N.R.M.R.E. An investigation. V.2

[ion]

The main discrepancy seems to be in how you have the AC inputs of the charger FWB connected.  I think.

Yes, I changed it and re-upoaded with a new ver #1.01.

I think I described how the error crept in with my earlier post

Thanks TK.

[TinselKoala]

By the way... has anyone figured out why we are doing this?

I mean, what are the claims or phenomena we are supposed to be reproducing or exploring? It's fun to make pretty coloured squiggly lines on expensive test equipment, no argument there. But seriously.... whaaaat?

Ambient energy harvesting (when there is energy in the ambient to be harvested) using tuned circuits? Been there, done that.
Unstable low voltage Joule Thiefs? Been there, done that.
"HV Radiant" circuits? Been there, done that.
Wireless power transfer? Been there, done that.
Blown up and burned out lots of components? Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt, in spades.

About the only thing I haven't done, earlier and, IMnotsoHO better, is to sell my stuff to foreign investors.

[TinselKoala]

Looking into it now.

OK found the problem and reloaded it with a ver1.01

I fixed two errors on my redraw.

If you change the wire passing through the core in the original hand drawn schematic to a tiny inductor you will see that the capacitor needs to be after this inductor. The collector of the transistor always goes directly to the CW of T2.

All outputs are after this small inductor, which nowhere appears on the original.

In Itsu's drawing, the inductor is between the collector and the CW winding, which does not agree with the original hand drawn schematic.

The two earlier schematics are thus not in agreement AFAIK.

I'm to blame for the position of the inductor in Itsu's drawing, his original did not include this inductor. It is where I put it on my test build. 

[ion]

By the way... has anyone figured out why we are doing this?

I mean, what are the claims or phenomena we are supposed to be reproducing or exploring? It's fun to make pretty coloured squiggly lines on expensive test equipment, no argument there. But seriously.... whaaaat?

Ambient energy harvesting (when there is energy in the ambient to be harvested) using tuned circuits? Been there, done that.
Unstable low voltage Joule Thiefs? Been there, done that.
"HV Radiant" circuits? Been there, done that.
Wireless power transfer? Been there, done that.
Blown up and burned out lots of components? Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt, in spades.

About the only thing I haven't done, earlier and, IMnotsoHO better, is to sell my stuff to foreign investors.

Dear TK

You lead with a very good question. After reviewing a few of NR's videos and getting totally bored I'm thinking of bowing out before I bow in too far, but will probably get kicked out for that comment.

I'm sure you've seen it all and are quite tired of the "radiant" claims as am I.

About 60 years ago I built one of those radio circuits that scavenged it's supply off a local AM high power transmitter. It's been downhill since then LOL.

So I ask you, where do we go from here? For right now, TR's device looks interesting to me.

Kind regards

[JimBoot]

By the way... has anyone figured out why we are doing this?

I mean, what are the claims or phenomena we are supposed to be reproducing or exploring? It's fun to make pretty coloured squiggly lines on expensive test equipment, no argument there. But seriously.... whaaaat?

Ambient energy harvesting (when there is energy in the ambient to be harvested) using tuned circuits? Been there, done that.
Unstable low voltage Joule Thiefs? Been there, done that.
"HV Radiant" circuits? Been there, done that.
Wireless power transfer? Been there, done that.
Blown up and burned out lots of components? Been there, done that, bought the T-shirt, in spades.

About the only thing I haven't done, earlier and, IMnotsoHO better, is to sell my stuff to foreign investors.

For the glory? It's a good learning circuit for me to tinker with. I'll spend time swapping components and winds to see how efficient I can get it.

[TinselKoala]

Well, connecting the  inductor as shown in ION's diagram made a big difference in the maximum voltage obtainable on the Collector spike.

Also, the polarity of the inductor makes a difference (as I suppose it should if it is affecting the toroid parametrically.)

Two scopeshots, both at 2.0 volts input, inductor wired one polarity and then the opposite polarity, pot tuned for maximum p-p spike amplitude.

[TinselKoala]

Dear TK

You lead with a very good question. After reviewing a few of NR's videos and getting totally bored I'm thinking of bowing out before I bow in too far, but will probably get kicked out for that comment.

I'm sure you've seen it all and are quite tired of the "radiant" claims as am I.

About 60 years ago I built one of those radio circuits that scavenged it's supply off a local AM high power transmitter. It's been downhill since then LOL.

So I ask you, where do we go from here? For right now, TR's device looks interesting to me.

Kind regards

Yes.... the TR device. I ran the sim on my LTSpice IV (running on Linux) and I do see a minuscule change in the peak output voltage when changing the +11 to -11. It isn't clear to me though how an electronics modelling program can encompass and accurately model a variable that is... shall we say... speculative to the extreme. This would appear to violate Ibison's Law of simulations. The results with actual apparatus may show some tens or hundreds of microvolts difference depending on orientation, but how is it possible actually to attribute this change to the hypothesized cause, and not to some other "third variable" that hasn't been controlled for? Personally I don't want to participate in that discussion myself as I have a string of PMs from TR that effectively turned me completely off, but I will make this comment about proper control experiments (rather than mere demonstrations of an effect) that must be performed in order to assign causality.

[ion]

Yes.... the TR device. I ran the sim on my LTSpice IV (running on Linux) and I do see a minuscule change in the peak output voltage when changing the +11 to -11. It isn't clear to me though how an electronics modelling program can encompass and accurately model a variable that is... shall we say... speculative to the extreme. This would appear to violate Ibison's Law of simulations. The results with actual apparatus may show some tens or hundreds of microvolts difference depending on orientation, but how is it possible actually to attribute this change to the hypothesized cause, and not to some other "third variable" that hasn't been controlled for? Personally I don't want to participate in that discussion myself as I have a string of PMs from TR that effectively turned me completely off, but I will make this comment about proper control experiments (rather than mere demonstrations of an effect) that must be performed in order to assign causality.

I agree with some of your observations. The sim is meant to help tune a ferrite core by plugging in numbers from the bench, not to actually simulate real gravity effect. Then you must go back to the bench and retune the actual device.
  I do also have reservations about noise pickup and shielding and the rigorous controls that must be applied before a effect can be claimed as real. I was employed in the real world designing commercial uV level laboratory equipment for half a lifetime, discrete chopper stabilized amplifiers for thermocouple level signals,  am very familiar with the errors that can creep in.

But I guess this is off topic so we can continue elsewhere, and Grum can delete.

Regarding your scopeshots, are you looking at the collector voltage? if so there is a noticeable change in slope when switching positions. Try to look at collector current and notice the effect on the ramp up of current when switching positions. Stretch your horizontal and vertical so one ramp up fills the screen corner to corner. WE don't need to see the other stuff for this test. This makes it easier to see the slope change. May require a CSR. I'm sure you know all this, but others may not. Also put a reasonable resistive load on both outputs so the transistor can work a little harder.

Kind Regards

P.S. see my post here about hazardous base drive current:
http://overunity.com/17242/replication-of-mini-radiant-exciter-circuit-of-nelson-rocha/msg505242/#msg505242

[ion]

Digging a little deeper, the max allowable base drive current is 120 mA. The maximum reverse voltage is 5 volts per the datasheet.

There is no resistance to limit the peak current drive capability from the core to the base since it is capacitively coupled with some rather large values. Whatever current is stored in the T2 core during the core charging ramp up will be discharged into the base when Q1 cuts off, as that is the load with the fewest diode drops.

This is a needless waste of power from T2 since much less base drive will turn Q1 on efficiently, The DC current gain minimum is 1000 per the datasheet so 1 milliamp base drive will allow for 1000mA of collector current . Since the maximum collector current For TIP122 is 5 Amps, 5 mA is adequate to saturate the Q1 output transistor to it's max collector current rating.

Assuming the circuit is run from a 12 volt battery, absolute max ratings would be approx. 5 A x (12-Vsat)  = 52.5 Watts output power capability. Does anyone know the actual output power capability vs power drain of the circuit?
What is it's design point? What does Mr Rocha claim?

Assuming best case of saturated turn on, with no power dissipated in switching, the transistor will then be dissipating Vsat of 1.5 volts x 5 amps or 7.5 watts so a heatsink large enough to keep the device within the temp max of about 130 C is needed.

We have not even touched on the possible destruction of the base by exceeding the 5 volts reverse rating.

Of course all this is moot if there are no specs on the device and it is only intended work once in awhile for just a few minutes to light up a NE-2 (uA) before the base is degraded.

Am I the only one who enjoys curling up by the fire with a good data sheet...a true nerd?

[TinselKoala]

One more comment on that other project: Please don't misunderstand me. It is often far easier to demonstrate that an effect is real, than it is properly to assign causality for the effect.  Digging a microvolt signal out of the noise floor is one thing, but trying to figure out what actually causes the signal you are seeing may be a horse of a different color altogether. In the case of working on conventional circuits it may not be so important, because usually you will know what the cause is, and usually you won't get a Nobel prize for re-writing the physics books if you do catch the cause. However, obviously, in the case of interest here, things are a little different. Merely demonstrating the effect is apparently rather trivial, albeit requiring sensitive equipment and extra care on the part of the experimenter. Definitely assigning the cause of that effect to invisible pink unicorn farts, polarized aetheric ley line vibrations or the flow of space is far from trivial.

Re operating near or beyond the limits of the transistor, yes. I just blew out one of mine by exceeding the Base-Emitter voltage by too much.  I can't imagine running this circuit on a 12 volt battery. I have my current-limiting power supply set at about 1.8 amps and it is easy to get to that limit with even only around 2 volts, when the pot is turned all the way up.

[TinMan]

Well,it's running 

Seems to work ok,and quite stable in my case.

Turning the voltage up above 3v,blows out the neon,when the pot is turned all the way down.

Have not toasted a transistor yet-->yet.
I also went with horizontal coil's,instead of the coil through the center of the toroid.

I do notice about a 20mA decrease in current draw,when those horizontal coils are removed from the circuit,but that also results in a duller NE2.

So now that Vortex has re-drawn the circuit,we can see it is just a JT,with a heap of other part's that would dissipate power-->a loss in other words.

Not seeing anything special about this circuit yet,but only just got it up and running.

Going to build a standard JT,with the same step up transformer on it,and do a side by side comparison.

Video 1 up soon.


Brad

[TinMan]

The video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elVI05A_q_I


Brad

[Grumage]

Hi Brad.

Nice video. 

To the uninitiated it would be considered a " miracle " running without a power supply.

I assume we can attribute its self running ability to the " super cap " installed at the front end?

On a more serious note, what's the cause of the " package mode " ?

Cheers Grum.

[TinMan]

Hi Brad.

Nice video. 

To the uninitiated it would be considered a " miracle " running without a power supply.

I assume we can attribute its self running ability to the " super cap " installed at the front end?



Cheers Grum.

Yes indeed Grum, that is a super cap on the input.
After watching the video again,i see i did not mention that-which i thought i did.

On a more serious note, what's the cause of the " package mode " ?

I do not know,nor do i know how you could actually achieve that---but i have lol.

You would think that once the transistor stopped oscillating,it would remain off.
But as you can see,it fires up again 


Brad

[Grumage]

Well Brad.

This was one of the " curiosities " that some of us witnessed previously.

Here's Nelson's reply to what has transpired so far.

Quote from Nelson Rocha at OU.Com today.

" Hi everbody ,

I could see by last updates , most are trying lit up neon bulb   Is there any special reason for this to happen?
I have already said, and I repeat:
The purpose of this circuit is not to ignite neon bulb lol, even because in the original circuit there is no neon connected at the transformer output, but near the input of the circuit near the capacitor C5 maybe people should consider search by negative resistance theme and will find better explanation to i use the neon bulb.

I already describe that hv radiant output when circuit is property tuned is capable to charge a capacitor just by one wire without apparently increase the input , or even be used to transmit electric power by one wire . In the video we could see just one wire connected to one coil and be received by other isolated coil .
https://goo.gl/photos/mXtpKMi9L69WVjVBA

We can see too how different are the wave shot in scope from most of replications until now, and without burned transistors
The circuit could do that operation and in same time recharge a battery without impact in input . I just saw one person show that until now
call's MAC and he made one video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iER4K1O7iMc&t=17s

Like i said since first beginning this circuit is just to be study , And is part of a learning process to other nice project, but..... i know "is only a JT" like most pro people say , and in that way i just could answer to "Pro's" replicators  :
don't need spend  their precious time in something that is so simple and trivial  , just ignore  and go forward in other projects.
I just say that  because already saw some "elite" replicators at end of some days of experiment with this circuit, start complain why are spend their time with something is only a simple JT and they have better alternatives circuits to lit several neon bulbs .

To the people real interested i know they will have moments of fun and learning with that circuit not any doubt .


Nelson Rocha "

End quote.

It seems we might be "missing " something ?

Cheers Grum.

[TinMan]

Well Brad.

This was one of the " curiosities " that some of us witnessed previously.

Here's Nelson's reply to what has transpired so far.

Quote from Nelson Rocha at OU.Com today.

" Hi everbody ,

I could see by last updates , most are trying lit up neon bulb   Is there any special reason for this to happen?
I have already said, and I repeat:
The purpose of this circuit is not to ignite neon bulb lol, even because in the original circuit there is no neon connected at the transformer output, but near the input of the circuit near the capacitor C5 maybe people should consider search by negative resistance theme and will find better explanation to i use the neon bulb.

I already describe that hv radiant output when circuit is property tuned is capable to charge a capacitor just by one wire without apparently increase the input , or even be used to transmit electric power by one wire . In the video we could see just one wire connected to one coil and be received by other isolated coil .
https://goo.gl/photos/mXtpKMi9L69WVjVBA

We can see too how different are the wave shot in scope from most of replications until now, and without burned transistors
The circuit could do that operation and in same time recharge a battery without impact in input . I just saw one person show that until now
call's MAC and he made one video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iER4K1O7iMc&t=17s

Like i said since first beginning this circuit is just to be study , And is part of a learning process to other nice project, but..... i know "is only a JT" like most pro people say , and in that way i just could answer to "Pro's" replicators  :
don't need spend  their precious time in something that is so simple and trivial  , just ignore  and go forward in other projects.
I just say that  because already saw some "elite" replicators at end of some days of experiment with this circuit, start complain why are spend their time with something is only a simple JT and they have better alternatives circuits to lit several neon bulbs .

To the people real interested i know they will have moments of fun and learning with that circuit not any doubt .


Nelson Rocha "

End quote.

It seems we might be "missing " something ?

Cheers Grum.

Well i guess the neon is being used to see this HV radiant energy output-->what ever radiant energy is suppose to be 
I guess any type of energy that radiates out from a source,could be called radiant energy 

I have placed an LED across !what is T1 ! in IONs circuit drawing,and now we have a new situation 

Will get to that tomorrow night,as time for me to hit the hay.

Looks like there is a new project coming up,but nothing to do with free energy--more like broken bone's,by the sounds of it lol.
I dont know how i get talked into these thing's
At 48 years of age,things start to snap a little easier 
Seems a couple of my close friend's,want to start a lawn mower racing club,and i have been talked into building and racing one.

Anyway,back tomorrow night.


Brad

[Chet K]

well
sometimes cutting the grass the fastest.....Um...yeah sooo...

HHmmm , naaah yer  gonna have a hard time talking the wife into this one.



we only live once...put wings on it too...

[TinselKoala]

Has anybody  (Besides Nelson that is) seen any hint of "HV Radiant" at the output of this circuit? With the neon on the output transformer removed, of course, and with or without the FWB on the transformer's output winding.

This is as high as I have dared to go (no neon, FWB or other load on transformer output). This is at 2 volts input at about 500 mA draw:

[Grumage]

Dear TinselKoala.

What is "HV Radiant" ? Terminology undefined, like Aether??

That's one heck of a spike though.

Taking an excerpt from Nelson's last message.

               " but near the input of the circuit near the capacitor C5 maybe people should consider search by negative resistance theme and will find better explanation to i use the neon bulb. "

Now as I see it C5 is an additional store, BUT can it be classed as in parallel with C1 as there's a Diode D1 between them? Is the NE2 flashing over and putting some charge into C5 ? 

               " negative resistance "

Suggestions ?

Cheers Graham.

[TinselKoala]

..... and with my 8-diode FWB on the transformer output, but with no load on the FWB... this is the maximum I could get. A bit more drive from the pot setting and it falls back abruptly to about 400 V, so it is possible that something is breaking down, like transformer insulation or diodes.

Also this is the current state of the circuit I'm using.

[TinselKoala]

Dear TinselKoala.

What is "HV Radiant" ? Terminology undefined, like Aether??

That's one heck of a spike though.

Taking an excerpt from Nelson's last message.

               " but near the input of the circuit near the capacitor C5 maybe people should consider search by negative resistance theme and will find better explanation to i use the neon bulb. "

Now as I see it C5 is an additional store, BUT can it be classed as in parallel with C1 as there's a Diode D1 between them? Is the NE2 flashing over and putting some charge into C5 ? 

               " negative resistance "

Suggestions ?

Cheers Graham.

My working definition of "HV Radiant" is high voltage RF noise. And by high voltage I mean generally in excess of 10 kV, where one might see some tiny corona spraying from a sharp point.
So I've got some way to go before I declare "Eureka!".  But it has become clear to me that NR defines things differently than I do. So perhaps he sees the threshold for "HV Radiant" as 1 kV or so, maybe.

I did see a tiny glow in the neon with only one leg connected, so maybe. But again... I have simpler and more efficient circuits that will genuinely produce much higher voltages and will light up neons and CFLs and suchlike with _no_ wires connected and at considerable distance. Whenever I point out these facts to NR he replies with something like "but that is not the primary purpose of this circuit". Well... what IS the primary purpose of this circuit then? Wait.... I think I know.... it's to get us off his back so we will stop constantly asking him to demonstrate a self running circuit, or to tell us what he sold to the FMIBS (Foreign Men In Black Suits).  Or maybe it is just a big joke, to see how many components we will burn up before shelving the project like some others have already done.

As for the rest, again, I don't know exactly what he is trying to say.

[ion]

Here is my metaphor take from it what you will.

We have at least three maybe four guys here that have extensive backgrounds in working with engines. I need not name them.

Lets say there is a different guy named Jim who had never designed or even looked at engines before, has no history or knowledge of prior art but got a bright idea one day and decided to build an better gasoline engine.

So he builds this thing and takes it to the four mechanical experts here and they look it over and begin finding major flaws in the construction of the device. Fuel is blowing by the piston, the timing is way off, the crank is not suited to the displacement chamber, the valves stick and do not seat properly, fuel is leaking from the carburetor, the mix is terribly wrong, the porting is inefficient etc, etc, etc.

The engine has a tiny propeller that it is turning as proof of it's magic horsepower (or unicorn power, as you prefer).

Jim says: see, there it is, unicorn power!

Jim says: You mechanical think inside the box types, say you would like to put the device on a dyno and compare it to known working devices?, but I insist this engine puts out power that can't be measured by those conventional measuring devices.

Then he says nevermind all that, you guys are not thinking outside the box, you are trained in conventional engineering thought. It's easy to see, my device puts out magic horsepower that can't be measured with conventional devices, see the propeller turning.

When you ask for Jim's drawing of his engine to see what materials he specified, he pull out a scrap of cardboard with some very crude markings and does not explain why wood was used for the piston or why the mains power had to be used to generate the spark. The drawing looks like it was made by someone who never worked in a mechanical engineering environment and does not follow any standards for the communication of mechanical ideas.

It is clear to the mechanical experts that Jim is totally unskilled in the art of engine design, has an exalted sense of his own abilities and ideas, and cloaks his ignorance in further obfuscation.

Then as  final insult Jim says, I give this to you as a tool to study and learn from and move on to better designs.

Now the question is what standards would you expect from such a person bringing you an engine to test, what rigorous testing would you insist be applied before you take Jim seriously?

So Jim leaves in a huff taking his engine to a group of people that are more like him,  that have no real experience in mechanical designs especially engines, and as expected, they are quite impressed with his engine and want to learn more about unicorn power and how they might use it's magic properties.

End of story

[TinselKoala]

Have I hit a "berserk mode" at 2.5 v , 250 mA input?   

[TinselKoala]

>spew(coffee, keyboard)!

Now I'm laughing hilariously at ION's story!  The wooden piston really got me going. 

[Grumage]

Dear ION.

Point taken and a smile " to boot "....

I well know my limitations in the electronics area with just level 3 Radio/Television repair qualifications from over 40 years ago now.

Time for bed then ?

But before you tuck me in.

Could someone answer my earlier question please.

" Now as I see it C5 is an additional store, BUT can it be classed as in parallel with C1 as there's a Diode D1 between them? Is the NE2 flashing over and putting some charge into C5 ? "

Night night.....