PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2021-10-19, 19:20:58
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Anomalous voltage increase  (Read 22547 times)

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3482
tExB=qr
since this is jsut a test for an "indication" of a change, any size should do.

You could try pumping out a container and making a simple one.  The vac caps that I have a concentric cofiguration rather than plate so the sirection of the gradient between the plates is different.
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3482
tExB=qr
if a magnetic field compresses space then I would think that the permittivity of a vacuum cap would change and this would be measured as a cange in capacitance

But what if the magnetic field only changes the permittivity of space while the magnetic field is changing?
   
Group: Guest
it was never my intention to start a discussion.
i just wanted to show Grumpy the circuit.

I realize now that i made a big mistake by posting and i appologize for that.

« Last Edit: 2010-09-24, 04:42:54 by Microcontroller »
   
Group: Guest
Microcontroller:

You made your first posting, that's great.  Honestly I can't really decipher the process that you are describing.  You show two diagrams and you description of what's going on is very limited and you don't indicate what diagram you are talking about.

However,  let's just talk about dumping a charged capacitor into a coil or vice-versa using a diode.  Let's assume that no energy is lost in the diode to make it simpler.

The energy in an inductor is 1/2*L*i-squared.

The energy in a capacitor is 1/2*C*v-squared

Since the energy is going to be the same in both cases, you can say:

1/2*L*i-squared = 1/2*C*v-squared

So if you rearrange the equation for the voltage on the capacitor you get:

v = sqrt(L*i-squared/C)

So so if the inductor discharges into the capacitor, then the smaller the cap, the higher the voltage you can get across the cap.

This should not be confused with the very high voltage spike you can get when you open-circuit an inductor that has current flowing through it.  In fact, if you have a large capacitor, then the same coil that can produce a very high voltage when you open-circuit it might only charge the large capacitor to 0.1 volts.  There will be no spike to speak of, just a small bump in the large capacitor's voltage.

MileHigh
   
Group: Guest
Microcontroller:

Just for fun, I will tell you what will happen with your first diagram.  I saw your comments in the chat so I figure your description in the posting was about the first diagram.

I assume that when you close S1 that current will flow from C1 through D1 into L1.

Let's also assume that the diodes are ideal for the fun of it.

So you start with C1 charged up with voltage.  In this case if you close S1 and keep it closed for a long time, then you will end up with C1 charged up again, but the voltage on C1 will be the opposite polarity.  So you end up reversing the voltage on C1.  That's it, the circuit will do nothing after this if you open and close S1.

Same initial setup again, but this time let's assume that you open S1 the moment the voltage across C1 is zero.  In this case let's pretend that the diodes are a bit more like real diodes.  So the moment you open the switch L1 will generate super-high voltage that's trying to push its way through C2 and D2.  Let's assume that you "blow up" D2 and it makes a firecracker noise.  You end up with something like C2 at about half the voltage of C1 and a blown D2 diode.  Same ending for S1, the circuit will do nothing after this if you open and close S1.

That's the way the cookie crumbles!

MileHigh
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3541
It's turtles all the way down
I think perhaps this thread was misnamed from the beginning. There are no anomalies being discussed anywhere in the thread. There are attempts at optimizing inductive switching circuits, and those skilled in the art are certainly advanced at squeezing the last bit of efficiency from such circuits using newer topologies and such things as active snubbing, synchronous rectification etc. etc. to name just a few.

But we see none of that here. There is no anomaly in a boost converter. It is well defined technology.

The thread started with the effects of magnets placed on a switched inductor. There were no quantitative measurements, just a claim that it (the voltage) was higher with one configuration vs. an alternate configuration.

Magnetically biased inductors are also well known and used extensively in video monitors having CRT's. There are numerous patents and literature regarding MBI's. It has been well studied.

 Still no anomaly.

a·nom·a·ly  (-nm-l)
n. pl. a·nom·a·lies
1. Deviation or departure from the normal or common order, form, or rule.
2. One that is peculiar, irregular, abnormal, or difficult to classify:


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

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3482
tExB=qr
Unlike others, I'm jacked into the Matrix...LOL!

This is a lesson in simplicity, not some textbook lesson, or new discovery.

This method requires time to build up to a high voltage, a number of pulses per unit time.

you might switch the low voltage at a high freq and then switch the HV at a lower rate

Remember we are after voltage not power.

if the hv ckt is of high impedance and the pulse fast, very little current flows, you get your pulse effect, and your hv cap charges right back up.

flyback supply,a napkin and shoestring...

did you loop back to tell the low voltage when to turn off?

need a switch that requires very little current like an overvoltage type

free-running avalanche diodes...hmm 1n4007 av at about 1450v  lower for the rest of that series down to a few 100v's for 1n4001's.  you could use different one for different settings.  Very robust if current is low - and small.  Avalanching transistors of the TPU times (90's) could do 200v give or take, some to 500v - again - small and robust of current is low.

Triggering requires control and energy, don't need it if you are always triggering the same rate - find the rate - carve it in ckts





   
Group: Guest
Well I know that I am usually out of sorts and I am very textbook.  My view is that if you look at a very simple circuit the the best case scenario would be for everybody in the group on the thread to understand it - really understand it.  That is "foundation building" and hopefully you can build from that.  I am nearly 100% confident that my description of how the now-gone first Microcontroller circuit works was correct.  Too bad Microcontroller seemed to take offense.  You certainly have to worry about the timing of the opening of the switch.

Somewhere I wrote down on my computer the freebie Spice simulation software that Poynt uses.  As you know I am just dabbling here and sticking my nose in.  But as a suggestion for the people investigating the AVEC/TPU stuff, it would be great if you passed around some pSpice models and played with them.

I agree with Ion that when you look at small circuits there are no anomalies.  And at the same time there are limits to what you can visualize in your head.  Even for Microcontroller's remaining second circuit it gets hard to visualize exactly how it works because of the transformer coupling and all that.  pSpice would be great for that example.  Then when you look at it run in pSpice that tends to makes things 'click' in your brain too and then you can "keep navigating" further.

MileHigh
   

Group: Tinkerer
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3482
tExB=qr
Mission accomplished.

Seek truth not faults and you will be better for it.

   
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2021-10-19, 19:20:58