Great to have you here, Bob Boyce.
Your projects with hydrogen generation are legendary! That broken diode on the alternator that started it all off - are you able to give us the idea behind why the broken diode was causing the extra power anomaly you observed ?
As far as I could see the pulses from two of the 3 phase coils would each be fed back as DC pulse spikes into the coil with the broken diode.
With regards to phase could you expand on what aspect of the phase is important ?
Are we trying to get pulses exactly lined up ?
Sequentially staggered by a very small amount in time ?
My current thoughts are that the accurate physical placement of the coils in a circle is critical and that the phase timing is to do with how long it takes the magnetic field ( or is it electric field ?) from one coil to travel to the other coils. The idea being that the other coils are pulsed at exactly the right time to coincide with a certain point of the magnetic/electric waveform that is going past the coil. Question is what point in the waveform !!?
Thanks, Bob Rennips
Thank you Bob, glad to be here.
The shorted rectifier in that 3 phase alternator caused a distorted AC waveform to be superimposed upon the DC output. The leading portion of the positive half of the sine was missing, so the rise to peak was very fast. The trailing edge dropped off rapidly as well, so the positive side of the waveform closely resembled a 20% duty cycle pulse centered at the peak of where the positive portion of the sine should have been. The negative portion of the sine was almost fully intact, and was the same regardless of RPM. After the positive pulse, there were a pair of fairly high amplitude positive spikes, with a low amplitude distortion between them. That distortion was very similar to the NMR "seed" pointed out by Otto. The timing relationship between the pulse, spikes, and "seed" varied greatly with RPM. At some RPMs, the "seed" would blend into other portions of the waveforms.
Honestly, at the time, I was not looking for any signs of overunity in this process. The only thing that I noticed as unusual was that if the waveform was at a specific frequency (RPM related) range, the electrolyte solution would respond by disassociating much more rapidly at much less input power.
Phase requirements will depend on the construction of the device. If the device is using one primary coil (I think you guys call it a control coil), then the phase requirements for that single phase peak performance is way different from the phase requirements for a 2 phase, 3 phase, or 4 phase device. I have built all 4, from single phase to 4 phase, and I was unable to measure any additional performance gain from a 4 phase design as compared to a 3 phase design. This confirmed my earlier experiments with the use of 3 frequencies vs 4 frequencies combined on a common primary.
Accurate primary coil placement and characteristics are absolutely essential to accurate phase reproduction from the drive electronics. Minor errors in these areas can be compensated for by fine tuning of the phase and amplidute of the drive signals, as long as it is kept in mind that errors in the windings will impact system efficiency.
There are two modes of operation of a true 3 phase toroidal power system. One is pulsed mode, and one is rotational mode. Each has different timing and phase requirements.
Pulsed mode is where the timing of the pulses are such that the entire toroid pulsates at the same frequency, all nearly in phase.
Rotational mode is where the timing of the pulses are about 120 degrees out of phase. These are driven in a Wye configuration.
Regardless of the mode, phase angle between drive signals can be used to create repeatable interference patterns in the EM field. Try to think of these interference patterns as EM holograms, that given the right conditions can interact with dominant energy. When the dominant energy is kicked, it can kick back - hard! Normally, the three states of dominant energy are in balance, and no net energy flow occurs. When unbalanced, energy flow can be initiated. Our goal is to create controlled imbalances, and maintain this control while we make use of the tapped energy to power loads.
Bob
Hi Bob.B
I am glad you are here. I had almost given up hope.. ;)
I believe that SM's device, like Teslas, involved an ELF stationary wave sweeping over the toroid, while the three frequencies meanwhile are making music. I believe that this was done either naturally through tuning, or artificially creating the stationary wave through use of an oscillator as Tesla did.
In your experience with your device, have you seen anything to confirm this? Have you tried rolling a stationary wave across the toroid while the frequencies are doing their thing?
Thank you and warm regards,
Bruce :)
Hello Bruce,
By stationary wave, are you referring to an ELF unmodulated carrier wave, an ELF scalar wave, or some other form of ELF wave?
I do pre-load the toroid with a DC bias on the secondary winding that covers the entire 360 degrees of the toroid. This is typically 155 to 160 VDC, and provides the dipole potential that I spoke of in my post on page 67 on the "Successful TPU-ECD replication !" thread. The incoming energy is superimposed upon this bias supply, which is sent to the load. This dipole potential does not have to be that high, but the higher it is, the more effective it becomes. Testing with this particular toroidal device has shown that bias supply potentials below 11.5 VDC result in below unity performance.
I have not read over the documents, or looked at photos, relating to SM's device, so I don't can't form an opinion as to what he was doing. When I first found this site, I only briefly scanned over the topics and read a few posts. I really didn't see anything interesting enough to catch my attention, as I had done much of that sort of research and experimentation back in the mid 90s.
After I was injured by a lightning strike in 1995, I mothballed the more dangerous radiant energy research until after I moved. I still have the Seike g-strain energy absorber I had built back then. As you probably already know, several years ago, I went back into the hydroxy gas research that I had stopped doing in the early 90s. The resonance drive system was needing updating for modern times, so that led me back into the toroidal research. I have made many improvements over the old system, some of which were to improve control and stability, and increase output. I'm not sure if my resonance drive system bears any resemblance to SM's device or not. I would have to look over the information available for his device(s) to see.
The PWM3 series waveform generator boards that I put into the public domain were to allow others to experiment with the 3 phase toroids for powering their cell stacks, but they are really just proof of concept devices with no phase control. This allowed them to be safer for others to experiment with, as it is difficult to accidentally happen upon an avalanche without precise control of phase. The NE556 was a poor choice, which I now regret, as the TL594 would have been more suitable back then. The HexController is the newer device on my bench. It is based on an Atmel AT-Mega48 microcontroller chip. At this time, that board is still proprietary, but I do have a couple of alpha testers working with a version that I intent to release into the public domain if all works out well with it. That board allows precise control of frequency, phase, and pulse duration.
I have long been intrigued with the anomolies of toroidal power systems, but on oupower.com the primary quest of others there has been for hydroxy gas systems. I am so tired of messing with that stuff, as I feel direct energy production makes a whole lot more sense than cracking water to burn in engines. Having the water there to soak up energy avalanches just made it so much easier and safer.
Control... We must maintain control of the reaction! Unfortunately, that can sometimes be a lot easier said than done ;-)
Bob Boyce
Quote from: Bob Boyce on July 02, 2007, 04:26:04 PM
...
Rotational mode is where the timing of the pulses are about 120 degrees out of phase. These are driven in a Wye configuration.
Regardless of the mode, phase angle between drive signals can be used to create repeatable interference patterns in the EM field. Try to think of these interference patterns as EM holograms, that given the right conditions can interact with dominant energy. When the dominant energy is kicked, it can kick back - hard! Normally, the three states of dominant energy are in balance, and no net energy flow occurs. When unbalanced, energy flow can be initiated. Our goal is to create controlled imbalances, and maintain this control while we make use of the tapped energy to power loads.
Bob
Fascinating information. With the rotational mode pulses are the pulses still pulses with fast leading and trailing edges ? I assume that in rotational mode that we still need to go after what is in effect as fast an acceleration and decelleration as possible with each pulse, and not use 'standard' sinwaves ?
I've never come across the idea of three states of dominant energy or even dominant energy for that matter. Where can I find out more about this in the context of toroidal power units ?
thanks, Bob R.
Quote from: Bob Boyce on July 03, 2007, 12:23:00 AM
Hello Bruce,
By stationary wave, are you referring to an ELF unmodulated carrier wave, an ELF scalar wave, or some other form of ELF wave?
I was thinking along the lines of Tesla, finding he could create stationary waves with an oscillator. In his Colorado Springs Notes, Tesla noted that these
stationary waves "... can be produced with an oscillator," and added in
parenthesis, "This is of immense importance." I believe that with SM's device, he has produces this stationary wave at 7.3 Hz. I would love to know how the frequencies within the Toroid would react to that. I hope that helps to explain that question. :)
I do pre-load the toroid with a DC bias on the secondary winding that covers the entire 360 degrees of the toroid. This is typically 155 to 160 VDC, and provides the dipole potential that I spoke of in my post on page 67 on the "Successful TPU-ECD replication !" thread. The incoming energy is superimposed upon this bias supply, which is sent to the load. This dipole potential does not have to be that high, but the higher it is, the more effective it becomes. Testing with this particular toroidal device has shown that bias supply potentials below 11.5 VDC result in below unity performance.
I have not read over the documents, or looked at photos, relating to SM's device, so I don't can't form an opinion as to what he was doing. When I first found this site, I only briefly scanned over the topics and read a few posts. I really didn't see anything interesting enough to catch my attention, as I had done much of that sort of research and experimentation back in the mid 90s.
After I was injured by a lightning strike in 1995, I mothballed the more dangerous radiant energy research until after I moved. I still have the Seike g-strain energy absorber I had built back then. As you probably already know, several years ago, I went back into the hydroxy gas research that I had stopped doing in the early 90s. The resonance drive system was needing updating for modern times, so that led me back into the toroidal research. I have made many improvements over the old system, some of which were to improve control and stability, and increase output. I'm not sure if my resonance drive system bears any resemblance to SM's device or not. I would have to look over the information available for his device(s) to see.
The PWM3 series waveform generator boards that I put into the public domain were to allow others to experiment with the 3 phase toroids for powering their cell stacks, but they are really just proof of concept devices with no phase control. This allowed them to be safer for others to experiment with, as it is difficult to accidentally happen upon an avalanche without precise control of phase. The NE556 was a poor choice, which I now regret, as the TL594 would have been more suitable back then. The HexController is the newer device on my bench. It is based on an Atmel AT-Mega48 microcontroller chip. At this time, that board is still proprietary, but I do have a couple of alpha testers working with a version that I intent to release into the public domain if all works out well with it. That board allows precise control of frequency, phase, and pulse duration.
I would suggest you grab the .pdf of SM's clues from the locked thread entitled, "Read this first". I think you would understand it far better than most. And you continued help here is most appreciated. Some of these guys have been working for a very, very long time on this project.
Also, knowing that your Toroid has had control problems in the past, SM's did as well until they developed the proper controller for it. He warns us over and over of the potential for danger and the need for a frequency kill switch. Overheat shutoff switch, and over voltage shutoff. I look forward to the release of your controller.
If you are using frequency, phase, and pulse in your Toroid you already have very much in commen with SM's device. Have you experimented along the lines of Identical signals/different sources, opposing one another, one slightly out of phase,in your Toroid?
I have long been intrigued with the anomolies of toroidal power systems, but on oupower.com the primary quest of others there has been for hydroxy gas systems. I am so tired of messing with that stuff, as I feel direct energy production makes a whole lot more sense than cracking water to burn in engines. Having the water there to soak up energy avalanches just made it so much easier and safer.
Control... We must maintain control of the reaction! Unfortunately, that can sometimes be a lot easier said than done ;-)
Bob Boyce
Hello Bob.
Please see above, for replies!
Thank you very much for the information you have already given us. We will digest it. Test it. And use that which we can.
Warm Regards,
Bruce
Great to have you on board, Bob!
Lotsa folks are working with the HHO production side of yer circuitry... IronHead's High voltage HHO thread seems to follow in yer "neutral plate" design.
The Chapps controllers use a microprocessor chip that can hold to 1 Hz.
Maybe now we can get all these loose ends tied up into a more easily replicated device.
Thanks for the advice,
Turtle
Quote from: bob.rennips on July 03, 2007, 12:33:00 AM
Fascinating information. With the rotational mode pulses are the pulses still pulses with fast leading and trailing edges ? I assume that in rotational mode that we still need to go after what is in effect as fast an acceleration and decelleration as possible with each pulse, and not use 'standard' sinwaves ?
I've never come across the idea of three states of dominant energy or even dominant energy for that matter. Where can I find out more about this in the context of toroidal power units ?
thanks, Bob R.
Yes, as fast as possible in both rise and fall times. I refer to them as fast, sharp pulses. Sine waves have their uses, but the really freaky stuff begins to happen when you shove lots of fast pulses that have enough current at the gate to force the FET into full conduction fast, and load the gate enough to get a fast decay of the gate charge. Input capacitance of some of these devices can make this quite a challenge. Good strong drivers, lots of low ESR capacitance on the power pins for the drivers, bypass caps, and good operating voltage to get the fastest rise/fall times are all good design practices.
I think many that are stuck on established scientific dogma would disagree with me when I use the term dominant energy, but I don't really care. They can stick their collective heads in the sand all they want, as that does not change how this universe operates. Dominant energy is the dominant driving force force behind almost all of our observable/measurable energies. The three forms are Polar, Parapolar, and Diapolar, so named as to the roles they play in measured and observed interactions. By manipulation of very particular blends of the three, one can experience various effects such as anomolous heating, cooling, magnetic, gravitational, and electrical phenomonae. Dominant energy can even affect the quantum energy patterns that are responsible for the physical manifestation of energy that we know as matter. Matter = energy. I hope I've not gone too deep as to scare you.
Bob Boyce
Quote from: btentzer on July 03, 2007, 01:46:36 AM
Hello Bob.
Please see above, for replies!
Thank you very much for the information you have already given us. We will digest it. Test it. And use that which we can.
Warm Regards,
Bruce
Hello Bruce,
Ok, now I understand where you are coming from. What you are calling stationary waves are called standing waves. Absolutely, standing waves are the key to creating these EM holograms (interference patterns) that can induce effects to and from the dominant energy. I also use standing waves within the cell space of cell stacks to enhance the disassociation of water in the hydroxy gas project.
Inducing these effects to occur is an energy transmission process. In order to make full use of these effects requires opening a bi-directional path. This is so that not only can you manipulate energy to affect the dominant, but the dominant can affect the energy back in a manner that can be collected. The most common attempts are related to radiant energy phenomonae, and this brings about some inherent dangers. Strong, and even not so strong at some spectrum, EM fields can disrupt or damage the natural energy fields of living tissue, as well as tissue itself. There is so much dominant energy in every cc of space that there is no need to spread out the energy collection to a large area. By focusing fields inwards within the core of a toroid, and increasing the energy collection efficiency within that localized space/time, we can make very small, concentrated bubbles of disruption. In this manner, we can limit our exposure to the harmful effects of EM radiation.
Bob Boyce
Quote from: keithturtle on July 03, 2007, 02:41:00 AM
Great to have you on board, Bob!
Lotsa folks are working with the HHO production side of yer circuitry... IronHead's High voltage HHO thread seems to follow in yer "neutral plate" design.
The Chapps controllers use a microprocessor chip that can hold to 1 Hz.
Maybe now we can get all these loose ends tied up into a more easily replicated device.
Thanks for the advice,
Turtle
Hello Turtle,
1 Hz resolution is fine for bench test applications where you're just looking for proof of concept. Is it a fast and powerful enough microprocessor to monitor all the feedback points while maintaining tuning on the resonant reaction? It will require at least 0.01 Hz resolution to maintain a good phase control system for higher performance operation. This can make the difference between a 200 - 300% power efficient vs a 500 - 1000% power efficient system.
Just a good series cell design using catalytic reaction mode can hit 200% or so power efficiency.
I love the toroidal power systems for standalone operation. At at least they don't require maintaining and tracking the resonance reaction of the water to keep the system in tune for maximum hydroxy gas production.
Bob Boyce
@Boyce,
Are you seeing a rotational field and/or intertial effects?
Rotational field, yes. Inertial effects, I don't know. I do not dare to handle the toroid when the waveform generator is powered up and driving the primaries.
Bob
Are you using multiple poles (oriented inward like a motor or wrapped around the core like solenoid coils?)
OR
multiple wire segments (by segments, I mean more than one individual wire wrapped around the collector wire - side by side - perhaps with different frequencies - in any even they are side by side so a phase difference will exist and the field will move either direction or stand - assuming the phases don't cancel)
Was cooling encountered with direction of rotation - say CW?
Things start to get a little odd at about 10 khz?
Hi Bob;
Thanks for the pointers. At this early stage, I'm jes concerned obout proof of concept. The fine point will come as I make progress.
I wanna get involved in TPU, but will wait till I get grounded in HHO pulse production.
I'll follow this on the sidelines.
Yo, Grumpy;
Gots that plastic / caustic test ready to run later this week.
Gracias,
Turtle
Quote from: Grumpy on July 03, 2007, 04:04:28 PM
Are you using multiple poles (oriented inward like a motor or wrapped around the core like solenoid coils?)
OR
multiple wire segments (by segments, I mean more than one individual wire wrapped around the collector wire - side by side - perhaps with different frequencies - in any even they are side by side so a phase difference will exist and the field will move either direction or stand - assuming the phases don't cancel)
Was cooling encountered with direction of rotation - say CW?
Things start to get a little odd at about 10 khz?
My primaries are wound over the top of other windings on the toroidal core. I do not use a collector wire. The preload winding is wound at 90 degrees to the other windings, a secondary winding, and three primary windings wound on 120 degree centers. The deeper windings leads are brought out exactly centered between 2 of the 3 primaries. I use a little melted beeswax to secure the deeper windings, as this helps reduce winding movement/vibration/noise. The deeper windings are secured with a very tight wrap of winding tape, which can then be marked for accurate primary winding placement.
Anomolous effects that can be tuned for, at lower power levels, are excess heat production, heat absorbtion, power production, power absorbtion, gravitational perturbations,and magnetic anomolies. Higher power levels can result in small scale nuclear effects, such as matter transmutation at the atomic level, and even localized weather disruptions.
Many factors will determine what anomolies you can achieve, only part of which is related to any one specific frequency or set of frequencies. If you notice what I said, it is pulse shape that determines whether or not things can get freaky, not some arbitrary frequency point that you must cross. There are anomolies that can be found at frequencies well below 100 Hz. The size and inductance of your coil system can greatly determine what frequencies work well with that system. For example, laminated iron cores are great for lower frequencies as compared to ferrite cores, powdered iron cores, black sands cores, conductor ring cores, and air cores.
Trying to push cores beyond their ability can result in a lot of heat production in the cores. Eddy currents can waste energy, but sometimes they are needed to obtain a desired effect. Look at the ECD for example, where Otto is using eddy currents for heating of the aluminum heat sink above and beyond what the power MOSFETs can do. If the Mobius loops were not so radiant, these eddy currents would be much harder to obtain.
I really love the saying "the eye of the storm", as it is very applicable to a torus of swirling energy. Much more can be said on this, but there are already other threads pertaining to it.
Bob
@Bob B.
So, you are using a three-phase arrangment, with a biasing dc solenoid at the core/center, and toroidal secondary - which is internal to primaries.
Are you shifting the phase digitally like with a stepper controller or analog with like an RC network? Not that it matters, just asking - no one else is asking any questions.
Does not sound as though your wire lengths are critical. Is this a correct assumption?
Can you elaorate on pulse shapes and their effects?
Quote from: btentzer on July 03, 2007, 01:46:36 AM
I was thinking along the lines of Tesla, finding he could create stationary waves with an oscillator. In his Colorado Springs Notes, Tesla noted that these stationary waves "... can be produced with an oscillator," and added in parenthesis, "This is of immense importance." I believe that with SM's device, he has produces this stationary wave at 7.3 Hz. I would love to know how the frequencies within the Toroid would react to that. I hope that helps to explain that question. :)
I would suggest you grab the .pdf of SM's clues from the locked thread entitled, "Read this first". I think you would understand it far better than most. And you continued help here is most appreciated. Some of these guys have been working for a very, very long time on this project.
Also, knowing that your Toroid has had control problems in the past, SM's did as well until they developed the proper controller for it. He warns us over and over of the potential for danger and the need for a frequency kill switch. Overheat shutoff switch, and over voltage shutoff. I look forward to the release of your controller.
If you are using frequency, phase, and pulse in your Toroid you already have very much in commen with SM's device. Have you experimented along the lines of Identical signals/different sources, opposing one another, one slightly out of phase,in your Toroid?
Hello Bob.
Please see above, for replies!
Thank you very much for the information you have already given us. We will digest it. Test it. And use that which we can.
Warm Regards,
Bruce
As I had already mentioned, standing waves do play a very big role in interactions between out of phase signals. I'm not so convinced that 7.3 Hz was a target, as the heating issue SM had mentioned tends to suggest higher frequency operation. A proportionally smaller portion of energy is a lot easier to control.
I downloaded the info and went over it, just finished reading it all. It is amazing how much information has been provided by SM, yet the majority seems to have gone right over the heads of most people here. There are a few here however that really do seem to have a good grasp of the concept, and are doing very well. SM has given way more informatiuon than required to fully replicate a device that operates on these principles. Heck, I have had 2 people replicate my toroidal power system so far, and I didn't even have to give them nearly as much key information as SM has provided! I only provided them with the toroid winding and connection information, power requirements, preliminary tuning instructions, and some safety advice. I did not go into fine detail on the theory of operation. They observed the anomolous behavior and learned for themselves how to tune from there for improved operation.
I really wanted to say that this does not have to be that difficult, just listen to SM and follow his clues. But after having dealt with exactly this sort of issue myself over the years, where most people just don't seem to grasp even the simplest of details, I can definitely relate to the frustration that SM seems to have. I eventually became so frustrated that I buried myself in my research and gave up trying to explain any of the really intense details to others.
I rarely go into the details because frankly, most people think I'm nuts when I speak of anomolous energy or apparent over-unity output. These poor closed-minded souls do not look at the big picture, that WE do not have to input all of the energy IFwe can tap into and channel a natural energy flow to do work. Do WE put the energy in the wind that we can tap with a windmill? Do WE put the energy into the sunlight that we can tap with a solar panel? Do WE put the energy into the stream that we can tap with a water wheel? Of course not. They seem to have very little trouble with these examples, but yet they have a very hard time grasping the concept of tapping into unseen or unfelt natural energies.
I helped several replicators closely, and shared proprietary information with over 2 dozen experimenters that were willing to enter into non-disclosure agreements. After getting burned by one of them, a guy in Australia that published a portion of my proprietary and copyrighted information and diagrams, things changed. I'm just glad that he betrayed me prior to getting the more intimate details, as that severely limited the impact of his actions. My attorney still will not allow me to make any further detailed disclosures under NDA, while we determine the damages of this one NDA violation. I still work with the replicators that are already involved, but have not taken on helping any new ones.
The main reason I am so careful with this is, the dangers involved with precision phase control getting out of control are great. SM was absolutely correct about what can occur during energy avalanches. Even if tuned off-center, tremendous energy can flow if an avalanche occurs. I have experienced the wrath of this on a couple of occasions. Lightning protection is an absolute MUST if you are wanting to experiment along these lines. If you look outside and see the clouds above you begin to slowly spin, centered over your location, shut it down immediately! I am not kidding here. I don't want to scare you off, just make you aware of how dangerous this technology can be at higher power levels.
This is why I designed my toroidal power system specifically for use with the hydroxy gas systems. The onboard safeties are there to shut down the frequency generators, as long as the safeties are connected to overtemp, overvolt, overcurrent, and overpressure detection. I did as much as I could to make this as safe as possible for those that know nothing about the technology. The controllers were also designed to minimize the risk of conditions favoring an avalanche from even occuring. The use of water as a load can minimize the impact of lower energy avalanches, as the energy can be totally absorbed by the water. By design, it is also very difficult for someone to create the right conditions to get it to even operate correctly by accident. They will have to know how to wind the toroid, how it is connected, how to power it, and how to tune it. Without that information, it is nothing more than an oddly wound toroidal transformer ;-)
PS: Mannix, if you are still in contact with SM, please relay to him that I understand the frustration, and I hope all is well with him.
Bob Boyce
Bob,
Thanks for sharing. So glad to hear your validation of TPU as you are very well known and respected. Thank you, thank you, thank you for being here!
Humble
Quote from: Grumpy on July 04, 2007, 07:41:56 PM
@Bob B.
So, you are using a three-phase arrangment, with a biasing dc solenoid at the core/center, and toroidal secondary - which is internal to primaries.
Are you shifting the phase digitally like with a stepper controller or analog with like an RC network? Not that it matters, just asking - no one else is asking any questions.
Does not sound as though your wire lengths are critical. Is this a correct assumption?
Can you elaorate on pulse shapes and their effects?
@Grumpy
Three phase, yes. The DC biasing is distributed around the core periphery. I have 2 different winding setups.
The one that incorporates DC bias into the secondary winding is one strictly for driving the hydroxy gas systems, and it is very tame in comparison. It lacks an intense angular field component, which makes it very mild-mannered in comparison. It is not so prone to runaway, but lacks in total power capacity. It is like a tropical storm at best. This is the one shared with the hydroxy gas crowd.
The one that has a seperate DC bias winding can introduce a much greater angular field, but it can be quite the beast to control. This one is like a hurricane that can turn into a tornado at a moments notice. This is one that can initiate intense lightning strikes and other nasty stuff if not kept on a VERY tight leash. Obviously, this one is not shared with the hydroxy gas crowd.
The controller that I designed and released into the public domain does not utilize phase control. Precision phase control is too dangerous for most of the type of hobbyists that usually want to build the hydroxy gas systems, so a milder form of controller was the answer. It uses pulse conditioning and safety interrupts prior to the power MOSFET devices. My method of precision phase control is via precision pulse duration and timing using software on a microcontroller. The outputs are conditioned and applied through safety interrupts to power MOSFETs via drivers.
The secondary wire lengths are not critical in and of themselves, as long as it is a full fill around the toroid. What is important is that the number of turns on the secondary, in combination with target DC bias, are used to determine optimum primary winding ratio. Core diameter determines the amount of power that can safely be handled without heating issues.
Pulse shapes vs effects... It's much more complex than just pulse shapes. But think about what you are asking. Do we really want that sort of information spelled out online, even if there were a mapping chart of frequencies/waveform patterns/effects? Just consider what could happen if certain people were to get all the information they could on negative uses of this or any other energy technology.
Bob Boyce
Hi Bob,
And thank you for your well put together answers to our questions. I agree that it is amazing how 1000 people can read the same words and most never hear them.
I also, some time ago, made the suggestion of testing with our units hooked to a simple HHO cell, to get a true reading of output current. Also because it seems that SM's toroid was able to "rise to the load", of course within bounds. But if one is lighting one bulb, how does that person know that there is enough wattage to light five bulbs. So I had suggest the tie in with HHO. But many in this community boo'd me for this. I took it as lack of understanding and carried on! LOL :) It is good that you do understand.
Lastly, after you have read SM's clues, how similar would you say your devise is both in function and in mechanics to the SM device? Also does your toroid produce Alternating Current or Direct Current for power output?
Thank you and warm regards,
Bruce
Hi Bob, hi All,
I have just posted an idea with schematic at
http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2582.msg38506.html#msg38506
and am looking for peer review.
I call it the Rat Race because it is like a rat running in a circle chasing its own tail.
Regards, Earl
Quote from: btentzer on July 05, 2007, 04:04:46 PM
Hi Bob,
And thank you for your well put together answers to our questions. I agree that it is amazing how 1000 people can read the same words and most never hear them.
I also, some time ago, made the suggestion of testing with our units hooked to a simple HHO cell, to get a true reading of output current. Also because it seems that SM's toroid was able to "rise to the load", of course within bounds. But if one is lighting one bulb, how does that person know that there is enough wattage to light five bulbs. So I had suggest the tie in with HHO. But many in this community boo'd me for this. I took it as lack of understanding and carried on! LOL :) It is good that you do understand.
Lastly, after you have read SM's clues, how similar would you say your devise is both in function and in mechanics to the SM device? Also does your toroid produce Alternating Current or Direct Current for power output?
Thank you and warm regards,
Bruce
Yes, one of the "features" of this power source is that it seems to adapt to the load, within reason of course. Load impedance is fairly important to getting maximum output, due in part to the HF portion of the energy riding on the DC output. Momentary shorting of the output does result in a plasma-like discharge arc.
From what I can see, they do look to be very similar. The primary differences that I could see are core material and number of poles. It sounds and looks like SM used stranded copper wire and 4 poles, while I use powdered iron and 3 poles in my current device. Otherwise, both seem to build up a swirling electromagnetic vortex during operation.
I have used other core materials with varying degrees of success as well over the years. I started out with laminated iron cores on the 2 phase devices in the mid 80s, and progressed to air cores on the 3 phase devices in the early 90s. One of the first units I tried 3 phase on was a Seike "g-strain energy absorber" that I had connected to a hand wound 3 phase air core torus coil. Talk about uncontrolled operation! But I kept at it, unaware of the dangers. Since I was no longer doing the hydroxy gas research at that time, I was obsessed with trying to replicate Tesla and Moray research on a shoestring budget. After my lightning strike injury in 1995, I mothballed that line of research until I had the time, energy, and funds to continue. I refused to apply this 3 phase design to practical application until the control issue could be solved.
I have openly shared almost all of my past research online, and even most of my more recent research. But like SM, I am reluctant to share the latest microcontroller based controller research. This does not mean that I will not, it just means that I will do so very carefully. I already have a "bare bones" model designed and being tested by another replicator. The toroidal core is nothing special, a MicroMetals T650-52 green/blue core. They make these material 52 cores in various sizes, but I understand that the T650 size are on back-order due to the current heavy demand from the hydroxy gas folk.
Bob Boyce
Again Bob, a wealth of information. You have answered even unasked questions in your last post. Thank you again.
A fellow builder and poster, working closely with me on our next build had suggested 3 phase, with the thought that it was probably what Tesla used for his famous "Egg of Columbus" demonstration. And yes, you are correct, that at least in the early years, there was four poles on the SM TPU. In his clues, as to the mechanics of the unit, he merely says, "segments". But hearing the control problem you had with 3 phase, it sounds like you think it safer for us to perhaps start with two phase for our rotating field.
I have tried to get others to realize that it is the way to produce DC output. The intermix of three frequencies, as facinating as they are, in producing alternating current, it is not overunity, but as SM says, "They are only a means to achieve an end."
With the potential danger that these devices "can" pose, when operating, how can we all work together to overcome these, and introduce such a working device to the world. Or do you see that as "not possible". Perhaps it could be scaled up to say "transmission station" size and used safer in that way. I am sure you must have thought on this.
Warm regards,
Bruce
Quote from: bob.rennips on April 25, 2007, 03:43:20 AM
I had been using one of these:
http://www.oceancontrols.com.au/motor_controller/microstepping_motor_controllers.htm
I had four 'motor' coils arranged on a wooden board in typical 2 phase motor arrangement but all Norths pointing towards the center, so basically pulsing north facing towards center, magnetic pulses in a circle. I placed another air core solenoid over the whole arrangement. i.e. Like placing a pipe vertically over the coils so the circumference of the one pipe covered all the 4 coils. In otherwords this solenoid is at 90 degrees to the four coils.
I placed 12 volts DC from a car battery across this solenoid in series with a 15ohm 20watt resistor.
A function generator pulsed the microstep controller. I had the whole thing running at around 6.8Khz. I was looking at waveforms on the scope to see if the DC coil, even though it was at 90 degrees to the other coils, affected the scope waveform. No real difference detected.
The DC coil was connected to one battery and the microstep and the four coils to another battery. I used two batteries is so that there would be no possibility of electrical noise from the 4 coil switching going over the wires to the DC coil via the common connections to a single battery.
The connection to the DC coil came loose at the battery and was sparking and then POOF the whole microstep controller goes up in smoke. You could smell burnt up electrolytic capacitors and could see resistors burnt out on opening the box up.
Theoretically there should have been no coupling between the DC coil and the four coils... so this is a very interesting result. However, I can't afford to burn up $99+, each time I try this!, so now looking for a cheaper homemade circuit, to continue the 'burning' experiment.
Hi Bob,
Back in April I experienced the above. It appears to have a similar arrangement of coils to what you have been doing. Could this be the case or was it just BEMF getting into the 'motor' coils ?
thanks,
Bob
Thanks much, Bob B. - my commetns in blue:
More than enough to get started - I am surprised more are not discussing this.
Quote from: Bob Boyce on July 05, 2007, 03:57:29 PM
@Grumpy
The DC biasing is distributed around the core periphery.
This makes the direction of the bias field "directional". Depending upon the field centered may prove beneficial or detrimental - for example of the outer edge reversed.
The one that has a seperate DC bias winding can introduce a much greater angular field, but it can be quite the beast to control.
Yes, I see what you are saying.
The controller that I designed and released into the public domain does not utilize phase control. Precision phase control is too dangerous for most of the type of hobbyists that usually want to build the hydroxy gas systems, so a milder form of controller was the answer. It uses pulse conditioning and safety interrupts prior to the power MOSFET devices. My method of precision phase control is via precision pulse duration and timing using software on a microcontroller. The outputs are conditioned and applied through safety interrupts to power MOSFETs via drivers.
Got it.
Pulse shapes vs effects... It's much more complex than just pulse shapes. But think about what you are asking. Do we really want that sort of information spelled out online, even if there were a mapping chart of frequencies/waveform patterns/effects? Just consider what could happen if certain people were to get all the information they could on negative uses of this or any other energy technology.
I'll stop with the "means of excitation determines the result" and leave it at that.
Bob Boyce
Quote from: bob.rennips on July 05, 2007, 11:25:30 PM
Hi Bob,
Back in April I experienced the above. It appears to have a similar setup to what you have been doing. Could this be the case or was it just BEMF getting into the 'motor' coils ?
thanks,
Bob
From some of the pictures of the SM device I looked at, it appears that SM used permanent magnets oriented to provide a fixed magnetic preload bias to his device. This would give a preset amount of angular distortion (twist) to his RMF. I do not know if he later went to adjustable fields in the interest of maintaining better control.
The magnetic field from an applied DC bias allows for an adjustable amount of angular distortion to form in the RMF. Polarity of applied DC determines the direction of angular distortion in reference to the desired direction of RMF spin, ie CW or CCW (depending on hemisphere). The strength of the DC bias field determines the extent of angular distortion in the RMF. Essentially, the kicks are the interacting energy, while the shape of the EM field can help to guide the overall operational characteristics. This is why so many device configurations are possible with this type of technology, some working better than others. Are you wanting a mild angular distortion to keep power down and minimize control issues, or do you want a wild angular distorsion to tap massive power at the trade-off of control stability and other possible issues? Having a RMF with angular distortion does not replace the requirement of providing interacting kick energy with sharp, clean pulses.
Quote from: btentzer on July 05, 2007, 09:15:34 PM
Again Bob, a wealth of information. You have answered even unasked questions in your last post. Thank you again.
A fellow builder and poster, working closely with me on our next build had suggested 3 phase, with the thought that it was probably what Tesla used for his famous "Egg of Columbus" demonstration. And yes, you are correct, that at least in the early years, there was four poles on the SM TPU. In his clues, as to the mechanics of the unit, he merely says, "segments". But hearing the control problem you had with 3 phase, it sounds like you think it safer for us to perhaps start with two phase for our rotating field.
I have tried to get others to realize that it is the way to produce DC output. The intermix of three frequencies, as facinating as they are, in producing alternating current, it is not overunity, but as SM says, "They are only a means to achieve an end."
With the potential danger that these devices "can" pose, when operating, how can we all work together to overcome these, and introduce such a working device to the world. Or do you see that as "not possible". Perhaps it could be scaled up to say "transmission station" size and used safer in that way. I am sure you must have thought on this.
Warm regards,
Bruce
No, I am not recommending cutting back to 2 phases unless that is what you want to do. The amount of reliable interaction possible from kick reduces as you go to 2 phase energy patterns.
As to safety and use. Honestly, I don't think that the energy barons of this world would willingly stand by and allow this sort of technology to progress to widespread use without a fight. This is something that will have to be relegated to the grass roots efforts of basement inventors and tinkerers. Safety is relative to design. While it is entirely possible to design in limitations, there can be no absolute guarantee that something can not or will go wrong. All we can do it try to mitigate the issues. For example, if you design this to use a fixed power set of bias permanent magnets, and it runs great, but some yahoo decides to stick on bigger magnets without beefing up the control system... catch my drift? More is not always better, but some people do not see it that way.
Bob Boyce
Quote from: Bob Boyce on July 05, 2007, 03:57:29 PM
@Grumpy
Three phase, yes. The DC biasing is distributed around the core periphery. I have 2 different winding setups.
The one that incorporates DC bias into the secondary winding is one strictly for driving the hydroxy gas systems, and it is very tame in comparison. It lacks an intense angular field component, which makes it very mild-mannered in comparison. It is not so prone to runaway, but lacks in total power capacity. It is like a tropical storm at best. This is the one shared with the hydroxy gas crowd.
The one that has a seperate DC bias winding can introduce a much greater angular field, but it can be quite the beast to control. This one is like a hurricane that can turn into a tornado at a moments notice. This is one that can initiate intense lightning strikes and other nasty stuff if not kept on a VERY tight leash. Obviously, this one is not shared with the hydroxy gas crowd.
The controller that I designed and released into the public domain does not utilize phase control. Precision phase control is too dangerous for most of the type of hobbyists that usually want to build the hydroxy gas systems, so a milder form of controller was the answer. It uses pulse conditioning and safety interrupts prior to the power MOSFET devices. My method of precision phase control is via precision pulse duration and timing using software on a microcontroller. The outputs are conditioned and applied through safety interrupts to power MOSFETs via drivers.
The secondary wire lengths are not critical in and of themselves, as long as it is a full fill around the toroid. What is important is that the number of turns on the secondary, in combination with target DC bias, are used to determine optimum primary winding ratio. Core diameter determines the amount of power that can safely be handled without heating issues.
Pulse shapes vs effects... It's much more complex than just pulse shapes. But think about what you are asking. Do we really want that sort of information spelled out online, even if there were a mapping chart of frequencies/waveform patterns/effects? Just consider what could happen if certain people were to get all the information they could on negative uses of this or any other energy technology.
Bob Boyce
Hi Bob,
My partner and I had our eyes fixed on 3 phase, so thanks for that confirmation. 3 phase it will be.
I understand the new controller is proprietory, so I will not ask about that. ;) So let's talk mechanics for a moment. Do you recommend 1 secondary and three primary, with the primary wound in trifilar fashion, wound perpindicular on the toroid, 360 deg.?
I thought I had run across this on your site. I am trying to picture in 3D how you have wound your coils, or should I say, how you would recommend, for us to start and learn and study from. The simplest design possible! ;D And I know it is difficult to express pictorially with words. Let's call anything wound around the circumference of the coil, horizontal and anything wound perpindicular to that, perpindicular. LOL
Warm regards,
Bruce
@Bob B.
The only general details left are direction (CCW or CW) - and safety measures.
I have freq sources - adjustable output. With two signals I can do just about anything - drive logic circuits or drive four coils for four phase.
With the DC bias - I'll start with milliamps.
@btentzer
Hush the talk of "public" and "open" and replace with "private" and "cryptic".
@Bruce
I will take better photos during my next toroid winding session, that should help. I used to have a toroidal transformer photo posted in one of my project folders on the oupower.com site. I had to remove it because everyone was counting the primary turns and taking that winding count as absolute and literal. Even though I had put in that pictures description that the toroid shown had been wound for a particular application (a 290 VDC system), and would not work for any other voltage system. I tired of repeating this to people as well, so I finally just totally removed the photo.
@all
While on the subject of toroids, I contacted MicroMetals about core availability. As many have posted, they are still out of stock on the T650-52 core. I was told that the next production run of 90 units are due to be ready on 08/08/2007. Some have apparently ordered the -26 material cores as a replacement. I can only guess that they based this on material density and reference permeability, or maybe the lower price. However the -26 material has a higher temperature coefficient of permeability, and higher thermal conductivity. Quality is important.
I source my mil-spec wire from surplus outlets to save money, and tried doing that for cores as well. It worked ok when I was able to find the right cores, but I ended up wasting more money in the long run buying surplus cores to try.
Bob
hmm - iron core or air core - hmm - decisions...decisions
@ Grumpy
I vote one of each. LOL
Never a good thing to have all or our eggs in one toroidal basket!
@ Bob Boyce
Pictures would be helpful of course. Is there a formula you have worked out based on diameter of the core, or say primary to secondary winding? Or would that same formula be the same regardless of diameter, but simply the length/amount of wire would change?
Warm regards,
Bruce
Quote from: Grumpy on July 07, 2007, 07:51:49 PM
hmm - iron core or air core - hmm - decisions...decisions
I was gonna say try both, as toroidal power systems can be be made in many ways, but Bruce already answered that while I was typing this.
Bob
CCW was my first guess.
Your winding arrangement - being circumferal - produces more than just a rmf.
The number of poles might effect the pattern of he standing wave when the shift occurs - have to think more about that.
winding...
It's wound.
Not sure if I want to use a ring counter or my two freq gens to drive it.
Well put some pics out and parade that beauty down the promenade!
--giantkiller.
Yep, pictures would be good, Grumpy. I hope you took some at each of the three stages.
Others should not be far behind! ;D
Methinks the controller may slow some down, to add the needed precision. Except GK, he almost had every tuning imaginable as it was! LOL
I love this part...the building! I can't wait to see the electronics Jason and Roberto come up with!
Happy Days! :)
Bruce
Let's get back to the discussion of "phase":
@Bob B:
How close to ideal phase separation (as in 120 degrees separation for three poles, 90 degrees for four, etc.) should or shouldn't it be? I can use a ring counter or shift register to get the phased signals and then adjust them at each coil to make up for differences in winding/position, etc. - this sounds like the best approach.
Are you reversing the signal polarity like a 3-phase motor or just positive pulses?
--------------------------
I got the parts, just need to wire them up. Pretty simple actually. Earl posted a circuit on another thread that would be good for experimenting. Build that and adjust the clock for freq, tune the phases, and hold on to your hat.
EDIT: (Earl's circuits - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2582.0.html )
Pictures? This is so simple to wind - why would you need a picture?
EDIT: I did not count the windings. I did not take pictures while winding. It is easy enough to disassemble when and if the time comes.
@Bob B.,
Please tell us how do we 'focus the field inward' for safety as you describe.
I assume the DB Bias is preferred for battery charging as well. Does this help in containing or focusing the field?
Can you tell us more about calculating efficient windings needed for a particular core size and intended load as you mentioned? Thank you very much for time and patience.
Humble
I am trying to be more like the following quote from Bob Boyce on the Oupower.com forum, and encourage everyone else to do the same:
QuotePosted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:01 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm glad someone is getting encouraged. Yea, I suppose Lester Hendershot, and the others that successfully replicated his device, made sure they were always nearby to a powerful radio transmitter before tuning their devices to run lights and motors. Must be one hell of a crystal diode radio receiver
Been there, done that. When I was fiddling with atmospheric energy, I experienced first-hand the typically pitiful amounts of power that could be drawn from RF and atmospheric potential. Unless one had access to a couple of high mountaintops like the Swiss Alps or a few really tall radio towers to string cables between, the current was typically in the microamps. That does not always hold true though. I have witnessed some spectacular discharges and potentials from some of the simplest of radiant energy collectors at times, and not because of nearby thunderstorms. Utility linemen must ground unconnected lines before working on them, to discharge the potentially lethal atmospheric potential, even when there are no nearby energized lines to couple or leak. I guess that means they are only imagining that they could be killed.
I have been on top of remote radio and television towers under construction, where there are no nearby transmitters yet in operation, dozens of miles from the next nearest radio tower, and witnessed first-hand the audible sizzle and visible corona of atmospheric potential from sharp points of metal. I have held electrostatic dissipators in my hands while installing them, and watched these corona discharges continue as the energy passed right through my body from the tower to the dissipators on many occasions. I have been on radio towers, within 50 feet of the top, as they were hit repeatedly by lightning. It was an occupational hazard that one must endure when installing or removing antennas from governmental/commercial radio or broadcast towers, sometimes even during inclement weather. When you spend all day working up on a tower in south Florida, you can't just decide to come down when the weather changes, or nothing would ever get done. And yes, I do still have pictures taken from some of these giant towers
What's the point in all of this? Simple, unless you actually get your hands dirty building or doing something, you can only speculate and go by what you have been taught, whether it was right or wrong. Am I a scientist? No way. I like to actually build and test rather than use scientific models. If I see a need to test for something, I will. I don't always need to know why something observed behaves the way it does. Sure, I would like to know. But some of my most unproductive time was spent pouring over scientific texts trying to make heads or tails of observed phenomonae. I find it more satisfactory to explore and see how better to make practical use of this, rather than to pour through endless textbooks trying to find politically correct terminology.
Bob
"IronHead" summarized this advice down to three words: "Just Build It!"
'K. Already in motion. Saftey first like Bob B. says.
Bob, My question is about your 90 degree biasing winding.
I can "see" the rest of how your coil is constructed if not connected in my mind, but this bit is a bit shady.
Do you mean that it is circumferentially wound around the outside of the torus? As in SM's collector, only more turns, and around the outside of the secondary?
This is the image I have in my head based on your description.
On another note, I agree with you that it is understandable why SM gets frustrated by know it alls, and newbies who think they are on track, but are actually just distractions. Or worse yet, people who don't get basic clues in spite of their proclaimed experience. I understand that you have probably had to deal with a number of these types over the years of your research career. It's one of the things that makes communicating via forums difficult. Threads are easily sidetracked by these types, and they are usually relentless posters. The quiet few knowlegable ones, that are not attention whores are usually the productive few. There are a few noisy yet productive types as well... They are typically the eccentric, too-smart-for-your-own-good types. But are exceptions to the rule generally.
You mentioned however that you have given "less" information, and others have been able to replicate.
The information you gave them was winding, connection, and tuning info, which was all pretty specific.
There are a lot of pretty sharp guys here, and in their defense, the information you gave out was pretty specific info. Whereas SM's info has been easily interpreted a number of ways. You, coming from a background with a device that operates very similarly to his, see everything plain as day. You were already wearing "TPU tinted glasses" so to speak. The rest of the dedicated few here have spent thousands in personal funds in order to find out if "this interpretation" or "that interpretation" has been right. There are simply too many variables to explore. And we can have one or two, or even a dozen variables exactly right, but if one is off, we have to scrap that model and move on, never knowing we had it mostly right.
See the problem? You yourself said that without knowing the connection details and winding specifics, and driving specifics, it would be very difficult to even accidentally come across the desired effects.
So, that is what we have been doing. Me, for two years now. Most of us have "TPU Graveyards" that we keep in case something proves to be promising, and we discover that at one point in the past we happened to have more things right than wrong.
Even though, I understand SM's frustration, and I would be too. I think I would be more frustrated with my limitations of info sharing, than I would be with my students. And I also think I would have a tendency to understand their frustrations as well. It's a two way street.
I feel bad for SM really, his health problems, his gag order, his aching desire to get this info out. I can't imagine living that way. It must be impossible to simply enjoy life with these thorns in his side.
At any rate, it's been good reading all of your posts and your experiences with this tech. Hope to keep you here for more of the fun.
I realize that you asked Bob, but I'd like to go ahead and add some comments toward your questions - maybe get some other people interested in this thread.
I have wound the bias coil (solenoid style) on a thin form (rolled plastic sheet) that fits over the ring so as to make it removable for changes and such. By having this coil over the entire ring, the magnetic field inside the coil is applying a directional vector to the field of the ring. Imagine the ring itself being stretched by pulling at it's center (even though there is really nothing in the center - imagine space stretching) - that is the effect of the bias coil. Imagine the pulled space with a twist in it and you have an image of the vortex.
(hmm - that image gives me an idea...)
The info on this thread so far was enough for me to make the ring.
Connections?
Connect as required to make a rotating field - this varies depending on whether you are using pulses or full-wave signals. With four windings at 90 degrees, you cross the connections of the opposing coils and each pair of opposing coils are fed a signal that is 90 degrees out of phase from the other one. Which one leads/lags determines the rotation direction. The coils will be 180 degrees out of phase with their opposing partners do to the crossed connections. With pulses, you just hit them sequentially and tune phase as required to sweeten the field. Just like stepper motors work.
Standing waves (magnetic) should be visible with ferrofluid or magnetic viewing film - assuming these materials do not vary the field so much that they alter the field and cause the pattern to collapse.
Well, I haven't comitted to building just yet, as I'm not in a position to commit to anything, with my move and all still in the works. However, if/when I do build, I would do it with the three coils 120 degrees each, and pulse with very short duty cycle (just enough to load the capacitance in the fets), and use some very sturdy drivers and with nice specs in order to get as sharp a rise and fall time as possible.
I probably wouldn't even try sines, and four "controls", as he noted that adding the fourth one doesn't seem to add anything spectacular to the mix. Besides, I only have three F sources unless I build another one myself. Which, If I ever wanted this thing to run itself independent of lab equipment, I would have to eventually anyway.
Oh and I forgot to ask bob... On your toroidal units, output is via the all encompassing secondary is that correct? Primaries are beneath that, and are fed signals. Then we have the biasing winding.
Thanks again.... Rich
three signals?
-----------------
EDIT: Bob did mention FET's.
Digital devices like shift registers, Johnson registers, and various others will produce very clean, sharp signals and only require a clock signal, yet they can drive several poles - 3 to 16 is easily done with one chip. Then you use a delay line (they are on chips these days) or and RC phase shift combo to adjust the phase of each pole to get the honey out of the pot.
Many ways to pull the voltage higher if desired.
Primaries are outside the secondary.
The trick is not in forcing power out, but in allowing it to force itself out. Only a small signal is required to start and then it builds up - related to the frequency applied (the clock) to all of the poles - just like a motor.
Visuallize the arrangement of the primaries - see that there are two magnetic loops formed - see that they are rotating out of phase, but at the same rate - and then Whoa! - you get a standing wave pattern when everything is just right. Of course, this is just my interpretation and I have not verified it yet.
Here: This will give you an idea - not exactly like this but similar concept.
http://scitation.aip.org/phf/gallery/2003-lorenz.jsp
I'll take your word for it, I was just going by bob's posts. However you seem to know more about it than I do.
I'll read up, but I don't understand why bob would say those things in his posts here if he didn't mean it. I just read them today, it's still pretty fresh. I'm pretty sure he specifically mentioned fets and drivers. Which, you are correct, require a bit more power to run. But I might have gotten context wrong or something.
I'll read through all the material I can get ahold of before commenting further.
I don't want to make unfounded assumptions.
Rich
Hmmm. About Phase means about phase... and coil config's that relate to phase... and pulsing strategy.
Bob. B's words here and on page 67 of Succ'TPU-Replicat' thread were very carefully written so read them well.
Please post photos here of things created from his advice. Nothing not stemming from his words. You've all suffered reading bla bla in other threads to understand why.
This is not Poker, this is about mentoring each other. If someone takes time to PM you, help them. If they need to 'step off', tell them. They are asking for your help offline so as not to mess up and dilute these threads! Point to the info if it is in thread somewhere when you speak about it.
Show how you accomplish phase control, show your edge speeds, show your waveforms. Briefly share results here born out of Bob B's advice so Bob will come and see how the garden is growing. If you've read his words you should now be 100% motivated to begin building a coil... any coil. If he comes back here and sees 250 pages of bla bla lost sheep, this may be it folks! Show the fruit!
Rich:
you are correct - Bob did state FET's.
Will edit my post, but I do not see why a lot of power should be required. Should be able to run it off a battery. Maybe Bob is running a house from it.
wcernuska:
point taken. Let's keep this thread clean.
All:
I'm going to rewind my primaries and will take pictures this time.
@all
I'm sorry that I have not been on. I was staying with my daughter at the hospital as she was going through a surgery, and no internet there. It will take me a day or two to rest up, go through the posts, and post responses.
Bob Boyce
Hi Bob,
I hope that all is well with your daughter. I too have a 5yr old. The joy of my life. I will keep ya'll in my prayers.
Thank you again for your time.
Warm regards,
Bruce
Quote from: Bob Boyce on July 10, 2007, 11:15:10 PM
@all
I'm sorry that I have not been on. I was staying with my daughter at the hospital as she was going through a surgery, and no internet there. It will take me a day or two to rest up, go through the posts, and post responses.
Bob Boyce
No problem at all Bob, health and family first man. Time will come. Till then do what you have to.
Regards,
Rich
@Grumpy, NP man.
@all, are you guys using cores or a wire core like SM? If you are using cores like Bob's, where are you getting them?
Regards,
Rich
Quote from: Grumpy on July 09, 2007, 11:00:19 AM
Let's get back to the discussion of "phase":
@Bob B:
How close to ideal phase separation (as in 120 degrees separation for three poles, 90 degrees for four, etc.) should or shouldn't it be? I can use a ring counter or shift register to get the phased signals and then adjust them at each coil to make up for differences in winding/position, etc. - this sounds like the best approach.
Are you reversing the signal polarity like a 3-phase motor or just positive pulses?
--------------------------
I got the parts, just need to wire them up. Pretty simple actually. Earl posted a circuit on another thread that would be good for experimenting. Build that and adjust the clock for freq, tune the phases, and hold on to your hat.
EDIT: (Earl's circuits - http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2582.0.html )
Pictures? This is so simple to wind - why would you need a picture?
EDIT: I did not count the windings. I did not take pictures while winding. It is easy enough to disassemble when and if the time comes.
Phase is everything, so accuracy of primary coil mounting is important. As I said before, minor errors can be compensated for by timing at the controller, at the expense of overall efficiency of coarse. In my controllers, each power MOSFET switches the negative side of the primary circuit. The positive is fed to the primaries common via a choke to minimize HF EMI to the power supply. Pulses applied to the primaries are uni-polar, as there is no H-Bridge used.
Bob
@Bob B,
Thanks much. Confirming my assumptions.
----------------
This "dominant energy", would this be a scalar energy that is non-cancelling? Is it perpendicular to both the electric and magnetic fields?
Anything else you can tell me about dominant energy?
Quote from: wcernuska on July 09, 2007, 02:34:06 PM
@Bob B.,
Please tell us how do we 'focus the field inward' for safety as you describe.
I assume the DB Bias is preferred for battery charging as well. Does this help in containing or focusing the field?
Can you tell us more about calculating efficient windings needed for a particular core size and intended load as you mentioned? Thank you very much for time and patience.
Ward
By the use of a full toroid shape and a powder iron core, the field is focused inwards more than outwards. This is inherent in toroidal transformer design. The permeability of the core helps ensure high flux density where it is desired, but not so high of a permeability as to saturate easy.
The DC bias is two-fold in my system. Primary function is to provide a relatively high voltage dipole charge seperation between the core and earth/ground. The RMF which occurs during 3 phase drive of the toroid takes place while contained within the electrostatic field of this DC bias. Secondary function is specifically related to the application of this system as a power source for the hydroxy gas system. It provides a source of free electrons for cancelling charge, which is required by my resonance drive system.
Since this was designed for a particular application, I had worked out a way of calculating the secondary to primary ratio based on operational parameters of the load cell stack. The load impedance of the water in a cell stack is a bit strange in that regard, because there is no real load unless potential is high enough. Potential below that threshold results in a very high impedance. I really don't want to get into details of hydroxy gas technology here, but suffice it to say that the formula I use would not translate well to other types of loads. For most other applications, a capacitor would probably be required to isolate the load from the DC bias potential, while passing the energy to drive the load.
Bob
Quote from: Grumpy on July 10, 2007, 10:41:52 PM
Rich:
you are correct - Bob did state FET's.
Will edit my post, but I do not see why a lot of power should be required. Should be able to run it off a battery. Maybe Bob is running a house from it.
wcernuska:
point taken. Let's keep this thread clean.
All:
I'm going to rewind my primaries and will take pictures this time.
The power to switch the power MOSFETs is so that they turn on ultra fast and clean. Enough load at the gate should be provided to get an ultra fast and clean turn of as well. It takes a good fast FET driver with plenty of power available at its input to do this.
Bob
@Bob,
Yes, the field around a toroid (outside) would be more dense inside than outside the ring based on the geometry and hence surface areas of the inside and outside of the ring. A thin ring would have less of a difference compared to a very thick ring.
Have you been able to relate dimensions to performance and controllability? Like, would a thin ring require more bias to get the same effect as a thick section. Isa thin ring more controllable do to the closer field densities inside and outside the ring?
Might have missed this in the other posts, but how much voltage/current are you switching across the MOSFETS? I have several IFR types and a few STP9NK90Z's (900 volts 8 amps - low ns - see attached).
EDIT: In an effort to try to understand the dynamics of phase and the rotating field - at higher frequencies of operation and, hence, rotation, does phase error become better, worse, or just limit the upper field to some level? You know, like with 5 degree phase accuracy you get 100%, 200% with 3 degrees, 500% with 1 degree, etc. Not looking for these specifics, just general rules of thumb to help understand the dynamics of the field based on how I think it works. I think that the phase error would limit the field and you may have referered to this when you spoke about 200% VS 1000%.
Does the current output heat like regular current does?
Hello Bob,
S.M. talked about counter rotational fields in his TPU. Of course, his mechanics are slightly different from yours. He had his collectors wrapped around the circumference of the toroid. He had three of them. Into each of these he placed primary frequency into the first, harmonic into the second and then the third freq. into the third collector. I also believe he had three segments, that he called control wires and you call phase windings. His collectors were stranded lamp chord (two conductor). It vibrated at 7.3 Hz. when operating.
Based on you experience and knowledge, does it sound like perhaps he used a 7.3 Hz phase in the three control wire segments for the RMF, used a DC Bias in one of the two conductors of the collectors and placed the frequencies in the other collector conductors. Both the frequencies and this DC bias would be rotating in the opposite direction of the RMF established by the phases. What are your thoughts on this, and this part of the SM device? Have you had any success with other configurations of your mechanics?
Thank you,
Bruce
Quote from: btentzer on July 11, 2007, 10:10:05 PM
Hello Bob,
S.M. talked about counter rotational fields in his TPU. Of course, his mechanics are slightly different from yours. He had his collectors wrapped around the circumference of the toroid. He had three of them. Into each of these he placed primary frequency into the first, harmonic into the second and then the third freq. into the third collector. I also believe he had three segments, that he called control wires and you call phase windings. His collectors were stranded lamp chord (two conductor). It vibrated at 7.3 Hz. when operating.
Based on you experience and knowledge, does it sound like perhaps he used a 7.3 Hz phase in the three control wire segments for the RMF, used a DC Bias in one of the two conductors of the collectors and placed the frequencies in the other collector conductors. Both the frequencies and this DC bias would be rotating in the opposite direction of the RMF established by the phases. What are your thoughts on this, and this part of the SM device? Have you had any success with other configurations of your mechanics?
Thank you,
Bruce
Let me take a stab at this, in that video, the 7.3 hz he speaks about is the physical vibration of the unit. He's talking about the inertial effect. Of course, we don't have enough information from SM directly to determine the cause of the inertial effect or why it happens at that frequency, so we have to do some interpretation. Marco did some experiments a while back he called his "dancing magnets" experiments. In some he had a small toroidal transformer which he pulsed with a square wave at a decent amplitude in the direct vicinity of some ring magnets that he got from some pc speakers. At very close to that frequency, the magnets began to dance violently. It was 7.83hz to be exact. He stepped through the frequencies and watched the effect rise and fall in relation to them. Marco said that the effect also worked with sine waves, but was far more pronounced with square waves(dc pulses). In marco's experiments the coil was fixed and the magnets were free to move, however if the magnets had been fixed and the coil free to move, it would have been the coil vibrating. So what can we determine from this? Either the coil is interacting, at that specific frequency, directly with a local magnetic field, from a magnet, or perhaps the earth's field. SM's coils are much larger of course, so could be much more sensitive to a weak local field. Magnetometers are obviously sensitive enough, since that is what they are designed to do. Now, how is SM's device producing this frequency? Is it a resultant beat frequency? Is he actually feeding the device with this frequency? Nobody knows. There is another problem here, that is what Marco's experiments would imply. Contrary to currently accepted physics, this would imply that Magnetism itself, has a frequency component. This in turn would imply that magnetism is an energy (not a force), and part of the em spectrum, independent of, but tied to electricity. Unfortunately, Marco did not perform these experiments with larger magnets to see if it was resonating with the mass of the object, rather than the magnetism, at least not to my recollection. However, I still believe that it was probably the single most important experiment anyone has done since all this started.
As to the other parts of your post. I don't recall SM saying counter-rotating fields, so I cannot comment on that. He did say rotate a ball in two directions at the same time. See GK's avatar for the currently accepted idea as to what SM meant by this. Imagine those balls moving at different speeds and what that would do to those collisions the resultant direction of rotation of field would be such that it moves in one direction. Now consider the polarity of those pulses, and what happens when you put a positive and negative together at the same point in a wire. Now think of the "jumper cable" experiment. SM's first suggestion of how to see the kick.
Also your interpretation of the operation and construction are off a bit, or your terminology is. From everything that is posted by SM through mannix, it can be easily ascertained the that collectors in SM's device are not directly fed a frequency, or a harmonic. However it can be said that this is where the frequencies combine. This would be where the resultant beat frequency would come in. This is where the vibration would come from. Also, in Bob's device, the longitudinal bias winding would be analogous to the collector, and the transverse controls are analogous the phase windings. In Mag-Amp theory, the transverse windings are called control windings. And that's what these devices are in operation. Very special Mag amps. The biggest difference between Bob's device, and Stevens, is the addition of a core in Bob's. However, if we go back and look at all of SM's devices, we can see that it's quite possible that some of his smaller units used core's as Bob's device does. And we all know Bob's story about his air-core unit, and how it induced a lightning strike that injured him. That sounds very familiar. The other big difference is that Bob's output is via his secondary, which would be analogous to SM's secondary control, that is all encompassing. However the arrangment is different so this can be a simple logical transformation, or, we could be misinterpreting those build instructions from SM.
I'm not sure what you mean, by "7.3hz phase" Phase is phase, it's the relationship between the peaks and valleys in two different signals. Usually indicated by degrees. Also the rotating bias thing kinda confused me a bit. The dc bias does not "rotate", however it would be perturbed by the rotating fields being generated around it. "Squeezed" so to speak. That might sound familiar as well.
Rich
Quote from: gn0stik on July 12, 2007, 12:59:44 PM
Let me take a stab at this, in that video, the 7.3 hz he speaks about is the physical vibration of the unit. He's talking about the inertial effect. Of course, we don't have enough information from SM directly to determine the cause of the inertial effect or why it happens at that frequency, so we have to do some interpretation. Marco did some experiments a while back he called his "dancing magnets" experiments. In some he had a small toroidal transformer which he pulsed with a square wave at a decent amplitude in the direct vicinity of some ring magnets that he got from some pc speakers. At very close to that frequency, the magnets began to dance violently. It was 7.83hz to be exact. He stepped through the frequencies and watched the effect rise and fall in relation to them. Marco said that the effect also worked with sine waves, but was far more pronounced with square waves(dc pulses). In marco's experiments the coil was fixed and the magnets were free to move, however if the magnets had been fixed and the coil free to move, it would have been the coil vibrating. So what can we determine from this? Either the coil is interacting, at that specific frequency, directly with a local magnetic field, from a magnet, or perhaps the earth's field. SM's coils are much larger of course, so could be much more sensitive to a weak local field. Magnetometers are obviously sensitive enough, since that is what they are designed to do. Now, how is SM's device producing this frequency? Is it a resultant beat frequency? Is he actually feeding the device with this frequency? Nobody knows. There is another problem here, that is what Marco's experiments would imply. Contrary to currently accepted physics, this would imply that Magnetism itself, has a frequency component. This in turn would imply that magnetism is an energy (not a force), and part of the em spectrum, independent of, but tied to electricity. Unfortunately, Marco did not perform these experiments with larger magnets to see if it was resonating with the mass of the object, rather than the magnetism, at least not to my recollection. However, I still believe that it was probably the single most important experiment anyone has done since all this started.
............
Rich
About your whole post Rich, I agree 100%.
In addition, Marco's dancing magnets and even his 7.8Hz magnet motor that he had made, very impressive stuff, and I don't just mean because it LOOKS cool, lol.
Listen folks, in all of our searches for OU, the one constant thing we should all be looking for is ASYMMETRY, for it provides a basis for all OU devices' 'mechanisms of energy gain'. We should strive to recognize and look for instances where we can find such asymmetries, for these are 'sign-posts' on our way to finding viable OU devices.
Let me give you a 'for instance' in regard to asymmetry so you know what I am talking about, I will use Marco's dancing magnets as an example.
You can clearly see in Marco's dancing magnets experiment that at 1Hz, the magnet's are hardly moving, but as Marco approaches 7.83Hz the magnet's start violently moving about, hence we are seeing an INCREASE IN MOVEMENT(ENERGY OUTPUT). Now, what isn't shown in the video explicitly is that for each of those frequencies at which Marco is doing the pulsing, THE INPUT ENERGY to his kick coil IS THE SAME.
So, we SEE a STEADY INPUT POWER, and an INCREASING ENERGY OUTPUT(in the form of more magnet movement). The ratio of input power to output power is changing as Marco changes the frequencies. That is called an asymmetry!
So, two questions you know have to ask yourself, after finding any asymmetry, is:
How can we MAXIMIZE this asymmetry?
and
Once we do maximize it, will the output energy ever exceed the input energy?
This applies to all OU devices...
PS - The above was not written as an effort to 'talk down to' or belittle anyone here, I merely wrote it for those in the majority that might not know exactly how to go about looking for or qualifying an OU device...
Anything and everything relating to 7.xx Hz would be interesting if the Shaumann REsonance frequency had not shift to somewhere around 10 or 11 Hz. Also Bob mentioend in an early post that he doubted that SM tuned to this low freq and that the discharge was more representative of a mugh higher frequency. Also, SM has mentioned RF burns on several occasions as well as precise frequency control.
As for "ASYMMETRY" I don't agree 100%.
It is a little known fact that a rotating magnetic field will change a curled vector potential into a divergence - a dipole. It is also little known that the inside and outside may not be pointing the same direction as the field rotates.
As has been posted about several times before, magnets do have a frequency and it is on the order of about 175 khz - far above 7 Hz. I read somewhere that Tesla used this freq in some of his devises, but have not confirmed this. There are something like 5 different classifications of magnetism and they all have a frequency - ferromagnetic is around 175 khz. Find the others and you got something to talk about.
Then there is the newly explored world of "spintronics" where scientist hope to harness the a known aspect of electrons - they spin and this spin creates a "spin current" - which is very hard to control. An elxtric field will produce a transverse force on a spin field - similar to the Hall effect. Also, spin currents do not interact with the environment like charge current does - spin currents produce little heat. One could also surmise that a spin field will produce a transverse force on a magnetic field - which would induce a current...
Go further and we see that everything has the primal element of spin - everything. Neutrons have spin but no charge (neutrinos - ala Tesla's RE also have no charge), protons spin and have positive charge, electrons spin with negative charge. When an electric charge is applied to a wire and the electrons rotate to align their axis to the potential - before they drift and create a current, what are the neutrons and protons doing? The proton should also rotate since it is charged. What is the neutron doing?
So, harness the spin and you got the keys to the universe.
I have enjoyed reading all three of the last posts. The part I wish to comment on is where I talked about the three collectors, each receiving a frequency.
SM:
"There need to be three of them all the way around.
start them up one at a time each.
First frequency then second harmonic component into the second,
then the third.
when you eventually strike the cord look out.
you will know what has happened at that point.
In the mean time you can measure a slight output even if you do not
strike the exact cord."
Now, it has always been an assumption, one that I made also, that of course the three frequencies need to mix. But based on Bob's information I no longer believe that. He uses a frequency and harmonic in each of the three phases, and they never mix, except when going to ground.
Warm regards,
Bruce
The only "requirement" for an OU device is that it "increase energy in and of itself". A free-energy device only has to collect or harness energy - a windmill spins for free - solar cells colelct for free - after the inital cost that is.
Edgar Cayce made this clear a long time ago when he chanelled the design of a motor that ran perpetually - based on two fluids with different viscosities. Info flow was cut off when world events changed for the worse.
EDIT:
What do the following devices have in common?
Boyce dominant energy ring
SM TPU
Molina-Martinez device
Leedskalnin motor
Gunderson SS device
Stephan Marinov's MAGVID (magnetic hyper-ionization device)
EDIT:
@Bob B - notice any distortion inside the ring or "bands"? Like a mirage.
Edit: the verticle component of Earth's magnetic field, at about 50,000 nT field strength, yields a Larmor frequency of 175 khz (determined by the Zeeman splitting of the cesium ground state - atomic magnetometer)
The GWEN-Towers of the HAARP-Project are sending waves at 175kHZ.
The ionosphere is manipulated by the US transmitter, called HAARP, in Alaska, (High frequency Active Auroral Research Program).
The natural geomagnetic waves are replaced through artificially produced VLF (low frequencies ground waves), which proceed from GWEN Towers. GWEN (Ground Wave Emergency network) transmitter stand all 200 miles across the USA and permit it so to the technology to steer the geomagnetic field artificially. One operates 150 and 175 kHz with VLF. Furthermore with UHF waves between 225 - 400 MHz. The VLF of signals go all over the earth. A GWEN station sends signals on average up to 300 miles. Each Tower is ft high on average 299-500
I understand that magnets seem to produce (resonate) an output near 175 KHz
..dani
Below I have posted a graph of three composed square waves - notice how they approximate the inverse sine function.
I've been wondering why there has to be separate control coils? Certainly, it must afford a degree of flexiblity, but I'm just not knowledgable enough to know.
Quote from: Grumpy on July 12, 2007, 03:28:04 PM
Anything and everything relating to 7.xx Hz would be interesting if the Shaumann REsonance frequency had not shift to somewhere around 10 or 11 Hz. Also Bob mentioend in an early post that he doubted that SM tuned to this low freq and that the discharge was more representative of a mugh higher frequency. Also, SM has mentioned RF burns on several occasions as well as precise frequency control.
As for "ASYMMETRY" I don't agree 100%.
It is a little known fact that a rotating magnetic field will change a curled vector potential into a divergence - a dipole. It is also little known that the inside and outside may not be pointing the same direction as the field rotates.
As has been posted about several times before, magnets do have a frequency and it is on the order of about 175 khz - far above 7 Hz. I read somewhere that Tesla used this freq in some of his devises, but have not confirmed this. There are something like 5 different classifications of magnetism and they all have a frequency - ferromagnetic is around 175 khz. Find the others and you got something to talk about.
Then there is the newly explored world of "spintronics" where scientist hope to harness the a known aspect of electrons - they spin and this spin creates a "spin current" - which is very hard to control. An elxtric field will produce a transverse force on a spin field - similar to the Hall effect. Also, spin currents do not interact with the environment like charge current does - spin currents produce little heat. One could also surmise that a spin field will produce a transverse force on a magnetic field - which would induce a current...
Go further and we see that everything has the primal element of spin - everything. Neutrons have spin but no charge (neutrinos - ala Tesla's RE also have no charge), protons spin and have positive charge, electrons spin with negative charge. When an electric charge is applied to a wire and the electrons rotate to align their axis to the potential - before they drift and create a current, what are the neutrons and protons doing? The proton should also rotate since it is charged. What is the neutron doing?
So, harness the spin and you got the keys to the universe.
Grumpy the Schumann resonances (note plural) are a range from around 7hz to around 42 hz. There has been no real change, however there are local disruptions, and even global disruptions like solar flares etc, which can last for over a year, however, the overall range is the same. I've researched this in detail. If you can provide source material to show me otherwise, I would be willing to read it open mindedly. Scientists disagree on this, is the best we could come to if we decided to pursue this debate.
However, the 7.8hz thing with regard to Marco's experiment is not necessarily a Schumann phenomena, anyway, and should pique any scientifically minded person's interest without regard to anything else. The point is, is that something is happening here. There is something special with that frequency. It is not just coincidence that this happens with those magnets, that the earth seems to resonate at that frequency, and that our minds, that right, our brainwaves, do as well. All alpha, beta, and gamma waves that our brains produce, fall within the Schumann range. We are a product of our environment after all.
As to the 175khz thing. I know where it comes from, and I've tested this, along with just about anyone who has a frequency generator a coil, and magnet who is interested in FE.
Nobody that I know personally has ever seen any result which confirms this in any way.
But again, that's not the point. The point is, that magnetism is NOT supposed to have a frequency component, in and of itself.
@bruce, context is your friend.
At any rate, this is off topic and should be discussed in another thread, or in PMs.
Rich
I know what the Schumann Resonances are. I'd have to search for the "Shumann Freq has changed" source, but this is not important. [By the way, 7.5 hz is a measured circumferal harmonic of the earth - based on it's diameter (8 hz being a mathematical estimate based on diameter)].
The point I was trying to make, which everyone seems to have missed, is that a rotating magnetic field can meet the requirement of "increasing energy in and of itself".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
@Bob B - are the polarities of the primaries and the secondary the same?
The three components and frequencies required for "interesting" results corelates with requirments for creating spinors. This is unpublished work so dont bother searching for it -- I would post animations but cant due to the size restrictions for attachments...
A simple spin 1/2 spinor can be constructed from 3 nested (referenced) harmonic oscillations of x, 2x and x frequencies in 3 orthogonal axis. It is possible to make real world circuits that exhibit spinor characteristics. I have sets of 3 orthognal coils that form a passive 3 phase resonator in which positive and negative phase rotation directions are distinguishable independantly of view. I was pleasantly suprised to find that strong resonance can also be achieved by tuning the component coils to x, 2x and x. -- to be absolutly clear these coils sets create passive 3 phase resonators that result in rotational fields and most importantly the two rotation directions are view independantly rocognizable in the same way left and right helices (and positive and negative charge) are distinct. It is also posible to make spin 1/2 neutral spinors in which the field is spinning but with no net view independant rotation -- as in neutrons.
I comment here simply to make the observation that the TPU and other related devices (Aurelano's "Mexican device" and Hollingsheads devices) all appear to embody spinor resonance configurations. No one seems to have noticed this as yet... Regretably the quaternion maths to describe spinors is hardly taught outside the one practical application of 3D rotations in 3D applications. Visualization of quaternion and spinors is even less know -- barely done at all.
I have been working on new vizualizations of spinors and have discovered a diverse range of coil configurations that make sense from the point of creating (or tuning into) spinor resonance but are nonsensical in any other context. I supose I can release one image now -- all of the apparent "coils" in the attached image are actually snapshots of trace lines through 3D space as it is distorted by a radiating spinnor. -- forget any intuition borrowed from simple axial rotation as you look at this image. Spinors work quite differnetly -- the spin direction and axis are indicated by the white arrow in the foreground. If you look closley you will also note that the traces spirall in counterwound fashion.
anyway... a lot of what people are stumbling onto appears to make good sense from the standpoint of spinor resonance which, as you can see, is very different from simple single axis rotational systems.
I also attached a (sorry for the blur) scope trace showing output of a passive 3 phase resonator. The phase separation is not perfect in this shot -- it's very dificult to tune perfectly and reject the background single phase resonance in the component coils. The 3 phase resonance has a Q >10x the Q for single phase resonance of component coils and is very difcult to tune into. If you didn't know it was there it would be extreemly dificult to find.
Quote from: MarkSnoswell on July 13, 2007, 12:07:00 AM
The three components and frequencies required for "interesting" results corelates with requirments for creating spinors. This is unpublished work so dont bother searching for it -- I would post animations but cant due to the size restrictions for attachments...
A simple spin 1/2 spinor can be constructed from 3 nested (referenced) harmonic oscillations of x, 2x and x frequencies in 3 orthogonal axis. It is possible to make real world circuits that exhibit spinor characteristics. I have sets of 3 orthognal coils that form a passive 3 phase resonator in which positive and negative phase rotation directions are distinguishable independantly of view. I was pleasantly suprised to find that strong resonance can also be achieved by tuning the component coils to x, 2x and x. -- to be absolutly clear these coils sets create passive 3 phase resonators that result in rotational fields and most importantly the two rotation directions are view independantly rocognizable in the same way left and right helices (and positive and negative charge) are distinct. It is also posible to make spin 1/2 neutral spinors in which the field is spinning but with no net view independant rotation -- as in neutrons.
A truly amazing post, Dr. Snoswell!
This one post helps to explain so much of what is transpiring. Including how the three frequencies interact on the TPU, without mixing together. Any pictures or further 3D drawings of your own orthogonal coil setup would be good.
And the tuning is to precise phase of the three frequencies to bring this "resonance" as shown by your scope shot. It is also interesting that you are indeed using sinewaves. Many are attempting to tune to precise phase with square waves, overlapping.
Hmmm.....
"
Now, if we tune the angular frequency of the small rotating field so that it exactly matches the precession frequency in the original static magnetic field, all the magnetic moment will see in the rotating frame is the small field in the x-direction! It will therefore precess about the x-direction at the slow angular speed This matching of the small field rotation frequency with the large field spin precession frequency is the ?resonance?.If the spins are lined up preferentially in the z-direction by the static field, and the small resonant oscillating field is switched on for a time such that the spins will be preferentially in the y-direction in the rotating frame, so in the lab they will be rotating in the x,y plane, and a
coil will pick up an ac signal from the induced emf."
The following is for the very math savvy:
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/751.mf1i.fall02/Spin.htm
Hmm...... Much more study needed of these "spinor" spins..
@ Bob B.
Is your input to phase, square or sine? Cheers,
Bruce
hey :)
Your image looks like the "wobbling spinning top" which constantly remains on the edge of falling down and going back up due to energy feed control and gyroscopic balancing force.
i had that image in mind for a long time, thanks.
M.
Quote from: MarkSnoswell on July 13, 2007, 12:07:00 AM
The three components and frequencies required for "interesting" results corelates with requirments for creating spinors. This is unpublished work so dont bother searching for it -- I would post animations but cant due to the size restrictions for attachments...
A simple spin 1/2 spinor can be constructed from 3 nested (referenced) harmonic oscillations of x, 2x and x frequencies in 3 orthogonal axis. It is possible to make real world circuits that exhibit spinor characteristics. I have sets of 3 orthognal coils that form a passive 3 phase resonator in which positive and negative phase rotation directions are distinguishable independantly of view. I was pleasantly suprised to find that strong resonance can also be achieved by tuning the component coils to x, 2x and x. -- to be absolutly clear these coils sets create passive 3 phase resonators that result in rotational fields and most importantly the two rotation directions are view independantly rocognizable in the same way left and right helices (and positive and negative charge) are distinct. It is also posible to make spin 1/2 neutral spinors in which the field is spinning but with no net view independant rotation -- as in neutrons.
I comment here simply to make the observation that the TPU and other related devices (Aurelano's "Mexican device" and Hollingsheads devices) all appear to embody spinor resonance configurations. No one seems to have noticed this as yet... Regretably the quaternion maths to describe spinors is hardly taught outside the one practical application of 3D rotations in 3D applications. Visualization of quaternion and spinors is even less know -- barely done at all.
I have been working on new vizualizations of spinors and have discovered a diverse range of coil configurations that make sense from the point of creating (or tuning into) spinor resonance but are nonsensical in any other context. I supose I can release one image now -- all of the apparent "coils" in the attached image are actually snapshots of trace lines through 3D space as it is distorted by a radiating spinnor. -- forget any intuition borrowed from simple axial rotation as you look at this image. Spinors work quite differnetly -- the spin direction and axis are indicated by the white arrow in the foreground. If you look closley you will also note that the traces spirall in counterwound fashion.
anyway... a lot of what people are stumbling onto appears to make good sense from the standpoint of spinor resonance which, as you can see, is very different from simple single axis rotational systems.
I also attached a (sorry for the blur) scope trace showing output of a passive 3 phase resonator. The phase separation is not perfect in this shot -- it's very dificult to tune perfectly and reject the background single phase resonance in the component coils. The 3 phase resonance has a Q >10x the Q for single phase resonance of component coils and is very difcult to tune into. If you didn't know it was there it would be extreemly dificult to find.
Gyroscopic forces, precession, spinning a sphere in two directions at the same time. It hits a lot of points. I have to admit.
Excellent post.
Rich
In response to questions in a few PM's.
One of my recent activities is as founder and president of the Computer Graphics Society www.CGSociety.org
I have been lurking around this field for a long time. I have rarely posted anywhere before because of the low signal to noise ratio in public forums. I am posting here now because I noticed a good signal to noise ratio and a number of people that are doing real work and thinking.
I have been doing some caerfull experiments in a number of areas for a a number of years. The research and experiments are aimed at understanding what is really happening rather then trying to duplicate others work.
I have visited some very interesting people and groups that are very secretive. Steven Marks TPU is not unique -- it has almost exactly the same behaviour, artifacts, failure modes etc as at least one other groups technology that I have seen.
I have been developing conceptual models for spacetime, particles (spinor waves) and spherical wave interactions etc for some years now. Spinors are central to this -- I cant stress enough just how different real spherical rotation (spinor) is to the common concept of rotation. No one will fully understand untill you see the animations and play with the parameters -- lots of them.
One of the rare posts I made a while ago is here http://marksnoswell.cgsociety.org/gallery/329928 it's rough and unedited but will interest the readers here.
I believe I have a good conceptual model that fits with current theories but simply explains what is happening in areas that embarass current theories -- things like black holes, renormalization, and the ratio of gravity to electromagnetic forces. When I find time to present it well I'll put it up on the web. It also appears to fit with a number of features people ar stumbling onto in areas such as the TPU -- it also neatly supports Randal Mills CQM. However what is most encouraging is that it has suggested practical devices and experiments which are exhibiting predictable and novel features in early research.
AH -- I see I miss read the attachment limitation previously -- I can upload some of the animations. Attached is a recent development I made -- it's a simple three shell solution for a spinor. There are three nested shells - each linkes to the next. There is a simple harmonic rotation on each shell as shown. This demonstrates the application of 3 components -- two at a fundamental frequency and one at the second harmonic -- that combine to create a spinor. I made this development in response to the desire to come up with a spinor fomulation that I coul make from nested coils. I believe that this (and it's topoligical equivelants) is the simplest posible formulation of a spinor. The practical side of the research is in early stages but appears to support the theory so far.
goto go now.
cheers.
Hello MarkSnoswell,
Hmmmm..... Very interesting animation! Reminds me of a couple of quotes from Steven Mark:
"Rotation of field. . . How many people think about that? If you could have a field that you could think of as a big ball, and you could rotate it in two directions, what would the ramifications be?"
and
"Listen, you need to make three coils or so one on top of the other.
But the important thing is to wrap the control coils perpendicularly
around the collector coils.
There need to be three of them all the way around.
start them up one at a time each.
First frequency then second harmonic component into the second,
then the third."
The "second harmonic component" seems to line up with your idea of using x, 2x, x harmonics. Can the effect still work if all three frequencies are the same and just phase shifted?
God Bless,
Jason O
Hello All,
Some people here had asked earlier about the square vs. sine wave input to make the rotating field. In my oppinion, you can use the square waves to 'tap' the coils into resonance, and at that point the waveform will actually turn into a sine wave. The beauty of doing it this way is that you can use an extremely short, quick pulse to accomplish this, and the resulting sine wave will always been a much higher amplitude then the same wave with purely sinusoidal input. Also, it is very energy efficient to do it this way since you're not constantly driving current through the coil as you would with a sine wave input. For those who haven't seen it, I posted a video on YouTube demonstrating this very effect:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpEYlmsMmyw
The trick to getting the higher amplitudes at resonance is NOT grounding the coil, it has to float. One more thing, I didn't show this in the video but you will get a higher amplitude sine wave at resonance with a shorter pulse width than a longer one.
God Bless,
Jason O
just time for some quick notes...
Must have pulses for (efficent) OU effects... you need a spin wave front. If the core effect is due to spin waves fronts driving spinor resonance then the timing of component signals within SM TPU configuration will not be what you expect -- Start with full control of pulse timing and separation for three drive coils and just tune up one at a time.
Drive coils dont need to be closed -- leave them open circuit and it will still work (with dramatically lower input requirment). It's the spin pulse on potential jump that is the motive force. This is the pulse Edison engineers noticed and Tesla called the radiant pulse. By wrapping a collector wire with the drive coil the resulting spin wave front drives current down the central collector coil -- this is what SM alluded to as "like squezing water along a hose". (Ideally the potential pulse is so short that it can be contained within a percentage of the drive coil -- there will be an optimum pulse width but that probably a lot shorter then anyone is using at present.)
Static bias potentials -- both electric and magnetic -- can/need-to be controled for tuning. (This can be used to modulate the output for ease of matching/forming to power grid frequency.)
There is an exponential relationship of static potential to output -- drive with high voltage pulses for maximum effect. Conversly you will have a hard time tuning devices with low voltage pulses.
Start with sine waves and you wont get anywhere. -- you will get lots of nice rotating fields but no easy access to interesting effects.
cheers
mark.
Dr. Snoswell,
Thank you for confirming what Jason (JDO 300) had posted. We thought this all along, we just wanted to absolutely verify. ;)
Warm regards,
Bruce
Great detail and explanation into the wire loops.
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/94/12/6013
And 'A Sound of Thunder' was always my favorite Ray Bradbury story. Great kinematics! The 'Butterfly effect' was a take off from this.
I noticed in your wire loop graphic there is no copper in the wire cores. ;) I spent a large amount time going through all the CGS links. Real eye candy.
--giantkiller. Great post. Thanks.
Quote from: Jdo300 on July 13, 2007, 09:56:09 AM...
The "second harmonic component" seems to line up with your idea of using x, 2x, x harmonics. Can the effect still work if all three frequencies are the same and just phase shifted?
No. In principal -- 3 in phase signals in 3 non-linked coils just vectorially add to a single component. You need independant control of pulse timing and the right coil design... but this is all based on work I have done simulating spinors. This work seems to fit SM and other devices better than any other theory I have seen but thats no guarantee that its right. Right now I am trying to extend my spinor generation software (a plugin within 3ds max) so I can search for higher order frequency relationships. I expect that exact phase timings will depend on the physical relationship of the coils -- there will also be different timings (harmonics) you can drive at given a single physical setup.
What is certain is that three independant components are required to create spinors. There is a huge range of physical ways to generate these components. There is also a corresponding large range of potential signal sets to create different spinors. As SM said -- start with one drive and then just vary the second component looking for maximum output... and then add the third and itterate to improve. After you have a set of timings that work then you can start to experiment with resonant feedback.
hm... if I get a chance over the next few days I'll put up an animation that makes this all clearer.
Mark.
PS. In some ways SM's TPU designs are sloppy -- at a guess about 10 years behind a competive technology. Although interesting effects seem easy to get *precise* physical designs should result in even more suprising effects. Whatever people make they should strive for very neat construction and be aware of small design changes that influence the output. As a hint look at Randal Mills work with generating Hydrinos and ask yourself how a low energy (reduced spin) electron from a hydrino would behave as a charge carrier in a wire.
Hi Mark,
RE: spinor_--_electrical_coil_analouge_-_45deg_helicies.jpg
Does this show 4 conical shaped vorticies of magnetic field?
Also this test coil:
http://marksnoswell.cgsociety.org/gallery/329928 (http://marksnoswell.cgsociety.org/gallery/329928)
This is a slightly different way from what is currently being looked at.
This is clever in that the green and yellow control coils have 1 turn vertically and 2 turns horizontally.
The red coil seems to be twisted in some way but I have no idea how you would wind it like that.
I have some ideas on getting on getting a variable duty cycle.
If my calculations are correct:
50% at 200kHz = 2.5 uSec.
But if the duty cycle is exceedingly small, say 0.5 % at 200kHz then your pulse width will be 25 ns, very short pulse. So short, that the mosfet driver and mosfet may not be able to keep up, given the rise and fall times for the components we have been looking at.
Perhaps mosfets are out and high speed transistors are in.
Can valves switch at these speeds?
So we have a physical limit on pulse width for the parts people are using, can you give an indication on the duty cycle required?
With your simulation, do the 4 x magnetic vorticies only appear when you have 3 frequencies in place?
Is the coil arrangement for the simulation as per your "spin half test coil" ?
Thank you for a new insight into what is happening with the TPU, I hope we can attack this from a new angle.
Your simulations certainly look as if they can at least prove the vortex idea.
Regards
Rob
Quote from: MeggerMan on July 13, 2007, 05:05:12 PM
Hi Mark,
RE: spinor_--_electrical_coil_analouge_-_45deg_helicies.jpg
Does this show 4 conical shaped vorticies of magnetic field?
Also this test coil:
http://marksnoswell.cgsociety.org/gallery/329928 (http://marksnoswell.cgsociety.org/gallery/329928)
This is a slightly different way from what is currently being looked at.
This is clever in that the green and yellow control coils have 1 turn vertically and 2 turns horizontally.
The red coil seems to be twisted in some way but I have no idea how you would wind it like that.
I have some ideas on getting on getting a variable duty cycle.
If my calculations are correct:
50% at 200kHz = 2.5 uSec.
But if the duty cycle is exceedingly small, say 0.5 % at 200kHz then your pulse width will be 25 ns, very short pulse. So short, that the mosfet driver and mosfet may not be able to keep up, given the rise and fall times for the components we have been looking at.
Perhaps mosfets are out and high speed transistors are in.
Can valves switch at these speeds?
So we have a physical limit on pulse width for the parts people are using, can you give an indication on the duty cycle required?
With your simulation, do the 4 x magnetic vorticies only appear when you have 3 frequencies in place?
Is the coil arrangement for the simulation as per your "spin half test coil" ?
Thank you for a new insight into what is happening with the TPU, I hope we can attack this from a new angle.
Your simulations certainly look as if they can at least prove the vortex idea.
Regards
Rob
It is wound very much like the mobius toroid. http://www.littlemountainsmudge.com/mobiuscontinuosknot.htm
Also there is no copper in the wires. It was done with 3dmax. The builders all concur: simulations and graphics don't cut it.
But they make great training materials and presentations to get the investigator up to speed.
--giantkiller. Not slammin', just jammin'.
Hi,
If I am on the right track with the spinor resonance then phase, pulse timing and coil configurations wont quite be what you expect -- that doesnt mean they will be complicated, but not what classical intuition would lead you to expect. Simple experimentation is called for...
I won?t have time to do experimental work on this project for a few months. I have some other projects to finish, an overseas trip and an office to move first.
If anyone is interested this is exactly how I will start. I?m giving instructions here so that others can try this if they wish. No guarantees -- this is just what I plan to do based on every bit of practical, hearsay and theoretical information I have to hand.
Construction:
1. Starting with a single collector coil and primary. I would use some heavy duty coax for my collector coils as this provides a perfect core to wind the primaries on. RG218 is a good candidate. Cut 1196mm length and strip the outer sheath and remove the braiding ? this leaves the 15.7mm OD PE dielectric with 4.95mm OD copper core. The reason for using the coax is that you want precise and even spacing of the primary coil from the surface of the collector wire. I think this will work better than a stranded core ? it?s the precise/consistent spacing that is critical. Leave the striped coax straight for now.
2. Wind a primary coil. I would do this on my lathe winding tightly with 1mm OD magnet wire over a 15mm OD steel former. After winding ? when the tension is released the coil will spring back enough to easily remove it from the former. It should slide snugly over the 15.7mm coax core you have prepared.
3. The RG218 core is 5mm OD solid copper ? not very flexible and very hard to solder too neatly. For connecting to it I would drill 0.95mm holes radial into it right near the ends. I would then inert 1mm solid wire that I had sanded to a slight taper.
4. Shrink wrap to hold the primary firmly in place. Alternately wrap tightly with a single layer of electrical tape.
5. I would bend the completed collector with primary coil assembly over a circular former to bend into circular form. Tape the ends together and you can remove it from the form. The heavy copper core of the RG218 will help to stabilize the circle.
6. *Variation: I would actually wind a perfect counterwound primary in anticipation of testing single primary vs counterwound. The reason for this is that we are interested in the spin wave front and not the B field generated by the primary. It may work better to eliminate the B field by applying the pulse to a counterwound primary. It is easy to wind a counterwound primary now and start testing driving just one helix. (I attached a photograph of the first counterwound coil I ever wound -- I found a novel way to make these perfectly and easily and made a whole lot of them a while back ;)
**OK -- you can also try a complete coax solution -- using the shield as the primary and core as the collector. In theory I thik this would work but the speed fo the spin wave front would be to fast to make for a practical design with a managable circumference.
Test procedure:
1. Start with just one primary/collector coil.
2. Connect the collector to a low impedance load ? a 100w incandescent light bulb.
3. Drive the primary coil with the shortest pulse you can cleanly generate. I would use a 600V MOSFET and drive with rectified mains voltage ~ 340V. I would use a good MOSFET driver like TC4421 and do everything else possible to ensure a clean fast pulse.
4. Slowly sweep the drive frequency from 1Khz or so up to 100Khz looking for a peak in output. At this stage any peak should have a relatively low Q so it should be easy to find.
5. I would then vary the pulse width ? looking to see if there is an optimum.
6. I would repeat the previous step with single wound and counterwound primaries. I would try it with the primaries open circuit first and then closed to ground through a modest resistive load ? 1K ? 100K or so. The reasoning here is that we are looking for the optimum timing of the spin wave front pushing (SM talks about kicking and squeezing) a charge pulse down the collector == very fast circulating static field == very fast rotating magnetic field.
7. After finding the optimum drive frequency for the first collector coil I would then add a second coil set. Space it one primary minor diameter above the first coil set ? that will be 15.7mm. I would use acetal or nylon spacers to hold the coil sets apart and tape them firmly together.
8. I would series connect the collectors and check that with just driving the bottom primary things are working as expected. With the first primary (bottom coil set) running I would sweep the drive frequency of the second primary looking for further increase in the output. I would expect the Q to be higher now so I would sweep more slowly so as not to miss a resonance peak.
9. I would repeat the previous step with the third (top) coil set added.
** After getting the three coil sets working as well as possible I would look at adding a bias coil around the whole set ? this is the single outer toroidal winding over SM devices. I would use this winding to control both the static and magnetic bias environment for the three coil sets.
** All of this would be done with three independent signal sources. Only after getting everything tuned and working like this would I attempt to put in resonant feedback ? from one collector to the next primary.
** I would also repeat all of the above with three segment primary coils on a single colector and injecting the three frequencies into those three primaries on a single collector. I would try 3 primaries covering 120 deg and also 3 primaries covering 360 deg but tharting 120 apart.
If any of you are looking for control boards check out www.futurlec.com ? I would not use the http://www.futurlec.com/ATMEGA_Controller.shtml even though it has 6 independent PWM?s ? it?s too slow and you cant get good precise pulse width control over 10Khz or so. I am looking at using 3 of these http://www.futurlec.com/ARM7024_Controller.shtml and syncing them up.
Quote from: MarkSnoswell on July 14, 2007, 01:26:27 AM
Hi,
If I am on the right track with the spinor resonance then phase, pulse timing and coil configurations wont quite be what you expect -- that doesnt mean they will be complicated, but not what classical intuition would lead you to expect. Simple experimentation is called for...
I won?t have time to do experimental work on this project for a few months. I have some other projects to finish, an overseas trip and an office to move first.
If anyone is interested this is exactly how I will start. I?m giving instructions here so that others can try this if they wish. No guarantees -- this is just what I plan to do based on every bit of practical, hearsay and theoretical information I have to hand.
Construction:
1. Starting with a single collector coil and primary. I would use some heavy duty coax for my collector coils as this provides a perfect core to wind the primaries on. RG218 is a good candidate. Cut 1196mm length and strip the outer sheath and remove the braiding ? this leaves the 15.7mm OD PE dielectric with 4.95mm OD copper core. The reason for using the coax is that you want precise and even spacing of the primary coil from the surface of the collector wire. I think this will work better than a stranded core ? it?s the precise/consistent spacing that is critical. Leave the striped coax straight for now.
2. Wind a primary coil. I would do this on my lathe winding tightly with 1mm OD magnet wire over a 15mm OD steel former. After winding ? when the tension is released the coil will spring back enough to easily remove it from the former. It should slide snugly over the 15.7mm coax core you have prepared.
3. The RG218 core is 5mm OD solid copper ? not very flexible and very hard to solder too neatly. For connecting to it I would drill 0.95mm holes radial into it right near the ends. I would then inert 1mm solid wire that I had sanded to a slight taper.
4. Shrink wrap to hold the primary firmly in place. Alternately wrap tightly with a single layer of electrical tape.
5. I would bend the completed collector with primary coil assembly over a circular former to bend into circular form. Tape the ends together and you can remove it from the form. The heavy copper core of the RG218 will help to stabilize the circle.
6. *Variation: I would actually wind a perfect counterwound primary in anticipation of testing single primary vs counterwound. The reason for this is that we are interested in the spin wave front and not the B field generated by the primary. It may work better to eliminate the B field by applying the pulse to a counterwound primary. It is easy to wind a counterwound primary now and start testing driving just one helix. (I attached a photograph of the first counterwound coil I ever wound -- I found a novel way to make these perfectly and easily and made a whole lot of them a while back ;)
**OK -- you can also try a complete coax solution -- using the shield as the primary and core as the collector. In theory I thik this would work but the speed fo the spin wave front would be to fast to make for a practical design with a managable circumference.
Test procedure:
1. Start with just one primary/collector coil.
2. Connect the collector to a low impedance load ? a 100w incandescent light bulb.
3. Drive the primary coil with the shortest pulse you can cleanly generate. I would use a 600V MOSFET and drive with rectified mains voltage ~ 340V. I would use a good MOSFET driver like TC4421 and do everything else possible to ensure a clean fast pulse.
4. Slowly sweep the drive frequency from 1Khz or so up to 100Khz looking for a peak in output. At this stage any peak should have a relatively low Q so it should be easy to find.
5. I would then vary the pulse width ? looking to see if there is an optimum.
6. I would repeat the previous step with single wound and counterwound primaries. I would try it with the primaries open circuit first and then closed to ground through a modest resistive load ? 1K ? 100K or so. The reasoning here is that we are looking for the optimum timing of the spin wave front pushing (SM talks about kicking and squeezing) a charge pulse down the collector == very fast circulating static field == very fast rotating magnetic field.
7. After finding the optimum drive frequency for the first collector coil I would then add a second coil set. Space it one primary minor diameter above the first coil set ? that will be 15.7mm. I would use acetal or nylon spacers to hold the coil sets apart and tape them firmly together.
8. I would series connect the collectors and check that with just driving the bottom primary things are working as expected. With the first primary (bottom coil set) running I would sweep the drive frequency of the second primary looking for further increase in the output. I would expect the Q to be higher now so I would sweep more slowly so as not to miss a resonance peak.
9. I would repeat the previous step with the third (top) coil set added.
** After getting the three coil sets working as well as possible I would look at adding a bias coil around the whole set ? this is the single outer toroidal winding over SM devices. I would use this winding to control both the static and magnetic bias environment for the three coil sets.
** All of this would be done with three independent signal sources. Only after getting everything tuned and working like this would I attempt to put in resonant feedback ? from one collector to the next primary.
** I would also repeat all of the above with three segment primary coils on a single colector and injecting the three frequencies into those three primaries on a single collector. I would try 3 primaries covering 120 deg and also 3 primaries covering 360 deg but tharting 120 apart.
If any of you are looking for control boards check out www.futurlec.com ? I would not use the http://www.futurlec.com/ATMEGA_Controller.shtml even though it has 6 independent PWM?s ? it?s too slow and you cant get good precise pulse width control over 10Khz or so. I am looking at using 3 of these http://www.futurlec.com/ARM7024_Controller.shtml and syncing them up.
Impeccable...
I poster after my own heart.
Funny, you start posting here just as I am making my grandiose thread http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2702.0.html , LOL.
Mark, it appears we have somewhat similar ideas, but use different terms/wordings ;)
Additional note for experimenters:
When series connecting the colector coils you have to either trim the conector length or tune the pulse delay (phase) of the drive coils. The reson is that it's the phase alignment and spacing of the multiple pulse trains in the collector coil that can give rise to a spinor resonance.
Tao -- yes I saw your posts... and everything else in this forum.
Rob -- "RE: spinor_--_electrical_coil_analouge_-_45deg_helicies.jpg
Does this show 4 conical shaped vorticies of magnetic field?"
No. I have attached the image here again for reference. The "coils" you see are trace lines through 3D space. This image is a composite showing some of the distorion of space at various points inside a spinor. As it is a spin 1/2 spinor it repeats every 720 deg (NOT 360 deg). At + 45 deg you get the orange and at -45 deg the red conical pairs of spacial distortions. At 360 deg you get the pancacke and solenoid distortion (in fact all of the spherical volume is wound up at 360 deg).
This image suggests that a spinor resonance could be generated with various coils wound in a simillar fashion to the image. However phasing of the coils would be dificult -- thay would best be driven with timed pulses at the phase angles I indicated.
I have attached two animations of composite spinors. There is *no* tnagling of space. In the first animation you can see that the central spere rotates twice in one cycle -- this is a spin 1/2 characteristic. You are looking at a representation of a spherical wave like the one that could be an electron or proton. These waves spin space continuously but never tangle space. There is no magic or trickery here although it is beyond everyday intuition -- you really can take any closed 3D volume and spin it continuously in oue direction without it ever geting tangled.
In the second animation you see a layered spinor (it's still spin 1/2). With the multiple spinors layered it is easier to se the regular distortions of space at various points in the 720 deg cycle.
In case you think these animations show an unrealistic distortion of space -- they do not. With a Plank length mesh and the diameter of a proton the distortions you see here would be flatter than the curvature of surface of the Earth!
The final image is a snapshot of orthognal trace lines distorted in a 3 phase spinor with homogenous energy distribution into all availble curvature modes, but with rigid shells for any given radius. The remarkable feature is that space is spiraling along every axis -- even though there is no tangling of and we are dealing with harmonic rotations of rigid spherical shells!
Cheers
mark.
Hi Mark, hi All,
Mark, I am enthralled that you have shown up on overunity.com and this thread.
I have various and sundry comments and questions to make.
Why do you use the term "3-phase" in the image name:
3_phase_spinor_-__Mark_Snoswell_2006_.jpg
I could understand 3D, perhaps you mean this is the result of 3 electrical signals, perhaps of -sine w, +sine w, and sine 2w ??
Your comments on the following imaginary system please:
a vertical copper bar with bottom end in the ground and the top end going to a distribution system or washing machine. This straight, linear bar has three coils on it, spaced at appropriate distances, which are pulsed with 1kV 1 picosecond wide pulses. Could this be a mover and shaker, or would it be a flop? Would such an imaginary system generate "3-phase" spinors? Or must the collector be bent in a circle?
If a circular system with n coils, driven by high-voltage picosecond signals with 360/n phase difference is good and goes like King-Kong, would not a duplicate ring going through the center and positioned orthogonal be even better? The corresponding signals would have a phase shift of 90 degrees between the rings.
If one was to take the copper-colored cone-shaped coils, as in the image below, and feed the two cones with HV narrow pulses of opposite polarity (at the pointed ends) would a radiant energy collector as shown in green be the best location? Or the flat spiral Tesla type of coil colored in blue? Or maybe the outside purple-colored coil? Here the pulses would have to be sufficiently short and the cone coil conductors sufficiently long such that the pulse would end before something traveling at the speed of light reached the end of the cone coil. This is an absolutely crazy idea that has nothing to do with traditional engineering thought.
This idea could be carried further by reinserting the two cone coils that I removed and feeding them with 90 degree phase shift.
By feeding the two/four cones at the center, lead lengths would be short, which is good for nanosecond or picosecond pulses, but the coil ends have no choice but to hang open and unterminated. This tends to disturb my traditional non-RE brain.
In theory, one could have a set of three coil pairs, each orthogonal to the other pairs. The first two pairs would be fed 90 degrees out of phase, but the third set ???
In your spin_half_spinor_composition_-_c.avi animation, you have
y = - sin a
x = cos 2a and
y = sin a
what does it look like if there are three dimensions involved:
y = - sin a
x = cos 2a and
z = sin a
or something equivalent?
Regards, Earl
Guys, not to detract from Mark's awesome posts, but I believe he should have his own thread. It is related in that it is dependent on phase. But we're trying to replicate a WORKING device here, in Bob's design. We have all the information we need to do that from Bob.
Now, Bob's device may work on some of these principals, however, we're talking about significant design changes now. And, personally, I believe we're being distracted by theory, when we already have build instructions.
That being said. I also think that Mark's stuff will help us go from Bob's device to SM's device after we've built bob's and we decide that it's time to expand upon it.
I think we'd be shooting ourselves in the foot if we changed paths right now.
Regards,
Rich
Well said Rich, and ditto's.
@ Dr. Mark Snoswell
If you would be kind enough to start your own thread, "spinors" it would be wonderful. And also help us get back to build instructions over here from Bob B. Perhaps we could have Stefan transfer some of your posts and photos if you prefer. Or you can reference them with a link.
Highest regards, your work is great!
Bruce
I have started a new thread here http://www.overunity.com/index.php/topic,2764.0.html
with copies of all my posts from this thread.
so that's it, anybody working on this thing?
rich
4017 is wired - coil is wired - no time to get too deep into it now. Got 3 days vacation starting tomorrow - so next weekend I crank it up. I used a CD74HC4017 - good to 50Mhz. Prtty damn simple - I recommend everyone plug one in and check out the RMF.
Bifilar series, by the way - got to lt Tesla get a piece of the action...hehehe!!! I'll get a picture up. Bias coil is completely outside - only one vector effecting the RMF until t proves otherwise.
More later...
PS - Get your hands dirty!
Hello @ all
I finally had a tiny break in the daily doctor trips and was able to actually spend a few hours out in the shop tonight starting on another core wind. I was able to get a couple of pictures to upload here.
This picture is of the core (MicroMetals T650-52), a roll of winding tape, a spool of magnet wire, a block of beeswax, and the heat gun I use to melt the wax.
Bob
Hi Bob:
Really hate to have to bother you with this question but I can find no price on these torrids anywhere. Micrometals has much info but no prices. Can you give a ball park as to how much I am going to have to shell out for this. I have wound a torrid and then realize that it breaks every rule set down. So back to the start and do it by the papers.
I see you are using regular enamel wire here. Will that suffice in making it run? I am not sure I can source the silver coated wire. Ready to fly with things on the controller now. Three parts on the way to finish it.
Thanks much
thaelin
Quote from: Thaelin on July 19, 2007, 04:00:11 AM
Hi Bob:
Really hate to have to bother you with this question but I can find no price on these torrids anywhere. Micrometals has much info but no prices. Can you give a ball park as to how much I am going to have to shell out for this. I have wound a torrid and then realize that it breaks every rule set down. So back to the start and do it by the papers.
I see you are using regular enamel wire here. Will that suffice in making it run? I am not sure I can source the silver coated wire. Ready to fly with things on the controller now. Three parts on the way to finish it.
Thanks much
thaelin
You will have to submit a sample quote request from micrometals for the number of cores you want. Back when I sourced mine, they were only US $25 each (in qty of 3) + shipping. Others have been given higher quotes, probably due to increased demand and location.
I am using regular wire for that winding because the longitudinally wound bias winding is a DC winding, not HF.
Sure, you can use magnet wire for the HF transverse windings, at reduced efficiency. I shall leave it for others to explain why the silver plating on the wire makes it more desirable at HF. And before the Litze wire recomendations start pouring in, keep it in mind that the more random nature of the intertwisted insulated conductors makes precision control of the fields nearly impossible! Stranded wire is bad enough due to the field perturbations caused by the twists and bumps in the conductor group surfaces. This is why I go through the extra difficulty of sourcing solid mil-spec silver plated wire. But stranded ml-spec silver plated teflon insulated wire is still better than magnet wire.
I have to take off now to go pick up materials from a machine shop.
Laters.
Bob
I've taken pictures of mine, it's all wound and everything, the collectors, bias, and controls. Just figuring out a good oscillator plan with the tubes I'm going to order eventually (money issues)
Hi Thaelin and All,
It is $34.95 per core with a minimum order of two. If you or one of the guys want to go halves, on the two order minimum shoot me an email. I have went halves with someone already. ALL core orders must be placed ASAP. Their next production run is August 8. If an order is not placed soon, it will not be in this production run.
Core: T650-52
Micrometals, Inc. Home Office
http://www.micrometals.com/contactus_index.html
Address: 5615 E. La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92807 USA
Phone:
714-970-9400
Toll Free in US:
1-800-356-5977
Fax:
1-714-970-0400
E-Mail:
sales@micrometals.com
Got my cores from http://alphacoredirect.com/
Which seems to be one of the ONLY easy-to-buy-from-online core manufacturer
A recent core I bought was:
Standard Toroid PN# L40
PN# L40
$11.98 USD
4.870lbs
Epoxy Coated Toroid, Id=2.750", Od=5.250", Ht=1.125", 835 VA Relative Power Handling, 0.345 V/turn @60Hz, 15KG
Shipping was fast too and the core is very well made. They even make O-RING cores ;), and will even do custom cores for you at a very fair price.
Quote from: Super God on July 19, 2007, 10:21:01 AM
I've taken pictures of mine, it's all wound and everything, the collectors, bias, and controls. Just figuring out a good oscillator plan with the tubes I'm going to order eventually (money issues)
Why not try a simple blocking oscillator design using a small torrid from a PC power supply and tap that for your open ended primaries? I recall reading that you can build 2 blocking osc and have one track the other and by adjusting the time constant of one you can create a simple frequency divider which is sync'd.
here a a couple of sites that might be interesting to review.
http://139.134.5.123/tiddler2/c0508/block.htm
http://home.att.net/~pldexnis/CTC2_how_it_works/blocking_oscillator.html
http://www.vias.org/eltransformers/lee_electronic_transformers_11_01.html
http://www.electronic-circuits-diagrams.com/psimages/powersuppliesckt6.shtml
http://www.du.edu/~etuttle/electron/elect37.htm
I am good for one. I will even take the two if I have to. Now just to figure out where to get the wire. I will figure on using #20 enamel for the bias wind. Any pointers on where to get the silver coated #16 at?
That way I will be on the exact page when I fire it up.
The only diff here is I plan to use the tl494 plls. I have yet to ever get 555s to be steady. That should make the controller more stable and run a lot higher in freq. That into opto's into gate drivers and on to the mosfets should do the trick.
Thanks Bob B. for the clarify on the windings.
thaelin
Quote from: btentzer on July 19, 2007, 10:25:03 AM
Hi Thaelin and All,
It is $34.95 per core with a minimum order of two. If you or one of the guys want to go halves, on the two order minimum shoot me an email. I have went halves with someone already. ALL core orders must be placed ASAP. Their next production run is August 8. If an order is not placed soon, it will not be in this production run.
Core: T650-52
Micrometals, Inc. Home Office
http://www.micrometals.com/contactus_index.html
Address: 5615 E. La Palma Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92807 USA
Phone:
714-970-9400
Toll Free in US:
1-800-356-5977
Fax:
1-714-970-0400
E-Mail:
sales@micrometals.com
Silver coated ezflow wire can be found in high end automotive audio stores.
Hello all,
Here are some sources for silver plated copper solid wire. I would suggest not ordering yet, until we have a gauge or suggested range of gauges, as it is very pricey. Unless money is no matter to you. ;)
Thank you Jason and Grumpy for your help in sourcing this information:
http://cgi.ebay.com/CRAFT-30-YARD-OF-24ga-SILVERED-WIRE-METALWORK_W0QQitemZ8174749479QQihZ 020QQcategoryZ41224QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem
http://cgi.ebay.com/Silver-Coated-Beading-Wire-Tiger-Tail-38mm_W0QQitemZ220131859114QQihZ0 12QQcategoryZ67718QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
http://www.alphawire.com/pages/254.cfm
Mil spec number for Teflon coated solid copper wire with silver plating is MIL-W-16878 - Google this and you get plenty of hits. This place carries it: http://www.weicowire.com/specpage.asp?nGroupID=190 I recommend searching for surplus - stuff ain't cheap. PTFE is "Teflon". FEP is very similar compound. The silver plating is what matters.
Quote from: starcruiser on July 19, 2007, 01:01:16 PM
Quote from: Super God on July 19, 2007, 10:21:01 AM
I've taken pictures of mine, it's all wound and everything, the collectors, bias, and controls. Just figuring out a good oscillator plan with the tubes I'm going to order eventually (money issues)
Why not try a simple blocking oscillator design using a small torrid from a PC power supply and tap that for your open ended primaries? I recall reading that you can build 2 blocking osc and have one track the other and by adjusting the time constant of one you can create a simple frequency divider which is sync'd.
here a a couple of sites that might be interesting to review.
http://139.134.5.123/tiddler2/c0508/block.htm
http://home.att.net/~pldexnis/CTC2_how_it_works/blocking_oscillator.html
http://www.vias.org/eltransformers/lee_electronic_transformers_11_01.html
http://www.electronic-circuits-diagrams.com/psimages/powersuppliesckt6.shtml
http://www.du.edu/~etuttle/electron/elect37.htm
I don't understand the blocking oscillator. Could someone explain what it would do? Does it just block out the negative cycle of a wave?
Looks like my open posts here need to end. The water for fuel crowd have begun to link here in the misguided impression that the RMF device is the same as the lower energy version that was designed specifically for the waterfuel application. I do not want to be responsible for encouraging the wrong kind of experimenters into dabbling with dangers they do not comprehend. I was afraid that this would happen. Those advanced enough in the art to experiment safely with this can continue to communicate with me via email or PM.
Bob Boyce
Thanks much Bob.
A heartfelt thank you, Bob.
Your concern for those guys dabbling where they ought not tread, just shows what kind of fabric and character you are made of. And thank you for your continued availability.
High regards,
Bruce
Same here Bob, your contributions are appreciated as well as your offer.
@Super God,
I will post you something on the Blocking Oscillator that may help a bit later, I am still working and need to complete a project.
But in simple terms the blocking oscillator blocks the transistors conduction due to negative biasing from the coils wave. The oscillator can produce squarewave like pulse of short duration, this is depending on how it is designed/built.
I found the links I provided interesting due to the use in older TV's and the SM story about the exploding/Imploding GE TV.
Please do at least point to any 'additional' information you may have on the Blocking Oscillator, cuz its high on my need to know list! I will post back what I learn. Thank you all very much for sharing. Humble
Anyone here had any luck working with this design?
Rich
Quote from: starcruiser on July 19, 2007, 01:01:16 PM
Quote from: Super God on July 19, 2007, 10:21:01 AM
I've taken pictures of mine, it's all wound and everything, the collectors, bias, and controls. Just figuring out a good oscillator plan with the tubes I'm going to order eventually (money issues)
Why not try a simple blocking oscillator design using a small torrid from a PC power supply and tap that for your open ended primaries? I recall reading that you can build 2 blocking osc and have one track the other and by adjusting the time constant of one you can create a simple frequency divider which is sync'd.
here a a couple of sites that might be interesting to review.
http://139.134.5.123/tiddler2/c0508/block.htm
http://home.att.net/~pldexnis/CTC2_how_it_works/blocking_oscillator.html
http://www.vias.org/eltransformers/lee_electronic_transformers_11_01.html
http://www.electronic-circuits-diagrams.com/psimages/powersuppliesckt6.shtml
http://www.du.edu/~etuttle/electron/elect37.htm
@Starcruiser,
Many thanks for your thoughtful links on Blocking Oscillators; one being used one to syncronize another. This is the way to point out info!
Humble
What ever happened to discrete components, or passive components?
tuuuubes....tubes men!! ;D
the discrete components comes in later.
descreat components?
i did not know there were any
coils diodes tubes and caps humm is that not all the parts?
unless the descreat components are the freqs and that should not be hard to find the right freqs
is
when looking for the right freqs remember to look where things instantaly change and you dont know why
Discrete components is basically solid state components. Transistors, IC's and such.
thaelin
Quote from: gn0stik on August 07, 2007, 01:23:55 AM
Anyone here had any luck working with this design?
Rich
I'll take that as a no?
@Rich,
Most are waiting on parts. Don't think anyone has fired anything up yet.
Sounds like Jason is making some great progress on the control cct. I'm looking forward to this breaking, and seeing some progress. I really feel like this is the avenue we should be on. I've seen hundreds of theories, and hundreds of tests of said theories since I began studying the SM TPU. This feels more in line than anything else does, and the deeper I dig, the more attractive it becomes. For now I am just reading Bruce's update emails, my move is mostly completed but it'll be a while before life is routine again, at least enough so, that I can again put together a lab of sorts. I am excitedly watching for now.
To everyone who recognizes the potential in this enough to build, I commend you and await patiently your initial results. I believe I have missed the window for buying a core out of this batch. But I have a small one, that may work, with bob's help doing some of the figuring.
Keep on, keeping on.
Regards,
Rich
Rich,
Can make it without a core - this is what I did. Just wind it. Don;t even stop to think about it.
yes rich
with that nice video you made some time ago i thought you were far beond this
is
@ Bob Boyce.
Some time ago you posted a response to a question regarding a suitable MOSFET for fast switching:
QuoteTake a look at the MG400Q1US41, datasheet attached. A bit large, but they should have similar lower power devices in smaller packages. I have not looked.
Rise Time (tr) 0.3 uS typ, 0.6 uS max
Turn-on Time 0.4 uS typ, 0.8 uS max
Fall Time 0.2 uS typ, 0.5 uS max
Turn-off Time 0.8 uS typ, 1.5 uS max
Bob
This surprised me. The specs for the above device represent an eternity in terms of what many other devices out there can do....about one magnitude less.
Also, in your schematic available at oupower.com for the PWM3F board, you are using a Lumex OCP-PCP116 as a MOSFET driver, which exhibits a relatively long (3us best case) propagation delay as well. Rise and fall time specs are "ok". The output current of this device is only 50mA, and I am curious how this would drive a MOSFET gate sufficiently and to the degree that you have been emphasizing here?
I was under the impression from your posts here and at oupower.com, that it is important to switch the MOSFET's as quickly as possible, yet the above devices do not seem to fit the bill as you have prescribed.
I was wondering if you could comment on this, if you are still reading here.
Thanks,
Darren
Quote from: z_p_e on August 25, 2007, 02:25:10 PM
@ Bob Boyce.
Some time ago you posted a response to a question regarding a suitable MOSFET for fast switching:
QuoteTake a look at the MG400Q1US41, datasheet attached. A bit large, but they should have similar lower power devices in smaller packages. I have not looked.
Rise Time (tr) 0.3 uS typ, 0.6 uS max
Turn-on Time 0.4 uS typ, 0.8 uS max
Fall Time 0.2 uS typ, 0.5 uS max
Turn-off Time 0.8 uS typ, 1.5 uS max
Bob
This surprised me. The specs for the above device represent an eternity in terms of what many other devices out there can do....about one magnitude less.
Also, in your schematic available at oupower.com for the PWM3F board, you are using a Lumex OCP-PCP116 as a MOSFET driver, which exhibits a relatively long (3us best case) propagation delay as well. Rise and fall time specs are "ok". The output current of this device is only 50mA, and I am curious how this would drive a MOSFET gate sufficiently and to the degree that you have been emphasizing here?
I was under the impression from your posts here and at oupower.com, that it is important to switch the MOSFET's as quickly as possible, yet the above devices do not seem to fit the bill as you have prescribed.
I was wondering if you could comment on this, if you are still reading here.
Thanks,
Darren
@Darren
I'm not sure that that response was a specific recomendation to use that exact part as the MOSFET, but just an example of a device. By the way, if you are not switching a boatload of current, switching times on even large devices can be much faster than published specs. Just take a look at the time vs voltage and current charts. On of my replicators does in fact use the MG400Q1US41 and drives them with TC4420 chips, but I have not used it myself yet.
As for the Lumex OCP-PCP116, do not sell it short so quickly. Try finding another opto-isolated chip that can accept a logic level input, amplify it, clean it up, power itself with internal regulator from a higher voltage (in case you need 24 volt operation) gate supply, and deliver a clean crisp output in excess of 100 Khz. Especially for the price!. It is a very nice chip for the application as long as it is driving small power FETs. I would not use that chip to directly drive a large FET with a lot of gate capacitance however. In the random phase pulsed mode operation that the PWM3 series runs in, propagation delay is not important. It does have very good rise and fall times, 3 times faster than similar chips, even from the same manufacturer. I used that chip because it was the best choice for the application in the PWM3 series.
Now for the rotational version, the PWM3 series board is not used. For that I suggest a more appropriate driver. Like the TC4420, or the TI chips UC3710, UCC37322, ect.
Bob
Quote from: Bob Boyce on August 25, 2007, 10:42:27 PM
@Darren
I'm not sure that that response was a specific recomendation to use that exact part as the MOSFET, but just an example of a device. By the way, if you are not switching a boatload of current, switching times on even large devices can be much faster than published specs. Just take a look at the time vs voltage and current charts. On of my replicators does in fact use the MG400Q1US41 and drives them with TC4420 chips, but I have not used it myself yet.
Bob, I agree with the "lower ID / faster switching" phenomenon, thank you for pointing that out.
QuoteAs for the Lumex OCP-PCP116, do not sell it short so quickly. Try finding another opto-isolated chip that can accept a logic level input, amplify it, clean it up, power itself with internal regulator from a higher voltage (in case you need 24 volt operation) gate supply, and deliver a clean crisp output in excess of 100 Khz. Especially for the price!. It is a very nice chip for the application as long as it is driving small power FETs. I would not use that chip to directly drive a large FET with a lot of gate capacitance however. In the random phase pulsed mode operation that the PWM3 series runs in, propagation delay is not important. It does have very good rise and fall times, 3 times faster than similar chips, even from the same manufacturer. I used that chip because it was the best choice for the application in the PWM3 series.
A question that arose for me was: Why do you need opto-coupling?
The MAX4420 has a TTL/CMOS compatible input, 4.5V - 18V operation, 25ns RT/FT (into 2500pF), 40ns Prop Delay, 6A peak current output, and should easily operate in excess of 1 MHz. Cost is about $2. This is the device I chose for my TP900 design, which can be found here: http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2831.msg41629 (http://www.overunity.com/index.php?topic=2831.msg41629).
Quote
Now for the rotational version, the PWM3 series board is not used. For that I suggest a more appropriate driver. Like the TC4420, or the TI chips UC3710, UCC37322, ect.
I would recommend the MAX4420, as it is an upgrade to all older "4420-type" drivers.
Regards,
Darren
Quote from: innovation_station on August 21, 2007, 11:24:15 AM
yes rich
with that nice video you made some time ago i thought you were far beond this
is
IS that video was of an experiment carried out in Jason's Lab. If you read the article you can see that. Also, it wasn't on this platform, it was on Otto's, to which updated info has not been forthcoming as of late. That camp has gone silent for some reason. Draw your own conclusions.
At any rate, that experiment did not seem to turn out to be overunity. I personally believe this is the approach to be following at the moment.
Rich
im glad to hear that
follow the path you choose i have chosen mine and now i will walk it
this thing operates on re as does most of the overunity devices built in the past but no one understands how it can work cuz there was no such explnation of this publicly out there prior to the tpu
choose your path and remember this is open source so why hide in the shadows?
ist
remember sm wanted this public his gift to the world and we will make it happin as he can not
@ rich is there some reason YOU cannot be the CHAMP?
Well it's up for grabs I guess as to who the champ is... Anyone could crack this thing at this point.
I try to follow all the angles and make notes on what works and what doesn't. However, Bob's experiences with his setup are so remarkably like SM's words, and notes on what we should expect the significance is undeniable.
So for now, this is what I'm keeping tabs on.
Good luck on your direction. I'm watching what you are doing too.
Rich
i am well aware of bob's ring and to bob much respect you have done what many in this world can not do
for all others i do not expect free hand outs in life but when they come around they are nice
for all of you othere guys that wait for someone else to crack it and make it public i wish you all the best things come to people that try so give it a shoot
i could of had a working ring a long time ago and i know this but ask your self is this a race? no it is a learning experience
so learn it!!!
and
just build it!!
ist