Tesla coil + Blocking-oscillator as driver ("Slayer device") - testing Pin, Pout

[ion]

You are correct, the cheap calculator I used did not support 100, 000,000 as an input and left off a zero making it 10,000,000.

Redoing it with the calculator on the computer produces the right value of 0.0212 Watts.

On the other hand, I think your efficiency number is wrong, should be 3.5% (mpy COP x 100%)

Proper probing technique across your CSR will yield better readings on the scope. The long ground can act as a inductor and exaggerate the signal.

These peak to peak amps must also be divided by 2.8 to get RMS amps.

If you wish you can build your own divider with 10 megohm or 1 megohm string of resistors to see if more loading produces more current flow and a better impedance match.

When you are not drawing off power with a matched load, the high voltage rises because of the high "Q" of the resonant secondary. This radiates into space as an EM wave and can ionize the gas in fluorescent tubes in the vicinity.

When loaded, the "Q" will drop drastically and power will transfer to the load instead of being radiated.

[Itsu]

On the other hand, I think your efficiency number is wrong, should be 3.5% (mpy COP x 100%)

Right,       i have corrected it in my original post.


So we are back to age old problem of harvesting power from a coil in resonance without destroying the resonance.

Regards Itsu

[ion]

Right,       i have corrected it in my original post.


So we are back to age old problem of harvesting power from a coil in resonance without destroying the resonance.

Regards Itsu

Yes, many have been pondering this question before us.

Here is a good site that explains the scope ground clip problem and solutions.

http://www.williamson-labs.com/scope-probes.htm

Often I just use an extra BNC cable soldered directly and close to the body of my CSR, and don't use the probe.

[Itsu]

OK,  i redid my input current measurements using a modified probe.
Now the input current (voltage across the 0.1 Ohm resistor) went from 220mV p2p to 130mV p2p.

This with the PS input voltage set to 30V.
When i put the PS voltage to 25V, the current signal lowered to about 122mV p2p (and more stable).

I did this to compare with a battery source instead of the ps, and it turns out that the current when feeded from a 25V battery source is much more stable and lower (84mV p2p).

Finally i hooked up the HV probe and measured still 2960V (input went to 54mV across the 0.1Ohm csr, meaning 0.54A p2p at 25.55V).

Looks like that my PS is influenced by the HV/HF or its an impedance problem there too.


Crunching the numbers:

Irms is 0.54A / 2.8 = 0.19A
So input = 0.19 * 25.55 = 4.85W


2960V / 2.8 = 1057.14V
Output power across my 100MOhm probe = 1057.14^2 / 100M = 0.011 = 11mW.

Cop = Pout / Pin or 0.011 / 4.85 = 0.022 or 2.2%   

Video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpFuBG3H0OE&feature=youtu.be

Regards Itsu

[ion]

Hi Itsu

Your tests are nothing to be discouraged about. You have demonstrated good science and lab practice.

What were you expecting from this circuit configuration?

You cannot expect a lot of efficiency from a "class A" oscillator. While circuits like this work to some degree, they are nowhere near the efficiency they could be, as they are not really "designed", more like accidental configurations that "sorta work... somewhat".

I'm sure Dumped and Ex would agree, being "radio men" they know what a class A oscillator is in terms of efficiency vs. class C .

Is your intention to build a very efficient Tesla Coil? Much has been written on that subject.

Your power supply can be stiffened up for HF with a low esr cap on the output. But some power supplies might not like that and  become unstable (might turn into oscillators)!

Battery impedance is typically very low, milli-ohm range even at HF, unless it is sulphated.

Maybe you could build a  tuned circuit with load resistor and place it near your coil to see how much power you could absorb. Then try another and see if the first reduces and so on.

[PhysicsProf]

   Thanks.  I'm pursuing some other things right now, but I wanted to call your attention to this vid, related to Tesla coils.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml6cedjSt70

Note the use of a second tesla-coil as a receiver.  I wonder if this would facilitate some output power measurements, by bringing the output voltage down.  Of course, there would be expected losses...

[PhysicsProf]

 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml6cedjSt70

Note the use of a second tesla-coil as a receiver.  I wonder if this would facilitate some output power measurements, by bringing the output voltage down.  Of course, there would be expected losses...

Tesla coils are clearly not just transformers.  The 2nd tesla steps DOWN the voltage, and acquires its energy from the "field" of the first.  What is the nature of this field that the 2nd tesla taps into?  What is the efficiency of this process?

With my Tesla set-up shown before, and using a simple light-calorimeter, I find 40 Lux from the following conditions:

1.  Mains through a variac, then measuring AC amps with my multimeter:
53.2VAC  0.33mA   so 18mW

2.  Tesla coil  measuring DC amps with my multimeter:
26.1VDC  3.55mA   so 93mW lighting the SAME LED lamp  wirelessly and same light-tube-calorimeter

Using matching light outputs from the same bulb;
I realize this is a rather crude measurement, but with that caveat:
(2)/(1) eff ~ 18mW/93mW ~ 19%.

[ion]

From PhysicsProf:

Tesla coils are clearly not just transformers.  The 2nd tesla steps DOWN the voltage, and acquires its energy from the "field" of the first.  What is the nature of this field that the 2nd tesla taps into?  What is the efficiency of this process?

I would have to respectfully state that IMHO they are air core high frequency, high voltage transformers. The normally unterminated top terminal works best when fed into a capacitive globe. In this manner it creates an HF oscillating electrostatic field that can couple through the capacitance of the air to a similar coil /globe (other capacitor plate) that completes the link  to the "step down" transformer.

The efficiency of the process can be improved and determined easily and with simple test methods as you would for any capacitively coupled pair of step up / step down transformers.

Unterminated, the top terminal forms a corona discharge in the form of streamers and local ionization of the air, and if not properly terminated into an antenna of the correct wavelength, it wastes its energy in this manner. Big impedance mismatch!

If you utilize the antenna termination method, you convert the energy into EM waves, which can travel great distances and be received by a similar setup with a similar tuned antenna. Of course, to do this most efficiently it is required that one has knowledge of  proper matching to the impedance of space and the elimination of standing waves. This is the essence of radio (EM) wave transmission and radio art.

I built and studied my first few Tesla coils at the age of 10 in 1956. Some used spark gaps, others used type 807 vacuum tubes in push pull designs. Yes, we lit fluorescent tubes and neons at a distance. It was fascinating.

Back then Tesla had not yet been transformed into an internet god with all the hype and urban legend that normally accrues to such deification.

I constructed a few others to demonstrate to my son in the early 80's. We found nothing strange and no anomalies, all easily accounted for by conventional RF theory and practice.

But people have always been fascinated with sparks and the bigger sparks the more effective stage magic. As Timothy Leary said "you've got to dazzle their eyeballs". Look up what this phrase was used in reference to for a fuller understanding of the nature of humans.

[Itsu]

ION,

Thanks for this solid "down to earth" explanation, so there is magic, but only for the eyes.

Do you have any area which you think might be worth investigating in for extracting extra energy?

Regards Itsu

[ion]

ION,

Thanks for this solid "down to earth" explanation, so there is magic, but only for the eyes.

Do you have any area which you think might be worth investigating in for extracting extra energy?

Regards Itsu

If it was real, the Steve Mark device is noteworthy. This is the only unit of late that still puzzles me After 7 years of scrutinizing research down to fine details, timelines, letters, videos examining methods of possible hoax, it remains a mystery.

The letter exchanges between the reputable Professor Schinzinger and Mr. Mark are to me the most revealing in the veracity of the device. IMHO, Much else is conjecture or misinfo.

Mr. Mark alluded to a new method of getting electron flow in a conductor in one of the video's but the audio of the explanation has been cut out. He said essentially the effect is well known in electrical art, he is using it in a different way.

There are others that have faded out of history, such as Hubbard, Hendershot, Moray, Coler, Amman, and too little information is available for possible replication except perhaps for Hendershot and Coler.

I discount most of the mysticism and deification that now surrounds Tesla, having, as I said earlier, seen his persona been magically transformed over the last few decades by internet hype. There are a few well researched biographies around, the rest is pulp fiction and hyperbole.

The Kapadnaze device is surrounded with too many strings attached, and some of his prior work appears to be investor scams that he abandoned. Con men rarely change their MO. Still it is interesting.

For now I'll put my money on Mark's TPU and Spheric's AVEC. These are the rocks I look under. I urge you to read the SM threads on this forum and form your own opinion.

Bear in mind that the whole SM saga never made it to the internet and died out in 1997 ( possibly after the gov't slapdown). It resurfaced accidentally in 2006 with an internet post of a found video that was clearly made so that the inventor could document his work. Others were found and posted. The videos were never used as sales tools as they were too poorly done, with none of the marketing hype that you would have expected.

I have many other thoughts on this which I have shared in the threads on SM's device.

You asked for an opinion, that is it. Others will disagree, they are entitled to theirs.

[PhysicsProf]

Here's another vid of a BO + Tesla coil from last month:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqk97SR6hpg

He has eliminated the diodes, runs ~ 4W, claims the fluorescent tube is nearly full brightness, but did not measure that.

[PhysicsProf]

So I removed the two diodes from my circuit; could not see a noticeable difference in brightness of the LED lamp -- stayed at 45 lux in my light-calorimeter.

Today I rec'd via priority mail a dual-Tesla-coil kit from Gary Bluer --

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=151012736654&ssPageName=ADME:L:OC:US:3160

Hooked up in a couple of minutes -- it ran immediately - no problems.  I recommend this one, also it supports Gary.

[PhysicsProf]

I'm wrapping up my current set of experiments on the BO +  Tesla coil.  Moving on to the Gegene finally.
I have made measurements, with my set-up and with Gary Bluer's.  In summary, did not find evidence for ou in anything I tried. 

BUT -- I did find an empirical difference between bifilar-wound and straight-wound coils, as shown in this vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXcH05MLbxM&feature=youtu.be

Light output tests,  using two different coils wound on identical nails, placed one at a time as pick-up from my Tesla coil.  One would bifilar, one would straight, both same wire same # turns , 29 turns.  The bifilar wound coil repeatably gives higher yield (light output in lux) than the straight-unifilar-wound coil.

[TinMan]

As this slayer exciter was made for this thread,i will post this video here aswell as on the aether vortex thread.This is my first slayer exciter,and as you can see-it is quite hungry on power input. But it was a fun build,and i have learned what primary coil wont work on this system lol. I wont bother with P/in and P/out measurement's,as i already know it's very power hungry-but it works as it should.

There is another experiment taking part in the video,and i am interested in how you think we are getting the results we are getting???.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrHCjRCzGgg

[PhysicsProf]

Tinman -- good stuff.  Glad to see your coil fired up with the other primary -- things are sensitive here; resonance I think.

  Now that is very interesting that you show clearly that you get DC output using the neons.  You also say that there are "two forms of energy" in the field around the coil.  I hope you will explain this statement and how you rectify the output with the neons!  I would be very interested in your explanation.

PS -- is there another forum where you discuss this vid?  You said the electrolytic cap achieved 7.4V IIRC -- but don't you intend to say 0.074V?