PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2022-11-28, 05:43:46
News: A feature is available which provides a place all members can chat, either publicly or privately.
There is also a "Shout" feature on each page. Only available to members.

Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Where does the energy come from  (Read 2442 times)

Newbie
*

Posts: 27
Radio frequencies are the same electromagnetic waves as light.
The energy of a quantum, its depends on the frequency.
Why does ten watts of, for example, 10 MHz RF power and 100 MHz RF power
 generate the same amount of heat in a matched load?
Why is there no frequency dependency?  ;)
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1716
That being acknowledged a coulomb is a specific number of electrons.
How can there be 7 times more electrons in C2 + C3 than were taken from C1?
When a capacitor is charged electrons move from one plate to the other, so you get an excess of electrons on one plate and a lack of electrons on the other plate.  So the electron count remains the same.  Electrons were not taken from C1 nor given to C2 + C3.
Smudge
   

Newbie
*

Posts: 27
We have a charged capacitor consisting of two flat parallel plates.
When these plates are moved apart, its voltage and energy increase.
But we are doing work against the forces of Coulomb.
If we move one plate from another, similar to how it
happens in the KPI of radio receivers, do we do the same work?
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
...
I like to work the problem backwards, what is energy?. Energy is motion relating to work (a Force acting over a Distance) ergo any extra energy in the Cook coil must relate to an extra Force/field or extra Distance/motion ie. current. So we can dispense with most of the other nonsense and look for means to produce extra Voltage or Current. As these are the only means to produce extra energy.

AC,

We’re already on the same page here, but see my next post to Smudge. I think it’s necessary for me to nail down what is happening with what I have before trying to go any further.

Quote
Here's a clue, Cook said only one coil is required which ends up acting like a linear/series generator. While two coils shown in the patent acts more like a flip-flop or alternating generator. So we now know the two coil setup has a flip-flop or alternating action which produces an extra force or current on each alternation cycle.
...

Yes, Cook made that plain where he detailed the actions and where he wrote about using the alternate changes of the iron cores to produce motion.

I appreciate your comments and posts AC. I do pay attention to them.

Regards
Cadman


---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
When a capacitor is charged electrons move from one plate to the other, so you get an excess of electrons on one plate and a lack of electrons on the other plate.  So the electron count remains the same.  Electrons were not taken from C1 nor given to C2 + C3.
Smudge

That is what I was taught and believed too, and is why I’m having difficulty understanding what is going on with this little circuit attached here.
Why, or how can there be, such a difference between C1 and C2 when the two caps are basically wired in parallel?

BTW, both coils are wound in the same direction, as Cook specified.

Regards
Cadman


---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1582
Cadman,

Certain additional info is needed from your circuit in order to possibly determine the source of the energies.  First, what is the inductance and DC resistance of the primary and secondary windings of the transformer?  What is the turns ratio secondary to primary and is the dot notation as shown below?

What type of circuit is used for the pulse source?  For example, the current in the primary has not reached it's full peak judging from the starting and ending voltage on C1.  If a single N-channel FET is used in a common source configuration, when it is turned off the magnitude of primary current will force the drain more than likely into avalanche depending on the FET's BVds.  This would have an effect of continuing the charging of C2 past the pulse turn-off time however, this would still be conservative normally.

We all know that UC=V^2*C/2 and that Q=CV so by simple substitution, UC=VQ/2 .

Regards,
Pm

Edit:  Also measuring the inductance of the 'primary aiding the secondary' and the 'primary bucking the secondary' would allow the k factor to be calculated.     
   
Newbie
*

Posts: 13
What most people lack is focus and a plan. All the successful FE inventors basically had the same plan or procedure as follows...
1)Build a system which shuttles energy between two or more circuit elements with minimal losses. Find the greatest efficiency.
2)Find ways or means to produce an extra force or an extra motion within the system to extend it's operation. Avoid equilibrium.
3)build on what was learned to produce enough extra force/motion to sustain the system operation.

This is a really good guide. Something I will share from experience is that this energy doesnt have to bounce between circuit elements it can also bounce between electrical and mechanical. The extra force doesnt always have to be 'extra' in terms of another force that is unaccounted for and otherwise mysterious but also a force that has acted against our direction if motion being flipped to assist our motion.
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
Certain additional info is needed from your circuit in order to possibly determine the source of the energies.  First, what is the inductance and DC resistance of the primary and secondary windings of the transformer?  What is the turns ratio secondary to primary and is the dot notation as shown below?

What type of circuit is used for the pulse source?
...
Regards,
Pm

Edit:  Also measuring the inductance of the 'primary aiding the secondary' and the 'primary bucking the secondary' would allow the k factor to be calculated.   

Partzman,

Thanks for responding. A complete schematic is attached and here’s the data.

Electrical measurements were taken at a 100 Hz meter setting using a DEREE DE-5000 LCR meter.

Straight rod core: 2.3cm diameter. x 18cm 99% pure iron powder in a 2.5cm OD plastic tube, hand compressed, no binder.

Primary: 20 AWG,  656 turns, 12.69 mH,  2.45 DCR,  199.63 μF
Secondary: 20 AWG, 1048 turns, 34.19 mH, 5.39 DCR, 74.08 μF

The way I understand it, the dot notation you drew for the primary is correct, but I’m unsure which end the dot should be at for the secondary. If you were winding them with the core laid horizontal in front of you, start at the left end and wind the wire going away from you, under the core, up, back toward you over the top of the core then down to complete 1 turn. Continue winding toward the right until the end of the spool then wind toward the left, back and forth as needed. Both coils are wound in the same manner.

The end of the wire you started with on the primary is connected to the positive and the other end connects to C2.

There is about a 2mm gap between the iron and primary wire, and about a 3 mm gap between primary and secondary windings. The gaps are from the PLA coil spools and air space for the 20ga wire primary leads. There are 6 spools for the primary coil, but the 2 center spools are not connected to anything other than terminals. There is a 3 mm space between each primary coil too. The other 4 coils are wired in series to make the 656 turn primary winding.

I don’t know how to measure the inductance 'primary aiding the secondary' and the 'primary bucking the secondary', otherwise, I would be happy to furnish that info.

Measured capacities: C1 = 4.38 mF, C2 = 2.63 mF, C3 = 2.63 mF

Regards
Cadman

PS Where should the secondary's dot be placed?

EDIT: The schematic has been replaced. The secondary's diode & cap polarity were wrong. Very sorry for any inconvenience.
« Last Edit: 2022-06-28, 10:52:32 by Cadman »


---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Full Member
***

Posts: 207
Cadman,

What type of circuit is used for the pulse source?  For example, the current in the primary has not reached it's full peak judging from the starting and ending voltage on C1.  If a single N-channel FET is used in a common source configuration, when it is turned off the magnitude of primary current will force the drain more than likely into avalanche depending on the FET's BVds.  This would have an effect of continuing the charging of C2 past the pulse turn-off time however, this would still be conservative normally.

Regards,
Pm

One advantage old time inventors had over present day researchers is that they used mechanical switches for their interrupters.  These switches produce an internal arc when opened.  As the arc fizzeles and the current goes down, the voltage will increase, if the circuit includes a load, such as an Inductor.  (Ed Gray referred to the voltage rise as 'overshoot'.  He found that this could be significant enough to overcharge and damage the capacitor driving the arc in his power tube.  Hence, the inclusion of TVS diode 46 in his circuit.). This could be a source of some 'exyra' energy in the Benitiz circuit, compared to what would appear when using a 'clean' interruption associated with semiconductor switches.

Another factor to consider is that an arc - or a magnetic field, which an arc has - will collapse faster than it expands, due to pressure against, then from, the active vacuum.  This will also increase the circuit's voltage.
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1716
That is what I was taught and believed too, and is why I’m having difficulty understanding what is going on with this little circuit attached here.
Why, or how can there be, such a difference between C1 and C2 when the two caps are basically wired in parallel?

BTW, both coils are wound in the same direction, as Cook specified.

Regards
Cadman
That is an overly simplified circuit.  I think you would gain from knowing the current waveforms at each capacitor.  Since Q is the time integral of that current waveform (over the time period where that Q changes value) it should give you some clue to answer your concerns.  Quite clearly your measurements indicate that the current waveform across C1 is different from that across C2 taken over the whole time period between your voltage measurements.  I think the most outstanding thing here is the apparent OU for energy in and energy out as partzman calculated, and that should be investigated.  I note that in your edited full diagram C3 is being charged up the wrong polarity for an electrolytic.  Is that having an effect?   I note your core is iron powder without any binder, just hand pressed into a tube.  I think that could be quite active as when magnetized there will be internal forces on the iron particles that could give the core some delayed magnetic recovery changes outside the pulse region.

Smudge   
   

Sr. Member
****

Posts: 374
I think that could be quite active as when magnetized there will be internal forces on the iron particles that could give the core some delayed magnetic recovery changes outside the pulse region.

That sounds akin to a Ferroelectric capacitor which has an oddly flat, nonlinear charge+discharge curve, which results in some pretty crazy hysteresis curves.
https://www.advancedsciencenews.com/direct-observation-negative-capacitance-ferroelectric-materials/

What happens to common AC formulae if real capacitance is negative during part of the cycle? ???


---------------------------
"An overly-skeptical scientist might hastily conclude by scooping and analyzing a thousand buckets of ocean water that the ocean has no fish in it."
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1716
This may be more relevant to the Holcombe threads.  I tried to get to my Smudge's Papers thread but I keep getting error messages.  I prepared this presentation on electron spin in 2013 but never got round to using it.

Smudge
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1582
Partzman,

Thanks for responding. A complete schematic is attached and here’s the data.

Electrical measurements were taken at a 100 Hz meter setting using a DEREE DE-5000 LCR meter.

Straight rod core: 2.3cm diameter. x 18cm 99% pure iron powder in a 2.5cm OD plastic tube, hand compressed, no binder.

Primary: 20 AWG,  656 turns, 12.69 mH,  2.45 DCR,  199.63 μF
Secondary: 20 AWG, 1048 turns, 34.19 mH, 5.39 DCR, 74.08 μF

The way I understand it, the dot notation you drew for the primary is correct, but I’m unsure which end the dot should be at for the secondary. If you were winding them with the core laid horizontal in front of you, start at the left end and wind the wire going away from you, under the core, up, back toward you over the top of the core then down to complete 1 turn. Continue winding toward the right until the end of the spool then wind toward the left, back and forth as needed. Both coils are wound in the same manner.

The end of the wire you started with on the primary is connected to the positive and the other end connects to C2.

There is about a 2mm gap between the iron and primary wire, and about a 3 mm gap between primary and secondary windings. The gaps are from the PLA coil spools and air space for the 20ga wire primary leads. There are 6 spools for the primary coil, but the 2 center spools are not connected to anything other than terminals. There is a 3 mm space between each primary coil too. The other 4 coils are wired in series to make the 656 turn primary winding.

I don’t know how to measure the inductance 'primary aiding the secondary' and the 'primary bucking the secondary', otherwise, I would be happy to furnish that info.

Measured capacities: C1 = 4.38 mF, C2 = 2.63 mF, C3 = 2.63 mF

Regards
Cadman

PS Where should the secondary's dot be placed?

EDIT: The schematic has been replaced. The secondary's diode & cap polarity were wrong. Very sorry for any inconvenience.

Cadman,

On your schematic shown below, the dot convention would be correct for the case where C3 is charged thru the secondary diode during the collapse of the primary.  OTOH, if the C3 is charged during the time when the primary is also being charged, the secondary dot would be on the other end of the secondary.  The dot ends we will consider to be the start of each winding.  As Smudge pointed out, the polarity of C3 needs to be reversed.

The IRF9Z30 has a typical Vds max of 50v so IMO it will avalanche during the time it is turned off.  This means the source will drop ~50v below the voltage on C1 and the IRF9Z30 will conduct the collapsing current in the primary until S2 is opened or before depending on the transformer coupling, currents, etc.

To do a 'P1 aid S1' measurement, connect the measuring instrument to the dot or start of the primary, then connect the end of the primary to the dot end or start of the secondary with the end of the secondary connected to the measuring instrument.

To do the 'P1 buck S1' measurement, again connect the measuring instrument to the dot or start of the primary but then connect the end of the primary to the end of the secondary.  The dot end or start of the secondary is now the other connection to the measuring instrument.  This buck mode should read a lower value of inductance than the aid mode measured above.

If you have a scope and current probe or CSR [current sense resistor] and could take measurements of the voltages and currents as the circuit operates would really be helpful in calculating the various energy levels.

Edit: Once you have the aid and buck measurements, I can simulate your circuit to see what would conventionally happen in your circuit.

Regards,
Pm
   

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1716
That sounds akin to a Ferroelectric capacitor which has an oddly flat, nonlinear charge+discharge curve, which results in some pretty crazy hysteresis curves.
https://www.advancedsciencenews.com/direct-observation-negative-capacitance-ferroelectric-materials/

What happens to common AC formulae if real capacitance is negative during part of the cycle? ???

A transformer core with the secondary loaded by a capacitor and driven by sine waves sees a negative reluctance.  Don't know what that does :-\

Smudge
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
That is an overly simplified circuit.  I think you would gain from knowing the current waveforms at each capacitor.  Since Q is the time integral of that current waveform (over the time period where that Q changes value) it should give you some clue to answer your concerns.  Quite clearly your measurements indicate that the current waveform across C1 is different from that across C2 taken over the whole time period between your voltage measurements.  I think the most outstanding thing here is the apparent OU for energy in and energy out as partzman calculated, and that should be investigated.  I note that in your edited full diagram C3 is being charged up the wrong polarity for an electrolytic.  Is that having an effect?   I note your core is iron powder without any binder, just hand pressed into a tube.  I think that could be quite active as when magnetized there will be internal forces on the iron particles that could give the core some delayed magnetic recovery changes outside the pulse region.

Smudge   

Smudge,

I literally got those wires crossed in my hurry to fix what I thought was a mistake in the first circuit diagram. You know how it is sometimes, ‘The hurrier I go, the behinder I get’.
When the test was made C3 was charging with the correct polarity. I have to rebuild the circuit anyway so I’ll take my time and triple check everything and get it right next time.

I was a bit suprised at the apparent OU numbers, and I still can’t really believe them. The whole point of this circuit is just to give the coil 1 pulse and see what ended up in C2 and C3 and this circuit is only used for that 1 pulse.

I was hoping the total of C2&3 would be more than the discharge from C1, actually expected it to be. In my thinking C2 would contain both the charge or energy that was applied to the primary plus any emf produced during discharge, less the resistance loss, and C3 would contain some extra from the secondary coil. Then adding those together should be a little more than C1 expended. If that proved to be true, then building Cooks induction coil battery should be possible.

Regards
Cadman



---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
Cadman,

On your schematic shown below, the dot convention would be correct for the case where C3 is charged thru the secondary diode during the collapse of the primary.  OTOH, if the C3 is charged during the time when the primary is also being charged, the secondary dot would be on the other end of the secondary.  The dot ends we will consider to be the start of each winding.  As Smudge pointed out, the polarity of C3 needs to be reversed.

The IRF9Z30 has a typical Vds max of 50v so IMO it will avalanche during the time it is turned off.  This means the source will drop ~50v below the voltage on C1 and the IRF9Z30 will conduct the collapsing current in the primary until S2 is opened or before depending on the transformer coupling, currents, etc.

To do a 'P1 aid S1' measurement, connect the measuring instrument to the dot or start of the primary, then connect the end of the primary to the dot end or start of the secondary with the end of the secondary connected to the measuring instrument.

To do the 'P1 buck S1' measurement, again connect the measuring instrument to the dot or start of the primary but then connect the end of the primary to the end of the secondary.  The dot end or start of the secondary is now the other connection to the measuring instrument.  This buck mode should read a lower value of inductance than the aid mode measured above.

If you have a scope and current probe or CSR [current sense resistor] and could take measurements of the voltages and currents as the circuit operates would really be helpful in calculating the various energy levels.

Edit: Once you have the aid and buck measurements, I can simulate your circuit to see what would conventionally happen in your circuit.

Regards,
Pm

Partzman,

Thanks for the dot info. So basically the dot goes where the voltage enters the coil when it’s active? This has always confused the heck out of me for some reason.

I haven’t had a chance to get the aid & buck figures yet, I’ll see if I can get some free time this evening for that.

Also I don’t have a CSR or current probe, so I’ll order a CSR but that will take a while to get.

The IRF9Z30 is the best pmos on hand. Do you, or anyone, have a recommendation for one that would live with this circuit? Quite a few of these have died on me including the one in the circuit now.

Regards
Cadman



---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
For anyone interested, these pics are from an earlier open voltage test with a slightly different setup.
The primary is composed of the first and sixth coil in series. The middle 4 coils are wired in series as an output so together it’s similar to Figuera’s second patent. The 1048 turn secondary is also on there, and there’s a diode at the end of the primary to see what that might do.

It looks like this little DSO-Shell is only good for about 60v. Anything higher gets truncated and the voltage numbers are wrong so it’s mainly used to look at the wave forms, but I’d rather risk it than the Rigol. The traces seem to be ok.




---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
Partzman,

P1 aid S1:   014.008 mH

P1 buck S1:  80.040 mH

Thanks for volunteering your time for a simulation. Looking forward to it.

Regards,
Cadman


---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1582
Partzman,

P1 aid S1:   014.008 mH

P1 buck S1:  80.040 mH

Thanks for volunteering your time for a simulation. Looking forward to it.

Regards,
Cadman

Cadman,

OK, thanks for those measurements however, the aid measurement should be larger than the buck.  You can picture it this way, when like notations are connected such as dot to dot or no-dot to no-dot, the coils on a common core will be in a bucking mode and the resultant value will be less than the aid mode of dot to no-dot.  Also, the dot notation can be chosen arbitrarily and does mean it is always the start winding.  You can choose to indicate any coil connection with a dot as long as the notation is consistent throughout the schematic.

I have also already run a preliminary sim as the k factor was the only missing variable but the results are far from being what you see.  So, I noticed something in your data some posts back which is repeated here-

Primary: 20 AWG,  656 turns, 12.69 mH,  2.45 DCR,  199.63 μF
Secondary: 20 AWG, 1048 turns, 34.19 mH, 5.39 DCR, 74.08 μF


How did you measure these relatively large capacitance values?  I assume since the primary value is larger than the secondary that we are coil to core measurements but in the uF range?  If so, is the core connected to the circuit ground or left open?  These values are way too high for self capacitance values IMO.

If these large values are truly the primary and secondary coil to core distributed capacitance values, then you have two coupled transmission lines with individual td's of 1.59ms each using Td=(L*C)^1/2 .

I'll wait for your response before proceeding with the sim.

Regards,
Pm
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
Patzman,

I started getting OL displays when measuring these coils at anything higher than 100 hZ and erratic ones at that freq. Put in a new battery and that took care of it, so every previous measurement other than the cap volts is probably junk.

Using 1 kHz measurement freq.

P1 aid S1:  79.29 mH
P1 buck S1:  14.014 mH

P1:  1.999 uF
S1:  744 nF

P1:  12.65 mH
S1:  34.00 mH

Cadman



---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1582
Cadman,

Based on your current parameters, below are two sims. 

The first has the secondary L2 connected in the boost mode that is, the secondary L2 is conducting during the primary L1 charging phase.

The second has the secondary L2 connected in the flyback mode that is the secondary L2 conducts during the collapse of the primary L1.

D4 and the zener model the avalanche as the IRF7343P model in LtSpice did not include this parameter.

The voltages across C1 and C2 are measured at ~2ms and can be compared to your results.  The voltage across C3 is close to C2 in both cases but not shown.

The buck and aid inductance measurements of L1 and L2 calculate to a k=.49 .

The results here are not even close to yours so the core material must be playing an important part.

Edit: Note the extremely high surge current at the start which is most likely destroying M1 in your bench device.

Regards,
Pm
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
Partzman,

Thank you very much! Almost 80A is way more than expected. Now I have an idea what kind of mosfet I have to get.

I don’t know what difference it could make but your sims don’t have that contact right after C1. When testing, and using both hands, the toggle switch is opened manually as soon as I can after pressing the 1ms pulse button. Even so, I doubt if the delay would be less than 50ms.

Earlier, Smudge mentioned the current waveform across C1 being different from that across C2 taken over the whole time period between the voltage measurements. Astonishingly, C2 takes 220ms to reach full charge after the 1ms impulse. Of course, now that mosfet isn’t any good so I can’t get the C1 curve right now.

Before we make any conclusions about the core, would you mind repeating the the second sim with C2 volts measured at 220ms and C1 at 2ms and also 50ms to see what that shows?

Regards
Cadman


---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1582
Cadman,

Here is the flyback sim showing the C1, C2, and C3 voltage measurements at ~50ms.  They have basically not changed since the 2ms point in time due to the fact that there is no energy input after M1 is turned off.  If the  sim is run for a longer period, the voltages don't change.

So, this means that in your bench device, there is some form of additional energy being received by the circuit after M1 is turned off.  The most likely source is the core although the when you turn off the mechanical switch, the resultant switch or contact "bounce" may have some means of inputting extra energy.

Regards,
Pm
   
Group: Moderator
Jr. Member
*****

Posts: 95
Partzman,

I appreciate your assistance. Thank you.

This transformer was built to make it easier to change it’s core & winding configuration, but now, since it might be the source of some anomalous energy I don’t want to change anything about it. I have all the material on hand to duplicate it so that will be the next step unless someone has a test they would like to have performed with it as is.

If a successful duplicate can be made then I can try different winding methods and core material. I have R45 welding rods and I can try to get some transformer steel too. I’m wondering if the the primary coil construction could have an effect, like continuous wound vs. the multiple segments it has now. Also how does having the secondary on a PLA spool instead of directly on the primary windings change things.

Studying Smudge’s paper on electron spin as a source of energy I can see a similarity in the construction, and this passage from page 13 seems similar to the transformer's operation: “If we could have spins present while an applied magnetic field is rising, then not present (or better still reversed) while the applied field is falling, we break the claw-back reciprocity.”
If changing core material and winding methods has little effect on the output then I think this would appear to be the most likely explanation for where the energy is coming from.

Regards
Cadman



---------------------------
'Tis better to try and fail than never try at all
   
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2022-11-28, 05:43:46