Confirming the Delayed Lenz Effect

[MileHigh]

Magluvin:

I read that patent a while ago.  The jist of it is that the "interleaving" or "pseudo-bifiler" winding of what is actually a single coil allows for the inherent capacitance between the coils to be charged to a much higher voltage potential.  So it's "tricky" in the sense that there is not much more capacitance in the windings, but rather the opportunity to charge that inter-winding capacitance to a higher potential.

You can also visualize (at least I do) this:  The "mini capacitors" between each winding are "fleeting" in the sense that the dielectric that sustains the electric field does not emulate a purely insulating environment.  Thee is a conductor in parallel with the dielectric that acts to short out the "mini capaciors."

There is an excellent model in real life for all of this.  A true model of an ideal inductor is a massless spring.  It's just a "force in the air."  But a real-world spring has mass.  And lucky for us, mass is equal to capacitance in this model.  So that means a real-world spring is a decent analogy for an inductor with an associated capacitance, but oscillating thousands or millions times more slowly.

MileHigh

[Farmhand]

What I got from reading the patent some time ago was that one of his main objectives for the "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS",
was to do away with capacitors which were costly at the time. Page 1 lines 26 to 31 cover this objective and then
lines 32 to 38 he says what he means by the term "coils". Then he states that the arrangement can be made so that for a given frequency the
arrangement is resonant because of the increased capacitance due to the way it is wound.

Then the two claims made by the patent are on page 2 lines 43 to 54. The claims are fairly clear and real.

http://www.google.com/patents?id=baRZAAAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

Cheers

P.S. Basically by some formula a coil can be wound to be resonant at a fairly low frequency due to the way it is wound.
To me logic says that for a given coil wound that way the more voltage used the higher the capacitance will be and the lower the resonant frequency will be.

P.S. 2, So I'm assuming the resonant frequency of a given coil wound that way would be very different when excited by 10 volts as compared to being excited by 100 volts.
How is this useful to us, it seems it could be a very useful property in a coil and very different to using just a regular spiral coil and a capacitor.

P.S. 3. The funny part of it is that the way Tesla describes what he terms as a coil for the purposes of the patent means he has pretty much covered all types of coils.
So it's all open to be used in any way we please.

..

[wings]

Naudin

http://jnaudin.free.fr/dlenz/DLE24en.htm


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=t2Zid7HWonY

[synchro1]

Synchro1:

Here is the key point from your link:

I am not set up to do any experiments.  On the other hand I have years of experience working on a bench.  I am still assuming were are talking about a pseudo-bifilar coil here like I defined it in my previous posting.  I also explained the logic:  It's the ampere-turns that determine the strength of the magnetic field.  Both coil configurations will give you the same number of ampere-turns.  The fact that this guy makes reference to voltage in his statement instead of current is an indicator that he most likely a beginner to this stuff himself.  It's just one of millions of pages on the Internet, it's not necessarily true.  In fact, his conclusion is false.  Please trust me, I am not stating this to make a fuss.  I am qualifying this guy for you and telling you in all honesty that he is wrong.  You can spend a few hours and find hundreds and hundreds of websites that will confirm what I am saying.

On the other hand, what is your reason for the two coils being different in magnetic field strength?  Can you back up your statement with a logical argument?  Forget about that guy's web page, what are your thoughts?  What about the inductance?

Look, each loop in the entire coil, whether it comes from the "even field" coil, or the "odd field" coil is wrapped around the nail.  Each loop is like a miniature magnetic field generator.  They are all lined up in a row and contribute to the total magnetic field.  The nail "doesn't care" if the loop is from the "even field" coil or the "odd field" coil.  All the nail knows is that there are loops of wire around it generating a magnetic field and every loop has the same amount of current flowing through it.  Can you see that?

If you can see that then that's good.  The goal is to be able to know the basic fundamentals and then apply that knowledge to other configurations.  I can look at a set of pick-up coils and rotor magnets have a decent idea of what the output waveform will look like before I even hook up a scope.

MileHigh

Magluvin just posted a video by the Oldscientist. He demonstrates clearly that the Tesla bifilar has exactly 1/2 the Ohmic resistance of the single wire coil of same length and gauge wire. This doubles the bifilar's magnetic field strength, and makes a more efficent pulse motor power coil. There's a copper weight to Weber advantage over the single wire coil of equal wire. That's the point you began to dispute. I hope you learned something.

[MileHigh]

Synchro1:

Magluvin just posted a video by the Oldscientist. He demonstrates clearly that the Tesla bifilar has exactly 1/2 the Ohmic resistance of the single wire coil of same length and gauge wire. This doubles the bifilar's magnetic field strength, and makes a more efficent pulse motor power coil. There's a copper weight to Weber advantage over the single wire coil of equal wire. That's the point you began to dispute. I hope you learned something.

Please see my postings #1008 and #1015 about the Oldscientist clip.  He simply got mixed up when he made the clip.

MileHigh