Overunity.com Archives is Temporarily on Read Mode Only!



Free Energy will change the World - Free Energy will stop Climate Change - Free Energy will give us hope
and we will not surrender until free energy will be enabled all over the world, to power planes, cars, ships and trains.
Free energy will help the poor to become independent of needing expensive fuels.
So all in all Free energy will bring far more peace to the world than any other invention has already brought to the world.
Those beautiful words were written by Stefan Hartmann/Owner/Admin at overunity.com
Unfortunately now, Stefan Hartmann is very ill and He needs our help
Stefan wanted that I have all these massive data to get it back online
even being as ill as Stefan is, he transferred all databases and folders
that without his help, this Forum Archives would have never been published here
so, please, as the Webmaster and Creator of this Forum, I am asking that you help him
by making a donation on the Paypal Button above
Thanks to ALL for your help!!


TP600 - TPU PULSER

Started by z_p_e, July 24, 2007, 08:52:02 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dutchy1966

Quote from: z_p_e on July 25, 2007, 09:55:19 PM
PULSE WIDTH QUESTION

@All,

What range of pulse widths would folks here like to have?

Here are some examples:

1) 100ns ~ 500ns in 100ns increments
2) 50ns ~ 250ns in 50ns increments
3) 20ns ~ 100ns in 20ns increments
4) 2ns ~ 510ns in 2ns increments (deluxe $$ implementation)

Perhaps longer than 500ns?  ???

Thanks,
Darren

Hi Darren,

Personally I think option 3 is the best. I understand what you're saying about the rise time of the MOSFETS but, at some point, we might find others that are faster than than the 50 ns. It would be nice that we could just replace the mosfets and don't need to change the rest of the circuit.

I suppose you mean to want to leave an option in there to use 50% duty aswell? Like a switch that can select 50% duty or a variable (very) small duty cycle.

Hope this helps....

Robert 

wattsup

@z_p_e

Thanks for your explanation. This is really not what I had in mind at all. With all due respect, in my opinion pulsing negative only is a dead end. Frequencies or not.

If you apply a current to a wire and stop it before it reaches the end of the wire, you will get the Tesla effect. You cannot do this if you are pulsing the negative. There is no inrush and you are just blocking the BEMF. The BEMF is faster than the electricity flow so before the flow even stops, if the BEMF knows where the negative is, it will know where the positive is and recede back into the positive before the current actually stops. The field is faster than the current. Maybe 1000 times faster, we do not know.

This is what I am thinking is happening. When you get BEMF, the BEMF is blind and has two options. Either it can touch the negative (like a blind man using his cane to tap the ground) to then know where the positive is, into which it will recede, or, if it cannot touch the negative, it just stays put, does nothing and creates heat. This second option or action on a pair of wires is nothing, produces nothing and is analagous to the current ECD.

Now, please understand that this is my view, the view of an EE-Neophite (EEN) but because of my EENism, I see the circuits more as living circulations then as static components. This also stems from my 20 years experience in water treatment technologies working with complex systems and processes. And from what I can see even in Otto's ECD is a stuck negative, everything is trying to go through this open and closed door while you are pushing voltage forward continuously. There is no play. There has to be some play, a place for expansion and contraction for a device to live on its own. A place where energy can be conserved and not wasted.

z_p_e there are some great thinkers and doers on this board that do not all have the EE acumen but have their insights that are not masked over by such EE knowledge. Most of the time you guys are talking tech shop, we are simply lost if the shuffle so many of us EEN's will just sit back and wait it out. Because our rebuttals may seem too simplistic, so in many instances, it is better to say nothing. But, if you have to think out of the EE box, sometimes it's is an advantage to already be out of it.

So I feel what we are doing is working backwards. Most are trying to get the big flash, major output, when we have not even see one watt, grow to 2 watts, we are working trying to get 250 watts and more. If you can just get 1 extra watt and do this 250 times, there's your 250 watts. How can a whale scratch a living off of tiny krill.

In my view Otto already had a good start of an answer with his 50 turns around the finger and ONE wire going through. What if you had 50 of those in parrallel working off a simple little spark. Sparks are easy to make and very powerfull. Work out the small and you'll find the big.

This is why I asked my questions. To work out an OU unit, you will require the flexibilities given in my questions and more in order to have a fighting chance. Otherwise, with just negative pulsing, you will be wasting precious time. If you want to practise your hunting, it is best to have a good variety of traps. If you only have one trap and it is the wrong one to begin with, then you are wasting time. Same goes for fishing if you only have one lure, good luck.

I think what I may have to do to get my idea across is to make a block diagram showing the logic. I think alot of you guys are not on the right track with negative pulsing. You need the negative solid for BEMF, or you have to have a complimentary switching to send the BEMF to a capacitor when the negative is open, otherwise you're wasting juice and producing heat.

Now again, maybe I fail to see the logic of this and I would appreciate if you could explain the benefits of negative pulsing to me in laymans terms with an example of a block diagram or simplified circuit. I just don't see it. Also, I hope I did not put this in a bad way as I do respect your abilities tremendously and know your views are essential.

z_p_e

Thanks for all the good feedback guys, I appreciate it.

I am still digesting it however, and have been brainstorming all morning to come up with a way to make everyone as happy as possible in terms of frequency range and pulse width capability. So far it looks good ;)

Regards,
Darren

z_p_e

wattsup,

I must admit that I am better at understanding technical descriptions as opposed to figuring out what someone means using laymen's terms.

I'm not following what you mean by "pulsing the negative", and I'm also not sure why you want the bemf, or why you feel it is "faster" than electricity.

If you want the bemf, no problem...just eliminate the freewheel diode across the MOSFET. Just be sure that you DO SOMETHING with the bemf however, or it may take out the MOSFETs with HV spikes.

So if you could describe what you mean in a little more technical terms, perhaps I can see where you are coming from and hopefully explain the differences (if there are any) to what the circuit is already doing. A block diagram if you wish may be helpful.

No offence taken wattsup. I understand that you may have a different point of view in what's going on and what needs to happen, and that's ok. But I need to understand that point of view before I can comment.

What is "negative pulsing"? What is "positive pulsing"? What is the difference in your opinion?

Cheers,
Darren

turbo

in my opinion, the bemf is working against us, meaning it's a pulsed flow in the other direction as the one we want our magnetic field to go.
therefore we need to elimminate it resulting in a magnetic field which goes one way only so we can speed it up fast.

Darren, is there a way to add crystals to the circuit?

Marco.