PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2026-01-29, 08:37:51
News: If you have a suggestion or need for a new board title, please PM the Admins.
Please remember to keep topics and posts of the FE or casual nature. :)

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8
Author Topic: Transformer Induction  (Read 26455 times)
Topic Options img
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #50 on: 2025-09-15, 09:34:59 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-14, 17:24:42
That has been the case with most of my past experiments however, thanks to you and this latest dielectric test, I have produced the following results seen below. 

Basically, the ferrite core has a 4V/T primary
The V/T depends on the rate of flux change so I guess you assume the voltage on the primary would always achieve that rate, hence you have a 10T primary against your 40V supply.

Quote
with a 1.22ufd cap in parallel with a 90uh inductor both of which are in the center core hole.
A circuit would help here as it is not clear whether the paralleled 90uH L and 1.22uF C are also in parallel with the primary or in series (my guess is in series).  And how it is driven by the mosfet.

Quote
All leads are in the core center hole exposed to the E-Field.  The resonance frequency is ~15.1kHz as seen in the scope pix below.  CH1(yel) is the gate drive for the primary mosfet devices, CH2(blu) is the power supply, CH3(pnk) is the voltage across the LC network, and CH4(grn) is the LC current.

ICR1 shows the differential at the charge separation switching to be 6.15v.  Note this is larger than the 4V/T of the primary.
But does it change value if the circuit is pulled out of the hole?

Quote
ICR2 shows the RMS values for the LC voltage and current.  This LC resonance is not seen by the primary.
Are you saying the primary coil is seeing current impulses related to the pulsing with no indication of this LC resonance?.

Quote
Also note that this test is running continuously but can also be demonstrated with a single pulse as well.

It is my opinion that my tests with loads outside the core are also operating in this fashion but via Lenz, they affect the primary energy.

So, I leave you with the question, what is supplying the energy to this resonance circuit?
It is from the 40V supply that is seeing current impulses that integrate to a non-zero value.  In some respects this can be seen in the LC current waveform where the two sudden steps are of slightly unequal value.  I think you could pull the circuit out of the hole and get exactly the same results.
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #51 on: 2025-09-15, 09:45:08 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-14, 16:23:26
The toroid core I am using is metglas and with a 10T primary, the inductance is 3.4mh.  Therefore, the resonance frequency with 17pf of dielectric in the hole should be ~662kHz.  I have tried driving the primary with a 50 ohm source using sine waveform and also a series connected 1k resistor with the primary.  I see no resonance at any time manually sweeping the frequency spectrum.  I then removed the dielectric and placed a single secondary turn with 22pf capacitance and again found no resonance with a sweep.
But there must be a resonance there of the 22pF with the secondary inductance.  How are you looking for the resonance, a dip or increase in the primary voltage?
   
img  Verpies
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #52 on: 2025-09-15, 10:28:37 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4513
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-15, 08:50:16
Your compression got you within a factor of 2 to the 5000 permittivity.
Wouldn't that mean that the formula C = επr2/d is incorrect and d does not affect the capacitance ?
r is the radius of the plates , d is the thickness of the dielectric and ε is its permittivity.
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #53 on: 2025-09-15, 15:23:07 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-15, 09:34:59
The V/T depends on the rate of flux change so I guess you assume the voltage on the primary would always achieve that rate, hence you have a 10T primary against your 40V supply.

Yes.  Any delay in the dispersion of flux within the core appears to be negligible.

Quote
A circuit would help here as it is not clear whether the paralleled 90uH L and 1.22uF C are also in parallel with the primary or in series (my guess is in series).  And how it is driven by the mosfet.

I've posted the schematic below.  The input is driven by the same 3/4 bridge circuit I've been using on the other charge separation circuits. 

Quote
But does it change value if the circuit is pulled out of the hole?

See response below.

Quote
Are you saying the primary coil is seeing current impulses related to the pulsing with no indication of this LC resonance?.

Yes that is correct.

Quote
It is from the 40V supply that is seeing current impulses that integrate to a non-zero value.  In some respects this can be seen in the LC current waveform where the two sudden steps are of slightly unequal value.  I think you could pull the circuit out of the hole and get exactly the same results.

First, when the LC circuit is pulled from the hole, there is no voltage or current measured.  It must be under the influence of the E_Field to achieve the measurements shown.  There is also no change in the primary current.

Next, the primary current is non-symmetrical in it's rise and fall due to the nature of the 3/4 bridge.  The current increase is created by the primary being switched between +40v and ground with relatively low loss mosfets.  The collapsing current however, is switched between ground and +40 with the addition of one Schottky diode drop.  This means the collapsing current sees a net voltage of ~40.4v.  Therefore, the time for the collapsing current to reach zero is slightly shorter that the time for the increasing current.  Since the generator is producing a symmetrical square wave, we see a slight pause in the negative portion of the resonant waveform during the charge separation polarity change.

Now, what has not been noticed is the fact that I'm able to get a potential difference between L1 and C1 to create the resonant waveform in the first place!  If L1 were to be replaced by a resistor R1, the potential between R1 and C1 would be zero thus rendering zero circuit current.  So how does this work?  I have found that an inductor even with a precise layer wound construction, does not charge separate as expected.  It is always lower in value than expected and at this time I do not have an explanation.  This then provides the means for the potential difference between L1 and C1 and also explains why the charge separation differentials are not 2x the V/T as they should be.

Pm
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #54 on: 2025-09-15, 15:52:47 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-15, 09:45:08
But there must be a resonance there of the 22pF with the secondary inductance.  How are you looking for the resonance, a dip or increase in the primary voltage?

I looked for resonance changes in both primary and secondary voltages and currents and couldn't find any measurable changes.
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #55 on: 2025-09-15, 19:56:58 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-15, 15:23:07
I've posted the schematic below.  The input is driven by the same 3/4 bridge circuit I've been using on the other charge separation circuits.
Thanks for that.  Could I ask for more clarification, how was the scope probe ground lead connected.  Was it as A or B in image Mod1 below?  Same question when the LC circuit is pulled out of the hole, A or B in image mod2?
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #56 on: 2025-09-15, 20:50:55 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-15, 19:56:58
Thanks for that.  Could I ask for more clarification, how was the scope probe ground lead connected.  Was it as A or B in image Mod1 below?  Same question when the LC circuit is pulled out of the hole, A or B in image mod2?

It was A in Mod1 and B in Mod2.
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #57 on: 2025-09-15, 21:26:59 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Smudge,

In your configuration Mod1 with the ground in position B, the ground lead is charge separated and creates havoc with the overall results.  So, I have run a test with the resonance circuit measured in a differential mode as shown in the schematic below.

The resultant scope traces are shown in "ICR Differential".  CH3(pnk) is connected to the top of L1/C1, CH2(blu) is connected to the bottom of L1/C1, and the difference between them is measured and shown in the Math(red) channel.  The scope ground connection is made in the 3/4 bridge primary drive circuitry.

With the complete L1/C1 assembly moved outside the core, no hint of resonance is seen.
   
img  Verpies
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #58 on: 2025-09-15, 22:33:00 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4513
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-15, 19:56:58
Could I ask for more clarification, how was the scope probe ground lead connected.  Was it as A or B in image Mod1 below?
The answer to this question is very significant.
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #59 on: 2025-09-16, 07:36:26 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-15, 21:26:59
Smudge,

In your configuration Mod1 with the ground in position B, the ground lead is charge separated and creates havoc with the overall results.  So, I have run a test with the resonance circuit measured in a differential mode as shown in the schematic below.

The resultant scope traces are shown in "ICR Differential".  CH3(pnk) is connected to the top of L1/C1, CH2(blu) is connected to the bottom of L1/C1, and the difference between them is measured and shown in the Math(red) channel.  The scope ground connection is made in the 3/4 bridge primary drive circuitry.

With the complete L1/C1 assembly moved outside the core, no hint of resonance is seen.

Thanks for doing that.  I think this is quite significant as it shows that the E field in that core hole can excite the LC circuit.  IMO this is not the dielectric displacement that I have been talking about but merely induction into components that have dimensions (including their connecting wires) that act like E field antenna.  An L by itself will not carry significant AC current.  Neither would a lone C.  But put the two together and you get that 1A rms.  That circulating 1A rms sinusoidal current can't create sinusoidal AC flux in the core.  I think it would be interesting to put a series R in the LC circuit that dissipates significant sinusoidal AC power as shown in the image below.  Then check whether that power comes from the primary power source via the difference in the current impulses at the leading and trailing edges of the pulse.
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #60 on: 2025-09-16, 07:39:22 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-15, 20:50:55
It was A in Mod1 and B in Mod2.
That was what I expected you to say.  Your new differential measurement appears to settle the conflict.
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #61 on: 2025-09-16, 14:35:19 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
@Partzman,
In anticipation of you showing genuine OU in this endeavour, and if the inductor produces the field shown in Mod4 image below, I am offering the possibility that this field crossing that within the core coheres the Larmor precessions of the atomic dipoles in the core for that to be the source.  Wild I know but you have to start somewhere.
Smudge
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #62 on: 2025-09-16, 15:17:02 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-16, 07:36:26
Thanks for doing that.  I think this is quite significant as it shows that the E field in that core hole can excite the LC circuit.  IMO this is not the dielectric displacement that I have been talking about but merely induction into components that have dimensions (including their connecting wires) that act like E field antenna.  An L by itself will not carry significant AC current.  Neither would a lone C.  But put the two together and you get that 1A rms.  That circulating 1A rms sinusoidal current can't create sinusoidal AC flux in the core.  I think it would be interesting to put a series R in the LC circuit that dissipates significant sinusoidal AC power as shown in the image below.  Then check whether that power comes from the primary power source via the difference in the current impulses at the leading and trailing edges of the pulse.

Up to this point I have been using short clip leads to connect L1 and C1 together but in the first scope pix below, these leads have been soldered.  The improvement in both resonant voltage and current can be seen when compared to the results in my post #57.  I haven't tried to measure the Q of this circuit yet but it appears to be quite high!

The next two pix show the circuit with a 1 ohm resistor placed as you show in your schematic using soldered leads.  The second pix shows the measured primary current stored in R1(wht) with the circuit in place in the core.  Also seen is the differential resonant voltage on the Math(red) channel.

The third pix shows the primary current in CH4(grn) overlaid on the R1 stored current with the circuit removed from the core.  Essentially there appears to be no difference.  Note that all these scope measurements are taken in the hi-res mode which is 16 bit full deflection resolution.
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #63 on: 2025-09-16, 15:22:04 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-16, 14:35:19
@Partzman,
In anticipation of you showing genuine OU in this endeavour, and if the inductor produces the field shown in Mod4 image below, I am offering the possibility that this field crossing that within the core coheres the Larmor precessions of the atomic dipoles in the core for that to be the source.  Wild I know but you have to start somewhere.
Smudge

You could be correct with your speculation however, at present the L1 core axis is 90 degrees to your diagram.  I do expect to be able demonstrate OU with this concept but not quite there yet.
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #64 on: 2025-09-16, 15:28:06 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: verpies on 2025-09-14, 23:59:22

@Partzman:  To cold bond the BaTi powder, you can find some shop with 80 ton press and ask them squeeze to powder for you into a pellet. 80 ton press is not an exotic piece of equipment (here is a video of a 500 ton press)

Better late than never.  I do have a 20 ton "H" press and actually thot about using it but talked myself out of it when I considered how I would get the pellet out of a metal sleeve without destroying it.  Any thots?
   
img  Verpies
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #65 on: 2025-09-16, 15:44:07 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4513
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-16, 15:28:06
I do have a 20 ton "H" press...
20 ton is not enough at your plate area. You need at least 300MPa to bond the powder without heating.
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #66 on: 2025-09-16, 15:53:11 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: verpies on 2025-09-16, 15:44:07
20 ton is not enough at your plate area. You need at least 300MPa to bond the powder without heating.

OK, thanks!
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #67 on: 2025-09-16, 16:03:04 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
I thought I would post a pix of the core I've been using for these past tests as in the past there was some question about the toroids I was using.

This core is assembled with 2 complete sets EC-70 core in N27 material with the center legs removed and stacked as shown.  The AL=4.93uH/T^2 .
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #68 on: 2025-09-16, 19:20:33 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-16, 15:22:04
You could be correct with your speculation however, at present the L1 core axis is 90 degrees to your diagram.  I do expect to be able demonstrate OU with this concept but not quite there yet.
So its magnetic field gets into the core, for one half of the core mostly parallel to the core field there, but for the other half of the core it would be anti-parallel?  I'll ponder on that.

Could you please show us a picture of the LC in the hole at its position where you took your measurements?  Thanks.
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #69 on: 2025-09-16, 20:49:23 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-16, 19:20:33
So its magnetic field gets into the core, for one half of the core mostly parallel to the core field there, but for the other half of the core it would be anti-parallel?  I'll ponder on that.

Could you please show us a picture of the LC in the hole at its position where you took your measurements?  Thanks.

Attached is a pix of L1 and C1 in the core.  The position of L1 in the plane shown is sensitive to it's location relative to the core.  There is a large H-Field in L1 that could be coupling to the EC-70 core assembly although this doesn't appear to show up in the primary current.  I have done some tests with L1 tightly coupled to the EC-70 core but need to do more testing before posting.
   
img  Verpies
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #70 on: 2025-09-16, 21:31:40 »

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 4513
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-16, 20:49:23


Rememeber that the core does not have an infinite permeability and the flux leaks out of it like this:


Gaps or loaded secondary windings only exacerbate this leakage.
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #71 on: 2025-09-17, 07:23:35 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-16, 20:49:23
Attached is a pix of L1 and C1 in the core.  The position of L1 in the plane shown is sensitive to it's location relative to the core.  There is a large H-Field in L1 that could be coupling to the EC-70 core assembly although this doesn't appear to show up in the primary current.  I have done some tests with L1 tightly coupled to the EC-70 core but need to do more testing before posting.
Thanks for that, it gives me a clear view of the coupling between L1 and the core, something for my brain to work on.
   
img  Smudge
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #72 on: 2025-09-17, 10:02:27 »

Group: Professor
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2332
Quote from: partzman on 2025-09-16, 15:17:02
Up to this point I have been using short clip leads to connect L1 and C1 together but in the first scope pix below, these leads have been soldered.  The improvement in both resonant voltage and current can be seen when compared to the results in my post #57.  I haven't tried to measure the Q of this circuit yet but it appears to be quite high!
And presumably the scope channels are as stated in your post #57

Quote
The next two pix show the circuit with a 1 ohm resistor placed as you show in your schematic using soldered leads.  The second pix shows the measured primary current stored in R1(wht) with the circuit in place in the core.  Also seen is the differential resonant voltage on the Math(red) channel.
I think you didn't mean "primary current stored in R1".  The current through R1 has to be the sine wave that was CH4 green but will now be at a reduced level.  I see you have CH4 rms value as 960.2mA compared to 1.519A previously but the CH4 trace is not there.  Is that really the new rms current flowing round the LCR resonant circuit?  If so it represents almost 1W dissipation that must come from somewhere.  You have a primary current trace (white) and I see it is a triangular waveform, not what I expected, so I must rethink my analysis.
 
Quote
The third pix shows the primary current in CH4(grn) overlaid on the R1 stored current with the circuit removed from the core.  Essentially there appears to be no difference.  Note that all these scope measurements are taken in the hi-res mode which is 16 bit full deflection resolution.
I see CH4(grn) overlaid on the differential resonant voltage Math(red) channel.

Edit.  I guess R1 is a scope trace that is previously recorded and not an R1 resistor, so your third pix is really showing two traces overlaid (green on white).  Would still like to know if the LCR circulatory current through the 1 0hm resistor is that 960mA.
   
img  partzman
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #73 on: 2025-09-17, 15:49:00 »
Group: Experimentalist
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2232
Quote from: Smudge on 2025-09-17, 10:02:27
And presumably the scope channels are as stated in your post #57

Yes, that is correct.

Quote
I think you didn't mean "primary current stored in R1".  The current through R1 has to be the sine wave that was CH4 green but will now be at a reduced level. 

Sorry for the confusion.  The "primary current stored in R1" should have read "primary current stored in Ref1".  IOW, the previously measured primary current with the resonant L1/C1 in place and operating.

Quote
I see you have CH4 rms value as 960.2mA compared to 1.519A previously but the CH4 trace is not there.  Is that really the new rms current flowing round the LCR resonant circuit?  If so it represents almost 1W dissipation that must come from somewhere.  You have a primary current trace (white) and I see it is a triangular waveform, not what I expected, so I must rethink my analysis.
 I see CH4(grn) overlaid on the differential resonant voltage Math(red) channel.

Edit.  I guess R1 is a scope trace that is previously recorded and not an R1 resistor, so your third pix is really showing two traces overlaid (green on white).  Would still like to know if the LCR circulatory current through the 1 0hm resistor is that 960mA.

I will have to re-run the test and actually measure the current through R1.  It will be considerably less than the resonant current of 1.519A without the resistor in the circuit but it will have some value that will produce an energy level that is not accounted for normally.  The 960.2ma current measurement on CH4(grn) in the second scope pix is an rms measurement of the increase and collapse of the primary current.  In the 3rd pix, the 953.3ma is again an rms measurement of the increase and collapse of the primary current with L1/C1 and R1 removed from the core.
   
img  Allcanadian
Re: Transformer Induction « Reply #74 on: 2025-09-17, 16:56:48 »
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3064
I suspect the circuit anomaly could be due to what I call a lack of follow through.

For example, many suppose all of the magnetic field is contained within the core based on hearsay. That is, the textbooks show a closed field confirmed by many simulations. Of course this is complete nonsense and in the real world, measured with real hall effect sensors and arrays, some of the field around the coil always curls back on itself outside the coil and core.

Based on real world experience here is the first thing I see when looking at the circuit partzman posted.

1)The core coil is near a corner which increases magnetic field leakage. In effect it partially closes the field path.
2)The core coil is next to a nub extending from the middle of the inner core increasing magnetic field leakage. In effect it partially closes the field path
3)The inner coil L1 is literally on the nub extending from the middle of the inner core where I would expect leakage.
4)The inner coil L1 is aligned with the nub, near the core coil end where leakage should be the greatest.

Whenever we do experiments we should always test every premise. So if we suppose all the magnetic field stays within the core we should test it. This is literally the first test which should have been done once the coil was wound on the core because all the other premises are dependent on it.

I can also say with near absolute certainty the core field model Verpies posted is incorrect. Verpies coil is in the middle of the core, covering most of the leg, not in the corner like the actual circuit. There is no nub in the middle of the leg extending inward at the end on the core coil. It's obvious the model is nothing like the actual circuit.

It's not rocket science, buy a $2 linear hall effect sensor, attach it to your DSO, energize the core coil and map the direction and magnitude of the actual magnetic field on a big piece of paper with a picture of the coil and core.

AC



---------------------------
Comprehend and Copy Nature... Viktor Schauberger

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”― Richard P. Feynman
   
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2026-01-29, 08:37:51