Tesla's "COIL FOR ELECTRO-MAGNETS".

[conradelektro]

Some great clips from Itsu:

Pick-up coil for a pulse motor configured in parallel resonance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syxL4f2OsPg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNtnLAVk9Og

Pick-up coil for a pulse motor configured in serial resonance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-avee5Z1oU

I would like to discuss and to understand the issues involved in these "rotor speeds up under load" claims.


The set up:

- some sort of pulse motor (or an ordinary electric motor) is pinning a rotor carrying magnets

- a pick up coil (in front of the spinning magnets) picks up electricity and drives a load (or is under no load)

- a certain amount of power is necessary to drive the rotor and the rotor spins with a certain speed


The claim:

- if the pick up coil is burdened with a heavier load (or even shortened) the speed of the rotor increases and the power demand to drive the rotor goes down


Oservation:

- I get the impression (when watching a video of these experiments) that the power necessary to drive the rotor is always very much higher than the power generated by the pick up coil. (Which leads to the question: why is this an OU claim? It is an interesting effect, but OU can not be achieved?)


Further observation:

- This "parallel resonance" (pick up coil LC circuit should have the same frequency as the AC generated by the spinning magnets) is just one of the theories involved and might not even be the explanation?


What is your opinion and how do you see these experiments, e.g. the one Itsu is showing in his videos (I mean the videos cited by MileHigh).

Greetings, Conrad

[conradelektro]

I put all the measurement circuits and calculators I learned in the last month into the attached PDF-file.

May be that helps others to climb the learning curve faster than I did. The experts will not need this collection.

Again, thank you MileHigh and Gyula for the time you spent on teaching these useful skills.

Greetings, Conrad

[synchro1]

Synchro, mate...

 1) That vid above by Stephen Jones, has to be one of the worst conducted experiments I've ever seen... It's terrible.

 2) The experiments you keep ranting about are *so easy to do yourself* - that your ranting is ridiculous.

 3) Your attitude towards Conrad & MH is out-of-order!

Just do the damn experiment yourself. For goodness sake!

I'm beginning to be quite irked by people who are not prepared to do their own !$%&# experiments!

I've uploaded close to forty experimental videos. I've repeated this experiment scores of times. Now think about this: Milehigh never uploaded any videos ever, nor has he ever ever done so much as one experiment. So that looks like you're the pot calling the kettle black to me!

It's not so important who's doing an experiment; What's important is that the experiment's done correctly, and if done incorrectly that the mistakes are pointed out and understood. Now I started out with a tank circuit, and it was jettisoned by Milehigh and we got mistaken results. The test was faulty as a result of improvising solutions and not sticking to the directions. It's important for people to know why the test failed! I sought to cultivate a working friendship with Conradelektro, and Milehigh stepped in and puppeteered the novice experimenter, with his "pseudo-expertise" into sidetracking the original design for a failed alteration!


The way in which Dr. Steven Jones conducted his experiment has very little to do with his choice of components to match with the BPC. He did choose to wire resistors onto output circuit!

[Farmhand]

I've been saying for a long time that the speed up under load effects are effects of resonance or harmonics. And I've shown it, Notice the voltage waveform is much reduced on load and the rotor is loaded to produce parallel resonance in the pickup coil meaning the loading on the motor and the input to the tank is highest at resonance to maintain the activity in the tank against the losses. When the setup speeds up due to the activity being reduced by load this indicate a reduced load on the prime mover.

I'm intrigued are you saying that you can continually excite a tank to parallel resonance with no input ? This is one of the reasons I usually say at or near resonance.

In practice the impedance is never near infinite because of the losses, as the tank stores energy there are always losses and so there is always input, and when at parallel resonance the voltage and activity is highest so the losses are highest and the input is highest with no load. In my experience. Now when we load a parallel resonant tank with a resistive load we lower the Q of the tank and energy is removed the activity in the tank is less and the losses are less and so there is less input required to maintain that.

If the tank had a near infinite impedance at resonance the input should get less the closer we get to parallel resonance.

In practice with most of the setups I have experimented with when the parallel tank is excited to resonance input is required to keep it there and the input is usually more than to run the transformer without parallel resonance.

Anyway as I said Tesla never mentioned resonance in the patent and I was using the term adjusting to resonance to describe tuning a tank to maximum activity with a load attached.

With no load and no losses a parallel tank would oscillate for ever and the input would see an infinite impedance continuously and the input would go to nothing continously but in practice this does not happen ever. Even in a resonator not directly loaded.

Try this experiment make a low resistance tank circuit and excite it with DC pulses of say 12 volts to maximum amplitude (parallel resonance) note the input as you do it, then place a 10 Ohm resistor on the tank, and re-tune to maximum amplitude (won't take much) then note the input.

What I imagine will happen is as the circuit is tuned around near to resonance is the input will go up and it's max will be when the amplitude is max. The lower the Q the more input will be required to maintain it.

You see practically the experimenter who wants max power throughput is not so concerned with perfect resonance, the object is maximum activity in a loaded tank to produce the highest output.

..

If you skip to about 2:40 in this video you can see the effect of the resistive load on the waveform and shortly after compared to the somewhat capacitive load of the fluro tube. The tube causes the activity to increase due to better resonance and the input also increases. The filament bulb reduces activity by removing energy and the input drops.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zxde9qga79c

I call these (effects of resonance or near resonance). At about 9:30 I show the effect of the fluro. The resonance is improved with the fluro and the input is increased.

I understand the "ideal" properties of parallel and series resonance being infinite and nil respectively. But I'm not concerned with that I'm concerned with practical use.

And I'm also concerned with showing the speed up under load effect can be done by a hack like me if we know why it happens.  And that it is nothing fantastic or out of normal
nor is it much use for anything.

I think we can all agree on one thing, the speed up under load effect touted as something special is a load of bogus.

..

I'm not sure about others but I'm usually tuning for maximum output to a load when I experiment with resonant setups. The input only concerns me where efficiency is concerned if it is one of my concerns.

..

I came to my conclusions on Thanes bogus speed up under load effect all by myself and I showed actual setups demonstrating it, many months ago. And I immediately recognized it as useless and a serious loss.

Whats to learn about that ? I had a theory and I tested it, I got the results I expected. I didn't need anyone else to tell me it was bogus, I could see it plain as day on first viewing of his video's, it was bogus through and through.

..

[Farmhand]

Another way the voltage might effect the frequency is by the higher voltage causing more current through the resistance and engaging the core better.

..

I don't see a tank capacitor as an output "load" in itself. It is a parasitic load, similar to the resistance of the wire in the coil.

..

An unloaded tank is a pointless exercise isn't it, as far as output goes.

..