Generator by Gerard Morin

[TinselKoala]

@Tinselkoala,

What's the difference between the beginning and end of a D.C. pulse and the end and beginning of an A.C. sine wave on either side of the zero line?

To answer your question.... in spite of your insults and general bad attitude.... the difference is the _time rate of change_ of the current. If you consider the same amplitude and frequency in both cases, a "DC" pulse will have very rapid rise and fall times as compared to a sine wave "AC". Hence, the induced voltage will be greater during the rise and fall times of the edges of the inducing DC pulse, than it will be during the rising and falling of the sine wave of similar amplitude. This is all contained in the statement and equation of Faraday's law of induction.

A monopole rotor will generate a D.C. wave that stays above the zero line.

No, it won't. A single polarity of the magnet, when approaching the coil, will have a positive time rate of change of the flux in the coil (Flux increases over time), and when it is receding the time rate of change is negative (flux decreases over time). This flips the sign of the induced voltage, again according to Faraday's law. If you don't believe me, try it yourself. (I just did it here, with the MHOP rotor which is "monopole", that is, has all N poles facing outward. See the scopeshot below. I spun the rotor by hand and had the scope probe connected across the drive coil. Each peak or cycle represents one magnet passing the coil. As the magnet approaches the centerline of the coil, the induced voltage increases to the positive peaks. As the magnet passes and recedes from the coil, the voltage decreases to the negative peaks (valleys).)

A signal generator can produce a D.C. square wave. My A.C. bifilar "Self resonant frequency ferrite rotor attraction motor" currently under discussion should generate a kind of A.C. square wave. Do you see any inductance advantage to that kind of signal compared to pulsed D.C.?

Your question isn't specific enough. Builders of resonant transformers (like Tesla coils) know that it is the _time rate of change_ of the primary pulse that is important in inducing high voltages in the secondary. The faster the _rise and fall times_ of the primary's pulse, the greater the induced voltage in the secondary. I suggest you copy out the Faraday's Law of Induction formula and meditate upon it. Since square pulses have faster rise and fall times than "AC sine waves" of the same frequency and amplitude, the square pulses will produce more voltage rise in the secondary.

A square wave can be "AC", that is, with zero crossings, or "DC" with only positive going (or negative going) "peaks". Technically, I suppose a "square wave" would be symmetrical about the zero baseline (that is, "AC") , and a "square pulse train" would be all positive (or all negative)... that is, a "square wave" with a DC offset of half-amplitude. Again, it is not so much the zero-crossing (AC vs. DC) that is important in producing induction effects, but the _rise and fall times_ of the pulse or wave edges. The _time rate of change_ of the inducing flux, signified by the d(B)/dt part of the Faraday's Law equation, is the important part, and as the sign of d(B)/dt changes (flux increases or decreases) the polarity of the induced EMF changes. This is why you can stimulate a transformer primary winding with a "DC" pulse train (all positive or negative) and get an "AC" response ( zero crossing) from the secondary.

In another thread I told how to find the resonant frequency of a coil by "striking" it with a single pulse of DC from a battery. The ringdown of the coil at the trailing edge of the supplied DC pulse is _AC_, and the frequency of this AC ringdown is the resonant frequency of the coil (and any associated capacitance forming a resonant tank circuit.) This is, in fact, a general way of determining the inductance of a coil, by pulsing it with a fast edge pulse (either AC or DC) and letting the coil ring when the pulse is removed, and then doing the math of the "resonant frequency equation" to which I have linked many times.

You like "Spiny" things, why not give my resonant bifilar air core attraction motor a whirl and find out with your community oscilliscope? This design may reveal the hidden Tesla bifilar amplification advantage I've predicted from the outset.

Spinny, not spiny. Sea urchins and cactuses are spiny, motor rotors are spinny. Why not do your own experimentation? You will learn much more that way. If you don't have an "oscilliscope" try to borrow one from your local university or ham radio operator. I think such things exist, even in Costa Rica.

I suffer from protective tariff rules while in exile down here in Costa Rica where it's very hard for me to procure the components I need. I wasn't raised with your uncanny midnight back alley trash foraging skills.

Are you telling me that you can't find a discarded or surplus CRT chassis, where someone has upgraded from CRT to flatscreen monitor for their TV or computer, to scavenge for magnet wire and other components? You don't have a few plastic jar lids that you can glue a few toy magnets to, for rotors? They don't sell threaded rod and machine nuts in your hardware stores down there? You don't even have any LEDs that you can connect to see polarity of pulses? 

Awwww.... my heart bleeds purple peanut butter for you.

[TinselKoala]

Now... making that post, and performing the experiment to illustrate the AC signal coming from a "monopole rotor" passing a coil, added perhaps 45 minutes to my "logged in" time. The knowledge and experience contained in that post cost me _years_ of study, experimentation, and involved hundreds of dollars worth of test equipment and apparatus, both donated and out of my own pocket. There are many other posts that I've made with similar content, construction, research and experimentation behind them, where I try to share my knowledge, correct errors that others have made, and simply to illustrate interesting phenomena.

You greatly misrepresent my work and my presence here, DMan0042.

Haha I never said anything about refuting your work TK. I'm not here to refute your work.

That's obvious... because YOU CANNOT.

My point is you spend an awful lot of time putting people down. That is all I have seen from you. History of mine or not.

Nobody on this forum has been insulted and "put down" more than I have been, generally by people like YOU who are just trolling, who are ignorant of their topic or who are outright frauds. Welcome to the club.

If you go to show all your post and read though them it is nothing but you refuting other people ideas and work. Literally. Now that is something I can prove and anyone can look that up and see for themselves.

Oh really? Now you are really showing your ignorance and your lack of actual research.

Regardless of how smart you think you are if you really had some intelligence you wouldn't waste your time calling people stupid. Refuting their ideas and their work. Instead you would solely focus on yourself and your own experiments.

Like you, you mean? I laugh at you and your trolling.

I don't see the point in someone claiming to know so much going through and keeping up with tons of different post arguing with different people at the same time.

Be intelligent. Quit wasting your time.

I don't know "so much" but it's pretty clear that I know more than some other people who are making various unsupported and unschooled claims here. What do YOU know? Anything? It's not obvious from your couple of posts which contain insults and errors and misrepresentations that you know anything about me, or about anything at all.  And it's my time to waste, isn't it? Why don't you get off your butt and do some experimentation of your own, and stop bothering people who are actually trying to help. Is it because YOU CANNOT? I laugh at you.

Anybody, even you, can put me on their "Ignore List", and I encourage you to do that thing, if you don't like reading my posts. Hurry! You might see some other information from me that you don't like! Protect yourself from the evil TinselKoala !!


(@Tinman.... heh, now you've revealed my secret.....     )

[memoryman]

synchro: you don' specify who Mr.Malicious is; since I mentioned several people, I won't speculate.

[tesletic]

I think you just fell in a deep hole

He could be a bot !?  ...anyway still waiting if anyone could answer my question including the famous ''bot'' let me know what our French buddy did wrong or calculated wrong !?

https://youtu.be/So4QwOktDFg

[TinselKoala]

He could be a bot !?  ...anyway still waiting if anyone could answer my question including the famous ''bot'' let me know what our French buddy did wrong or calculated wrong !?

https://youtu.be/So4QwOktDFg

Asked, and answered several times already. He is not using appropriate equipment or procedures, he is making claims unsupported by actual evidence and he isn't performing actual true experiments. He continually confounds units of power and energy, he misuses the equipment he does have and he clearly doesn't understand his own setups.
Anybody can multiply two numbers together and get some answer that is _mathematically correct_. But if the numbers are garbage "data" to begin with, the result of the math is also meaningless garbage, even if it might be mathematically correct. And that is the case with Morin.