Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[Magluvin]

I do not know what the adhesive is but if it is based on phenolic epoxy resin then acetone is not a good solvent to use.
I recommend benzene or methylbenzene (toluene), instead,

Thanks. There seems to be something for everything. LIke switching power supply transformers, acetone soaks seem to work to get the core apart for other projects.

I was at a speaker repair shop and to release the rubber surround from the cone, just a few dips of a particular solvent on a cotton swab, run it around the edge of the cone and rubber seam and a min or 2 later it just comes apart. Neat business.

Been goin through lotus parts to see possibly if everything is there. So logging the first load.

Should have a bit of time after we get this car thing settled as to how much it might cost to do.

Mags

[MileHigh]

MileHigh,

OK, one point at a time! First, Tinman asked for any suggestions for tests of which I obliged. He is certainly welcome to ignore or do whatever he feels is right as far as I'm concerned without any ill feelings on my part. As you say, I'm just trying to help.

Everything I have asked for or suggested has a reason. Overall I am trying to document and model the magnetic circuit tinman has demonstrated. If this is done accurately, much analysis can be done without having the device in hand and answers may be derived.

Perhaps you've forgotten or are unaware that the mutual induction M between two coils quantifies the lenz interaction between those coils. Taking the inductance measurements of at least one primary and the secondary as requested could be revealing.

My current research is in magneto electric induction and thus the reason for the capacitance measurements.  Yes the test frequency involved is low but we can only assume that each inherent capacitance in the assembly is in the pfd range has no effect on operation. I can guess from experience however that the bifilar wound primary has an inter-wind capacitance of ~5nfd and shouldn't affect circuit operation but what about the capacitance between the teflon covered secondary and the outer casting?

In tinman's post #5642, scope shot 1 reveals that the secondary open circuit voltage is higher than the primary which should not be the case in a 1:1:1 standard transformer. It is only during the relatively flat top portion of the inner secondary as shown by the blue trace that current is conducting thru the secondary winding to the led.

partzman

I encourage you to do any modelling that you can and I strongly believe that that process adds value to the forum.  I am also very used to seeing requests for information that are not relevant, and often that can promote misconceptions.  So all that I can ask you is that if you do do some modelling, is that you recognize what is relevant data vs. what is irrelevant data.  Knowing and being able to distinguish between the two is all part of the learning process.  So please don't take my comments the wrong way and if I am wrong I will be happy to admit that and learn from my mistakes.

In tinman's post #5642, scope shot 1 reveals that the secondary open circuit voltage is higher than the primary which should not be the case in a 1:1:1 standard transformer. It is only during the relatively flat top portion of the inner secondary as shown by the blue trace that current is conducting thru the secondary winding to the led.

In fact the scope shot is of the two secondaries, the inner secondary and the outer secondary, and not the "'secondary' and the primary."  We don't know what the primary voltage is because Timnan didn't provide that information.  Therefore we cannot make any comments about the "expected" transformers ratios.  He was not expecting to see 1:1:1.  Rather, he was expecting to see something like 1:1:0.7 if "the books" were correct.  However, these types of ratios are only valid when the load resistances are much higher than the coil resistances.  This was in fact not the case for the data presented by Tinman.  He used variable resistances in the form of diodes that can get very low the higher the output voltage.

Going back to the observed voltage ratios, what we actually see is that the outer secondary is lower in voltage than the inner secondary, which is not what Tinman "expected" it to be.  However, the problem that I already discussed in my previous postings is that the toroidal transformer configuration that he built is invalid for doing the test he was planning to do.  So you end up with a "double whammy" where the "expected" results are not what you were expecting to see and the test apparatus does not actually do what you "expected" it to do.

The flat tops on the waveforms were due to the fact that Tinman was using LEDs as the test load.  As I previously stated, it's a mistake to use diodes as a load if you are trying to do any serious measurements along the lines of what you are trying to accomplish in this experiment.

MileHigh

[tinman]

I encourage you to do any modelling that you can and I strongly believe that that process adds value to the forum.  I am also very used to seeing requests for information that are not relevant, and often that can promote misconceptions.  So all that I can ask you is that if you do do some modelling, is that you recognize what is relevant data vs. what is irrelevant data.  Knowing and being able to distinguish between the two is all part of the learning process.  So please don't take my comments the wrong way and if I am wrong I will be happy to admit that and learn from my mistakes.

In fact the scope shot is of the two secondaries, the inner secondary and the outer secondary, and not the "'secondary' and the primary."  We don't know what the primary voltage is because Timnan didn't provide that information.  Therefore we cannot make any comments about the "expected" transformers ratios.  .  However, these types of ratios are only valid when the load resistances are much higher than the coil resistances.  This was in fact not the case for the data presented by Tinman.  He used variable resistances in the form of diodes that can get very low the higher the output voltage.

Going back to the observed voltage ratios, what we actually see is that the outer secondary is lower in voltage than the inner secondary, which is not what Tinman "expected" it to be.  However, the problem that I already discussed in my previous postings is that the toroidal transformer configuration that he built is invalid for doing the test he was planning to do.  So you end up with a "double whammy" where the "expected" results are not what you were expecting to see and the test apparatus does not actually do what you "expected" it to do.

The flat tops on the waveforms were due to the fact that Tinman was using LEDs as the test load.  As I previously stated, it's a mistake to use diodes as a load if you are trying to do any serious measurements along the lines of what you are trying to accomplish in this experiment.

MileHigh

First up,it was not a test,but more of an observation with the LED's,and i just posted the result's of that observation-and it is also clear that the inner secondary is putting out far more power than that of the outer secondary.I also noted that disconnecting the inner secondary had very little effect on the outer secondaries output in this observational test. I am well aware of how an LED's voltage and current curves are.

Second-

He was not expecting to see 1:1:1.  Rather, he was expecting to see something like 1:1:0.7 if "the books" were correct

This is not correct. This transformer was designed to show exactly what i expected to see(and have seen before),and that is a far better coupling from the primary to the inner secondary than from primary to outer secondary. The reason for this is that my assumption was that there would be more magnetic flux cutting the inner secondaries loops than there would be on the outer secondary. In order for the magnetic field to occupy the whole of the core,then that field/flux must pass through the whole of the windings of the inner secondary. So my expectations were as has been seen,in that the inner secondary couples with the primary far better than the outer secondary.

The winding ratio is as i stated 1:1:1-all windings have the same number of turns,but the inner secondary uses half the amount of wire<-- here is a saving in both material and money,so the experiment was well worth it just for this alone.

So now i will go do some resistive load tests,and see how that looks.

[Vortex1]

LED's are poor loads to use because at certain power levels can cause core saturation by 1/2 wave rectification. This can skew results and provide bad loading effects on the signal generator.

Far better to use known resistor loads that are accurate so that power levels may be easily computes, as Milehigh said.

Also on the original homopolar question, you will be hard pressed to get enough voltage to light a ordinary red LED which is around 1.5 volts.

Unless precision built and balanced for high speed operation it is difficult to get to the LED threshold voltage, because high speeds are required or large diameters for this high threshold voltage. Most home built homopolars output less than a volt, often just a few hundred millivolts at lower RPM's. (sub2k RPM's)

Some of this low voltage output can be alleviated with the many tandem designs built by DePalma and others in the history of it's development.
Others have tried designs with spiral segments in the disc.

Regards, Vortex1

[poynt99]

First up,it was not a test,but more of an observation with the LED's,and i just posted the result's of that observation-and it is also clear that the inner secondary is putting out far more power than that of the outer secondary.

Just stating the obvious; voltage isn't power.