|
Hi Wattsup,
Yes, the boom bust cycle of excitement and dismay are part of doing this sort of research, or I guess, doing any sort of research.
I've only found a couple of induction coil patents that use the 'caduceus' winding. I'm sure I will find an older patent where the effect of this winding on the interwinding capacitance, and the ease of lead out, is discussed. That doesn't preclude any sort of high strangeness effects of course.
There are two Cook galvanic battery patents. I assumed everyone had them, for some reason. Here's the other one.
Note the caduceus coil winding on the central post :-)
I'm always interested to see more experiments with caduceus coils. About 20 years ago now, a colleague at the time and I did some experiments with a caduceus coil wound around a double terminated quartz crystal aligned vertically inside a Cheops Pyramid-shaped orgone accumulator. Stimulating the caduceus coil with low level AC didn't seem to do anything, until he touched the top of the pyramid one day and got a fat blue spark. We estimated >2 kV from the color and length. We were never able to get it to happen again, and believe me, we tried.
I think without a theory of operation it is a shot in the dark to try to figure out what to do next with the Cook coil. My suggestion would be to follow the historical record, such as it is. Not to restate the obvious, but if there are weird effects in the Cook coils it is because of their magnetic (and possibly electric) near fields, which to some extent are due to the fact that the cores are open magnetic circuited. They don't appear in the closed form which took dominance in the early 1920's. At that point, the relation to the Cook or Slaughter coils ends.
Following that history, and the observations of effects in the order that they occurred, ake two independent induction coils, disconnected from each other, and run both of them from separate source at same frequency in close proximity, both in phase and out of phase from each other. Then look for negative resistance or amplification phenomena. The magnetic and electric circuits in the coils have different time frames, so it would be very surprising if you did not see any of these kinds of effects.
As far as pre-magnetization, I recently found more evidence that the Hubbard central core was permanently magnetized after the windings were on. I also discussed the Coutier patent, similar to Hubbard in coil geometry, which saturates the central core. In both of those devices, the pre-magnetization or saturation tends to prevent flux from returning to the central core and forces it to return through adjacent secondaries. This technique uses the secondary flux for power, as Matt Watts' Lenz Lock Transformer and some other gadgets.
I'm guessing, but I suspect in the case of the Cook coil, you WANT the full open magnetic circuit to have as low reluctance as possible, so you would not magnetize it. But I could be wrong, and putting a third, choked, DC saturation winding around both Cook cores would allow for some interesting experiments, and a possible control technique if the L of the cores needs to be reduced for some reason.
Who's the manufacturer on your #16 wire? usually the chemical specs for the plastic coatings will be somewhere, and then that material's e can be found. I think the C of the coils is important, but not necessarily to remove it but to control it. It allows the magnetic energy to be dumped back and forth as in an LCL resonant transfer circuit.
I'm not sure how Leedskalin used metal discs.
There are indeed a lot of uses for conductive plates, rings or other elements in these old induction coil patents. The attached patent is interesting because it claims an increased output when a "false secondary" is included in the induction coil, and even more output when a condenser is put across this open circuited secondary. This is sort of be the idealized version of a disc with a slot in it, but he doesn't seem to be indicating this extra winding to prevent eddy currents, which would have been old hat by then, but for increasing efficiency. The open circuited version obviously doesn't have any real magnetic effect-- no current!-- but there would be a capacitance, and electric polarization along the open circuit wire. I'm not sure if all this has any relationship to the Cook setup or not. But it does give me an idea for controlling your coil capacitance, if it becomes necessary.
I think the rheostats of that time couldn't be concealed under the screw, and these are just connection points, looking just like those on the commercial models. They were called rheotomes and sat in front of the coil, as they probably did in Cook's case. These are often just assumed in these patents, and wouldn't necessarily be included in a patent referring to the geometry or winding.
orthofield
|
Author
Topic: Daniel McFarland Cook Generator (Read 239165 times)
