Partnered Output Coils - Free Energy

[TinselKoala]

That's right. We generally speak of u (greek letter mu) as relative permeability, the ratio of the test article's permeability to mu-nought, the permeability (not "inductance"!)  of free space. Hence it is dimensionless.

Not only that, but even if you are speaking of absolute permeability, the units are not "H" ( or nanoHenry) but rather Henrys per meter.

[myenergetic]

That's right. We generally speak of u (greek letter mu) as relative permeability, the ratio of the test article's permeability to mu-nought, the permeability (not "inductance"!)  of free space. Hence it is dimensionless.

Not only that, but even if you are speaking of absolute permeability, the units are not "H" ( or nanoHenry) but rather Henrys per meter.

Hi Tin and Gyula

Thanks the ur is about 2.75 within the margin of your calculations and Coil32 software 3 stand corrected.

jj

[gyulasun]

Hi JJ,

That is okay, thanks.

Hi TinselKoala,

Thanks for drawing attention to the coil32 program, now I see it has version 10, I used its earlier versions some years ago with good results for multilayer coils, then I put it aside.  Now I downloaded the latest Windows version and played with it a little.

First I used the Coil on a ferrite ring / Coil calculator with Brad's data:
Inductance=120 uH in the left hand side column,  I entered OD=50mm  ID=34mm  h=18mm  wire dia=0.55mm in the middle column and I got N=199.4 for the number of turns when the permeability was chosen to be u=2.2.

Then I chose the Inductance calculator in the middle column instead of the previous Coil calculator. I got back the 120 uH inductance with the previous N=199.4 turns and with u=2.2.

Would you check your u=10 result again, something is not ok either with my or your calculations?
And the Mini Ring Core calculator gives u=2.2 as I found earlier.      (In my earlier post above I made a typo when wrote 2.5.)

Thanks,
Gyula

[tinman]

Partzman,

I as well found that low value surprisnig.  It sure "looks" like a lot more than 120uH.

I had noticed in some of Tinman's sweep tests that his xfmr seemed to saturate at fairly low amplitude levels when the applied frequency was 500Hz or less (i.e., the observed non-linearity).

I do not know what Tinman's L meter uses for a test frequency, some use 100Hz.  If I were him, I'd scope across the L meter leads while testing to check what frequency the meter is using and see what the waveform looks like.

Although I am not sure how non-linearities might affect his meter's accuracy, I think it would be wise to verify that low inductance using an alternate method.  Connecting the toroid in a voltage divider with a known resistance and applied frequency (or resonating with a cap), for example, might at least confirm that 120uH is "in the ballpark".

PW

I did not press this core as i did with the other one,as i dont have the steel molds made up for this size. I just rammed the core material into the plastic mold with a drift and hammer. I dont think this core is so good,but it's made now,and will be a good testing point if anything. If results are bad,then we know a high perm core is required for the inner core.

[TinselKoala]

@Gyula
Yes, you are right, the first time through I mis-entered the ID of the toroid, forgot to "double" the thickness so I entered 42mm as ID. Duh       .

Output from program:

Ferrite ring core coil
____Required inductance L=120 μH
____Outer diameter of core D1=50 mm
____Inner diameter of core D2=34 mm
____Height of core h=18 mm
____Magnetic permeability of core μ=2.2
....................................................................
=>Number of turns N=199.4

It's all good that we can check each other's work. Thanks...
--TK