Bifilar pancake coil overunity experiment

[ayeaye]

Ok, i now did the calculation of the input and output parts with an online spreadsheet too, and the results were almost the same, see below. The input spreadsheet is the following.

https://lite.framacalc.org/hRrVK9eHf3

And the output spreadsheet is the following.

https://lite.framacalc.org/kb0Fxd8dCi

Start a new spreadsheet on the following, click on "Create a calc".

https://accueil.framacalc.org/en

In a spreadsheet, all is much less clear and less organized. One should use B, C instead of the names of the variables. One cannot use constants or common variables, or these will again be something like F16, which only makes it more confusing. So i used the values of the constants.

I can shortly explain how to use it, if that may be any problem. Click on the first shell, then paste the list there, it pastes to the whole column. Click on the cell, write formula, use like B1, C1, etc. Then under the format above, there is copy, copy it. Then select the column by clicking to its header. Then under the sort above there is paste, paste it, it pastes it to all column, and changes the numbers of the row after B1, C1, etc, accordingly. I think this is all there is to know.

If you prefer spreadsheet, then use it, but i don't know why it's better.

There was a small difference between the Python results and the spreadsheet result of the output power, in the Python results it was 111.954, and in the spreadsheet result it was 111.908, and i cannot explain this. Nothing is wrong with the spreadsheet, i did the same calculation in LibreOffice Calc, and the result was exactly the same. The Python float numbers are double (64 bit) with 16 significant digits, so maybe it's about less precision in spreadsheets.

I forgot that this Python int() gives an error when the string is empty, that is with the list with only one number in a line, it will give error if one writes an empty line after the last line. So these Python scripts should be the following. Too many things to remember.

import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistors 2 and 3 resistances in ohms
R2 = 987.2
R3 = 99.91
#Voltage of the power supply in V
V = 12.0
#Collector voltage in V
VC = 0.3
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#The length of a scale is 50 pixels
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
V *= 1000
VC *= 1000
F *= 1000
XU *= 1000 / 50
YU *= 1000 / 50
ilist = []
e = 0.0

for s in sys.stdin:
    if (s.strip() != ""): ilist.append(int(s))

for t in range(len(ilist)):
    vlr = ilist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    ilr = (V - VC - vlr) / R2
    plr = ilr * vlr / 1000
    pl = plr - pr
    e += pl
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Input power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))

import sys

#Time scale in us
XU = 2.0
#Voltage scale in V
YU = 0.225
#Resistor 3 resistance in ohms
R3 = 99.91
#Frequency in kHz
F = 110.001

#The length of a scale is 50 pixels
#In calculations XU and YU are in ns and mV for unit
#Voltages are in mV and frequency is in Hz
F *= 1000
XU *= 1000 / 50
YU *= 1000 / 50
olist = []
e = 0.0

for s in sys.stdin:
    if (s.strip() != ""): olist.append(int(s))

for t in range(len(olist)):
    vlr = olist[t] * YU
    pr = vlr * vlr / R3 / 1000
    e += pr
e *= XU / 1000000
print("Output power was %.3f uW" % (F * e))

[ayeaye]

Spreadsheet of the input part.

Someone said maybe increasing R3 may help the coil to get more energy or such, i don't know...

[ayeaye]

Hi everybody

The current experimentations here and there with bifilar coils made me want to try it too (thanks guys). If anomalous results are observed, which remains to be confirmed, then we may have a theory behind it with nuclear or electronic spin resonance phenomena.  The NMR/ESR is the guiding idea that gets me started in experimentation, that's why I plan to change from conventional wire coils to flat copper tape coils. In spite it will not be an exact duplication of ayeaye's experiment, I would like to inform you that I started today. I failed to do a correct winding, the copper tape is very thin and easily damaged. I just ordered some of these tapes again, like these:
https://www.amazon.com/Double-Sided-Conductive-Shielding-Soldering-Electrical/dp/B074QN1YNH/ref=sr_1_25

These tapes should provide a higher capacity between turns. Although they are very thin, the effective conduction depth due to the skin effect is only 65µm at 1 MHz and 20 µm at 10MHz so we will not lose much of the effective resistance at RF frequencies.
I think another interest is the much better regularity of the electric field between the two tapes because of a constant spacing between conductors unlike wires of round cross-section.
The thinness of the tapes is also an advantage if nuclear or electronic spin resonance phenomena are involved, as there will be less dispersion of the magnetic field in the conductor bulk.
I hope for my first results next week (positive or negative!).

Great, F6FLT ! I'm sorry, i didn't notice your post, was busy here with other things. These copper tapes, would be interesting to make a bifilar coil out of these, then the capacitance between the bifilar coil windings would be likely greater than can be achieved in any other way. Will wait for your results with interest Hope that what is written here about how to calculate, etc, may help you in some way.

About other things, i tried the output part calculation now also with spreadsheet calculator. It is for linux, for windows all there is, is the following in github, and when one knows how to use that thing.

https://github.com/n-t-roff/sc

With spreadsheet calculator, the result was *exactly* the same as with python. This shows that some spreadsheets calculate with the same precision as python, though libreoffice calc is not one of these, and excel may also not be. Some scientific spreadsheets i think may also give the same results.

[ayeaye]

I don't know what ones programming skills are, but below we will do it like spreadsheet, but not with spreadsheet.

In linux, there is a command line program named bc, that stands for "basic calculator". It is an arbitrary precision calculator, that is, it can calculate with any number of digits after the decimal point. By default, that is with the option -l, the number of digits is 20. It looks somehow primitive, and one may not believe it, but it is actually used by scientists. There is also the following windows version of it.

http://gnuwin32.sourceforge.net/packages/bc.htm

In windows, one should use the cmd console. For that in the windows explorer, go to the directory where your files are, then click on the address bar above, write cmd and press enter, this opens the cmd console in that directory. Selecting things and pressing enter will copy, and right click will paste there.

It's a problem to get a list into bc, as it wants things in the form like a[7] = 17. So, write the following script, that is create a text file and paste the following into it, like with wordpad. Maybe one can use bc also with some ide, but i don't know which one some may like. Then save it as tobc.bc.

for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) {
    n = read()
    print "a[", j, "] = ", n, "\n"
}

Provided that we have list of samples in the file list.txt, and that we also know that there are 134 numbers (again, we do calculations like in a spreadsheet), and that we have bc installed, write the following on the cmd console (followed by enter).

bc -l tobc.bc < list.txt > tobc.txt

Then write the following script that does the calculations, as you see, it calculates almost exactly like a spreadsheet. Save it as output.bc.

for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) b[j] = a[j]*0.225*1000/50
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) c[j] = b[j]*b[j]/99.91/1000
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) e[0] = e[0]+c[j]
e[1] = e[0]*2.0*1000/50/1000000
e[2] = 110.001*1000*e[1]
print e[0], "\n"
print e[1], "\n"
print e[2], "\n\n"
for (j = 0; j < 134; j++) print a[j], "  ", b[j], "  ", c[j], "\n"

Then write the following on the cmd console.

bc -l tobc.txt < output.bc > output.txt

The output is a bit primitive, as the bc language doesn't have the fancy things to write numbers in some format. The following is the output.txt, calculated for the output part like in the previous posts here.

https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/w5gBZkqtfV

The beginning of that output was the following.

25.44393954559103192763
.00101775758182364127
111.95435175818236334127

As one can see, the python result was correct, and the spreadsheet result was less precise, as i also said earlier. In fact, the python results were satisfactory. One can use spreadsheet as well when the precision is satisfactory, just that it has been proven now that spreadsheets are less precise than python, and in the scientific calculations they may in some cases not be satisfactory.

PS  For plotting, as one has to find that magic number, in whatever way, where the input part ends and the output part starts, to then split it into two lists of samples, for separate calculations of the input and output part. Other than doing it online as i did show earlier, one can also install the mingw version of gnuplot for windows, from the following link. There is a huge number of various plotting programs, whatever one may prefer, but gnuplot is the most classic.

https://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuplot/files/gnuplot/5.2.4

When there is a list of samples in the file list.txt, then run gnuplot and write  plot "list.txt"  followed by enter, this will plot a graph of it, it's that simple.

[skycollection 1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbyNYn676dQ
On top, i have a "bifilar" pancake coil, in this experiment i have connected the pancake coil in one coil only, the other coil "induces" the current.