The Old Standard Ignition System. Battery. Coil. Points. And Condenser....

SeaMonkey · October 31, 2017, 04:14:12 PM

Quote from: Miles Higher
When it comes to an ignition circuit and what it actually does - produce
a spark across a spark plug gap, it's all about the secondary and the
primary is just a minor side-show. You have to keep your eye on the ball.

The secondary is not induced by the oscillating primary. Once the
secondary is finished doing the plasma burn which I suspect represents
more than 90% of the energy put into the core in the first place, only
then does the primary oscillate with the capacitor, and this has nothing
to do with the plasma generation. It's just a harmless artifact of why the
capacitor was put there in the first place - to protect the points.

Repeat: The capacitor is there to protect the points, it was not put
there to create a resonance with the primary to give you a more robust
spark. As I said a few times already, it looks like the main reason for the
more robust spark is the capacitor prevents the arcing of the points which
represents a considerable loss of energy. I also said there is a simple test
that can be done to check for this.

Miles has explained it correctly. "Resonance" is not a factor in the process
of supplying High Voltage Energy to the Spark Plug by Inductive Discharge
of the Ignition Coil.

However, it is possible to construct an Electronic Ignition System which
will produce a rapid succession of sparks within a short time span in order
to improve combustion of the fuel/air mixture. Racing Cars sometimes
employ such a system. The Ford Model T Ignition System used Ignition
Coils with "buzzers" to produce such an effect many years ago. The Model
T also enabled selection of Battery Ignition or Magneto by the driver at
will. They don't make 'em today like they used to.

Magluvin · October 31, 2017, 04:14:39 PM

Carrol Im sorry. I did not make the CC list for all those in PM I did have the right to reply to certain posts there. If I had only replied to Mh then only his end of the story would be told there.

I really appreciate your view here as it reflects my view that MH will stop at nothing to quench the idea that resonance helps the spark to be more that it is without the cap.

He has attacked the idea from the very beginning that an LC resonance has anything to do with helping the circuit produce a better spark than we get without the cap installed. Even to the point of there is no resonant ring at all in the circuit, all the way up until just a few hours before I posted my vid showing the scope shots.

And I had posted my prediction 'here' that he would now say there is a resonant ring, and now will have to come up with reasons why it still has nothing to do with making a better spark. And he did so.

I just got back on here since last night. A lot to go over and I have a lot of other things to do today.

Will be back later

Mags

SeaMonkey · October 31, 2017, 04:38:38 PM

The waveform images that Miles posted earlier are
very informative.

There are oscillations in the Primary Circuit during
the time that the Breaker Points are Open. It is
possible to see that the oscillations occur at two
distinctly different frequencies: during spark burn
time the frequency is higher than the frequency
which appears following spark burn time.

Why is this so?

Also, why is there no evidence of oscillation in the
Secondary Circuit until after the spark has
extinguished?

Answer those questions and you'll have mastered
the Operation of the Kettering Ignition System.

Magluvin · October 31, 2017, 05:05:23 PM

Here is a PM from MH That I want to respond to. There were * people in the CC list and carrol was not included there, but was attacked in the post, so...

"I am going to assume that most of you people reading the above get it. You get that the "resonance" has nothing of substance to do with the operation of the circuit, which is essentially what I have been saying the whole time. I said that there was "no resonance" and it turns out that there was "inconsequential resonance that had nothing to do with the plasma spark generation."

So why pray tell was Magluvin saying that I am an "anti-resonance shill" or "paid by the powers that be." Magluvin will be lucky if he gets 100 views on his ignition circuit videos over the next 18 months! And this is not only Magluvin here, these types of accusations are thrown around all the time. You just want to discuss a circuit and get it right, and you are accused of being an agent for the National Security Agency. I got so much shit for just trying to discuss the reality of the ignition circuit and I got dragged through the mud for the 100th time.

Final thoughts from Carroll: <<< In the past I have come to MH's defense when I believed he was right. But I will not be a puppet for him when he is clearly wrong. >>>

What Carroll is saying is almost as bad but at least he doesn't think I work for the bloody CIA. He turned himself into a clown with his statement and his "explanation" for the ignition circuit was bullshit."

Here in the first paragraph....

"I am going to assume that most of you people reading the above get it. You get that the "resonance" has nothing of substance to do with the operation of the circuit, which is essentially what I have been saying the whole time. I said that there was "no resonance" and it turns out that there was "inconsequential resonance that had nothing to do with the plasma spark generation."

Just as I predicted before showing my vid...And then ....

"So why pray tell was Magluvin saying that I am an "anti-resonance shill" or "paid by the powers that be." Magluvin will be lucky if he gets 100 views on his ignition circuit videos over the next 18 months! And this is not only Magluvin here, these types of accusations are thrown around all the time. You just want to discuss a circuit and get it right, and you are accused of being an agent for the National Security Agency. I got so much shit for just trying to discuss the reality of the ignition circuit and I got dragged through the mud for the 100th time."

It is clear why MH. What I had claimed in the context of you being a shill makes more sense than youpersonally just wanting me to be wrong all the time, as you clearly show in this thread.

I dont care about views on my yt channel. I dont put up ads on my vids. I have messages from yt to do adds an make money. I have some vids that have enough view for them to ask. But I dont do this. My vids are free for all without delay, and not taking up peoples time unnecessarily with ads .

You 'got so much shit', as you say, because you have failed to even analyze the circuit from beginning till now, and keep saying I have failed. I have held my stance on this since before this thread in pm. Your work here in this has been a disaster from page 2. Its only a 10 page thread. Doesnt take that long to go over to find out the truth. If i thought I was in the wrong and you were just right the whole time, then I probably wouldnt recommend people read these 10 pages again to see what is there. But I want the ones that think otherwise of my views to do just that. I want them to show me where i went wrong and you were correct the whole time. Thing is they cant.

Not a shill? Then what is it M? Is it just a vendetta to try and make me look bad at any cost, even fake circuit analysis from you to just make me look bad even though Im right? Is that it?? Well its one of the 2.

If its the latter then seek a therapist because it is not doing you any good for your reputation you feel you hold so dearly.

If it is the former, then yes, a shill will lie cheat and bring on make believe arguments till the idea of any resonance gains is quenched. A shill will stop at nothing to get the job done.

Search monsanto shill stories. Milk industry shills. Pharmaceutical shills. Etc. If one reads on these things then it becomes apparent you are clearly following that path here in this thread. And other threads I can link up to here on this site.

"Final thoughts from Carroll: <<< In the past I have come to MH's defense when I believed he was right. But I will not be a puppet for him when he is clearly wrong. >>>

What Carroll is saying is almost as bad but at least he doesn't think I work for the bloody CIA. He turned himself into a clown with his statement and his "explanation" for the ignition circuit was bullshit."

Are you calling carrol a clown? There are 10 pages of you center stage at the circus here!!.

Mags

Magluvin · October 31, 2017, 05:14:01 PM

Quote from: SeaMonkey on October 31, 2017, 04:38:38 PM
The waveform images that Miles posted earlier are
very informative.

There are oscillations in the Primary Circuit during
the time that the Breaker Points are Open. It is
possible to see that the oscillations occur at two
distinctly different frequencies: during spark burn
time the frequency is higher than the frequency
which appears following spark burn time.

Why is this so?

Also, why is there no evidence of oscillation in the
Secondary Circuit until after the spark has
extinguished?

Answer those questions and you'll have mastered
the Operation of the Kettering Ignition System.

My scope shows the ring with the cap installed to be 12.3khz. I zoomed in on the wave and it was a consistent 12.3khz. With my earlier calculations in this thread I had come up with 15kz. Off, but close enough for me. My earlier calculations were with the measurement of the primary with the sec shorted. Here the sec is loaded with spark, which could change the result of the scope reading vs just a shorted sec for calculation.

mags