Confirmation of OU devices and claims

[itsu]

Thanks for the responses guys.

Hoppy,

thanks.


PM,   

yes, that last minute test needs to be repeated as my body seems to be influencing the big coil
and slight movements of my body distorts the input current into the gate driver.

More carefull and accurate measurements are needed there.

As for tightly coupling the bothy coils, i did couply them tightly by bringing them closely (almost toughing)
together (no led on) and by stacking (led on), so there obviously is a unique difference in coupling.


AG,

i use 50% duty cycle on the input square wave as that is what is being used in the original setup/kit.


A.king21,

yes,  will involve ground wires too, but my earlier tests with ground wires did not saw much difference.


seaad,

i see what you mean.



Benfr,

My coils are very similar, they all measure very close to 144uH.
Concerning the variable cap, this is more difficult as we need 5nF to get in resonance on 180KHz with the 144uH.
I can do the hand thing to influence the resonance point of the satellite coils though.
And i do not see any variable caps in the original setup/kit

Itsu

[seaad]

https://www.radiomuseum.org/forum/tuned_bandpass_filters.html

The closer the pic up coils comes to each other the more the Curve looks as in pic C !
The closer the pic up coils comes to each other the more the frequency in them  will be detuned / off the center frequency.

The  common bottom coupling coil, in the text not needed in our OU experiments.

Regards Arne

[AlienGrey]

Thanks for the responses guys.

AG,

i use 50% duty cycle on the input square wave as that is what is being used in the original setup/kit.


i see what you mean.

Benfr,

My coils are very similar, they all measure very close to 144uH.
Concerning the variable cap, this is more difficult as we need 5nF to get in resonance on 180KHz with the 144uH.
I can do the hand thing to influence the resonance point of the satellite coils though.
And i do not see any variable caps in the original setup/kit

Itsu

Yes Itsu  the 50% could be misleading the point pay attention, I made a 1mhz8 tesla coil, I pulse it with a 56 usec pulse
with a zero gap in the milliseconds (variable) range (thats at peek resonance) i look at the display and it's now a distorted sine wave 
an AM| carrier wave nothing special! so where does the magic creep in ?
Now watch JB's DVD no 7 !  or similar teach in video, whats missing ?   

[gyulasun]

Hi Arne,

It is good you show the behaviour of magnetically coupled resonant LC circuits, these characteristics are fully valid for such setups discussed here. The best energy transfer can happen when all the LC circuits mutually have the critical coupling between any and each LC circuit present in the setup, all tuned to resonance. This situation is very hard to achieve because any adjustment on any of the LC circuits influence all the others, a slow and arduous process. You mention the bottom coupling coil is not needed: I agree, it is one of the coupling methods between two resonant LC circuits, other methods include capacitive top or bottom coupling etc. In the present setup discussed here the energy goes through via mutual inductive coupling. In your drawing attached to Reply #771 you show an interesting arrangements for the receiver coils, I have not found such arrangement shown yet. Only tests can give answers how effective this array may be. 

Hi Itsu,

Very good experiments, thanks for showing and thanks for taking the trouble to do them. Regarding the test you show with placing one receiver coil onto the top of the most outer one: I think this coupling method increases the effective receiving area for those coils. The two coils mutually become the extension of each other in that position as if you had increased their length hence their number of turns.
Side notice: with an L meter the increased inductance due to the mutual coupling can be measured (when the 5nF tuning caps are removed). Notice also that the top coil gets into a physically higher position with respect to its place when it was in the middle between the innermost and the outermost coils, I mention this because earlier you showed field strength around the TX coil by a small probe coil with a indicator LED and you had a situation when there was stronger field at the top and at the bottom of the TX coil while there was little at its center, then vice verse.  This should be checked with this big TX coil having the 3.4 kVpp across it. The HV probe may also infuence the EM field distributon, unfortunately.
I can only wish you persistence to achieve your goals. 

Gyula

[benfr]

Notice also that the top coil gets into a physically higher position with respect to its place when it was in the middle between the innermost and the outermost coils, I mention this because earlier you showed field strength around the TX coil by a small probe coil with a indicator LED and you had a situation when there was stronger field at the top

Yes, i agree