Transient Power Generator (TPG) - Asymmetric Magnetic Induction

[lfarrand]

Hi,

I had an idea and thought it was worthy of researching further.

My idea is to harvest the magnetic field collapse using asymmetric magnetic induction.

Here are some diagrams of the high level idea.


Composite view


Input coil switches on, output coils are switched off / open circuit


Output coil switches off / open circuit, output coils are switched on

So the general idea is that there is one input coil which generates a magnetic field. When this coil is switched on the output coils are switched off and open circuit. Then the output coils switch on a few nanoseconds before the input coil switches off, after which the input coil switches off. The magnetic field that was created by the input coil then collapses (at the speed of light?) and passes through the output coils which are then induced to create a current.

I've made a small prototype with one input coil and two output coils and it seems to work well. I'm now in the process of making a larger prototype with more coils.

[chief kolbacict]

and it seems to work well.

it seems to work well, or it actually work well ? 

[lfarrand]

Hah, yes, I guess it's a black or white scenario.

The reason I said 'seems to' is that I haven't done any input/output measurements yet. I've just verified that I am able to charge two capacitors using the two output coils in my simple proof of concept. In theory they should only be charged from the collapse of the magnetic field since there is very little overlap (approx. 6ns)  between the input & output switches, during which they are both on.

Here is a capture of the PWM signals from my logic analyser probe. The top trace (channel 13) is the input switch and the bottom trace (channel 14) is the output switch(es).

[F6FLT]

Staggering the switches changes nothing. The energy recoverable when a magnetic field collapses is equal to the energy required to create it.
Asymmetry in the time taken to establish and collapse a field corresponds to asymmetry in the creation and recovery of energy, not to asymmetry in the quantity of energy.

[lfarrand]

I will perform some tests with the bigger prototype and report back.

[Smudge]

The energy recoverable when a magnetic field collapses is equal to the energy required to create it.

But we can and do use field creation and collapse to transport energy that exceeds those values.  In transformers the transport from primary to secondary is a waveform at 90 degree phase to that doing the creation and collapse and doesn't contribute to that creation and collapse.  There the source and sink energies are all electrical.  Things can be different when the creation and collapse is transporting energy from a thermal source to an electrical sink.

Smudge 

[F6FLT]

In the case of the transformer, not all the energy is stored in the field, as the secondary takes energy from the field at the same time as the primary supplies it. The secondary tries to collapse the field, while the primary tries to maintain it. In the near-field, this amounts to a direct interaction of charges between the secondary and the primary, and the field is the coupling vector.
As soon as there's a delay in which we hope to create a field at one moment, then use it at a later moment, only the energy of the field can be recovered. What's more, outside electromagnetic waves, this is an impossibility, since current and magnetic field are one and the same reality. You can't interrupt a current instantaneously in a primary inductive circuit since the collapsing field variation tries to maintain it. You have to close the secondary circuit at exactly the same moment as you open the primary circuit, and you'll never have anything but the energy of the field at that moment.

[Smudge]

In the case of the transformer, not all the energy is stored in the field, as the secondary takes energy from the field at the same time as the primary supplies it. The secondary tries to collapse the field, while the primary tries to maintain it. In the near-field, this amounts to a direct interaction of charges between the secondary and the primary, and the field is the coupling vector.

Yes, you are here considering the load current component of the primary coil.  You could have said "the secondary tries but fails to collapse the field, while the primary tries but fails to maintain it".  And that is over part of the cycle.  At another part of the cycle the opposite is true, the primary tries but fails to collapse the field, while the secondary tries but fails to maintain it.  The magnetizing current component of the primary achieves the magnetization and demagnetization, irrespective of whether the secondary is delivering energy, the secondary current plays no part in this.  And that is purely reactive current where the source supplies energy over part of a cycle and then it gets fed back over another part.

As soon as there's a delay in which we hope to create a field at one moment, then use it at a later moment, only the energy of the field can be recovered. What's more, outside electromagnetic waves, this is an impossibility, since current and magnetic field are one and the same reality.

Since the current you are considering is within a coil that statement can't apply to remanent field where there is zero current.  The image below shows the energy needed to take the core from zero field to its remanant point,the blue shaded area.  It also shows the energy needed to take the field back to zero, the red area.  The two areas may be equal, but in both cases it is energy input, there is no recovery.  The situation where the field decays by a thermal process is different.  Thermal agitation tries to collapse the field while the secondary tries to maintain it.  The field is the coupling vector between thermal energy input and secondary energy output. 

Smudge

[F6FLT]

...Thermal agitation tries to collapse the field while the secondary tries to maintain it.  The field is the coupling vector between thermal energy input and secondary energy output. 

Smudge

I don't know what effect you're talking about exactly. The thermal effect is used in magnetic refrigeration, for example. The effect there is significant, but it's a classic cycle with one hot and one cold source.
I haven't heard that room temperature demagnetizes with the possibility of recovering energy at the same time, unless the ferromagnetic material was initially hotter than room temperature because it had just been magnetized.