Splitting the Negative

[TinselKoala]

All,

Ok, I set up a two plate test capacitor that would allow a .010" thick piece of polycarbonate material to be moved and removed if necessary to confirm the previous test results as described in my post #23 which I have run many times in the past.  All my previous results indicated that the charge was stored in the dielectric.  At this moment in time however, I can not repeat those test results so I'm presently a little confused with the results I am seeing.

Regards,
Pm

Well, you can have energy stored as dielectric stress inside the dielectric material, and you can also have induced electrostatic patch (surface) charges on the surfaces of the material. When a capacitor is made, the metal conductive plates are in direct contact with the dielectric material, so you don't get the patch charges on the surfaces, just the dielectric stress within the material. But when the dielectric is then separated from the conductive plates the patch charges are induced (if the separation is done right.) Then when the dielectric with surface charges is reintroduced between uncharged metal plates, it in turn induces charges on the plates. So it looks like charge is "stored" on the dielectric, but really it is only separated.
I think.

[partzman]

Certainly. But aren't we talking about _vacuum_ capacitors? What dielectric material contains bound charges that can separate and create a dipole moment in a vacuum capacitor?

I don't understand quantum field theory on how charge is retained in a vacuum and for that reason, I see no avenue for potential OU energy generation by this means.  What I wish to know is where the charge is retained in a capacitance other than a vacuum based device as those to me do have OU potential.

If the charge is not retained in the dielectric of the many types of piezoelectric, ferroelectric, and paraelectric devices in use today that are well documented, then exactly where is it retained?

Pm   

[TinselKoala]

Charge is separated in those materials by application of some external force (and the separation can be retained in certain cases without continuing application of the initial external force, such as with electrets).  This isn't the same as storage of charge though. It is storage of _energy_ in the separation of charges which would ordinarily be balanced. What is retained is the separation. The overall quantity of charge is unchanged.

[partzman]

Charge is separated in those materials by application of some external force (and the separation can be retained in certain cases without continuing application of the initial external force, such as with electrets).  This isn't the same as storage of charge though. It is storage of _energy_ in the separation of charges which would ordinarily be balanced. What is retained is the separation. The overall quantity of charge is unchanged.

So, when I charge an un-poled dielectric between two plates or IOW, I charge this capacitor to any given voltage, where is the charge stored in this simple device?

Pm

[TinselKoala]

So, when I charge an un-poled dielectric between two plates or IOW, I charge this capacitor to any given voltage, where is the charge stored in this simple device?

Pm

On the plates. One has an excess of negative charge (electrons) and the other has an excess of positive charge (holes).  What causes the excess of charge? Electrostatic attraction, from the polarization of the dielectric material.



Charges, or rather charge carriers like electrons, only move over great distances in conductors. Think of the "electron sea" of conduction electrons in metals. In dielectric materials, which are insulators by definition, charge does not move that way, since the electrons remain bound to the atoms of the dielectric material, and the material as a whole is electrically neutral.  The molecules of a good dielectric are highly polar and elastically bound. The application of an external electric field (by putting charge onto the metal plates) causes alignment of the polar molecules, somewhat in the same way as an applied magnetic field aligns domains in a soft magnetic material. This process stores energy but does not transfer or build up charge in the same way that electrons and holes store charge in the plates. When the voltage source which is responsible for putting excess electrons is removed and a conductive load is applied, the stored energy of twisting and distorting the polar molecules of the dielectric, is released, returning to the unstrained, more random state, as the load allows the excess electrons and "holes" to neutralize.

There are lots of "free energy" implications of this, especially when one considers the vacuum dielectric property. Create enough stress in the vacuum and it will shatter, possibly releasing or de-virtualizing more of those virtual particle pairs talked about in the Wiki article above. This is one reason why I'm interested in high voltage phenomena.

[TinselKoala]

.

[TinMan]

 author=TinselKoala link=topic=3564.msg66101#msg66101 date=1513552780]

On the plates. One has an excess of negative charge (electrons) and the other has an excess of positive charge (holes).  What causes the excess of charge? Electrostatic attraction, from the polarization of the dielectric material.

If this were true,once the dielectric material is removed from between the two charged plates,there should be a potential difference between/across the two plates--but there is none.

Once the dielectric is removed,there is no sign of any charge on the two plates--as shown in the two video's posted some time back.

But once the dielectric is returned to it's original position between the two plates,the two plates now have a potential difference across them.

What is needed,is a very large value capacitor(200uF or so),where we can either increase or decrease the amount of dielectric material between the plates,or replace the charged dielectric material for uncharged dielectric material 

I'll see what i can come up with.


Brad

[TinselKoala]

Vacuum capacitors do work though, with only the vacuum as dielectric. Are you ready to say that the vacuum can hold a net charge?

The dielectric material in an ordinary capacitor is an insulator, that allows much greater voltage to be developed across the plates than would normally be the case if a conductive or ionizable medium, like air, were between the plates. This is also the case for the vacuum capacitor. The capacitance of a vacuum capacitor is nearly the same as an air capacitor of the same dimensions, but can be charged to a much higher voltage (hence energy content) because there aren't any ions (practically) that can conduct and limit the voltage.
In fact this phenomenon is used in high-vacuum "diode" pumps, where electrostatic attraction of the residual gas ions is used to sweep out the remaining gas.

[partzman]

All,

Does anyone reading this thread recognize anything significant in Itsu's posts #39 and #44?  Speak up!

Regards,
Pm

[Itsu]

Well, what significant is is that when you replace the dry air inbetween the plates of a (variable) air (so NOT vacuum) capacitor, when charged, by
moisture-saturated, CO2 enhanced, oxygen depleted air (my breath) you can up to quadruple the voltage.

Now how can we benefite from that?


I did some further tests, like measuring the capacitance of that capacitor (982pF) while breathing again on / between the plates.
No change in capacitance was measured using my Agilent U1733C LCR meter.


Then i was varying the plates when charged like this, see screenhot.

First peak was normal full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, not changing the plates, no blowing (control)
second peak was full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, then rotating the plates to minimum capacitance (75pF), no blowing
thirth peak was full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, blowing , then rotating the plates to minimum capacitance (75pF)      <== changed sequence, first blowing then rotating!!
fourth peak was full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, not changing the plates, blowing (seems somewhat lower then yesterday).


When changing the capacitance while charged to minimum is causing a higher voltage, but narrower peak.

Itsu

[partzman]

Well, what significant is is that when you replace the dry air inbetween the plates of a (variable) air (so NOT vacumm) capacitor, when charged, by
moisture-saturated, CO2 enhanced, oxygen depleted air (my breath) you can up to quadruple the voltage.

Now how can we benefite from that?


I did some further tests, like measuring the capacitance of that capacitor (982pF) while breathing again on / between the plates.
No change in capacitance was measured using my Agilent U1733C LCR meter.


Then i was varying the plates when charged like this, see screenhot.

First peak was normal full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, not changing the plates, no blowing (control)
second peak was full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, then rotating the plates to minimum capacitance (75pF), no blowing
thirth peak was full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, then rotating the plates to minimum capacitance (75pF), blowing
fourth peak was full capacitance (982pF) charged with 24V, not changing the plates, blowing (seems somewhat lower then yesterday).


When changing the capacitance while charged to minimum is causing a higher voltage, but smaller peak.

Itsu

Itsu,

Congrats and thanks for analyzing your results .  I totally agree with you and will add that your breath has enough moisture content to raise the dielectric constant above that of the ambient air between the plates when you charge the capacitor.  Now, this is a seeming contradiction to Q=CV or V=Q/C because normally the voltage should be less not greater if we raise the capacitance with an increase in dielectric constant while keeping the charge the same.  Now it is possible that there may be some poling of your breath (no offense ) that is adding to the original charge but I seriously doubt that.

Attached below is a scope pix of tests I ran to replicate your tests with 2 parallel copper plates held apart with spacers so a piece of polycarbonate sheet could be inserted and removed.  I was careful to be sure that the poling of any charge on the sheet was at a minimum or non-existent.  Basically, the copper plates with ambient air dielectric were charged with 30vdc then, the polycarb dielectric sheet was slid into position and then discharged with the probe and captured the same as your procedure.  The ch1 trace is the normal discharge with no added polycarb and the remaining Refs 1,2,and 3 are the voltages reached with the polycarb dielectric inserted.  The results are very consistent and repeatable and show an apparent energy gain of ~(64(avg output peak)/28)^2 = 5.22 .   

So, I would classify this as an anomaly and would welcome any expert advice from those more knowledgeable in this area.

Now, what can be done with this?  Picture a generator made with segmented conductive stators with segmented dielectric rotors placed between each stator and spun to some reasonably high RPM.  Use appropriate circuitry to charge the stators when air is the dielectric and discharge when the dielectric rotors are in place to allow the excess energy to be harvested.

Additionally, poled dielectrics could be used which would add to the "ambient air" charge thus increasing the overall energy gain.

One question would be what the rotor drag would consist of in newtons but I can show an old simulation from my past research on a segmented poled dielectric generator that indicated a stronger pulling force than opposing force which would seemingly indicate a self driving generator!

Regards,
Pm

[CITFTA]

Could you guys be close to figuring out the Testanika machine?  Just seems similar to what you are seeing.

[TinselKoala]

PM, nicely done as usual. I wonder if you can figure out some way (other than the voltage rise!) to determine the actual _work_ you do to the system by sliding the dielectric sheet in between the charged plates.


With rotating electrostatic machines like you describe, if they are hand-cranked one can actually feel the work being done as the dielectric "pushes" against the field when it moves between the charged plates. As the voltage on the accumulators (capacitances) rises they become harder and harder to turn.

[Smudge]

Itsu,

Congrats and thanks for analyzing your results .  I totally agree with you and will add that your breath has enough moisture content to raise the dielectric constant above that of the ambient air between the plates when you charge the capacitor.  Now, this is a seeming contradiction to Q=CV or V=Q/C because normally the voltage should be less not greater if we raise the capacitance with an increase in dielectric constant while keeping the charge the same.  Now it is possible that there may be some poling of your breath (no offense ) that is adding to the original charge but I seriously doubt that.

Attached below is a scope pix of tests I ran to replicate your tests with 2 parallel copper plates held apart with spacers so a piece of polycarbonate sheet could be inserted and removed.  I was careful to be sure that the poling of any charge on the sheet was at a minimum or non-existent.  Basically, the copper plates with ambient air dielectric were charged with 30vdc then, the polycarb dielectric sheet was slid into position and then discharged with the probe and captured the same as your procedure.  The ch1 trace is the normal discharge with no added polycarb and the remaining Refs 1,2,and 3 are the voltages reached with the polycarb dielectric inserted.  The results are very consistent and repeatable and show an apparent energy gain of ~(64(avg output peak)/28)^2 = 5.22 .   

So, I would classify this as an anomaly and would welcome any expert advice from those more knowledgeable in this area.

Now, what can be done with this?  Picture a generator made with segmented conductive stators with segmented dielectric rotors placed between each stator and spun to some reasonably high RPM.  Use appropriate circuitry to charge the stators when air is the dielectric and discharge when the dielectric rotors are in place to allow the excess energy to be harvested.

Additionally, poled dielectrics could be used which would add to the "ambient air" charge thus increasing the overall energy gain.

One question would be what the rotor drag would consist of in newtons but I can show an old simulation from my past research on a segmented poled dielectric generator that indicated a stronger pulling force than opposing force which would seemingly indicate a self driving generator!

Regards,
Pm

My guess is that the anomalous voltage is due to the tribo-electric effect.  When dissimilar materials come into contact with each other there can be a transfer of charge from one material to the other.  Multiple contacts can produce ever increasing charge transfer which is why aircraft (or any form of missile) gain electric charge when flying through rain or even dust particles, necessitating special wick dischargers to keep the potential gained low enough to stop corona discharge off the various antenna that would otherwise corrupt the signals.  So maybe your polycarbonate making contact to and possibly sliding across the electrodes produced the anomalous charge.  Don't know where polycarbonate sits in the triboelectric table but it is likely to be removed from copper.

Edit.  Seems polycarbonate is near copper so little effect expected.  So the next question is how was the dielectric inserted, was it by hand?  If so there is the possibility of charge transfer from your body.  You say you were careful to ensure that the dielectric was not poled, but how sure were you that the dielectrirc was not carrying surface charge?
Smudge

[Grumage]

This subject is now beginning to interest me greatly!

After my introduction to electrostatics earlier this year with the Franklin motor and in particular the statements made by Verpies and Cyril about the tremendous forces that can be got from a pair of like charged poles, it made me want to build a machine.

I have literally Kilo's of Polycarbonate off cuts in various sizes and thicknesses just waiting to be used.

In the new year I'd be willing to build a machine to a design that this group has brainstormed. There must be a way of utilising that repulsive force that TK has mentioned above to our advantage?

My only constraint is a maximum diameter rotor of 14 inches.

Can we design a new machine? I think we can!

Cheers Graham.

[TinMan]

Could you guys be close to figuring out the Testanika machine?  Just seems similar to what you are seeing.

AH-HA


As i stated in post 25 Carroll--> I think gaining a good understanding of what is happening here,would unlock so many doors.

For far to long,we have been trying to replicate and understand other peoples work,while there is so much to be discovered right in front of our noses.


Brad

[TinMan]

author=partzman link=topic=3564.msg66119#msg66119 date=1513636937]


   

So, I would classify this as an anomaly and would welcome any expert advice from those more knowledgeable in this area.



Additionally, poled dielectrics could be used which would add to the "ambient air" charge thus increasing the overall energy gain.



Regards,
Pm
[/quote]

Attached below is a scope pix of tests I ran to replicate your tests with 2 parallel copper plates held apart with spacers so a piece of polycarbonate sheet could be inserted and removed.  I was careful to be sure that the poling of any charge on the sheet was at a minimum or non-existent.  Basically, the copper plates with ambient air dielectric were charged with 30vdc then, the polycarb dielectric sheet was slid into position and then discharged with the probe and captured the same as your procedure.  The ch1 trace is the normal discharge with no added polycarb and the remaining Refs 1,2,and 3 are the voltages reached with the polycarb dielectric inserted.  The results are very consistent and repeatable and show an apparent energy gain of ~(64(avg output peak)/28)^2 = 5.22 .

So,we charge the cap while it has an air dielectric ,and discharge while it has a poly carb dielectric,and we see an energy gain  --or do we?.

If voltage went up,then capacitance value would have had to of dropped-yea?,or are we about to re-write the ruel book?.
Perhaps leave the plates uncharged,and slide the polycarb dielectric between the plates,and see if you get a voltage reading across the plates.
If the result is 0v across the two plates,then this would eliminate any static charge being introduced into the capacitor when you slide the polycarb sheet between the plates.

Now, what can be done with this?  Picture a generator made with segmented conductive stators with segmented dielectric rotors placed between each stator and spun to some reasonably high RPM.  Use appropriate circuitry to charge the stators when air is the dielectric and discharge when the dielectric rotors are in place to allow the excess energy to be harvested.

Indeed 

One question would be what the rotor drag would consist of in newtons but I can show an old simulation from my past research on a segmented poled dielectric generator that indicated a stronger pulling force than opposing force which would seemingly indicate a self driving generator!

To quote TK :With rotating electrostatic machines like you describe, if they are hand-cranked one can actually feel the work being done as the dielectric "pushes" against the field when it moves between the charged plates. As the voltage on the accumulators (capacitances) rises they become harder and harder to turn.

However,i do not think this is the same,and what we know seems to say the opposite.

We know
1-opposite charges attract
2-Both a negative charged object,and a positive charged object,attract an object with a neutral or no charge.
3 An object with a high negative charge,will attract an object that has a low negative charge-and visa versa for positively charged objects--as long as there is a potential difference in charge.

So it would seem to me,that if one plate has a positive charge,and the other plate has a negative charge,then both would have an attraction toward the polycarb sheet(dielectric),which has a neutral charge.

We would need some rather large segmented disk's to build a generator that would work on this principle,that has any sort of !volume! to the output.

In saying that,this has far more potential than any Bidumy energizer.


Brad

[Grumage]

" In saying that,this has far more potential than any Bidumy energizer. "

Brad, was the pun intentional?   

So, do we open a new thread for a " Freedom group " electrostatic motor generator design? OUR own?   

Cheers Graham.

[TinMan]

Perhaps some one could try this out.

We have two plates(our capacitor plates),and in between them,we have our polycarb dielectric.

What if the capacitor was charged while there was an air gap between the two plates,as well as the polycarb dielectric,and then the two plates were brought together after the capacitor was charges--in other words,the air gap was removed ?

What would be the outcome?.

As far as i know,there should be an attraction between the two plates once charged,and then once discharged,the plates would be able to be separated without much force required.


Brad

[TinMan]

" In saying that,this has far more potential than any Bidumy energizer. "

Brad, was the pun intentional?   

So, do we open a new thread for a " Freedom group " electrostatic motor generator design? OUR own?   

Cheers Graham.

Yes,the pun was intentional --i was a dummy to think there was any truth to it.

But all is not lost Graham,as i think we could use the base of our energizer build,to make this capgen Pm was talking about.

I am glad i raised the question about !where! charge and energy is stored in a capacitor,as it would seem that no one is quite clear on just what is going on here.

So, do we open a new thread for a " Freedom group " electrostatic motor generator design? OUR own?

I think this would be a great idea,as it is !OUR! idea--!OUR! research on stored energy within a capacitor.

Take note of what Carroll said in post 61,and tie that in with PM's capgen idea 

Do you want to start the thread Graham,or would you like me to?.

Brad

[partzman]

My guess is that the anomalous voltage is due to the tribo-electric effect.  When dissimilar materials come into contact with each other there can be a transfer of charge from one material to the other.  Multiple contacts can produce ever increasing charge transfer which is why aircraft (or any form of missile) gain electric charge when flying through rain or even dust particles, necessitating special wick dischargers to keep the potential gained low enough to stop corona discharge off the various antenna that would otherwise corrupt the signals.  So maybe your polycarbonate making contact to and possibly sliding across the electrodes produced the anomalous charge.  Don't know where polycarbonate sits in the triboelectric table but it is likely to be removed from copper.

Edit.  Seems polycarbonate is near copper so little effect expected.  So the next question is how was the dielectric inserted, was it by hand?  If so there is the possibility of charge transfer from your body.  You say you were careful to ensure that the dielectric was not poled, but how sure were you that the dielectrirc was not carrying surface charge?
Smudge

Smudge,

I am not sure that there was no surface charge on the dielectric.  I guess that Itsu's breath could also contain some charge as well but as I view things at this point, I'm not sure it would make any difference in the overall outcome.  In an attempt to do a simple analysis of what might be happening, I've concluded that we must be increasing Q (or an equivalent in regards to the plates) with the insertion of a dielectric that had no part in the original charge separation.  I do not posses an electrometer at this point but I would like to view how the separated charges are distributed between the plates as this may provide some answers.

Regards,
Pm

Edit:..... 

[partzman]

PM, nicely done as usual. I wonder if you can figure out some way (other than the voltage rise!) to determine the actual _work_ you do to the system by sliding the dielectric sheet in between the charged plates.


With rotating electrostatic machines like you describe, if they are hand-cranked one can actually feel the work being done as the dielectric "pushes" against the field when it moves between the charged plates. As the voltage on the accumulators (capacitances) rises they become harder and harder to turn.

Thanks Tk,

Not sure at this point on how to determine the work required to insert the dielectric on my simple test device.  Yes, the rotor drag of such a device is a critical key to success so I guess building a single rotor POC is in order to help answer these questions.

Regards,
Pm