An energy harvesting project

[sm0ky2]

Closed-system analysis of momentum imparted onto a charged-mass,
and the field that imparted said momentum, can be difficult.
Because the systems involved are affected by factors not present in the other system.


From analysis of the first system, cop > 1 may be apparent, but not actual.
Due to the energies of the second system not included in the analysis.


An example of this is the particle accelerator:
Energy A is used to accelerate the particle, where the energy B contained in the momentum of the particle is greater than energy A. (this is only true in certain types of accelerators)


Though this devices allows is to investigate high-energy particle physics, it is rarely addressed how it is possible for the particle to have such high energies from the low energy electric field.


The answer to this is simple in principal, but a near impossibility to differentiate the two energies.
We look to the difference between the laws of electric charge force and Newton's 3rd law.
Newton's law defines a mass-based acceleration, while the electric force is dominated by the charge quotient.


In the latter, using the time derivative of acceleration, we see the energy imparted onto the particle, from the field, in a much shorter period of time than the charge that built up (and sustained) the driving field. By use of the Einsteinian mass-equivalency, we now see that all energies can in fact be accounted for. (calculated or measured using initial and final energies)


A similar occurrence can be realized in electric motors.
Where we see that, even at the macro scale, the electric force is imparted at a much faster rate than the force applied to the physical mass.
Conservation of momentum tells us that the momentum of the field interactions must translate to the momentum of the mass.


So now let's take this knowledge to the bendini
We have the physical force, but only for a short duration.
We have the electric force (acting much faster) for a longer duration.
This was assessed by analysis of the field strength and timing cycle of multiple machines.
The effective field strength extends to a size greater than the physical force, which leads to longer interactions as the coil assembly passes.
We can view the moment of inertia of a pulse motor as being predominantly an electric field force interaction, rather than as an electromagnetic (physical mass) interaction.
While the second is still present, it is a short lived interaction, and follows field conservation.
Field conservation breaks down in the pure electric domain. (0 value tangents, 0 value magnetic flux)
Maxwell's solution must then become our default equation.
Therefore, to asses the energy value contained in the field, E-field theory cannot be used.
E-field approach looks only at the force applied to the charge, with no respect to changes in the field itself. Maxwell proves this theory to be incomplete.


We in fact should expect a scalar quotient variant in field strength between the particle (vector and velocity included) and the extremities of the effective field. ('effective' value is used here to truncate the equation to a countable infinity with respect to a minimum charge value constraint)


The effect of these changes on the driving circuit are to the magnitude of E(0). Permeability of free space.
The field exists in the space outside of the coil.
So where does the energy then come from?
Short answer - the energy that was running through the circuit at a prior moment in time.
More explicitly, the energy that created the field in the first place:
This energy is lost to space, even if we do not make use of it.
[physical analogy - remove the rotor and operate the device]
Measurements can be taken in this state
Then again with the rotor replaced.


Now, we want to observe what's happening in real time:
So we scope the input and output simultaneously,
And put them both side by side in the time domain.


We see the output has a higher magnitude and a shorter duration
This is the manifestation of the momentum we imparted on it from the field.
The input is performing 'work' for a longer duration, but with less force.
The difference in energy in/out (loss or gain)
should now be evident on the scope traces.


In the case of loss, it becomes clear that the energy exchange takes place in the shorter-lived physical force magnetic interactions. So why then is the energy exchange in the pure electric vector not manifest as a loss in the circuit? For this we look at Maxwell's interpretation of Ohm's Law.
Which points us right back to the time domain. The electric field already 'happened', this is the Voltage potential. Where as the magnetic force is derived from the Current, at THIS moment in time. The 'now'


So the energy loss in the electric domain comes from energy already emitted into the field.
[size=78%]Motors like the Corona Motor are able to achieve greater torque using less energy than their magnetic counterparts.[/size]
[size=78%]The laws of physics are not violated by this approach, when all energies are accounted for from their perspective.[/size]
[size=78%] [/size]

[kolbacict]

I tried to run a similar device with two batteries. Approximately two years ago.
But made from a conventional two-phase computer fan.
There, after all, there are already all the necessary windings and magnets.
Single transistor circuit, manual switching of batteries.It was perhaps on this site.
After several switching, the batteries were discharged.

[lota]

Hello JuleP


there is a coil twisted. But not in all pictures. Do you have to have them?


Greeting
Lota

[JulesP]

Hi all,

To address some questions, I started my tests with four identical coils and one 'litzed' coil, which is the format where you have several strands twisted together to form a trigger coil inside another. This is a system recommended in the SG books to do the triggering for the FET but I never found it to work. So during this year, I rewound the 5th coil to be the same as all the others. So they all have an inductance of about 350-400mH and around 12-15Ohms. When connected up in parallel then of course the combined readings will change to perhaps around 20-30mH and 1-2 Ohms.

The coils were not tuned in any way. I put on as many turns of wire as the plastic spools would take (~2600) and used a ferrite rod in the core. The coils are only doing the 'natural' thing of building up a mag field and then resisting the collapse when the current shuts off as described by Lenz's Law. In my opinion, there is no tuning of the coils required and the only 'tuning' of a sort is the matching of the PRF (Pulse Repetition Frequency) of the pulse to best suit the receiving battery, as described in my doc. This is not a resonant phenomenon but rather an optimisation to get the best results with the minimum energy input.

The circuity I have assembled is straightforward electronically speaking even though it may look complicated. If there is any 'magic' going on in this device it is where the pulses meet the battery electrodes. My working theory, one that I can't test with this setup, is that the high dV/dt (~10E8 V/s) is stressing the local space around the battery terminals and causing a local and temporary coherence in the vacuum that results in a short 'scoop' or burst of charge into the electrode vicinity. The battery then processes that in the normal way. I have no evidence of that and my research is primarily to demonstrate a phenomenon of energy gain (harvesting) and not to determine the pathway or mechanism of the energy influx. That may come later, and in the inductive scientific method, it should.

I also wanted to mention that I have added some more documents to the Mega files.

Firstly, I have revised the 'Suggestions' doc to include a paragraph (p9) regarding my suggestions on the essential elements of a generator that could be assembled based on my findings. There is no need to build a device as 'complicated' as mine and one can omit the rotor system and cap dump circuit. My design was as such only because I had to accommodate all the possible variables to find out what worked and what didn't. Although I said that I would be required to produce a revised PCB design to accompany my forthcoming paper, I have decided to bring that forward to before the end of the year to help those wanting to replicate a build. So I will prepare a revised PCB design, and the Gerber files for anyone to be able to get it printed, which removes those parts that I found not to be essential. It will be accompanied by a set of assembly notes.

For those new to this thread, the link to the files is at the bottom of the attached and revised 'Suggestions v2' doc

Also, I have added another file to the folders called 'Battery Swapper & Timer Circuit' that explains how that works and how to set up specific swap times using the CD4060 chip which is part of the swapper circuit. This file is also attached here.

Lastly, I have decided to undertake some additional experimentation using supercapacitors. Now that they have come down radically in price and size, some extra data using them will add further validation to the phenomenon. Although I believe that the suggestion that the energy gain is due to some chemistry artifact in the battery is not valid, since the batteries are never supplying energy at the same time as they are being charged, nevertheless, using pure electrostatics and fields to store the energy in supercapacitors will be both interesting and get round any questions over chemistry playing some unsuspecting role. Of course, as a scientist, I would have to be open to that possibility but from the work so far I can't see how it can be the cause of the energy gain and CoP>>1 results. The battery chemistry is, of course, central to the process of charging and discharging the batteries, but the suggestion that some chemical artifact is the cause of the energy gain may be due to a misunderstanding on how the tests are done and the role of the battery swapper. I will post any results of these experiments during December.

Happy discovering!

Jules

[sm0ky2]

let's examine a standard transformer (of as high efficiency as current industrial manufacturing allows for)


Now, while in operation, let us place an outside inductance close enough to the transformer to effectively 'tap into' the field.
if the inductance of our 3rd coil is significant enough, harnessing this energy results in a decrease in the efficiency of the transformer.
this is standard knowledge, we use 3-coil transformers in many electronics. (transformers with more than one output)
if the coils and connected circuitry are identical (ideal case): output current will be approximately equal through both secondaries.


However, we know field currents to follow Ohm's Law!
Therefore, if the inductance of the 3rd coil is comparatively insignificant: efficiency of the transformer is NOT AFFECTED!
It is important to understand this.


almost the entirety of the excess field volume can be harnessed.
https://oconnell.fas.harvard.edu/files/sct/files/evaluation_of_the_shielding_effects_on_printed_circuit-board_transformers_using_ferrite_plates_and_copper_sheets.pdf


this study from Harvard examines the process from the perspective of shielding in circuits, however, scientifically the same applies to currents induced in usable form.