Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[citfta]

Partzman,

I am still confused by something on your drawing.  You are still showing RS as being .05 ohm X 2 = 1 ohm.  Is it really  .5 ohm X 2 = 1 ohm or .05 ohm X 2 = .1 ohm?

[MileHigh]

Will you be so quick to dismiss Smudge's findings also ?.

Why should you get an alleged negative resistance when you measure an inductive current sensing resistor in series with a transformer primary?  Does that sound like something special to you?  In more than 100 years of the application of electronics, don't you think that somebody else would have discovered this by now?  Didn't you already agree that at frequencies of several megahertz that stray capacitive and inductive effects can possibly invalidate some measurements?   Did you observe an alleged negative resistance through the whole frequency sweep or just at a sweet spot frequency?  If you observed the alleged negative resistance at a sweet spot frequency only, how do you explain an ordinary resistance when not at the sweet spot frequency?

Here is a simple test:  I am going to make an assumption that you will get accurate voltage readings at high frequency for this test.  Only scope the direct function generator output (I am assuming that it is 50 ohms output impedance) and the far end of a one ohm non-inductive current sensing resistor that is in series with the signal line of the function generator.  You can do a (Ch1 - Ch2) subtraction to only see the waveform across the one-ohm resistor if you want.  Now, depending on how much current the setup is drawing, you should see a voltage drop on the far side of the current sensing resistor.  If the load is reactive, presumably you will see the current change direction back and forth.  What will you see at the sweet spot frequency?  The scope trace in Smudge's report shows power always being returned to the function generator.  Will you really see that with this simple test, power always being returned to the function generator?  I suspect that at the sweet spot frequency it will still look like a reactive load with the current changing direction back and forth over a cycle.  If you see that, that will invalidate your measurement that is always showing power going back into the function generator.

If my test is considered a valid test by the experts, it's worth doing.  I haven't probed around a circuit being driven at 3 MHz in a generation, hence I need some confirmation that this will work.  Assuming that the test is valid, then if you are looking into this with Smudge, this is the kind of self-checking that the two of you should be coming up with all by yourselves.  Invent your own tests to double-check your own measurements before you arrive at a conclusion.

I think that the chances of you always seeing power going into the function generator for a full cycle like your own scope shot and associated math trace shows are nil.  The caveat is that the probes must be giving you valid data with this setup and I am pretty confident that they will.  One probe will be looking at a 50 ohm source, and the second probe will be looking at a 51 ohm source.

Note this test is a variation of what Picowatt said.  He talked about looking at the function generator signal open circuit, and then looking at the function generator signal after it is connected to the device under test and comparing them.

MileHigh

[gyulasun]

Partzman,

I am still confused by something on your drawing.  You are still showing RS as being .05 ohm X 2 = 1 ohm.  Is it really  .5 ohm X 2 = 1 ohm or .05 ohm X 2 = .1 ohm?

Hi Carroll,

He clarified it in his Reply# 6010 : "...I just noticed a typo in the description of the Vishay csr on the schematic that should read  .5 x 2 = 1 ohm   not  .05 x 2 = 1ohm." 

Hi Partzman,

Thanks for showing the new schematic, it includes coil L3  (44.4 uH)  which was not shown or referred to earlier.
Does L3 have any magnetic coupling to T1 or it is an independent coil from T1?  Is it also made of Litz wire and also air cored?

Perhaps you could show a picture of the coils?

One more question:  is the duty cycle 50% for the input square wave? If yes, did you test COP with lower duty cycles?

Thanks, 
Gyula

[Smudge]

Here are some musings on magnetization.

Smudge

[tinman]

   
MileHigh

Why should you get an alleged negative resistance when you measure an inductive current sensing resistor in series with a transformer primary?  Does that sound like something special to you?

I guess you missed both Smudge's calculations of the inductance of the first CVR i used,and how he took that into account,and my test where a non inductive resistor was used.

In more than 100 years of the application of electronics, don't you think that somebody else would have discovered this by now?

One would also think that after 200 year's plus of research,they would have figured out how they managed to build the pyramids all those years back as well-->but they still only have theories,none of which they can all agree on.

   

Didn't you already agree that at frequencies of several megahertz that stray capacitive and inductive effects can possibly invalidate some measurements?

I did ,which is why we are carrying out various types of experiments on the HTT-->to eliminate the !!possible!!.

Did you observe an alleged negative resistance through the whole frequency sweep or just at a sweet spot frequency?

The effect is clearly seen from 700KHz through to 9MHz.

If you observed the alleged negative resistance at a sweet spot frequency only, how do you explain an ordinary resistance when not at the sweet spot frequency?

Well 9.3MHz is a wide range for a sweet spot. When not in the (very large) sweet spot,i would think that the magnetic harmonics are not at play. I believe with a larger HTT,the sweet spot frequency would be a lot lower.

Here is a simple test:  I am going to make an assumption that you will get accurate voltage readings at high frequency for this test.

One would hope so,as the scope is a 100MHz scope,and we are not above 10MHz.

Only scope the direct function generator output (I am assuming that it is 50 ohms output impedance) and the far end of a one ohm non-inductive current sensing resistor that is in series with the signal line of the function generator.

Well it can be if you like. My FG has the option to either have the 50 ohm impedance,or not.

Now, depending on how much current the setup is drawing, you should see a voltage drop on the far side of the current sensing resistor.

Assuming that i have interpreted your instructions correctly,then no,the voltage after the 1 ohm CVR is always  above the FG's voltage-->see 1st scope shot for circuit and scope placement.

If the load is reactive, presumably you will see the current change direction back and forth.

As the current is AC,then one would think that it will change back and forth.

If my test is considered a valid test by the experts, it's worth doing.  I haven't probed around a circuit being driven at 3 MHz in a generation, hence I need some confirmation that this will work.  Assuming that the test is valid, then if you are looking into this with Smudge, this is the kind of self-checking that the two of you should be coming up with all by yourselves.  Invent your own tests to double-check your own measurements before you arrive at a conclusion.

As has it,i did this very test a week back,but had to wait to confirm my results once i got my non inductive CVR's. I had forgotten to do that until you reminded me with your post. So below are the results of the test,as carried out on the circuit in scope shot 1.

What will you see at the sweet spot frequency?  The scope trace in Smudge's report shows power always being returned to the function generator.  Will you really see that with this simple test, power always being returned to the function generator?

Not quite through 100% of the cycle. But as you will see in the scope shot's,the transformer/inductor is still heading towards it peak voltage after the FG's voltage has peaked.
I will leave the math trace out for this post,as i will be doing a video on that latter this week.

I suspect that at the sweet spot frequency it will still look like a reactive load with the current changing direction back and forth over a cycle.  If you see that, that will invalidate your measurement that is always showing power going back into the function generator.

I am lost with this !current changing direction!! thing,as we are dealing with an AC current,so why wouldnt it change direction?.

I think that the chances of you always seeing power going into the function generator for a full cycle like your own scope shot and associated math trace shows are nil.

I think maybe you will have to have a rethink MH.

Note this test is a variation of what Picowatt said.  He talked about looking at the function generator signal open circuit, and then looking at the function generator signal after it is connected to the device under test and comparing them.

At some specific frequencies,i can get a voltage greater than that of which the FG can deliver at maximum VPP. The effect is seen right up until 10MHz,when the magnetic field cannot collaps fast enough in the transformer core. We then start to see a phase lag start around  9MHz. At 10MHz,the voltage before and after the 1 ohm CVR even out.

P.S-i forgot to mention that throughout the test,there was a 100 ohm load across the inner secondary,which is also dissipating power,where the amount varies with frequency. It is very little,but it is there.