PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2021-10-22, 10:18:54
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 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Author Topic: Investigating "anomalies" in Bifilar coils  (Read 155508 times)
Group: Tech Wizard
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 928
That's a good idea. I think the first thing to do would be to test whether the output will still work if the load resistor is removed and the voltage doubler part of the circuit is connected across L2 instead, still using the FG as input oscillator. That part can be tested pretty easily, probably. I've got plenty of 1n34a and 1n60 diodes hiding in my stash (also some small Schottkys in there too I think).

Sounds good.  And then loading the output of the voltage doubler by some resistors, it could be explored how much power is "available" there and how it may reflect back to the input.  This latter needs a series current sensing resistor at the input though.

Gyula
   
Group: Guest
Gyula's Doubler, ready for testing:

   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
To further complicate the number of variables, you could also treat the "pancakes" in the "coil sandwich" as elements of a capacitor compression type trimmer.....who knows how changing the spacing slightly between the sandwich layers will affect the output?

And while were at it, how do we know what type of spiral would give better results? Would varying the pitch of the spiral tune the layer to layer capacitance in a positive way? There are numerous spiral types.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral

Regards
ION,

When the flat pancake coils are separated by a dielectric such as polycarbonate (K~4) there will be characteristic changes to the overall performance that I have not totally understood yet.  I have assembled asymmetrical 3 coil devices wherein only one dielectric separator was inserted or two were inserted of different thicknesses.  Spirals would add yet another variable to the mix !!

Pm
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Just to be sure I'm not making some silly error in connections, I've enlarged the connection area of my test setup. Could you all please take a close look and see if I've done anything wrong with the connections? Comments and questions appreciated.

TK,

Your connections are correct as far as I can see.

Pm
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4409


Buy me some coffee
ION,

When the flat pancake coils are separated by a dielectric such as polycarbonate (K~4) there will be characteristic changes to the overall performance that I have not totally understood yet.  I have assembled asymmetrical 3 coil devices wherein only one dielectric separator was inserted or two were inserted of different thicknesses.  Spirals would add yet another variable to the mix !!

Pm

Because polycarb holds a static charge very well.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   

Group: Elite Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4409


Buy me some coffee
Because polycarb holds a static charge very well.


Brad

TK

Just out of curiosity ,can you re-do you P/in P/out measurements ,with  R2 in the position of the circuit  below.


Brad


---------------------------
Never let your schooling get in the way of your education.
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3541
It's turtles all the way down
Gyula's approach looks promising, I like the idea of the tuned secondary, however I question the need for the linear regulator LM317, unless it is just for runaway protection. O0 Also a push pull Mazili type oscillator with resonant secondary may prove to be more efficient.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May I submit some ideas for looping the device that keeps it in the AC domain rather than all the losses of the AC to DC then DC to AC techniques. Phase correction network is to be determined but should not be difficult.

I have included only three elementary phase compensation schemes, however the number of possible arrangements of passive devices for the network is very large.

With such an approach, the COP need not be very high, as L's and C's of high quality can provide very low insertion loss for the phase correction.

« Last Edit: 2017-05-02, 14:45:11 by ION »


---------------------------
"Secrecy, secret societies and secret groups have always been repugnant to a free and open society"......John F Kennedy
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Now... since cos(phase angle) tends rapidly towards zero as (phase angle) approaches + or - 90 degrees.... and one can apparently "dial in" pretty much any phase angle by selecting frequency.... what does this mean? Can you arbitrarily set your COP simply by selecting a frequency that gives a phase angle approaching 90 degrees? What if I set a frequency that gives exactly -90 degrees of phase shift? Does this mean input power goes to zero and COP goes to infinity?

Furthermore, what accounts for my changed results now that I am using a lower resistance and non-inductive resistors for R1? Is the fact that it is much harder to get COP > 1 due to lower resistance, or lower inductance, or both? If stray or parasitic inductance is responsible for the COP > 1 effect.... well, assuming the OU is real, what's the problem? Maybe "realni OU" requires this added inductance, stray or parasitic or deliberately introduced. Or... assuming the OU is not real... then can _all_ of our COP>1 results be attributed one way or another to stray or parasitic inductances introduced by even the best probing methods, or coil layout, or other factors we haven't considered?


"They are just questions, Leon...."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umc9ezAyJv0

TK,

OK, from these results we can begin to arrive at some answers.  First your load value is lower than I have used in my designs but also you, TM, and Itsu are using coils with a higher capacitance values with lower L/C ratios than anything I've tested.  I would also guess that your original film load resistor pack had enough inductance to affect the results but perhaps not.  Profiling that load resistor would answer that question.

I have never tested pancake coil sandwich transformers with the low L/C you have so I'm not really qualified to say however, it appears you are reaching the point of higher overall Q with your configuration.  This is evident by the frequency sensitivity and that your phase shift is approaching or equaling 90 degrees.  Do not be surprised if you experience a >90 degree phase shift and yes you can cross over into a negative input power region.

When you get to this point, it now becomes very important to measure over a complete number of cycles and use the highest number of sample points the horizontal sweep of your scope will allow plus, average readings over at least 32 samples.  The use of vertical cursor measurements is mandatory and they must be precisely positioned.  The reason for this is clear if you look at the reactive power circulating in the coils as compared to the output power.  This ratio can range from 5-50:1 depending on circuit parameters and frequency.  The higher this ratio is, the measurements are more touchy and in fact depending on your scope, I find the phase measurements are less reliable under high COPs due to the scope's inability to resolve the zero crossings with noise present.  This places more reliance and demand on the accuracy of the sense resistor measurements.

So, is OU really manifesting itself in this type of device?  The only real way to tell is to see one self-run.  I also think that if the op frequency could be <100kHz with a COP>1.5, frequency synthesis could be used to make a self runner but I doubt that this criteria could be reached.  So, looping output to input seems the only viable method in my mind at this point in time.

Pm 
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Hi Partzman,

Thanks for your additional info. 

I have devised a schematic to show how I mean to embed your bifilar coil circuit into a looped circuit, see attachment.  Of course, several solutions exist for the one transistor oscillator or to use an off the shelf micropower voltage regulator or a DC-DC switch mode converter.
In the oscillator I choose to work around 1 MHz, a 500 pF variable capacitor, labeled as C, can be used to tune the LC tank and find COP>1 frequencies.  AM pocket radio coil components like oscillator or IF stage coils can be adapted here.
In the lower left corner of the schematic I indicated to chain two bifilar coils in a hope it may be able to further increase output power, it is possible that a tuning capacitor would be needed across the second bifilar to help some matching or influence overall phase shift.

Maybe it is still too early to devise such looping circuit but there is a new replication at overunity.com
http://overunity.com/17186/the-bifilar-pancake-coil-at-its-resonant-frequency/msg505815/#msg505815
so things are promising...   :D

Thanks,
Gyula

Gyula,

Thanks for posting you design and ideas, looks promising.  I have tried cascading these devices and ran into some matching problems but definitely doable.  The only issue I foresee (I haven't tried it) with rectification on the output is when the storage cap has reached it's operating voltage, the current conduction from the secondary thru the diodes occurs only near the peaks of the output voltage waveform leaving the secondary unloaded for the remainder of time.  What affect this may have on the overall induction process would remain to be seen.

Pm

Pm
   
Group: Guest
TK,

Your connections are correct as far as I can see.

Pm

Good, thank you for checking.

Do you think it makes a difference if the "Red" and "Blue" windings swap roles? That is, I have been using the Red winding for input, one end open, and the Blue winding for the "load" and output. So will it make a difference if I now use the Blue winding for input, one end open, and put the "load" and output on the Red winding instead?
   
Group: Guest
TK

Just out of curiosity ,can you re-do you P/in P/out measurements ,with  R2 in the position of the circuit  below.


Brad

Yes, but I _think_ this will require differential probing and scope math. I'll try it later this evening, so don't hold your breath, it may be 18 hours before I can get to it.

   
Group: Guest
Partzman, yes, I've seen negative phase angles greater than -90 degrees with the present configuration and these of course give "negative" power input figures.

Yes I get your point about using cursors, but unfortunately my scope's cursors do not report phase angle directly, they only give time and voltage values. I'll try to figure out how to derive phase angles from the time differences at zero-crossings and the frequency,  but it may be only as accurate as the scope's own computations anyway.

Oh, yes, I know about large reactive power ratios. Some of my power transmission circuits would blow the minds of the casual scoposcopists because of their high reactive power in the transmission loops.


Another thing I'll be trying later tonight is to sub in a 10 ohm non-non-inductive resistor for the 9.4 ohm NI presently installed. Will that restore the ease of obtaining COP>1? I wish I could find or make a 50 ohm NI, but no joy there.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Good, thank you for checking.

Do you think it makes a difference if the "Red" and "Blue" windings swap roles? That is, I have been using the Red winding for input, one end open, and the Blue winding for the "load" and output. So will it make a difference if I now use the Blue winding for input, one end open, and put the "load" and output on the Red winding instead?

Although I haven't tested with your exact coil configuration, I don't think it will matter if you swap the windings.

Pm
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Partzman, yes, I've seen negative phase angles greater than -90 degrees with the present configuration and these of course give "negative" power input figures.

Yes I get your point about using cursors, but unfortunately my scope's cursors do not report phase angle directly, they only give time and voltage values. I'll try to figure out how to derive phase angles from the time differences at zero-crossings and the frequency,  but it may be only as accurate as the scope's own computations anyway.

Oh, yes, I know about large reactive power ratios. Some of my power transmission circuits would blow the minds of the casual scoposcopists because of their high reactive power in the transmission loops.


Another thing I'll be trying later tonight is to sub in a 10 ohm non-non-inductive resistor for the 9.4 ohm NI presently installed. Will that restore the ease of obtaining COP>1? I wish I could find or make a 50 ohm NI, but no joy there.

You might try both of your NI resistors in series to lighten the load on the secondary and see what change that gives you.
Pm
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Gyula's approach looks promising, I like the idea of the tuned secondary, however I question the need for the linear regulator LM317, unless it is just for runaway protection. O0 Also a push pull Mazili type oscillator with resonant secondary may prove to be more efficient.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May I submit some ideas for looping the device that keeps it in the AC domain rather than all the losses of the AC to DC then DC to AC techniques. Phase correction network is to be determined but should not be difficult.

I have included only three elementary phase compensation schemes, however the number of possible arrangements of passive devices for the network is very large.

With such an approach, the COP need not be very high, as L's and C's of high quality can provide very low insertion loss for the phase correction.

ION,

Thanks for the looping and phase correction schematics.  The more I consider this option for attempting a self-runner, the more viable it seems. 

Pm
   
Group: Guest
Whoopie! I just figured out how to get the Rigol to report phase angle using the cursors! Using Options deep within the Cursors menus, not documented in the User Manual as far as I can tell.
There are still more Cursor functions and options that I don't yet understand, but it seems that the scope's usefulness evaluation has just jumped up another increment! 

In the scopeshot below the Automatic Measurement is reporting -122.8 degrees and the manual Cursor measurement is reporting -119.6 degrees.
   
Group: Guest
So.. using the cursor value for phase angle...

F43 FG at 2.86 MHz....

IN: 2.77 x 0.583 x (cos-83.55) = 0.1814 W or 181.4 mW
OUT: 1.512/9.5 = 0.2400 W or 240.0 mW
COP  1.32

   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Whoopie! I just figured out how to get the Rigol to report phase angle using the cursors! Using Options deep within the Cursors menus, not documented in the User Manual as far as I can tell.
There are still more Cursor functions and options that I don't yet understand, but it seems that the scope's usefulness evaluation has just jumped up another increment! 

In the scopeshot below the Automatic Measurement is reporting -122.8 degrees and the manual Cursor measurement is reporting -119.6 degrees.

TK,

That's great!  I'm sure other Rigol users would like to know about that.

Also, that phase angle is huge!  The max I've seen on my testing was ~110 degrees as I recall.  The Pin should well into the negative range.

Pm

Edit:  OK, I think this test was not on an operating coil, right?
   
Group: Guest
You might try both of your NI resistors in series to lighten the load on the secondary and see what change that gives you.
Pm

I do have another 2 of the 4.7 ohm NI in the TO-220 package I could string along in series to give 18.8 ohms total, but I'm kind of worried about the extra wiring inductance.  I'll give it a try later on, thanks.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
So.. using the cursor value for phase angle...

F43 FG at 2.86 MHz....

IN: 2.77 x 0.583 x (cos-83.55) = 0.1814 W or 181.4 mW
OUT: 1.512/9.5 = 0.2400 W or 240.0 mW
COP  1.32

Those are nice clean appearing measurements.  I like the way Rigol displays a snapshot of all 4 channels simultaneously whereas TEK shows more than you ever need to know on 1 channel at a time.

Pm
   
Group: Guest
TK,

That's great!  I'm sure other Rigol users would like to know about that.

Also, that phase angle is huge!  The max I've seen on my testing was ~110 degrees as I recall.  The Pin should well into the negative range.

Pm

Edit:  OK, I think this test was not on an operating coil, right?

Yes, it was! I get those large angles at lower frequencies.
   
Group: Guest
Those are nice clean appearing measurements.  I like the way Rigol displays a snapshot of all 4 channels simultaneously whereas TEK shows more than you ever need to know on 1 channel at a time.

Pm
Yes, it makes it really easy to get the 3 needed numbers, just read down in the Period Vrms column!
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
Below is a pix of some of the various coil arrangements I have used that all yield COP>1 except for one, that is the coil in the upper right hand corner.  Most are made with ribbon cable and the one sandwiched between the plexiglass is 3x 25 turns of 26 awg magnet wire and has produced >30 watts out in a 51 ohm load when driven with resonance on the input.

Pm
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2502
Everyman decries immorality
Below is a pix of some of the various coil arrangements I have used that all yield COP>1 except for one, that is the coil in the upper right hand corner.

What measurement protocol was used to attain COP>1 observations ?

Were the COP>1 claims based on standard mathematical calculations that suggest COP>1 performance ?

Is there a device you can demonstrate that shows a COP>1 result and can be easily replicated by the community ?

Good stimulation!  O0


---------------------------
Everyman Standing Order 01: In the Face of Tyranny; Everybody Stands, Nobody Runs.
Everyman Standing Order 02: Everyman is Responsible for Energy and Security.
Everyman Standing Order 03: Everyman knows Timing is Critical in any Movement.
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1362
What measurement protocol was used to attain COP>1 observations ?

There is no formal written protocol at present, only the requirements I have stated such as non-inductive resistors, short lead lengths, etc.  There is some understanding that the experimenter already has knowledge of how to take proper power measurements into the low RF range using tools available in the latest families of scopes.

Quote
Were the COP>1 claims based on standard mathematical calculations that suggest COP>1 performance ?

Yes they were.

Quote
Is there a device you can demonstrate that shows a COP>1 result and can be easily replicated by the community ?

I have shown measurement results of various tests here on OUR on my bench titled "Magneto Electric Induction" over the past several years, so yes.  The stated COP>1 is based on measurements taken with reference to the input signal supplying the DUT and in most cases this is sine in shape.  No consideration is given to the energy consumed inside the generator source and I've always tried to be very clear about this.  IOW, once OU is established under these conditions, the next step is to utilize the device in a configuration that would produce a self-runner.

Replication is not difficult if one has the proper equipment and the knowledge to use the same.  It appears TK and TM have experienced replication with a modified Tesla bifilar pancake coil and hopefully others will as well as time goes on.  There are certainly many on this forum (and others as well) who are quite capable of doing so.

Quote
Good stimulation!  O0

Thanks!

Pm
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2021-10-22, 10:18:54