspect is thrown to the wind as well as the phase lag. It would generate multiple pulses in the loop progressively upsetting the balance and the harmonics require a non linear aspect adding. The good part is it could be fed from another small loop and pulse excited.
I guess you have a callsign too. ;)
Quote from: szaxx on 2011.01.06, 01:19:40
...
I guess you have a callsign too. ;)
No, I'm not active any longer. I was the MARS station (N0EFA) operator/tech
while at Naval Advisory Group Cat Lo RVN back in '72-'73. I still listen occasionally
though.
Spent time at numerous radio communications facilities west coast and throughout
Asia (ashore and afloat) and in the antenna fields. Almost ancient history now.
Quote...it was the double reflector part increasing the voltage at the source. I had a thought (wave superposition) but thinking more on it the rotational aspect is thrown to the wind as well as the phase lag. It would generate multiple pulses in the loop progressively upsetting the balance and the harmonics require a non linear aspect adding. The good part is it could be fed from another small loop and pulse excited.
Diodes to introduce the non-linearity?
Just an FYI:
I consider the complete TPU to be what SM called his 'collector'.
What the TPU research community commonly calls 'collectors' I call 'horizontal control coils'. I tend to keep that to myself while going with the flow during most discussions.
szaxx,
Take two loop elements of the same size. Feed both with the same signal, except delay the signal to one.
Place a pickup loop between them (1 half the wire length or less or 1 half the diameter or less).
That pickup loop will see an elliptical wave (rotation around the Z axis). The spacing between the two driven loops dictates the pitch of the elliptical wave. That part is not hard at all.
The hard part is creating the second rotation around the conductor of the pickup loop. Beyond that, I assume the two rotations must be synced in some way.
Between the two rotations you have the same magnetic fields around that pickup loop conductor as if it already had a current flowing through it. I also assume that an A field is also needed going the opposite direction of intended current flow.
With the right magnetic and A field orientation and placement current must be generated in that 'pickup loop'.
After all, all other methods of induction are reciprocal, aren't they?
My chances of being correct are just as good as anyone because we still don't have physical understanding of those electromechanical systems where we cannot neglect the mutual interaction between electric charges and currents, and the electromagnetic field emitted by them. Nor, do we have an understanding of how the correct device will react when subjected to such a combination of electromagnetic fields.
I think an SM collector is one of those systems.
In spite of a long history of efforts, there is still no generally accepted classical equation of motion for charged particles, as well as no pertinent experimental data. With this fact we throw computation of the A field out. Why? Because dominant theories suggest the A field has no effect except to allow for propagation in a vacuum?
IMO - Simple arrogance and idiocy.
Food for thought....
When you have DC continuous current going through single conductor your compass will point perpendicular to that conductor. Try to find separate North and South poles with that compass. You can't because that field is radial.
Just an FYI:
DE BROGLIE'S PERPETUAL MOTION
http://users.scnet.rs/~mrp/chapter27.html
Quote from: wings on 2011.01.06, 08:32:00
Just an FYI:
DE BROGLIE'S PERPETUAL MOTION
http://users.scnet.rs/~mrp/chapter27.html
I know it and love it. De Broglie was an undercover radical. :)
hi to alll
I see here some good theory of ,ion.
i like the first page of this thear. for the concept of two torid small coneckt each beatve. <,
ION you are raid...... i like to say whit this two frek. or two waves is dont mathere how whill call that .. and steven says two frek come togethere and superior effckt came up there . in visual we may imagen what whill hapend if we have two cars runing whit the same speed but in oposte direction what is hapend when hit is dont mather what speed or frek . whill hit this two frek is important what is hapend there like explosion . i ask you all here how is in this theatre.. what whil be what kind of voltage whill be came up there in the out coil .maybe something like maybe when steven sys dc. whit ac voltage or .. ac whit dc is posible i thing that one frek is going left to right . athere frek right to left and these two frek has diferent roads like difernt way of traveling but when these two whill be mithing in one pllace ther then this opsite direcktion whill all ways give resultates of one direction is dont mathere " if the two frekefency traveling in oposite each hit every time in to this two frek oposite whill give one direction each kick or each hit whill give resolt of same direction................................. IMAGEN .. NUCLEAR EXPLOSION OR ATHER SMALL EXPLSION WHEN BOMB EXPLODE AND HIT TO GROUND YOU WHILL SEE THAT DIRECTIONAL IS ALL WAYS HAS THE SAME DIRECTION IS VERY DIFICOLT to make elktromagnet waves to hit and give you one way directions ist
|
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>|<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
|
@grumy do you remeber of old story of our forum when some one say about two transformers coneckt together ....
the first tpu has one set of signal wires that I can see and so does the large tpu .. so does that mean just one frequency .. ?
Figure 1 shows that the large tpu is possibly a coil,the gap has a magnetic
field,indicating its a giant coil made to look like a giant torroid. Figure Red wire, shows that the red wire connects to one electrolytic capacitor,its hard to see if the caps are connected together however keep in mind
800 volts plus are placed on one cap.I used CHAT GPT to get an idea what electrolytic capacitors
you could get in 1998.Chat GPT was asked ,what value of electrolytic capacitors were available in 1998.
Practical upper limit (for that era)
Around 330–470 µF at 450 V was about the realistic ceiling for widely available catalog parts
Larger values existed but were:
Very bulky (large snap-in cans)
Expensive
Mostly used in industrial or specialized equipment
What you wouldn't typically see in 1998
450 V parts in the thousands of µF (like 1000 µF+) were essentially impractical with aluminum electrolytics at the time
Designers would instead:
Use multiple capacitors in parallel, or
Use different supply topologies
Typical real-world examples (1990s gear)
CRT monitor PSU: 100–220 µF / 400–450 V
ATX power supplies (late 90s): 200–330 µF / 200 V (doubled) or 120–220 µF / 400–450V
Audio amplifiers: 220–330 µF / 450 V (tube gear)
Bottom line:
In 1998, the practical, commonly available range for 450 V electrolytics was roughly:
10 µF to ~330 µF (with 470 µF at the high end but less common)
If you're trying to match or replace a part from that era, staying within that range will reflect what designers realistically had on hand.
The working voltage was 450v,your applying 800v plus,way beyond the 450v,
the solution you connect two caps in series,then the working volts are 900vdc,
this is the reason for the 2 capacitors,there are also resistors across the caps to balance the
voltage,and discharge the caps when not in use.Fig possible output circuit
of tpu,in my opinion,the tpu coil forms a transformer,with an air core,and a 1:1 ratio when giant current pulses are generated in the primary,the energy is
transferred by induction to the secondary,then thru a diode that charges caps.
Figure CLF POWER shows that this system will work,I generated high current pulses fed them to a air core transformer and lite a CFL.
Figure magnetic field of torroid,shows that the field extends across the torroid.Figure animated gif shows magnetic field of torroid with iron powder and steel bbs.Why does the
torroids have white wires,in my opinion its to expose the wire to the
magnetic field.Figures white wire 1 and 2 show what works and what doesn't
work.There are other factors that need to be figured out before a replication
can be attempted.