The bifilar pancake coil at its resonant frequency

[tinman]

I stand by what I say, period.

Apparently there is no discussion of the Tesla pancake coil because nobody has anything new to say.

You need to go back to Club Med for refresher training.  You are noise on this thread.

Have you not been reading what i have been posting for the last week,or the videos i have been posting as well?

While i have dabbled in partsmans circuit,i have been doing most of my work on the BPC.
If you have a good look at partsman circuit,you will see that it is the same as mine,but where as the R2 resistor is removed from the L1 end,and placed across the L2 coil-that is the only difference

Brad

[Magluvin]

Maybe a little clarification is needed:

The Tesla patent 512340 is titled: Coil for Electromagnets

It has many years later acquired the terms "pancake coil" or "bifilar pancake coil"

These terms are not used in the patent.

While this thread and the thread at OUR.com are respectively:

"The bifilar pancake coil at its resonant frequency"

and

Investigating "anomalies" in Bifilar coils

In actuality the testing of late in both threads is for a "transformer" with one input leg floating. While it shares similarities in construction, it is wired differently than the Tesla device as the continuous connection is broken, changing it from a singular "coil"
to a pair of "coils" or coupled inductors, otherwise known as a "transformer".

In essence it being now tested as a three terminal device unlike the Tesla patent, yet still may retain some of the supposed virtues of high interwinding capacitance and maximum voltage differences between turns, and neutralization of self inductance, although how effective those virtues were are yet to be determined due to the breaking of the connection, thus separating the singular "coil" into two "coils" that are now coupled capacitively and inductively,
therefore a "transformer".

One might try to argue that it is not a transformer since it does not have four connections, however the floating input leg is capacitively coupled to the secondary, so it is sort of an "autotransformer" which by definition has a minimum of three connections.

cheeky enough? 

Regards

P.S. Has anyone ever had real Vermont AAA Maple Syrup with theirs?

Well I can say that I think Tesla had drawn up the coil in pancake style more to better understand the connections between the 2 windings and the relationship between the 2 windings capacitance, as he said the coils could be wound in any styles known for the same results.  Maybe the things he declared and claimed were to cover his ownership to the use of the ability described, without actually divulging the a real practical use. Its possible and Im sure done many times before. Just like many patents when we look at them and try to build them and we dont get positive results, it is very likely they are covering their butts on the brunt of the idea while leaving out what really makes it special. And its probably important to do so in some cases where like today, some in China may see it and make copies and dont care. Like the Iphone back when, etc.  If I remember the Iphone fakes were not as special as the real deal.

On the 3 legged transformer, has anyone tried to reverse the end of the pri coil to see if there is a difference in operation? That may bring out whether it is inductive, or not and just capacitance between the pri and sec.

Anyway I think its good to run this thing through the ringer in any way or fashion to see what may come of it. There is more to do.

Mags

Mags

[MileHigh]

Have you not been reading what i have been posting for the last week,or the videos i have been posting as well?

Brad

You are mainly investigating Partzman's transformer, right?  I am talking about an investigation into the coil itself.

[tinman]

You are mainly investigating Partzman's transformer, right?  I am talking about an investigation into the coil itself.

I added to my previouse post.

I have been working mainly on the BPC,and quite a bit.

Im at work ATM, so will post more detail for you when i get home.

BTW-the pole is looking good for you MH.

Brad

[TinselKoala]

Mags said,

Well I can say that I think Tesla had drawn up the coil in pancake style more to better understand the connections between the 2 windings and the relationship between the 2 windings capacitance, as he said the coils could be wound in any styles known for the same results. (snip)

Yes, I think so too. People often quote Tesla's patent #512340 and yet they completely ignore the _facts_ that Tesla acknowledged that flat coils are not new, that he said that "any" and "every" coil can be made to have reactance cancellation, and that Tesla himself rarely if ever actually used the bifilar series-connected winding scheme in later patents and projects.

Now we have comparison reports from several sources, even some who formerly claimed unique properties, that there is no difference when the Tesla Bifilar Flat winding compared to flat monofilar coils in DC resistance, inductance, AC magnetic field, DC magnetic field, and pulsed DC magnetic fields. The _only_ "special" property of the Tesla Bifilar winding, whether in flat or solenoidal coils, is that of reduced resonant frequency due to the increased interturn capacitance of a _correctly wound_ TBF coil. Concomitant with this is the increased energy storage on a cycle-by-cycle basis of the TBF winding. However in any practical coil this increased energy storage (and release, per cycle!) is much smaller than the numbers Tesla used as an extreme example in his patent. 

The problems with "experiments" (which are really demonstrations and not true experiments) that purport to show some superiority of the flat coil, whether serially connected bifilar or not, is that they do not perform proper comparisons with, say, solenoidal coils, cored coils, etc. so _causality_ cannot be assigned to the "flat" or "TBF" or other properties that are alleged to be responsible for any demonstrated effects.