Kapanadze Cousin - DALLY FREE ENERGY

[Hoppy]

T1000 has mentioned that the power amplification 'effect' - stage 1, should be achieved before proceeding to the loop-back / self-running - stage 2. Could T1000 please suggest a suitable method of measurement to confirm that stage 1 has been achieved, bearing in mind that the chosen method of measurement must not upset the tuning of the device?

[NickZ]

   Hoppy:
   Assuming that because the draw goes up when the Kacher actually does produce a gain at the grenade output to the bulbs, that this is the proof that the system is not working right, due to this increased draw.
  The only device that I can remember that showed no draw from the input source once running, was the SR193 unit that he showed. That was with the power supply, or battery still connected up, but drawing 0 watts from the PS.
   What Akula/Ruslan devices are showing no draw at resonance?  Aren't they running off of their own output, once the kick start source battery is disconnected?  As there is no other input source.  If there is no feed back loop, of course the device is having to use the battery source, and increased loading at resonance will produce a higher draw.  Or not?
  Maybe T-1000 can explain more about it. Just how he figures that the amplification effect, is a prerequisite to further installing a feed-back path.  I agree with that, but, that in itself does not mean that there is no draw from the input, or no increased draw.
Sound kind of backwards, to me... As that would mean that a device would have to self run, before it could self run.
Power amplification (in an open system), itself does not necessarly mean no draw from any some source of input, there always has to be some source of additional input, such as from the surrounding ambient, for example.
  The Russian guy was showing amplification of output, by obtaining a better resonant point, from the use of the ferrite rod inside the Kacher. But, we don't know if the input draw was increased, or not. 
So, should he go on to include the feed-back path, next? I would think so...
   
    As there are several points of resonance, and hitting any one of them will raise the draw. And, the best resonant point will probably have the most effect of raising the input power drawn. Same as 10 bulbs will have more draw than 1 of them will. This in it self is not proof, one way or another. Until a feed-back loop shows that it can or can't maintain that higher draw at resonance, the jury still on vacation. 

[Hoppy]

Nick,

For there to be a power amplification prior to loop-back and following supply disconnection, then the power delivered by the source supply must be clearly shown by measurement to be less than the power consumed by the device and its load, irrespective of how brightly or dim the load bulbs are shining.

[NickZ]

  Are we to take T-1000's advice, even though he has not built this device?  Can he let us know where he gets that info from, please.

[Dog-One]

As there are several points of resonance, and hitting any one of them will raise the draw. And, the best resonant point will probably have the most effect of raising the input power drawn. Same as 10 bulbs will have more draw than 1 of them will.

Confusing.

My thought was at true LC resonance, very little input power is required.  A high-Q resonant circuit should "almost" be self-sustaining.  It will ring down on it's own if input power is cut off, but should take some time to do it.  The Q factor has a connection to resistance.  If the resistance is low, power loss at each cycle is minimized.  This is where "load" comes into play.  If you only have a small load, the resistance is high and the Q factor is low, but if you have a big load, the resistance is low, the Q factor high and the circuit continues to ring with little or no additional input power being supplied.  This makes me think the Ruslan device needs considerable load in order to function properly.  However, we need to keep in mind that with a larger load and higher Q factor, the bandwidth is much narrower, meaning the tolerances need to be tighter to keep the oscillation centered on the resonant frequency.  No doubt this is an engineering challenge.

The thing to notice in the output section of Ruslan's schematic is where the load is connected--it's not in parallel with the tank circuit, it is in series.  So clearly the lower the resistance of the load, the better the circuit should ring, provided you are centered exactly on the resonant frequency.  I actually wonder if this wouldn't be a good way to find what that frequency should be by using a low-power input and shorting the load completely.  Doing this should essentially create an extremely high Q factor and it should be easy to sweep the frequency and find that peak.